Title: To James Madison from Henry Lee, 25 November 1789
From: Lee, Henry
To: Madison, James

My dear sir
Richmond Nov. 25h. 89
Mr. Burnley will convey this letr. by some one of the many of your county people now here with their tobacco. In it you will receive a letr. sent to me from Alexa. by Mr C Lee on the presumption that you was or would be here.
The assembly have gone thro most of their business, & are now engaged in consideration of the amendments proposed by Congress, to the constitution. Some time ago Mr. Henry made a motion for postponing this business to the next session. This gentleman has left us & since his departure his motion has been taken up & rejected. It is probable that all the amendments will be adopted here. The two last are disapproved of by Mr. Randolph & others. The enmity to govt. is I beleive as strong as ever in this state. Indeed I have no doubt of this fact if the assembly be considered as a just index of the feelings of the people. Never adventure direct taxation for years. This event now would be attended with serious consequences. Can you not make your W. lands equal to the support of your domestic debt & its redemption. This being done will the revenue arising from commerce be sufficient for the support of govt. & the payment of the interest on the foreign debt. I hope so, for indeed if it is not I am at a loss to see what you will or can do.
I have not heard of Mr Jeffersons arrival yet nor have I heard from him in reply to our proposition. Soon we shall know I suppose & then I hope we shall be enabled to use the property at the falls.
We have passed an act for holding elections to Congress in Sepr. next. Yours most truely & affy
Henry Lee


Title: To James Madison from Hardin Burnley, 28 November 1789
From: Burnley, Hardin
To: Madison, James

Dr. Sir
Richmond Novr. the 28th. 1789
A few days ago I wrote a letter to Majr. Madison giving him some information on the general business of the present Session, which I suppose he has probably communicated to you. I now take the liberty of obtruding on you a short communication on the same subject. The revenue bill which proposes a reduction of the public taxes one fourth below the last year’s amount is with the Senate. Whilst this business was before the H. of Delegates a proposition was made to receive tobacco & hemp as commutables, which was negatived; the house determining s[t]ill to confine the collection to specie & specie warrants.
Two or three petitions have been presented which asked a general suspension of executions, for twelve months, they were read, but were denied a referrence. The Assembly have passed an act for altering the time of choosing representatives to Congress, which is now fixed to be on the third Monday in September, suspending the powers of the representative untill the February after his election. This change was made to suit the time of the annual meeting of Congress.
The fate of the Amendments proposed by Congress to the General Government is still in suspence. In a committee of the whole house the fi[r]st ten were acceeded to with but little opposition for on a question taken, on each seperately, there was scarcely a dissenting voice. On the two last a debate of some lenght [sic] took place, which ended in rejection. Mr. E. Randolph who advocated all the others stood in this contest in the front of opposition. His principal objection was pointed against the word retained in the eleventh proposed amendment, and his a[r]gument if I understood it was applied in this manner, that as the rights declared in the first ten of the proposed amendments were not all that a free people would require the exercise of; and that as there was no criterion by which it could be determined whether any other particular right was retained or not, it would be more safe, & more consistant with the spirit of the 1st. & 17th. amendments proposed by Virginia, that this reservation against constructive power, should operate rather as a provision against extending the powers of Congress by their own authority, than as a protection to rights reducable to no definitive certainty. But others among whom I am one see not the force of the distinction, for by preventing an extension of power in that body from which danger is apprehended safety will be ensured if its powers are not too extensive already, & so by protecting the rights of the people & of the States, an improper extension of power will be prevented & safety made equally certain. If the house should agree to the resolution for rejecting the two last I am of opinion that it will bring the whole into hazzard again, as some who have been decided friends to the ten first think it woud be unwise to adopt them without the 11th. & 12th. Whatever may be the fate of the amendments submitted by Congress it is probable that an application for further amendments will be made by this assembly, for the opposition to the Fœderal Cons[t]itution is in my opinion reduced to a single point, the power of direct taxation, those who wish the change are desirous of repeating the application whilst those who wish it not are indifferent on the subject, supposing that Congress will not propose a change which would take from them a power so necessary for the accomplishment of those objects which are confided to their care. Messrs. Joseph Jones & Spencer Roane are appointed judges of the General Court to fill the vacancies occasioned by the death of Mr. Cary & the removal of Mr. Mercer to the court of appeals. Be pleased to present me respectfully to Col: Madison & his family. With the highest esteem I am Dr Sir yr. Most Obt. Servt.
Hardin Burnley


Title: To James Madison from John Jay, 2 December 1789
From: Jay, John
To: Madison, James

Dr. Sir
New York 2d. December 1789
A few days since I received a Letter from Mr. Jefferson, dated at Cowes in the Isle of Wight the 17th. October last, in which he mentioned that he expected to sail from that Place the next Day in a Vessel bound to the Chesapeake, and enclosed a Bill of Lading, a Copy of which I have the Pleasure of herewith sending to you.
In case the Packages mentioned in the said Bill of Lading, arrive before you return to New York, they will of course be deposited in the public Store; for it is necessary that the Contents as well as their Value, should be ascertained, before an Entry of them can be made at the Custom House. I am informed that the public Store is a good and dry one, and that Goods stored in it will be perfectly safe. I have the honor to be with great Respect and Esteem Dr. Sir [Your m]ost obt. h’ble Servt.


Title: To James Madison from Hardin Burnley, 5 [December] 1789
From: Burnley, Hardin
To: Madison, James

Dr Sir
Richmond Novr. [December] the 5th. 1789.
Since the date of my letter to you which I wrote a few days ago the resolutions of the Committee on the amendments proposed by Congress have been reported. Those which respected the ten first were agreed to with even less opposition than they experienced in the Committee, & that wh. passed on the 11th & 12th. was rescinded by a majority of about twelve. The amendments with the resolutions on them are now with the Senate, where from the best information which I have been able to collect there is such a division in opinion as not to furnish a ground for probable conjecture as to their decision. Some of that body I am informed propose rejection in toto, others adoption, & others again wish to postpone a decision on them ’till next Session of assembly. I believe it may be said with certainty that the greater part of those who wish either to postpone or reject, are not dissatisfied with the amendments so far as they have gone, but are apprehensive that the adoption of them at this time will be an obstacle to the chief object of their persuit, the amendment on the subject of direct taxation. It is confidently said in this city that the Convention of North Carolina has adopted the Constitution by a very decided majority. I am Dr Sir yr. Most Obt. Servt.
Hardin Burnley


Title: To James Madison from John Dawson, 17 December 1789
From: Dawson, John
To: Madison, James

My dear Sir!
Richmond Thursday 17th. Dcr. 1789
I take the liberty of forwarding to you two resolutions which have pass’d both houses, on the subject of the permanent seat of the General Goverment. To the first of these there was considerable opposition from the South side of James river, under an apprehension that it woud not be advantageous to that part of the State; and from some of the Antis who considerd it as a favour to Congress—they however pass’d by large majorities, & my only fear is that the money will never be demanded.
The amendments recommended by Congress were taken up and all of them pass’d our house—the Senate amended the resolution by posponing the consideration of the 3d, 8th, 11th, & 12th, untill the next session of assembly—we adher’d, and so did they. A conference took place, and both houses remain’d obstinate, consequently the whole resolution was lost, and none of the amendments will be adopted by this assembly.
On tuesday last Mr. Griffin opend court in this place, but there being no business, soon closed it. Some time since Mr. E. Randolph mentiond to the house the subject of a state Goverment, and introduc’d a plan which he had prepard, and which met with the general disapprobation of the house—indeed a proposition was made to throw it under the Table which I verily believe woud have been done, had it not been agreed to pospone any consideration of it untill the 31 of March. I fear that by this impolitic step, it will be difficult to procure a Convention for the purpose of amending our State Constitution for many years.
You, no doubt have heard of the safe arrival of your friend Mr. Jefferson and of the favourable accounts he gives of France. By the act of Congress establishing the office of Secretary of foreign affairs, I find he is authorisd to appoint an assistant, an office which I have no objection to accept of; and as I am unacquainted with Mr. Jefferson, I must, (if you who know what pretentions I have, think me a proper person) request that you will speak to him shoud you see him, or write to him on the subject. The general assembly on yesterday by a general vote elected me a member of the privey council, which, (shoud I accept of it) I shall readily resign to fill the other place, where I shall have an excellent opportunity of acquiring political knowledge.
I shall wish to hear from you as early as possible on this subject, and trust you will continue your communications from New York. With my best wishes for your health & happiness I am Your real Friend & hm: Sert.
J Dawson
The assembly will probably rise on Saturday.


