Such was the youth who, in May, 1776, entered the Virginia Convention at Williamsburg to begin his life-work as the member from Orange. "He was five feet six inches tall, and his body was thin and delicate. His pale face was lighted by a pair of hazel eyes which were ready to reflect a quiet humor, but his features were irregular and not handsome, and his countenance bespoke the suffering of bad health. His hair was light, combed back and gathered into a small queue behind, tied with a plain ribbon. He was clothed so soberly that he looked more like a dissenting divine than the heir of a planter of large estate." But under this modest and demure exterior were concealed a mind of remarkable powers of analysis and a fund of information on matters historical and political, probably second to none in America.

Madison's life may be divided into three periods: twenty-five years of preparation, forty years of activity (1776-1817), and twenty years of retirement. In the second period were twenty-five years of legislative activity and sixteen of administrative duty, consisting of two terms as Secretary of State and two terms as President. His career as an executive adds little to his fame. While he was by no means a "pale shadow of Thomas Jefferson," he was not suited by endowment or training for the Presidency, and he was especially unfortunate in being called to it in the midst of foreign complications and violent domestic controversies.

Madison's position as a man of letters, as well as his fame as a statesman, rests on his labors during the second quarter-century of his life. It was an age "of constructive statesmanship, a period when all men of extraordinary intellectual power devoted their genius, not to scientific or poetic inventions, but to earnest striving for truth as it concerns human rights and government." With the exception of a few utterances on agricultural and biological subjects, he has left only letters and political papers.

His first political efforts were in behalf of religious freedom and in defence of the free navigation of the Mississippi River. In the Virginia struggle against an establishment he fought at first almost alone. The first draft of the State Constitution was made to read: "All men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion"; and at the word "toleration" his mind rebelled. He argued that if a State may tolerate, its ultimate control is conceded. After a considerable battle, in which his powers of logic were for the first time fully recognized, the Constitution was finally adopted with the troublesome clause amended to read "all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion." Mention may be made in this co nection of two papers in which the religious fight is continu

letters by Hamilton, signed "Pacificus," to defend President Washington's proclamation of neutrality. Madison took the ground that the proclamation was not properly an executive act, but one that should be performed by the legislative branch of the government. Written in great haste, in the midst of a Virginia summer, these papers represent their author's opinions rather than his style. Examples of his style of writing when not under stress may be found in the essays that he contributed in 1791 and 1792 to Freneau's National Gazette and in "Jonathan Bull and Mary Bull" (1821). This last is an allegorical account of the growing antagonism between the North and the South, and is unique among Madison's writings in that in it he allows some play to his imagination. Among his remaining writings may be mentioned the "Virginia Resolutions" (1799), with several papers called forth by the discussion of them; "An examination of the British Doctrine which subjects to Capture a Neutral Trade not open in time of Peace" (1806), and two papers on "Sovereignty" and "Nullification," both appearing in 1835. He died at Montpelier, Orange County, Virginia, June 28, 1836, the last production of his pen having been the "Nullification," in which he defends against the nullifiers that fabric of government his part in the creation of which is his title to fame.

Students of Madison's style have volunteered several explanations of it. Among other things, they say it was the result of his readings of Eighteenth Century literature, especially The Spectator. One of his biographers thinks that Dr. Witherspoon's influence is to be found in it. Such explanations are neither satisfactory nor necessary. Madison's temperament, training, the circumstances under which he wrote, and the objects for which he wrote determined his style; it would not, all things considered, have been other than it was. It is marked by dignity, appeal to the intellect alone, aptness of illustration, lack of humor or beauty, Latinized diction, and the long rhythmical sentences that also characterized Eighteenth Century writers; it is not forceful except in the force of his reasoning; it would be useless if resorted to in any but a righteous cause. It is the expression of the man.

The student of Madison's life and works is not well supplied with material. There is no adequate bibliography for his use; no satisfactory biography has been written; and, until recently, no complete edition of his writings has been undertaken. Gaillard Hunt's edition of his works, mentioned below, promises to be entirely satisfactory, and his biography is at least sympathetic. He promises a two-volume "Life" in the near future. John Fiske's essay, "James Madison, the Constructive Statesman," is the best estimate of the man and his work

at present available. Henry Adams's 'History of the United States' gives an excellent account of Madison's times, but must be taken with some allowance when Madison himself is under discussion. The principal works on Madison that are available are mentioned below.

