Introduction

My life has been so much of a public one, that any review of it must mainly consist of the agency which was my lot in public transactions.
Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 174)

Youthful Reading

[A] book fell into my hands, which I read…with particular advantage. I have always thought it the best that had been written for cherishing in young minds a desire of improvement, a taste for learning, and a lively sense of the duties, the virtues, and the proprieties of life. The work I speak of is the "Spectator," well known by that title. It had several authors, at the head of them Mr. Addison…
Addison was of the first rank among the fine writers of the age, and has given a definition of what he showed himself an example.
"Fine writing," he says "consists of sentiments that are natural without being obvious;" to which adding the remark of Swift, another celebrated author of the same period, making a good style to consist "of proper words in their proper places…"
Letter to Richard D. Cutts [nephew about 10 years old], January 4, 1829 (Madison, 1865, IV, pages 1-2)

Young and Disheartened

As for myself, I am too dull and infirm now to look out for any extraordinary things in this world, for I think my sensations for many months past have intimated to me not to expect a long and healthy life; though it may be better with me after some time, [but] I hardly dare expect it, and therefore have little spirit and to set about anything that is difficult in acquiring and useless in possessing after one has exchanged time for eternity. [Madison is 21.]
Letter to William Bradford, Jr., November 1772 (Madison, 1865, I, page 6.)

Origins of the Revolution

Your remark is very just on the subject of Independence. It was not the offspring of a particular man or particular moment…Our forefathers brought with them the germ of Independence in the principle of self-taxation. Circumstances unfolded and perfected it.
The first occasion which aroused this principle was…the projected Union at Albany in 1754, when the proposal of the British Government to reimburse its advances for the Colonies by a parliamentary tax on them was met by the letter from Doctor Franklin to Governor Shirley, pointing out the unconstitutionality, the injustice, and the impolicy of such a tax.
The opposition and discussions produced by the stamp and subsequent Acts of Parliament make another stage in the growth of Independence. The attempts to distinguish between legislation on the subject of taxes, and on other subjects, terminated in the disclosure that no such distinction existed.
And these combats against the arrogated authority of the British Legislature paved the way for burying in the same grave with it the forfeited authority of the British King.
Letter to John Adams, August 7, 1818 (Madison, 1865, III, page 165)

Declaration of Independence

My first entrance on public life was in May, 1776, when I became a member of the Convention in Virginia, which instructed her delegates in Congress to propose the Declaration of Independence…It has always been my impression that a re-establishment of the Colonial relations to the parent country previous to the controversy was the real object of every class of people, till despair of obtaining it, and the exasperating effects of the war, and the manner of conducting it, prepared the minds of all for the event declared on the 4th of July, 1776, as preferable, with all its difficulties and perils, to the alternative of submission to a claim of power, at once external, unlimited, irresponsible, and under every temptation to abuse from interest, ambition, and revenge.
Letter to Jared Sparks, January 5th, 1828 (Madison, 1865, III, page 609)

Nothing can be more absurd than the cavil that the Declaration contains known and not new truths. The object was to assert, not to discover truths, and to make them the basis of the Revolutionary act. The merit of the Declaration, therefore, could only consist in a lucid communication of human rights, in a condensed enumeration of the reasons for such an exercise of them, and in a style and tone appropriate to the great occasion, and to the spirit of the American people.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, September 6, 1823 (Madison, 1865, III, pages 336-337)

Thomas Jefferson

I was a stranger to Mr. Jefferson [till] the year 1776, when he took his seat in the first Legislature under the Constitution of Virginia, then newly formed; being at that time myself a member of that Body, and for the first time, a member of any public Body. The acquaintance made with him on that occasion was very slight; the distance between our ages being considerable, and other distances much more so. During part of the time whilst he was Governor of the State, a service to which he was called not long after, I had a seat in Council, associated with him. Our acquaintance then became more intimate, and a friendship was formed which was for life, and which was never interrupted in the slightest degree for a single moment.
Letter to Margaret H. Smith, September, 1830 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 111)

Free Transit of the Mississippi

[A]s the United States have an indisputable right to the possession of the east bank of the Mississippi for a very great distance, and the navigation of that river will essentially tend to the prosperity and advantage of the citizens of the United States that may reside on the Mississippi or the waters running into it, it is conceived that the circumstances of Spain's being in possession of the banks on both sides near its mouth, cannot be deemed a natural or equitable bar to the free use of the river.
Instructions to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Jay Concerning the Free Navigation of the Mississippi, & c. (from the Continental Congress to the Ambassadors to France and Spain; drafted by James Madison) October 17, 1780 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 445)

The vacant land of the United States lying on the waters of the Mississippi is, perhaps, equal in extent to the land actually settled. If no check be given to the emigrations from the latter to the former, they probably will keep pace at least with the increase of our people, till the population of both becomes nearly equal.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, August 20, 1784 (Madison 1865, I, page 96)