Title: To James Madison from Edward Carrington, 20 December 1789
From: Carrington, Edward
To: Madison, James

My Dear Sir
Richmond Decr. 20. 1789
I have not until very lately known with certainty where I could address a letter to you. Mr. Beckley told me he left you in New York and that you was shortly to set out for Virginia, but Mr. Jones’s return to Richmond from his trip to Orange gave me the first information of your having got home. But for this uncertainty I should before now have made you my most grateful acknowledgments for your very freindly attention to my interests. That in the course of my acquaintance with you in a public walk, I have intitled myself to your confidence is amongst the most pleasing reflections of my life. The President inclosed me a commission for the Office of Marshal for this district, in a very polite letter. I consider the appointment as one of high trust, & am of opinion that the success of the government depends much on its being executed with due fortitude and prudence. It must necessarily then be an honorable appointment. Whether the emoluments will afford an adequate compensation, is somewhat to be doubted, it however can be ascertained only from experiment, and this experiment I am willing to make, with this presentiment, that no occupant ought to hold it after it is found that he will not derive a reasonable compensation, because without it, the execution cannot be to the public advantage. Shortly after the receipt of the Presidents letter I communicated to him my determination to accept as soon as the Assembly should adjourn—it was then expected that the session would be over by the first of this month, and that the first sitting of the Court would not interfere with it—we have contrived however to prolong the session even ’til late in the present month. It was the opinion of the Judge, Mr. E. Randolph, and others that my qualification in Court was not necessary, as it could at any time be had before the Judge out of Court, this ceremony was therefore post-poned for the adjournment of the Assembly.
During the session, there has been much less intemperance than prevailed last year. Mr. H—— was disposed to do some antifederal business, but having felt the pulse of the House on several points and finding that it did not beat with certainty in unison with his own, he at length took his departure about the middle of the session without pushing any thing to its issue. His first effort was to procure an address of thanks, or in some other mode the acknowledgements of the House, for the great vigilance of our senators manifested in their letter upon the subject of our forlorn prospect in regard to such amendments as will secure our liberties under the Government. Upon this point he made a Speech to the house, but it not appearing to take well, it was never stirred again. This letter was considered by some of the most violent of the Anti’s as seditious and highly reprehensible. His next effort was to refer the amendments sent forward by Congress, to the next session of Assembly, in order that the people might give their sentiments whether they were satisfactory, alledging that in his opinion they were not. To this purpose he proposed a resolution, but finding the disposition of the house to be otherwise, he moved that it might lie on the Table, and went away without ever calling it up again. Somewhat later in the session the subject of the amendments was taken up—the ten first were, with the exception of perhaps not more than ten Members, unanimously agreed to—on the eleventh and twelfth some difficulty arose, from Mr. E. Randolphs objecting to them as unsatisfactory—after much debate they were rejected in the Committee of the whole but the report being defered a few days they were accepted in the House by a pretty good Majority thus the whole were adopted in the lower house—they went to the senate in one resolution where they remained long—the resolution at length returned with a proposition to amend by striking out the 3d. 8th. 11th. & 12, these to be refered to the consideration of the people. To this amendment the lower house disagreed and requested a conference—the Senate insisted, and assented to the conference, this was, however, productive of conviction on neither side, the Committee on the part of the Senate returned with S. T. Mason at their head, to their House, which upon his Motion, immediately adhered before any thing further passed between the two Houses; the delegates could in no stage have seen cause to recede from their disagreement, but under this intemperate and unprecedented Conduct they were left without a choice of any thing but to adhere also, and thus the whole amendments have fallen. The sense of the house of delegates was fairly & fully passed on the propriety of adopting them, and the intemperance manifested in the conduct of the Senate, will doubtless shew the people whether this fate of the amendments, was produced from a want of merit in them, or in the senate. Through the whole course of the business in that house there was on the several questions equal divisions of the members, so, as to leave the decision to the chair. Notwithstanding the unequivocal decision in the house of delegates for adopting the amendments, yet in the course of the discussion some intemperance was generated—this led to propositions which in the earlier parts of the session none would have thought of, and it was with difficulty that a proposition for demanding a compliance with the amendments proposed by our convention, so far as they have not been agreed to, by Congress was prevented from passing. This proposition was presented to the house as often as three times, at first it was rejected by a great majority, at the next attempt it was rejected by a less majority, and at the third by the vote of the Speaker. Had Mr. Henry conceived that such would have been the temper in the latter stages of the session, he would not have left us. My information from the various parts of the Country is that the people are at ease on the subject of amendments, expecting nothing but that those sent on would be adopted and that others will be supplied as further deliberation and experience shall discover the want of them. This I think I am warranted in supposing to be true, because the heats which have appeared in the latter part of the session would have shewn themselves sooner had they been amongst the people when their representatives came from their Counties, but they have been generated here in the course of the discussions upon the amendments.
Nothing else has occurred during the session which it will be very interesting to you to have a particular explanation of, and therefore I will not add to this long letter, further than to assure you that I am with unalterable regard and affection, your Most Obt.
Ed. Carrington
P. S. Pray continue to inclose me the papers—and write when you can.


Title: To James Madison from Jacquelin Ambler, 1 January 1790
From: Ambler, Jacquelin
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
1st. Jany. 1790.
Colo. Heth has at length brought the Money, and taken up your dr[a]ft for £100. which enables me to transmit your Bond, and the Auditor’s receipt.
It will ever give me satisfaction to serve you, being with very great esteem & regard, Dear Sir Your obedt Servt
J: Ambler

[First Enclosure]
[22 August 1789]
Know all men by these presents that I, James Madison Junior of the County of Orange in Virginia, am held and firmly bound to his Excellency Beverley Randolph Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and his successors, in the just sum of two hundred pounds current money of the said Commonwealth, to which payment well and truly to be made I bind myself, my heirs, Executors and Administrators, firmly by these presents.
The Condition of the above Obligation is such that if the above-bound James Madison Jr. his heirs, Executors or Administrators, shall well & truly pay or cause to be paid to His Excellency Beverley Randolph Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, or his successors, the sum of one hundred pounds current money of the said Commonwealth, then the above Obligation to be void otherwise to remain in full force and virtue. Given under my hand and Seal this twenty second day of August in the Year 1789.
Test:
John Page

[Second Enclosure]
Audrs. Office 1. Jany. 1790
Received of The Honble. James Madison the Treasurer’s Receipt for One hundred pounds for so much advanced by this State as a Member of Congress.
£100
P. Southall


Title: From James Madison to George Washington, 4 January 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Washington, George

Dear Sir
George Town Jany. 4 1790
After being detained 8 or 10 days beyond the intended commencement of my Journey, by the critical illness of my mother, I am now subjected to a further delay by an attack on my own health. A slight complaint in my bowels which I first felt on the day of my arrival here (friday last) very suddenly took the form of a pretty severe dysentery. With the aid of Docr. Stuart who has been good eno’ to see me every day, I have I hope nearly subdued the malignity of the disease, and got into a course of recovery. I find myself however much weakened by the joint operation of the malady & the medicine, and shall be under the necessity not only of remaining here a few days longer, but of travelling afterwards with some circumspection.

You will probably have seen by the papers that the contest in the Assembly on the subject of the amendments ended in the loss of them. The House of Delegates got over the objections to the 11 & 12, but the Senate revived them with an addition of the 3 & 8 articles, and by a vote of adherence prevented a ratification. On some accounts this event is no doubt to be regretted. But it will do no injury to the Genl. Government. On the contrary it will have the effect with many of turning their distrust towards their own Legislature. The miscarriage of the 3d. art: particularly, will have this effect.
A few days before I was allowed to set out for N. York, I took a ride to Monticello. The Answer of Mr. Jefferson to the notification of his appointment will no doubt have explained the state of his mind on that subject. I was sorry to find him so little biased in favor of the domestic service allotted to him, but was glad that his difficulties seemed to result cheifly from what I take to be an erroneous view of the kind and quantity of business annexed to that which constituted the foreign department. He apprehends that it will far exceed the latter which has of itself no terrors to him. On the other hand It was supposed, & I beleive truly that the domestic part will be very trifling, and for that reason improper to be made a distinct department. After all if the whole business can be executed by any one man, Mr. Jefferson must be equal to it; if not he will be relieved by a necessary division of it. All whom I have heard speak on the subject are remarkably solicitous for his acceptance, and I flatter myself that they will not in the final event be disappointed.
In case I should be detained here much longer than I calculate, and any thing should occur, I may trouble you with a few lines further. With every sentiment of respect and attachment I am Dear Sir, Your’s truly
Js. Madison Jr.


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Underwood, 4 January 1790
From: Underwood, Thomas
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Goochland 4th. January 1790.
I take the liberty to inclose you a copy of a rect. given me by Mr. John Hopkins for ticketts deld. him in order that he might draw money or Certificates for the prizes which I am entitled to recieve havg. bought the Ticketts of Mr. Massie. Mr Hopkins deld. the Ticketts to Mr. Rd. Claibourne who sed he would do the business but fail’d and has gone to Europe and carryed my Ticketts so that I can get nothing as yet for the prizes I am entitled too, I gave Colo. Carrington when in Congress a State of this matter and he apply’d to the Comptroller who compared the rect. with the Lottery Books saw what prizes I was entitled too & got him to make a Note on the Books that I was entitled to the prizes which at that time was not drawn, I have sent sevl. letters to Majr. Claibourne but have recd. no Answer, I beg the favr. of you and my other friends in Congress to look into this matter for me and so contrive as that I may get paymt. I suppose it may be done by way of a Petition to Congress on my Agreeing to indemnify Congress and givg. good secy. therefor which I am willing to do.
I hear much sed about the British Debts and shall be exceedingly obliged to you for information on that subject, if Congress say nothing about it sure I am our state will be in great confusion shd. the British Creditors bring suits immediately as I am told they will do—it is expected that they should be compell’d to give up the posts and make compensation for the slaves before they can be entitled to recover there Debts.
I shall be glad to hear from you as oft as convt. with great respect I am Dear Sir Your mo obt St.
Tho Underwood


Title: To James Madison from the Governor of Virginia, 9 January 1790
From: Governor of Virginia,Randolph, Beverley
To: Madison, James

Gentlemen,
Richmond January 9th. 1790.
In pursuance of the Directions of the General Assembly, I do myself the honour to transmit to you an Act—Concerning the erection of the district of Kentucky into an Independant State. I have the Honour &c.
Beverley Randolph.