Edgar Danson

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Madison's Papers. 3 vols., edited by H. D. Gilpin, 1840. Madison's Letters and Writings, Congressional Edition, 4 vols.,

1865.

The Life and Times of Madison, 1751-1797. By W. C. Rives, 3 vols., 1859-1868.

James Madison. By Sidney H. Gay, in the American Statesmen Series, 1884.

James Madison. By Gaillard Hunt. 1902.

The Federalist.

Lodge, and others.

Edited by Paul Leicester Ford, Henry Cabot

The Writings of James Madison. Edited by Gaillard Hunt, 9 vols. (seven of which have already been published, 1908).

VESTED POWERS

From The Federalist.'

"To guaranty to every state in the union a republican form of government; to protect each of them against invasion; and, on application of the legislature or of the executive, (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence."

In a confederacy founded on republican principles, and composed of republican members, the superintending government ought clearly to possess authority to defend the system against aristocratic or monarchical innovations. The more intimate the nature of such an union may be, the greater interest have the members in the political institutions of each other, and the greater right to insist, that the forms of government under which the compact was entered into, should be substantially maintained.

But a right implies a remedy; and where else could the remedy be deposited, than where it is deposited by the constitution? Governments of dissimilar principles and forms have been found less adapted to a federal coalition of any sort, than those of a kindred nature. "As the confederate republic of Germany," says Montesquieu, "consists of free cities, and petty states, subject to different princes, experience shows us, that it is more imperfect, than that of Holland and Switzerland. Greece was undone," he adds, "as soon as the king of Macedon obtained a seat among the Amphyctions." In the latter case, no doubt, the disproportionate force, as well as the monarchical form of the new confederate, had its share of influence on the events.

It may be possibly asked, what need there could be of such a precaution, and whether it may not become a pretext for alterations in the state governments, without the concurrence of the states themselves. These questions admit of ready answers. If the interposition of the general government should not be needed, the provision for such an event will be a harmless superfluity only in the constitution. But who can say, what experiments may be produced by the caprice of particular states, by the ambition of enterprising leaders, or by the intrigues and influence of foreign powers? To the second

question it may be answered, that if the general government should interpose by virtue of this constitutional authority, it will be of course bound to pursue the authority. But the authority extends no farther than to a guaranty of a republican form of government, which supposes a pre-existing government of the form which is to be guaranteed. As long, therefore, as the existing republican forms are continued by the states, they are guaranteed by the federal constitution.

Whenever the states may choose to substitute other republican forms, they have a right to do so, and to claim the federal guaranty for the latter. The only restriction imposed upon them is, that they shall not exchange republican for anti-republican constitutions; a restriction which, it is presumed, will hardly be considered as a grievance.

A protection against invasion is due, from every society, to the parts composing it. The latitude of the expression here used seems to secure each state, not only against foreign hostility, but against ambitious or vindictive enterprises of its more powerful neighbours. The history, both of ancient and modern confederacies, proves, that the weaker members of the union ought not to be insensible to the policy of this article.

Protection against domestic violence is added with equal propriety. It has been remarked, that even among the Swiss cantons, which, properly speaking, are not under one government, provision is made for this object; and the history of that league informs us, that mutual aid is frequently claimed and afforded; and as well by the most democratic, as the other cantons. A recent and well-known event among ourselves has warned us to be prepared for emergencies of a like nature.

At first view, it might seem not to square with the republican theory, to suppose, either that a majority have not the right, or that a minority will have the force, to subvert a government, and consequently, that the federal interposition can never be required, but when it would be improper. But theoretic reasoning, in this, as in most cases, must be qualified by the lessons of practice. Why may not illicit combinations, for purposes of violence, be formed as well by a majority of a state, especially a small state, as by a majority of a county, or a district of the same state; and if the authority of the