Nature has given the use of the Mississippi to those who may settle on its waters, as she gave to the United States their independence. The impolicy of Spain may retard the former, as that of Great Britain did the latter. But as Great Britain could not defeat the latter, neither will Spain the former.
Letter to Marquis LaFayette, March 20, 1785 (Madison 1865, I, page 137)

Manumission Fails in Virginia

The pulse of the [Virginia] House of Delegates was felt on Thursday with regared to a general manumission [freeing of the slaves], by a petition presented on that subject. It was rejected without dissent, but not without an avowed patronage of its principle by sundry respectable members. A motion was made to throw it under the table, which was treated with as much indignation on one side as the petition itself was on the other. There are several petitions before the House against any step toward freeing the Slaves, and even praying for a repeal of the law which licences particular manumissions.
Letter to General Washington, Novr 11, 1785 (Madison 1865, I, page 543)

Memorial and Remonstrances

The Anglican hierarchy existing in Virginia prior to the Revolution was abolished by an early act of the Independent Legislature. In the year 1785, a bill was introduced under the auspices of Mr. Henry, imposing a general tax for the support of "Teachers of the Christian Religion." It made a progress, threatening a majority in its favor. As an expedient to defeat it, we proposed that it should be postponed to another session, and printed in the meantime for public consideration. Such an appeal in a case so important and so unforeseen could not be resisted. With a view to arouse the people, it was thought proper that a memorial should be drawn up, the task being assigned to me, to be printed and circulated throughout the State for a general signature. The experiment succeeded. The memorial was so extensively signed by the various religious sects, including a considerable portion of the old hierarchy, that the projected innovation was crushed, and under the influence of the popular sentiment thus called forth, the well-known Bill prepared by Mr. Jefferson, for "Establishing Religious freedom," passed into a law, as it now stands in our code of statutes.
Letter to General La Fayette, November, 1826 (Madison 1865, III, page 543)

The Preparation for a Convention

The books which you have been so good as to forward to me are so well assorted to my wishes that no suggestions are necessary as to your future purchases.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, May 12th, 1786 (Madison 1865, I, page 231)

The Call for a Convention

Having witnessed, as a member of the Revolutionary Congress, the inadequacies of the powers conferred by the "Articles of Confederation," and having become, after the expiration of my term of service there, a member of the Legislature of Virginia, I felt it to be my duty to spare no efforts to impress on that body the alarming condition of the U. States proceeding from that cause, and the evils threatened by delay, in applying a remedy. With this, propositions were made vesting in Congress the necessary powers to regulate trade, then suffering under the monopolizing power abroad, and State collisions at home, and to draw from that source the convenient revenue it was capable of yielding. The propositions, though received with favorable attention, and at one moment agreed to in a crippled form, were finally frustrated, or, rather, abandoned. Such, however, were the impressions which the public discussions had made, that an alternative proposition, which had been kept in reserve, being seasonably brought forward by a highly respected member [of the Virginia legislature], who, having long served in the State [Virginia] councils without participating in the Federal, had more the ear of the Legislature on that account, was adopted with little opposition. The proposition invited the other states to concur with Virginia in a convention of deputies commissioned to devise and report a uniform system of commercial regulations. Commissioners on the part of the State were at the same time appointed, myself of the number. The convention proposed took place at Annapolis, in August, 1786. Being, however, very partially attended, and it appearing to the members that a rapid progress, aided by the experiment on foot, had made in ripening the public mind for a radical reform of the Federal polity, they determined to waive the object for which they were appointed, and recommend a convention, with enlarged powers, to be held the year following, in the city of Philadelphia. The Legislature of Virginia happened to be the first that acted on the recommendation, and being a member [of the Virginia Legislature], the only one of the attending commissioners at Annapolis who was so, my best exertions were used in promoting a compliance with it, and in giving to the example the most conciliating form, and all the weight that could be derived from a list of deputies having the name of Washington at its head.
Letter to Thomas J. Wharton, August, 1827 (Madison 1865, III, pages 586-587)

The only step of moment taken by Congress, since my arrival, has been a recommendation of a proposed meeting in May, for revising the federal Articles [of Confederation].
Letter to the HonbleEdmund Pendleton, February 24, 1787 (Madison 1865, I, page 278)

Constitutional Convention

That most of us carried into the Convention a profound impression, produced by the experienced inadequacy of the old Confederation, and by the monitory examples of all similar ones, ancient and modern, as to the necessity of binding the States together by a strong Constitution, is certain.
Letter to John G. Jackson, December 27, 1821 (Madison 1865, III, page 244)