Title: To James Madison from David Rittenhouse, 19 January 1790
From: Rittenhouse, David
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Philadelphia Jany 19th. 1790
I beg leave to recommend to your favorable notice Mr. Francis Bailey, printer, of this City, as a Gentleman of abilities in his profession and an amiable Character. I understand he intends to apply for something in the way of his business, either to the Treasury or elswhere. His mechanical Genius must in some respects give him advantages superior to any other printer of my Acquaintance. He some time ago invented a very simple and easy method of making flowers and ornaments for printing work which seem incapable of imitation, and may perhaps be of use.
Please to give my Compliments to our good friend Mr. Page. I am, Dr Sir, your friend & very humble Servant
Davd. Rittenhouse


Title: Receipt to the Treasurer, [24 October 1775]
From: Madison, James
To:

[24 October 1775]
Received twenty pounds for the Use of Colo. James Maddison for collecting Arms by Warrant from the Committee of Safety.
Jas. Madison jun


Title: To James Madison from John Walker, ca. 21 May 1781
From: Walker, John
To: Madison, James

Letter not found. Ca. 21 May 1781, Charlottesville. Mentions forced withdrawal of the Virginia legislature, owing to the threat posed by advancing British troops. “Charlotte[s]ville is now to be our metropolis. The Assembly will meet here on Thursday next.… I fear we shall have a red-hot campaign of it in this quarter; but our people appear to be firm and spirited.” The two-page letter is listed in Walter R. Benjamin et al., eds., The Collector: A Monthly Magazine for Autograph and Historical Collectors, VI (1893), p. 107.


Title: To James Madison from Samuel Hodgdon, 16 November 1781
From: Hodgdon, Samuel
To: Madison, James

Gentlemen
Philadelphia Novr 16. 1781.
Yesterday I received yours relative to Capt. Irish’s affair, in which I observe you do not think yourselves at liberty to bind the State by any Act of yours but that you are willing to give every possible Assistance by representing the necessities of the United States to the State you represent, & thereby urge the Payment of the Bill, as I consider the Establishment of the post in Virginia a real advantage to the State, I am led to hope the Application thro’ your Influence will prove effectual, and shall accordingly direct Captain Irish to wait on you for your Letters on the Subject, previous to his setting out which I expect will be on Monday next. With respect I am Gentlemen Yours
Saml. Hodgdon CGMS


Title: To James Madison from Edmund Pendleton, [25 March 1782]
From: Pendleton, Edmund
To: Madison, James

[25 March 1782]
… The people of Vermont, like many other Politicians of the cunning sort, seem to have overshot their mark, & will deserve to be mortified at least, before they obtain their point. However their conduct unavoidably suggests, a very serious consideration of the consequences of their emancipation; that is, will they be a proper firm Barrier to the United States in that quarter giving intelligence of any injurious design or movement in Canada, & in the meantime endeavour to impede it, or will they on the contrary avail themselves of their situation so as by contracts with the Enemy or the appearance or threat of them, to gain unreasonable advantages to themselves? The former would be their duty as members of the Union, but their conduct indicates that the latter would be their Policy; besides the objections that their admission would Influence the political scale, adding weight to the Northern against the Southern & to the small against the great; and the probable byas they would feel to foster confusion & disorder as their parent, are in my mind unanswerable Objections at least with the large or Southern States, or any who love order & propriety; All these arguments gain additional weight when it is considered that the general Education & manner of life of those people, have not a tendency to cultivate a liberality of sentiments & conduct.…


Title: From James Madison to the Governor of Virginia, [20 May 1783]
From: Madison, James
To: Governor of Virginia,Harrison, Benjamin

[20 May 1783]
… Notwithstanding the numerous arrivals from Europe, we receive no other information than what passes through the public prints. Sir G. Carlton in answer to a letter from General Washington on the subject of the provisional Treaty repeats the same sentiments regarding the Negroes, which he advanced in the Conference at Orange Town; entering a Caution however against their being considered as a final construction of the article. We have the honor to be with great esteem Yr. Excellency’s obt. & humble servants
J. Madison Jr


Title: From James Madison to Jacob Read, [17 February 1784]
From: Madison, James
To: Read, Jacob

[17 February 1784]
… You will receive this from the hand of Mr. James Maury, who wishes to be known to Congress as a candidate for their favorable notice at the time of filling up consular missions to Europe. The confidence I have in his qualifications for such a service induces me to recommend him in the warmest terms to my friends remaining in Congress and to you in particular. He is a gentleman of sound abilities, of commercial experience, of liberal views, and of a strictness of honor and probity which can yield to no competition. He possesses also the benefit of requisite skill in the French tongue and acquaintance with foreign manners acquired by residence in Europe.…


Title: To James Madison from George Washington, 3 December 1784
From: Washington, George
To: Madison, James

Gentlemen:
Mount Vernon, 3d December, 1784.
I returned yesterday from Annapolis, having conducted the Marquis La Fayette that far on his way to New York, and left him proceeding on the road to Baltimore, on Wednesday last.
This trip afforded me opportunities of conversing with some of the leading characters in the different branches of the Legislature of Maryland, on the subject of inland navigation, and the benefits which might arise from a commercial intercourse with the Western Territory. I was happy to find them so forcibly struck with the importance of these objects; and that there appeared the most favorable disposition to give encouragement to them.
Like us, they have two interests prevailing in their assembly—or rather in the present instance like ourselves have two ways by which the same interest is to be effected. The ill-grounded jealousies arising therefrom serves in some degree to embarrass this measure of public utility. The Baltimore interest has already obtained an act to encourage, and to empower a corporate company to remove the obstructions in that part of the Susquehanna, which lie within the territory of Maryland. And this, I perceive, is all that can be obtained in behalf of Potomac, from that quarter.
As no public money, therefore, is likely to be obtained from that State, and as little chance perhaps of getting it from this—should not the wisdom of both assemblies be exerted without delay to hit upon such a happy medium as will not on the one hand, vest too much power and profit in a private company; and on the other to hold out sufficient inducements to engage men to hazard their fortunes in an arduous undertaking? If the act does not effect this the object of it is defeated; and the business of course is suspended; which, in my opinion, would be injurious; as the present moment is important, favorable, and critical; and the spirit for enterprize greater now than it may ever be hereafter.
It is to be apprehended the money lenders among the class of private gentlemen are but few; resort, therefore, must be had to mercantile funds, from whence nothing can be extracted if there is not a prospect of great gain, present or future—but to you gentlemen, these observations are unnecessary, as you are better acquainted with public funds, and the circumstances of individuals than I am; and I am sure are not to learn that the motives which predominate most in human affairs is self-love and self-interest.

The bill I sent you is exceptionable in some parts, and gives discontent in others—so I am informed, for it came to my hands at a moment when I could not read, much less consider it. Would it not be highly expedient, therefore, as the session of both assemblies must soon draw to a close, for each to depute one or more members to meet at some intermediate place, and agree, (first knowing the sentiments of the respective assemblies,) upon an adequate bill to be adopted by both States? This would prevent dissimilar proceedings, as unproductive as no bill—save time—and bring matters at once to a point. A measure of this kind is consonant, I know, with the ideas of some of the leading members of the Maryland Assembly, who requested me to suggest to my friends in our assembly, and inform them of the result.
From what I can learn, there was in the meeting held at Alexandria too great a leaning to local advantages on one part, and too much compliance on the other part, to obtain general approbation of the bill which proceeded from it—I shall not pronounce on either side, but imperfections, if they really exist, at the meetings proposed, may be rectified; and a liberal plan adopted which shall have no eye to the interested views of a few individuals to the prejudice of the majority; who rather than damp the spirit which was up, resolved, it is said, to submit, to any plan, rather than impede the undertaking.
At such a meeting as has been suggested, of delegates from the two assemblies of Virginia and Maryland, might it not prove a politic step for them to agree upon a representation to be made by their respective Assemblies to the State of Pennsylvania, of the political advantages which would flow from a close connection with the Western Territory; and to request their concurrence to make the communication through their State as easy and as diffusive as possible?—pointing to the consequences which in the course of things must follow, if we do not open doors for their produce and trade. That State has many Delegates in the Assembly who would relish such a proposition highly. It would on our parts, appear attentive and respectful; and if rejected on theirs, place them (at least in the eyes of those people) in the wrong—and excite their reiterated applications, which most assuredly would effect it.
Another thing, in my opinion, should also be the object of this meeting, and that is to agree upon a sum, to be advanced by the States of Virginia and Maryland, for the purpose of opening a road between the Eastern and Western Waters. The Company, (if one should be formed,) and the bill, having nothing to do with this—and the Western settlers are not in circumstances to effect it themselves. With very great esteem and regard, I am, gentlemen, Your most obedient humble servant,
G. W.


Title: From James Madison to Tench Coxe, 20 January 1788
From: Madison, James
To: Coxe, Tench

Dear Sir,
N. York Jany. 20, 1788.
I have received and forwarded your letter and pamphlet to Mr. King. The latest information from Boston makes it probable that every aid to the federal cause will be wanted there. The antifederal party have forced such reinforcements in the Insurgents, and the province of Maine which is afraid of creating obstacles to her separation, that there is the most serious reason to apprehend the friends of the Constitution will be outnumbered. The consequences of such an event els[e]where are as obvious as they are melancholy. The Legislature at Poughkeepsy is now much divided on the point of submitting the Constitution to a Convention. The House of Assembly is in the affirmative, and is even supposed to be friendly to the merits. The Senate in its present State is opposed to a Convention. The arrival of the absent members may turn the scale in favor of one. On the merits that branch is certainly in the negative. The little piece by Philanthropos is well calculated, and will be reprinted here. I do not know a better mode of sewing the federal cause at this moment than to display the disagreement of those who make a common cause agst. the Constitution. It must produce the best affects on all who seriously wish a good general Government. Your commands for the Editor of the papers under the title of Publicus, shall be attended to. I am Dear Sir with great respect, Yr. obedt. & Hbl. Servt.,
J. Madison, Jr.


Title: To James Madison from Mann Page, 24 January 1789
From: Page, Mann
To: Madison, James

Letter not found. 24 January 1789. Listed in the Stan. V. Henkels Catalogue No. 694 (1892).


Title: To James Madison from Edmund Pendleton, ca. 20 January 1790
From: Pendleton, Edmund
To: Madison, James

Letter not found. Ca. 20 January 1790. Acknowledged in JM to Pendleton, 4 Mar. 1790. Recommends Dr. David Morrow for a federal appointment.


Title: To James Madison from Alexander Hamilton, [post 20 January?] 1790
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Madison, James

Wednesday [post 20 January 1790?]
If Mr. Madison should be disengaged this Evening Mr. Hamilton would be obliged by an opportunity of conversing with him at his lodgings for half an hour. If engaged this Evening he will thank him to say whether tomorrow Evening will suit.


Title: From James Madison to James Madison, Sr., 21 January 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Madison, James, Sr.

Hond Sir
N. York Jany. 21. 1790
An indisposition on the road retarded me so much that I was not able to take my seat in Congs. till yesterday. It began at Dumfries with a slight complaint in my bowells. On my arrival at George Town it took the form of a Dysentery and was pretty severe for some days. With the aid of my friend Docr. Stuart who was so good as to see me every day, I was in a condition to prosecute my journey in less than a week, but found it necessary to rest at several places afterwards, and to travel with some circumspection. At present I find myself entirely recovered from the symptoms, and have regained my flesh. The operation of the disorder and of the medicine which it rendered necessary left behind them a slight attack of the piles which I hope is also nearly over.
No business of consequence has yet been done. The budget of the Secretary of the Treasury was laid before Congs. some days ago and is in the Press. An outline of his plan is in one of the inclosed Newspapers. I have not been here long eno’ to collect the particulars of it, or the effect of it on the stocks. Of late the price of them has fluctuated between 8/ & 10/. in the pound. As I do not hear of any considerable rise I infer that doubts are entertained whether the plan will meet with the full concurrence of Congs. On this point however I can form no opinion, the members being generally reserved in communicating their views.
Nothing has come to hand of late date from France (except thro’ british channels), with regard to the progress of the Revolution in that Country. From a letter I recd. this day from Havre de Grace, dated Novr. 13. I find the distress for bread has not been fully removed. American Wheat was then selling at that Port for 10 livres that is two dollars per bushel, flour at 50 livrs. or ten dollrs. per barrel, and every article as Rye Barley &c. in great demand. Besides this proof of scarcity, the letter adds that a bounty was to take place from the 1st. Decr. to the 1st. July next, of 40 Sols or two livres per 100 lb marc on flour

30 do
per do
on Wheat

24 do
do
Rye

32 do
do
Rye flour

20 do
do
Barley.

Perhaps it may be worth while to communicate this information to Mr. Hite when you have an opportunity. It ⟨tends?⟩ to shew that the French Govt. does not rely on the late Harvest, and consequently that the demand for imported supplies is likely to be of some continuance.
I inclose a few seeds of the Dionæa Muscipula, a sensitive plant of N. Carolina. It may be well to try them in different soils, and for that purpose to let my brothers Ambrose & William if he pleases have a part of them. If I do not forget, the native soil is a moist and gravelly one.
I was in hopes on my arrival here to find a letter which would have given in ⟨full? a⟩n account of my mothers health. I have been disappointed and am extremely anxious to receive information on that subject. I shall look for it on the arrival of every mail. With the most fervent wishes that it may prove favorable, I remain your dutiful & affecte. son
Js. Madison Jr


Title: To James Madison from Jacquelin Ambler, 22 January 1790
From: Ambler, Jacquelin
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Richmond Virginia 22d. January 1790.
I did myself the pleasure to write you and enclosed the £100. Bond cancelled—with the Auditor’s Receipt in full discharge thereof. I hope the letter arrived safe.
It will give us all here very great satisfaction to hear you are perfectly recovered. I am Dear Sir With very great esteem & regard Your obedt Servt
J: Ambler
The enclosed failed to reach Mr. Page before he left home; will you do me the favor to deliver it.


Title: From James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, 24 January 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Jefferson, Thomas

Dear Sir
New York Jany. 24. 1790
A dysenteric attack at Georgetown with its effects retarded my journey so much that I did not arrive here till a few days ago. I am free at present from the original complaint, but a little out of order with the piles generated by that or the medicine it required.
The Cato in which were the busts of P. Jones and the box of books for myself never arrived till the day before yesterday, having sprung a leak which obliged her to put into an English Port. Every thing consigned to me appears as far as the parcels are yet opened to have escaped injury. I beg you to accept my unfeigned thanks for the proof medals, of which the value is much enhanced in my estimation by the circumstance which demands that tribute. I have supposed that I could not better dispose of the letters to Mr. Eppes as well as that to Col: Lewis than by inclosing them to yourself.
The business of Congs. is as yet merely in embryo. The principal subjects before them are the plans of revenue and the Militia, reported by Hamilton & Knox. That of the latter is not yet printed, and being long is very imperfectly understood. The other has scarcely been long enough from the press to be looked over. It is too voluminous to be sent entire by the mail. I will by the next mail commence a transmission in fractions. Being in possession at present of a single copy only I can not avail myself of this opportunity for the purpose. You will find a sketch of the plan in one of the Newspapers herewith inclosed. Nothing has passed either in Congs. or in conversation from which a Conjecture can be formed of the fate of the Report. Previous to its being made, the avidity for stock had raised it from a few shillings to 8/ or 10/. in the pound, and emissaries are still exploring the interior & distant parts of the Union in order to take advantage of the ignorance of holders. Of late the price is stationary, or fluctuating between the sums last mentioned. From this suspence it would seem as if doubts were entertained concerning the success of the plan in all its parts.
I take for granted that You will, before the receipt of this, have known the ultimate determination of the President on your appointment. All that I am able to say on the subject is that a universal anxiety is expressed for your acceptance; and to repeat my declarations that such an event will be more conducive to the general good, and perhaps to the very objects you have in view in Europe, than your return to your former station.
I do not find that any late information has been recd. with regard to the Revolution in France. It seems to be still unhappily forced to struggle with the adventitious evils of public scarcity, in addition to those naturally thrown in its way by antient prejudices and hostile interests. I have a letter from Havr. of the 13th. Novr. which says that wheat was then selling at 10 livrs. per Bushel, and flour at 50 livs per 100 lb. and the demand pressing for all kinds of materials for bread. The letter adds that a bounty of 2 livs. per 100 lb. marc on wheat & on flour in proportion &c &c was to commence the 1st. Decr. last & continue till the 1st. of July next, in favr. of imports from any quarter of the Globe. With the sincerest affection I am Dr. Sir Your Obedt. friend & servt.
Js. Madison

Previous to the arrival of the Cato I was favored with your letter of Augst: and several pamphlets.