The resolutions [i.e., the Virginia Plan] proposed by him [Virginia Governor Randolph] were the result of a consultation among the Deputies [the Virginia delegation], the whole number, seven, being present. The part which Virginia had borne in bringing about the Convention suggested the idea that some such initiative step might be expected from their deputation, and Mr. Randolph was designated for the task. It was perfectly understood that the propositions committed no one to their precise tenor or form, and that the members of the deputation would be as free in discussing and shaping them as the other members of the Convention. Mr. Randolph was made the organ on the occasion, being then the Governor of the State, of distinguished talents, and in the habit of public speaking. General Washington, though at the head of the list, was… disinclined to take the lead. It was also foreseen that he would be immediately called to the presiding station.
Letter to John Tyler (not sent?), 1833 (Madison 1865, IV, page 281)

It was generally agreed that the objects of the Union could not be secured by any system founded on the principle of a confederation of Sovereign States. A voluntary observance of the federal law by all the members could never be hoped for. A compulsive one could evidently never be reduced to practice, and if it could, involved equal calamities to the innocent and guilty, the necessity of a military force, both obnoxious and dangerous, and, in general, a scene resembling much more a civil war than the administration of a regular Government.
Hence was embraced the alternative of a Government which, instead of operating on the States, should operate without their intervention on the individuals composing them; and hence the change in the principle and proportion of representation.
This ground-work being laid, the great objects which presented themselves were: 1. To unite a proper energy in the Executive, and a proper stability in the Legislative departments, with the essential characters of Republican Government. 2. To draw a line of demarkation which would give to the General Government every power requisite for general purposes, and leave to the States every power which might be most beneficially administered by them. 3. To provide for the different interests of different parts of the Union. 4. To adjust the clashing pretensions of the large and small States. Each of these objects was pregnant with difficulties. The whole of them together formed a task more difficult than can be well conceived by those who were not concerned in the execution of it.…
The first of these objects, as respects the Executive, was peculiarly embarrassing. On the question whether it should consist of a single person or a plurality of co-ordinate members, on the mode of appointment, on the duration in office, on the degree of power, on the re-eligibility, tedious and reiterated discussions took place. The plurality of co-ordinate members had finally but few advocates. Governor [of Virginia] Randolph was at the head of them. The modes of appointment proposed were various: as by the people at large, by electors chosen by the people, by the Executives of the States, by the Congress; some preferring a joint ballot of the two Houses; some, a separate concurrent ballot, allowing to each a negative on the other house; some, a nomination of several candidates by one House, out of whom a choice should be made by the other. Several other modifications were started. The expedient at length adopted seemed to give pretty general satisfaction to the members. As to the duration in office, a few would have preferred a tenure during good behaviour; a considerable number would have done so in case an easy and effectual removal by impeachment could be settled.
It was much agitated whether a long term, seven years for example, with a subsequent and perpetual ineligibility, or a short term, with a capacity to be re-elected, should be fixed. In favor of the first opinion were urged the danger of a gradual degeneracy of re-elections from time to time, into first a life and then hereditary tenure, and the favorable effect of an incapacity to be reappointed on the independent exercise of the Executive authority. On the other side it was contended that the prospect of necessary degradation would discourage the most dignified characters from aspiring to the office; would take away the principal motive to the faithful discharge of its duties--the hope of being rewarded with a reappointment; would stimulate ambition to violent efforts for holding over the Constitutional term; and instead of producing an independent administration and a firmer defense of the constitutional rights of the department, would render the officer more indifferent to the importance of a place which he would soon be obliged to quit forever, and more ready to yield to the encroachments of the Legislature, of which he might again be a member.
The questions concerning the degree of power turned chiefly on the appointment to offices, and the controul on the Legislature. An absolute appointment to all offices, to some offices, to no offices, formed the scale of opinions on the first point. On the second, some contended for an absolute negative, as the only possible mean of reducing to practice the theory of a free Government, which forbids a mixture of the Legislative and Executive powers. Others would be content with a revisionary power, to be overruled by three-fourths of both Houses. It was warmly urged that the judiciary department should be associated in the revision. The idea of some was, that a separate revision should be given to the two departments; that if either objected, two-thirds, if both, three-fourths, should be necessary to overrule.
In forming the Senate, the great anchor of the government, the questions, as they come within the first object, turned mostly on the mode of appointment, and the duration of it. The different modes proposed were: 1. By the House of Representatives. 2. By the Executive. 3. By electors chosen by the people for the purpose. 4. By the State Legislatures. On the point of duration, the propositions descended from good behaviour to four years, through the intermediate terms of nine, seven, six, and five years. The election of the other branch was first determined to be triennial, and afterwards reduced to biennial.
The second object, the due partition of power between the General and local Governments, was perhaps, of all, the most nice and difficult. A few contended for an entire abolition of the States; some, for indefinite power of Legislation in the Congress, with a negative on the laws of the States; some, for such a power without a negative; some, for a limited power of legislation, with such a negative; the majority, finally, for a limited power without the negative. The question with regard to the negative underwent repeated discussions, and was finally rejected by a bare majority.…
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, October 24, 1787 (Madison 1865, I, pages 343-357)