Title: To James Madison from Henry Lee, 25 January 1790
From: Lee, Henry
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Stratford 25h. Jany. 90
I beg leave to make known to you the bearer Docr. Morrow.
He was early engaged in the service of the U States as a naval surgeon. He continued in this employment thro various vicissitudes, suffering extreme hardships, & acquitted himself with honor & reputation.
He understands that naval hospitals will be established & wishes to resume his old employment.
His knowledge, his amiability of character, his past services & his present situation unite in rendering me very solicitous for his success.
Your aid as far as you may think proper will be extremely pleasing to Mr. Morrow ever esteemed by your aff. frien⟨d⟩
Henry Lee


Title: A Note on the Sources of Madison’s Speeches in the Second and Third Sessions of the First Congress, 25 January 1790–8 February 1791
From:
To:

Editorial Note
As explained in the preceding volume, the editors have followed contemporary sources rather than the Annals of CongressDebates and Proceedings in the Congress of
          the United States, 1789–1824 (42 vols.; Washington, 1834–56). in presenting the texts of JM’s speeches in Congress (PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The
          Papers of James Madison (vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77; vols. 11—, Charlottesville,
        Va., 1977—)., XII, 62–64). The defectiveness of the Annals becomes more strikingly evident as one reads and compares the various sources for the debates of the second and third sessions. Thomas Lloyd’s Congressional Register, which was published in weekly numbers that were later bound together in volumes, carries the debates to 8 March 1790 (ending abruptly in mid-sentence). In addition to Lloyd, independent reports of congressional proceedings during the second session may be found in three New York City newspapers: John Fenno’s Gazette of the United States; Archibald M’Lean’s Daily Gazette; and Francis Childs’s Daily Advertiser. In compiling the Annals Joseph Gales followed Lloyd up to 8 March, and thereafter turned to Fenno. The newspapers of M’Lean and Childs, which Gales overlooked, are nevertheless indispensable sources for the second session’s debates.
Until Lloyd ceased publication, his Congressional Register usually provided the most complete reports of the House debates, though it always lagged several weeks behind the newspapers. Lloyd and his publishers, Hodge, Allen, and Campbell, had difficulty meeting their promise to supply weekly numbers for sale and distribution. One subscriber complained that his latest number, delivered on 17 April, did not carry the debates beyond 23 February (Tinling, “Thomas Lloyd’s Reports,” WMQWilliam and Mary Quarterly., 3d ser., XVIII [1961], 527–28; N.Y. Daily Gazette, 29 Jan., 20, 24, and 27 Apr. 1790). To fill in gaps in his shorthand notes, Lloyd occasionally lifted speeches from the newspapers. JM’s long speeches of 11 and 18 February in favor of discriminating between present and original holders of the public debt, for instance, originally appeared in M’Lean’s Daily Gazette. Although no numbers of the Congressional Register covering the debates after 8 March are known to have been published, Lloyd’s shorthand notebooks contain reports through 3 June 1790. A rough transcript of these notebooks, prepared by Marion Tinling, is available in the offices of the Documentary History of the First Federal Congress, George Washington University, Washington, D.C. While these transcribed notes are too disjointed to serve as a text for JM’s speeches, they are useful in making comparisons with the published versions (see speeches of 13 and 14 May 1790).
Beginning with the proceedings of 8 March 1790 and continuing through the remainder of the First Congress, the compiler of the Annals relied exclusively on John Fenno’s Gazette of the United States. On many days, however, Fenno devoted only a few sentences or a paragraph to the Committee of the Whole, and accordingly some important debates that were published in other newspapers receive only passing mention or none at all in the Annals. The slave trade debates of 16–22 March, for example, were fully reported in the Daily Advertiser and the Daily Gazette, but Fenno’s paper provided good coverage for only one day. The debate on JM’s trade and navigation bill went entirely unreported in the Gazette of the United States, which merely noted that a motion to postpone the bill “occasioned a lengthy debate” (26 June 1790).
Even where Fenno devoted ample space to the House debates, his reports were some weeks in arrears and frequently were copied from other newspapers. JM’s major speech of 22 April on assumption was reprinted by Fenno on 19 May from the Daily Advertiser of 26 April. The Gazette of the United States, moreover, printed only JM’s speech, omitting several others that preceded his. A reader of the Annals thus might conclude that JM was the only speaker on that day. The Annals also failed to indicate that JM was, in fact, speaking to Sherman’s motion for a modified assumption.
As a source for the debates of the second session, the Gazette of the United States is less useful than the Daily Gazette and the Daily Advertiser. Not only do these newspapers contain an abundance of material not included in the Annals, but they are also in many instances the original sources for the debates published in the Annals. In the present volume the texts of seventeen speeches of the second session are from these papers; only one is from Fenno’s Gazette. The Daily Gazette had consistently full coverage of Congress during this session; the Daily Advertiser was more often content with a brief summary of proceedings, but on certain topics its report of the debates is the most complete.
When the federal government moved to Philadelphia in December 1790, newspapers there assumed the responsibility for reporting congressional proceedings. John Fenno moved with the government and reestablished his Gazette of the United States in the new capital. Besides Fenno’s Gazette two other papers published independent reports of the House debates during the third session: the Pennsylvania Packet, published by John Dunlap and David Claypoole, which on 1 January became Dunlap’s American Daily Advertiser, and the General Advertiser, published by Benjamin Franklin Bache. Andrew Brown’s Federal Gazette also regularly carried the debates, but its reports were reprinted from the other papers.
As it had done with the second session’s debates, the Annals of CongressDebates and Proceedings in the Congress of
          the United States, 1789–1824 (42 vols.; Washington, 1834–56). failed to publish large segments of the debates from the third session and continued to rely on the Gazette of the United States. For much of this session the fullest reports of the House debates are to be found in the Pennsylvania Packet and its successor, Dunlap’s American Daily Advertiser. These papers are indispensable for the proceedings on the militia and excise bills of December 1790 and January 1791. Only with the bank bill debate of February does Fenno’s Gazette become the principal source. Even here it must be supplemented with Bache’s General Advertiser. Although its reports of individual speeches are generally briefer, this paper occasionally provides a more complete picture by summarizing speeches omitted by Fenno. In its account of the proceedings for 2 February 1791, for example, the Gazette of the United States prints only JM’s long speech. The General Advertiser has a shorter version of JM’s speech (though still quite full), but also reports three speeches that preceded his on this day.
The editors have retained the format used in the preceding volume of supplying a title and a brief context headnote (if necessary) for each of JM’s speeches (see PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The
          Papers of James Madison (vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77; vols. 11—, Charlottesville,
        Va., 1977—)., XII, 64). Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.


Title: Census, [25 January] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[25 January 1790]

   A bill “providing for the actual enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States” was under consideration by the Committee of the Whole.

Mr. Madison Observed that they had now an opportunity of obtaining the most useful information for those who should hereafter be called upon to legislate for their country if this bill was extended so as to embrace some other objects besides the bare enumeration of the inhabitants; it would enable them to adapt the public measures to the particular circumstances of the community. In order to know the various interests of the United States, it was necessary that the description of the several classes into which the community was divided, should be accurately known; on this knowledge the legislature might proceed to make a proper provision for the agricultural, commercial and manufacturing interests, but without it they could never make their provisions in due proportion.
This kind of information, he observed, all legislatures had wished for; but this kind of information had never been obtained in any country. He wished, therefore, to avail himself of the present opportunity of accomplishing so valuable a purpose. If the plan was pursued in taking every future census, it would give them an opportunity of marking the progress of the society, and distinguishing the growth of every interest. This would furnish ground for many useful calculations, and at the same time answer the purpose of a check on the officers who were employed to make the enumeration, forasmuch as the aggregate number was divided into parts, any imposition might be discovered with proportionable ease. If these ideas met the approbation of the house, he hoped they would pass over the schedule in the second clause of the bill, and he would endeavor to prepare something to accomplish this object.


Title: To James Madison from Nathaniel Gist, 27 January 1790
From: Gist, Nathaniel
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir,
Buckingham, 27th Jany. 1790.
I must beg leave to request the favor of you to write to me, soon as convenient, in respect to the business you were good enough to undertake to transact for me in Congress. Should you be at a loss for any information relative to the matter, I shall be obliged to you to apply to the President, who is acquainted with every circumstance: Or if it be necessary for me to attend in New York, you will be pleased to inform me of it. You will observe, sir, that the five thousand dollars which were furnished me by the Board of War in order to defray my expences, on one expedition to the Southern Indians, I returned to the Continental treasury, as will appear by the books in that office. I am, with the greatest respect Sir, Your mo: obt. servt
Nathl. Gist


Title: From James Madison to John Dawson, 31 January 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Dawson, John

Letter not found. 31 January 1790. Acknowledged in Dawson to JM, 26 Feb. and 14 Mar. 1790. Says the official reports of Hamilton and Knox have led to a variety of reactions.


Title: To James Madison from Robert Ballard, [ca. 1 February] 1790
From: Ballard, Robert
To: Madison, James

Sir
Baltimore [ca. 1 February 1790]
The Secretary of the Treasury has wrote the Officers of this Port, for the exact Sum, each Officer has received, up to the first of January.
I hope the Secretary is of Opinion that our Fees are too small and that he will lay a Statement thereof before Congress, for Their Consideration.
I have estimated on a frugal Plan the Sum I must expend for the Support of my Family, and find it will considerably exceed the Sum my Fees produces, for the same time—a circumstance I am persuaded the Rulers of my Country will not permit.
The Attention I am necessarely obliged to pay to the Inspectors, Weigher, Measurer, Guager, and measuring the Vessells, ascertaining the Tonnage and recording it, obliges me to Keep a Clerk, and such a One as requires large Wages.
The Nature of my Office makes me acqu[a]inted with most of the Masters of Vessells, as well Coasters as Foreigners. They all agree that the Officers Fees are so trifling that they scarcely feel them, and the Coasting Gentlemen laugh at us, and tell me: I do their Business for nothing, which is really the case! For Instance, a Boston Vessel arrives with a Cargo of Onions Potatoes &ca: &ca. that fills a Manifest, as long as my Arm, which I am to record, examine the Vessel, receive the Inspector’s Report and compare it with the Manifest, and enter it in my Book, agreeing or disagreeing, as the case may be—for all this trouble, I do not receive on an average more than 18. Cents. Vessells from the adjoining States I receive nothing from, Or the Vessells trading up this extensive Bay. And Sir, I will venture to say: They are the Vessells that will attempt smuggling. I am obliged to search and attend them. Surely then the Labourer is worthy of Hire. Another Piece of Service is particularly hard on the Surveyor: He is obliged to measure and ascertain the Tonnage of all foreign Vessells, record the same, and transmit a copy thereof to the Collector, for all Which trouble, he does not receive One Farthing. I have it from a Number of Masters of Vessells, that in the Ports of England they demand and receive Four Dollars and a half; for every American Vessel the Surveyor measures.
The Surveyor incurs a heavy Expence for Books, Paper, and blank Manifests. I have already wrote Two Rheams of writing Paper. And I calculate my Expences for Stationary and Printers Bills, at nothing less than Thirty Pounds per Year. The Law does not secure a Return of this Money. There are other Circumstances to shew that the Surveyor has not an adequete proportion of Fees for Services he must render, if he regards his Duty, and his Country’s Good. I have at an early period discovered a Zealous Attachment for the Wellfare of my Country. I have been unfortunate, and am honoured With a Commission by Our Truly Honourable and Worthy President. The Office on my part shall be executed with Fidelity.
I trust Sir, from Your own Observations, and what little Light I may have thrown on the Subject, that You will rather Coincide with me, that the Ratio of Fees to the Surveyor, are unequal to the Services he must perform. In that case permit me Sir, to sollicit Your Patronage and Aid, With each branch of the Legislature for further Allowances in Fees. Inclosed I will take the Liberty of discribing what I think at Least the Surveyor deserves.
The Collector of this Port is very anxious, that each Officer shou’d collect his own Fees. I am sattisfied it should be so, provided the Law secures the Officers in such a Manner, that they may not be deprived of their Fees.
Knowing the goodness of your heart, to act and explain on all occasions for the best, I have taken the liberty to address you on this subject. Sir, I cannot l⟨ive⟩ on the present fees—my family accustomed to live well must be stinted. I am sure the Proportion of fees I have laid to each sized Vessell, cannot be objected to by any Owner.
One Case more I will suggest. A Vessell arrives from a Forreign Port, the Surveyor performs all his Duty of receiving a Manifest recording it, examines the Vessell, Measures her, Ascertains Tonage, records it also, & passes a Certificate to the Collector, & receives only five Shillings. The Collector & Naval Officer Divide Five Dollars besides Perquisite fees. I am with great respect Yr Hb. Servt
Robert Ballard

[Enclosure]
Surveyor’s Fees.

Vessells with dutiable Goods,
under 80. Tons        Dollars
2.

d:___________________________________
above 80. T: and under 120. T:
3.

d:___________________________________
above 120. T: and under 180. T:
4.

d:___________________________________
above 180. T: and under 240. T:
4½

d:___________________________________
all above 240. Tons
5.

Coasting Vessells, not from an adjoining State,
under 80. Tons
 ⅔

do.
above 80. Tons
1.

Vessells from the same State, and adjoining State
under 50. T: and above 15. T:
 ¼

do.  from ditto
above 50. T:
 ½

The Measuring, Recording and Certifying the Tonnage of all Foreign Vessells
2.

ditto
for American Vessells
1.

Foreign Vessells, in Ballast,
above 80. Tons

2.

ditto
under 80. Tons

1.

American Vessells in Ballast, from a foreign Port
1.


Title: From James Madison to Edward Carrington, 2 February 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Carrington, Edward

Dear Sir
N. Y. Feby. 2. 90.
I sent to Col: Innis a few days ago Copies of the Reports of Mr. Hamilton & Mr. Knox, with a request that in case you should be in Town you might have a perusal of them. It was not then in my power to send separate Copies; besides that they are too voluminous to be multiplied without exceeding the due share of room in the conveyance. The former Report is to be considered on monday next. Amidst the variety of opinions it is impossible to ⟨know⟩ its fate. The latter does not seem to take and will ⟨be…⟩ certainly ⟨…⟩. The expence, if nothing else, is a millstone about it. The H. of Reps. has been at work for several days on the Census. It is still in the form I mentioned to you, so far as it affects the Marshalls. Mr. Blair & Mr. Randolph arrived yesterday, and the Court to which they belong was opened to day. Yrs. mo: sincerely
Js. Madison Jr


Title: Naturalization, [3 February] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[3 February 1790]
The first clause of the naturalization bill, requiring one year’s residence by aliens for citizenship and an additional residence of two years to be capable of holding either a state or federal office, was under consideration. Tucker moved to strike out the one-year residence requirement in order to permit aliens to purchase and hold lands immediately upon taking an oath of allegiance.
Mr. Madison. When we are considering the advantages that may result from an easy mode of naturalization, we ought also to consider the cautions necessary to guard against abuses; it is no doubt very desirable, that we should hold out as many inducements as possible, for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours. But, why is this desirable? Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, ’tis to encrease the wealth and strength of the community, and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the community, are not the people we are in want of. And what is proposed by the amendment is, that they shall take nothing more than an oath of fidelity, and an intention that they mean to reside in the United States: Under such terms, it was well observed by my colleague, aliens might acquire the right of citizenship, and return to the country from which they came, and evade the laws intended to encourage the commerce and industry of the real citizens and inhabitants of America, enjoying, at the same time, all the advantages of citizens and aliens.
I should be exceeding sorry, sir, that our rule of naturalization excluded a single person of good fame, that really meant to incorporate himself into our society; on the other hand, I do not wish that any man should acquire the privilege, but who, in fact, is a real addition to the wealth or strength of the United States.
It may be a question of some nicety, how far we can make our law to admit an alien to the right of citizenship, step by step; but there was no doubt, but we may, and ought to require residence as an essential.


Title: Madison’s Rebuttal to “The Earth Belongs to the Living” Precept, 4 February 1790 (Editorial Note)
From:
To:

Editorial Note
JM’s cogent reply to Jefferson’s famous 6 September 1789 letter with its radical proposition that “the earth belongs to the living, not to the dead,” now needs little introduction to the serious scholar. Yet there were generations of Americans who studied Jefferson without knowledge of Madison’s philosophical chiding of his fellow Virginian; an oversight corrected since the 1940s by the scholarship of (among others) Adrienne Koch, Dumas Malone, and Merrill Peterson. Jefferson clearly believed the statement important and carried his letter from France to America, then mentioned it to JM when they met at Monticello, but forgot to hand it over. Not until 9 January 1790 did Jefferson send it forward (PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The
          Papers of James Madison (vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77; vols. 11—, Charlottesville,
        Va., 1977—)., XII, 382–87, 469). Professor Koch devoted an entire chapter to an analysis of the two letters and concluded: “The impression one gathers here—an impression reinforced in other exchanges—is that Jefferson is more speculative and more daring in putting forward dynamic generalizations, and that Madison is the more astute politician” (Koch, Madison and Jefferson, p. 63). Probably no exchange of letters between the two men better exemplifies their admiration and respect for the qualities of mind which each found in the other, and thus helps explain the basis for one of the greatest friendships in our history.
Ordinarily the editors would have published only the RC and called attention to important variations from the Tr in footnotes, but in this instance the letter is of such importance, and the revisions are so numerous, that publication of both texts is warranted. Had JM wanted a copy merely for his personal use, he would have been content with a verbatim transcript. However, JM scarcely left a single sentence from the original letter untouched. In making his revisions (which are all stylistic and do not affect the substance of the ideas expressed), JM surely anticipated the eventual publication of this important statement of his political philosophy.


Title: From James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, 4 February 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Jefferson, Thomas

Dear Sir
New York Feby 4. 1790
Your favor of the 9th. of Jany. inclosing one of Sepr. last did not get to hand till a few days ago. The idea which the latter evolves is a great one, and suggests many interesting reflections to legislators; particularly when contracting and providing for public debts. Whether it can be received in the extent your reasonings give it, is a question which I ought to turn more in my thoughts than I have yet been able to do, before I should be justified in making up a full opinion on it. My first thoughts though coinciding with many of yours, lead me to view the doctrine as not in all respects compatible with the course of human affairs. I will endeavor to sketch the grounds of my skepticism.
“As the earth belongs to the living, not to the dead, a living generation can bind itself only: In every society the will of the majority binds the whole: According to the laws of mortality, a majority of those ripe at any moment for the exercise of their will do not live beyond nineteen years: To that term then is limited the validity of every act of the Society: Nor within that limitation, can any declaration of the public will be valid which is not express.”
This I understand to be the outline of the argument.
The Acts of a political Society may be divided into three classes.
1. The fundamental Constitution of the Government.
2. Laws involving stipulations which render them irrevocable at the will of the Legislature
3. Laws involving no such irrevocable quality.
However applicable in Theory the doctrine may be to a Constitution, in [sic] seems liable in practice to some very powerful objections. Would not a Government so often revised become too mutable to retain those prejudices in its favor which antiquity inspires, and which are perhaps a salutary aid to the most rational Government in the most enlightened age? Would not such a periodical revision engender pernicious factions that might not otherwise come into existence? Would not, in fine, a Government depending for its existence beyond a fixed date, on some positive and authentic intervention of the Society itself, be too subject to the casualty and consequences of an actual interregnum?
In the 2d. class, exceptions at least to the doctrine seem to be requisite both in Theory and practice.
If the earth be the gift of nature to the living their title can extend to the earth in its natural State only. The improvements made by the dead form a charge against the living who take the benefit of them. This charge can no otherwise be satisfyed than by executing the will of the dead accompanying the improvements.
Debts may be incurred for purposes which interest the unborn, as well as the living: such are debts for repelling a conquest, the evils of which descend through many generations. Debts may even be incurred principally for the benifit of posterity: such perhaps is the present debt of the U. States, which far exceeds any burdens which the present generation could well apprehend for itself. The term of 19 years might not be sufficient for discharging the debts in either of these cases.
There seems then to be a foundation in the nature of things, in the relation which one generation bears to another, for the descent of obligations from one to another. Equity requires it. Mutual good is promoted by it. All that is indispensable in adjusting the account between the dead & the living is to see that the debits against the latter do not exceed the advances made by the former. Few of the incumbrances entailed on Nations would bear a liquidation even on this principle.
The objections to the doctrine as applied to the 3d. class of acts may perhaps be merely practical. But in that view they appear to be of great force.
Unless such laws should be kept in force by new acts regularly anticipating the end of the term, all the rights depending on positive laws, that is, most of the rights of property would become absolutely defunct; and the most violent struggles be generated between those interested in reviving and those interested in new-modelling the former State of property. Nor would events of this kind be improbable. The obstacles to the passage of laws which render a power to repeal inferior to an opportunity of rejecting, as a security agst. oppression, would here render an opportunity of rejecting, an insecure provision agst. anarchy. Add, that the possibility of an event so hazardous to the rights of property could not fail to depreciate its value; that the approach of the crisis would increase this effect; that the frequent return of periods superseding all the obligations depending on antecedent laws & usages, must by weak [en]ing the reverence for those obligations, co-operate with motives to licentiousness already too powerful; and that the uncertainty incident to such a state of things would on one side discourage the steady exertions of industry produced by permanent laws, and on the other, give a disproportionate advantage to the more, over the less, sagacious and interprizing part of the Society.
I find no relief from these consequences, but in the received doctrine that a tacit assent may be given to established Constitutions and laws, and that this assent may be inferred, where no positive dissent appears. It seems less impracticable to remedy, by wise plans of Government, the dangerous operation of this doctrine, than to find a remedy for the difficulties inseparable from the other.

May it not be questioned whether it be possible to exclude wholly the idea of tacit assent, without subverting the foundation of civil Society? On what principle does the voice of the majority bind the minority? It does not result I conceive from the law of nature, but from compact founded on conveniency. A greater proportion might be required by the fundamental constitution of a Society, if it were judged eligible. Prior then to the establishment of this principle, unanimity was necessary; and strict Theory at all times presupposes the assent of every member to the establishment of the rule itself. If this assent can not be given tacitly, or be not implied where no positive evidence forbids, persons born in Society would not on attaining ripe age be bound by acts of the Majority; and either a unanimous repetition of every law would be necessary on the accession of new members, or an express assent must be obtained from these to the rule by which the voice of the Majority is made the voice of the whole.
If the observations I have hazarded be not misapplied, it follows that a limitation of the validity of national acts to the computed life of a nation, is in some instances not required by Theory, and in others cannot be accomodated to practice. The observations are not meant however to impeach either the utility of the principle in some particular cases; or the general importance of it in the eye of the philosophical Legislator. On the contrary it would give me singular pleasure to see it first announced in the proceedings of the U. States, and always kept in their view, as a salutary curb on the living generation from imposing unjust or unnecessary burdens on their successors. But this is a pleasure which I have little hope of enjoying. The spirit of philosophical legislation has never reached some parts of the Union, and is by no means the fashion here, either within or without Congress. The evils suffered & feared from weakness in Government, and licentiousness in the people, have turned the attention more towards the means of strengthening the former, than of narrowing its extent in the minds of the latter. Besides this, it is so much easier to espy the little difficulties immediately incident to every great plan, than to comprehend its general and remote benefits, that our hemisphere must be still more enlightened before many of the sublime truths which are seen thro’ the medium of Philosophy, become visible to the naked eye of the ordinary Politician.
I have nothing to add at present but that I remain always and most affectly. Yours
Js. Madison Jr

[Revised Text]

Dear Sir
New York Feby. 4. 1790
Your favor of Jany. 9. inclosing one of Sepr. last did not get to hand till a few days ago. The idea which the latter evolves is a great one, and suggests many interesting reflections to Legislators; particularly when contracting and providing for public debts. Whether it can be received in the extent to which your reasonings carry it, is a question which I ought to turn more in my thoughts than I have yet been able to do, before I should be justified in making up a full opinion on it. My first thoughts lead me to view the doctrine as not in all respects, compatible with the course of human affairs. I will endeavor to sketch the grounds of my skepticism.
“As the Earth belongs to the living, not to the dead, a living generation can bind itself only: in every Society the will of the majority binds the whole: according to the laws of mortality, a majority of those ripe for the exercise of their will do not live beyond the term of 19 years: to this term then is limited the validity of every act of the Society; nor can any act be continued beyond this term without an express declaration of the public will.” This I understand to be the outline of the argument.
The Acts of a political society may be divided into three classes.
1. the fundamental constitution of the Government
2. laws involving some stipulation, which renders them irrevocable at the will of the Legislature
3. laws involving no such irrevocable quality.
1. However applicable in theory the doctrine may be to a Constitution, it seems liable in practice to some weighty objections.
Would not a Government ceasing of necessity at the end of a given term, unless prolonged by some constitutional Act, previous to its expiration, be too subject to the casualty and consequences of an interregnum?
Would not a Government so often revised become too mutable & novel to retain that share of prejudice in its favor which is a salutary aid to the most rational Government?
Would not such a periodical revision engender pernicious factions that might not otherwise come into existence; and agitate the public mind more frequently and more violently than might be expedient?
2. In the second class of acts involving stipulations, must not exceptions at least to the doctrine, be admitted?

If the earth be the gift of nature to the living, their title can extend to the earth in its natural State only. The improvements made by the dead form a debt against the living who take the benefit of them. This debt cannot be otherwise discharged than by a proportionate obedience to the will of the Authors of the improvements.
But a case less liable to be controverted may perhaps be stated. Debts may be incurred with a direct view to the interest of the unborn as well as of the living: Such are debts for repelling a Conquest, the evils of which descend through many generations. Debts may even be incurred principally for the benefit of posterity: Such perhaps is the debt incurred by the U. States. In these instances the debts might not be dischargeable within the term of 19 years.
There seems then to be some foundation in the nature of things; in the relation which one generation bears to another, for the descent of obligations from one to another. Equity may require it. Mutual good may be promoted by it. And all that seems indispensable in stating the account between the dead and the living, is to see that the debits against the latter do not exceed the advances made by the former. Few of the incumbrances entailed on nations by their predecessors would bear a liquidation even on this principle.
3. Objections to the doctrine, as applied to the third class of Acts must be merely practical. But in that view alone they appear to be material.
Unless such temporary laws should be kept in force by acts regularly anticipating their expiration, all the rights depending on positive laws, that is most of the rights of property would become absolutely defunct, and the most violent struggles ensue between the parties interested in reviving & those interested in reforming the antecedent state of property. Nor does it seem improbable that such an event might be suffered to take place. The checks & difficulties opposed to the passage of laws, which render the power of repeal inferior to an opportunity to reject, as a security against oppression, would here render the latter an insecure provision against anarchy. Add to this that the very possibility of an event so hazardous to the rights of property could not but depreciate its value; that the approach of the crisis wd. increase the effect; that the frequent return of periods superceding all the obligations depending on antecedent laws & usages, must by weakening the sense of them, co-operate with motives to licenciousness already too powerful; and that the general uncertainty & vicicitudes of such a state of things would, on one side, discourage every useful effort of steady industry pursued under the sanction of existing laws, and, on the other, give an immediate advantage to the more sagacious over the less sagacious part of the Society.
I can find no relief from such embarrassments, but in the received doctrine that a tacit assent may be given to established Governments & laws, and that this assent is to be inferred from the omission of an express revocation. It seems more practicable to remedy by well constituted Governments, the pestilent operation of this doctrine, in the unlimited sense in which it is at present recd. than it is to find a remedy for the evils necessarily springing from an unlimited admission of the contrary doctrine.
Is it not doubtful whether it be possible to exclude wholly the idea of an implied or tacit assent, without subverting the very foundation of Civil Society?
On what principle is it that the voice of the majority binds the minority? It does not result I conc[e]ive from a law of nature but from compact founded on utility. A greater proportion might be required by the fundamental Constitution of Society, if under any particular circumstances it were judged eligible. Prior therefore to the establishment of this principle, unanimity was necessary; and rigid Theory, accordingly presupposes the assent of every individual to the rule, which subjects the minority to the will of the majority. If this assent cannot be given tacitly, or be not implied where no positive evidence forbids, no person born in Society, could on attaining ripe age, be bound by any Acts of the majority, and either a unanimous renewal of every law would be necessary, as often as a new member should be added to the Society, or the express consent of every new member be obtained to the rule by which the majority decides for the whole.
If these observations be not misapplied, it follows that a limitation of the validity of all Acts, to the computed life of the generation establishing them, is in some cases not required by theory, and in others not consistent with practice. They are not meant however to impeach either the utility of the principle as applied to the cases you have particularly in view, or the general importance of it in the eye of the philosophical Legislator. On the contrary it would give me singular pleasure to see it first announced to the world in a law of the U. States, and always kept in view as a salutary restraint on living generations from unjust & unnecessary burdens on their successors. This is a pleasure however which I have no hope of enjoying. The spirit of philosophical legislation has not prevailed at all in some parts of America, and is by no means the fashion of this part, or of the present Representative Body. The evils suffered or feared from weakness in Government and licenciousness in the people, have turned the attention more towards the means of strengthening the powers of the former, than of narrowing their extent in the minds of the latter. Besides this It is so much easier to descry the little difficulties immediately incident to every great plan, than to comprehend its general & remote benefits, that further light must be added to the Councils of our Country before many truths which are seen through the medium of philosophy, become visible to the naked eye of the ordinary politician.

   RC (DLC: Jefferson Papers); Tr (DLC). RC docketed by Jefferson and noted as “recd. Feb. 24.” Below the docket is a note by Nicholas P. Trist: “Given to N. P. T. by James Madison, Montpellier May 22. 1827. / ‘Mr Jefferson returned to me my letters to hi⟨m⟩ (some of wh. however are missing, wh. perhaps he destroyed). Of some of those returned, I find I have copies; among them, one on the subject of his views with regard to the right to bind future generations. This I will give to you.’” As this note indicates, JM already had a copy of this letter when Jefferson’s letters were returned to him at an undetermined date. That the Tr was made no earlier than 1799 is certain, for the paper bears a clear watermark of that year. The handwriting is characteristic of JM’s vigorous years. Until Boyd published the RC in 1961, all previously published versions of this letter had followed the Tr (Boyd, Papers of JeffersonJulian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of
          Thomas Jefferson (19 vols. to date; Princeton, 1950—)., XVI, 146–54; George Tucker, The Life of Thomas Jefferson … [2 vols.; Philadelphia, 1837], I, 292–96; Randall, Life of Jefferson, III, 592–94; Rives, Life of Madison, III, 119–21; Madison, Letters [Cong. ed.][William C. Rives and Philip R. Fendall, eds.], Letters and Other Writings of James Madison (published by order
        of Congress; 4 vols.; Philadelphia, 1865)., I, 503–6; Madison, Writings [Hunt ed.]Gaillard Hunt, ed., The Writings of James
          Madison (9 vols.; New York, 1900–1910)., V, 437–41).

   See PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The
          Papers of James Madison (vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77; vols. 11—, Charlottesville,
        Va., 1977—)., XII, 382–87, 469.

   JM here deleted: “nor can any act be continued beyond this term without a positive [four or five words illegible] by the without an express.”

   This is a paraphrase, rather than an exact quotation.

   JM here deleted “expiring of necessity.”

   JM here deleted “vote of the.”

   This passage originally read: “The improvements made by the dead form a charge against the living which they can no otherwise satisfy than,” etc.

   JM substituted this word for either “justify” or “justly,” which he deleted.

   JM here deleted: “as less security agst oppression than an opportunity to reject, would here render the.”

   JM deleted either “sense of” or “source of” and interlined this word.

   “Another effect of public instability is the unreasonable advantage it gives to the sagacious, the enterprising and the moneyed few, over the industrious and uninformed mass of the people” (The Federalist No. 62, PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The
          Papers of James Madison (vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77; vols. 11—, Charlottesville,
        Va., 1977—)., X, 539).

   JM here deleted: “is to be inferred, where at least in most cases.”

   JM here deleted: “no persons attaining ripe age would [could?] not [illegible word].”

   JM here deleted “of these be obtained” and interlined the next five words.

   At a later time JM placed brackets around the passage beginning “The spirit of philosophical legislation” and ending at this point. He also wrote “omit” at the beginning of the bracketed passage. This was evidently an editorial direction to George Tucker, who obtained the Tr from JM and published it (omitting the bracketed passage) in his Life of Jefferson (Boyd, Papers of JeffersonJulian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of
          Thomas Jefferson (19 vols. to date; Princeton, 1950—)., XVI, 146, 154). Randall (who followed Tucker’s version) and Rives also omitted this passage, but Hunt published the letter in full.


Title: To James Madison from William Cavenough, 10 February 1790
From: Cavenough, William
To: Madison, James

Sir
William Street No. 66 Feby. 10th. 1790
Pardon the liberty I take in addressing myself to you, who I have not the Honor to be Known to. My presuming on this freedom, is as much from the severity of my present unhappy Situation, as from a persuasion, that you are a Gentleman of Humanity who can make allowances for improprieties, which are the Offspring of Necessity and real distress:
The World sir has severely frown’d upon me, and has left me as wretched as the Human mind can Conceive. There is but one thing now that can save me from total distraction, and I believe it may be in your power to Contribute greatly towards my obtaining it.
Permit me therefore sir to beg, that I may have the Honor of an Interview with you at your Lodgings, or elsewhere, at any Hour, in the Course of this Week, most Convenient to yourself, when I shall fully explain myself to you upon the subject that gives rise to this Address.
You may be Assured sir that I am Not a Mean low bad Man, and that I can produce Testimonials in my favor which a[re] Substantial & unquestionable. Besides sir there are Gentlemen here of your Acquaintance, who will speak to you in my favor should you incline to be of service to me. I have the Honor to be sir Your Most Obedt servt
Wm. Cavenough


Title: From James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, [ca. 11 February] 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Jefferson, Thomas

Dear Sir
[ca. 11 February 1790]
By the last mail I acknowledged the receipt of your favor of the 9th. Ult: and hazarded a few remarks on the subject of that of Sepr. last from Paris.
The newspapers forwarded by me from time to time will have exhibited something of the complexion of the politics here, particularly as they relate to the public debt. On this subject the H. of Reps. is at this moment deliberating. All that can be gathered from the sentiments disclosed, is that a great variety will be found in them.
Mrs. Greene has been disappointed in receiving no late accts. from her son in Paris, and I have been requested in her behalf, to enquire whether you can in any manner relieve her anxieties. If this should get to hand time eno’ before you mean to set out for this place, I will thank you for an answer to the enquiry.
Every one who mentions the subject of your appointment to me, seems to have much solicitude for your undertaking it, as well as that the benefit of your services may be enjoyed as soon as possible. Yrs. mo: affectly
Js. Madison Jr


Title: Slave Trade Petitions, [11 February] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[11 February 1790]

   FitzSimons presented an address of the fall 1789 meeting of the Quakers of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and the western parts of Maryland and Virginia. Laurance presented one from the New York Quakers. These petitions urged Congress to consider measures leading to the abolition of the slave trade. A debate arose over a motion to refer the petitions to a committee.

Mr. Madison. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzsimons) has put this question on its proper ground; if gentlemen do not mean to oppose the commitment tomorrow, they may as well acquiesce in it to-day; and, I apprehend, gentlemen need not be alarmed at any measure it is likely congress should take; because they will recollect, that the constitution secures to the individual states, the right of admitting, if they think proper, the importation of slaves into their own territory, for eighteen years yet unexpired; subject, however, to a tax, if congress are disposed to impose it, of not more than ten dollars on each person.
The petition, if I mistake not, speaks of artifices used by self-interested persons to carry on this trade; and the petition from New-York states a case, that may require the consideration of congress. If any thing is within the federal authority to restrain such violation of the rights of nations, and of mankind, as is supposed to be practised in some part of the United States, it will certainly tend to the interest and honor of the community to attempt a remedy, and is a proper subject for our discussion. It may be, that foreigners take the advantage of the liberty afforded them by the American trade, to employ our shipping in the slave trade between Africa and the West-Indies, when they are restrained from employing their own by restrictive laws of their nation. If this is the case, is there any person of humanity that would not wish to prevent them? Another consideration, why we should commit the petition is, that we may give no ground of alarm by a serious opposition, as if we were about to take measures that were unconstitutional.

   Cong. RegisterThomas Lloyd, comp., The Congressional
          Register; or, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the First House of
          Representatives … (4 vols.; New York, 1789–90; Evans 22203–4, 22973–4)., III, 312–13.

   The New York petition spoke of vessels engaged in the African trade, fitting and clearing from that state’s ports and thus evading the laws of neighboring states that prohibited such traffic (DNA: RG 46, Senate Records, Petitions and Memorials: Various Subjects).

[11 February 1790]

   Stone, Burke, Jackson, and Smith (South Carolina) opposed a commitment of the petitions.

Mr. Madison Thought the question before the committee was no otherwise important than as gentlemen made it so by their serious opposition. Did they permit the commitment of the memorial, as a matter of course, no notice would be taken of it out of doors; it could never be blown up into a decision of the question respecting the discouragement of the African slave-trade, nor alarm the owners with an apprehension that the general government were about to abolish slavery in all the states; such things are not contemplated by any gentleman; but, to appearance, they decide the question more against themselves than would be the case if it was determined on its real merits, because gentlemen may be disposed to vote for the commitment of a petition, without any intention of supporting the prayer of it.

   Cong. RegisterThomas Lloyd, comp., The Congressional
          Register; or, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the First House of
          Representatives … (4 vols.; New York, 1789–90; Evans 22203–4, 22973–4)., III, 318. After further debate the memorials were tabled.