[Madison discusses] the third object above mentioned, the adjustments of the different interests of different parts of the continent. Some contended for an unlimited power over trade, including exports as well as imports, and over slave as well as other imports; some, for such a power, provided the concurrence of two-thirds of both Houses were required; some, for such a qualification of the power, with an exemption of exports and slaves; others, for an exemption of exports only. The result is seen in the Constitution. South Carolina and Georgia were inflexible on the point of the Slaves.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, October 24, 1787 (Madison 1865, I, pages 343-357)

The knot felt as the Gordian one [fourth object in preceding letter] was the question between the between the larger and smaller States on the rule of voting in the Senatorial branch of the legislature; the latter claiming, the former opposing, the rule of equality…[A]n equal division of the votes on the question had reiterated and prolonged till it had become…seriously alarming. It was during this point of gloom that Dr. Franklin made his proposition for a religious service in the Convention…[A] proposition had been made…to refer the knotty question to a committee with a view to some compromise; the indications being manifest that sundry members from the larger States were relaxing in their opposition, and that some ground of compromise was contemplated, such as finally took place…
Letter to Jared Sparkes, April 8, 1831 (Madison 1865, IV, pages 169-170)

The finish given to the style and arrangement of the Constitution fairly belong to the pen of Mr. [Gouverneur] Morris; the task having been probably handed over to him by the Chairman of the Committee [on Style]…with the ready concurrence of the others.
Letter to Jared Sparkes, April 8, 1831 (Madison 1865, IV, page 169)

Ratification and Federalist Papers

It will not escape you that three names only from Virginia are subscribed to the act. Mr. Wythe did not return after the death of his lady. Doctor McClurg left the Convention some time before the adjournment. The Governor [Randolph] and Col. Mason refused to be parties to it. Mr. Gerry was the only other member who refused. The objections of the Governor turn principally on the latitude of the general powers, and on the connection established between the President and the Senate. He wished that the plan should be proposed to the States, with liberty to them to suggest alterations, which should all be referred to another General Convention, to be incorporated into the plan as far as might be judged expedient. He was not inveterate in his opposition, and grounded his refusal to subscribe pretty much on his unwillingness to commit himself, so as not to be at liberty to be governed by further lights on the subject.
Col. Mason left Philadelphia in an exceeding ill humor indeed. A number of little circumstances, arising in part from the impatience which prevailed towards the close of the business, conspired to whet his acrimony. He returned to Virginia with a fixed disposition to prevent the adoption of the plan, if possible. He considers the want of a Bill of Rights as a fatal objection. His other objections are to the substitution of the Senate in place of an Executive Council, and to the powers vested in that body; to the powers of the Judiciary; to the vice president being made president of the Senate; to the smallness of the number of Representatives; to the restriction on the States with regard to ex post facto laws; and most of all, probably, to the power of regulating trade by a majority only of each House. He has some other lesser objections. Being now under the necessity of justifying his refusal to sign, he will, of course, muster every possible one. His conduct has given great umbrage to the County of Fairfax, and particularly to the Town of Alexandria. He is already instructed to promote in the Assembly the calling a Convention, and will probably be either not deputed to the Convention, or be tied up by express instructions. He did not object in general to the powers vested in the National Government so much as the modification. In some respects he admitted that some further powers would have improved the system. He acknowledged, in particular, that a negative on the State laws and the appointment of the State Executives ought to be ingredients; but supposed that the public mind would not now bear them, and that experience would hereafter produce these amendments.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, October 24, 1787 (Madison 1865, I, pages 343-357)

The papers under the title of "Federalist" and and signature of "Publius" were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, in the latter part of the year 1787 and the former part of the year 1788. The immediate object of them was to vindicate and recommend the new Constitution to the State of New York, whose ratification of the instrument was doubtful, as well as important. The undertaking was proposed by A. Hamilton (who had probably consulted Mr. Jay and others) to J. M. [James Madison], who agreed to take a part in it. The papers were originally addressed to the people of N. York, under the signature of a "Citizen of New York." This was changed for that of "Publius," the first name of Valerius Publicola. The reason for the change was, that one of the writers was not a citizen of that State; another that the publication had diffused itself among most of the other States. The papers were first published at New York in a newspaper printed by Francis Childs, at the rate, during great part of the time, at least, of four numbers a week; and notwithstanding that exertion, they were not compleated till a large proportion of the States had decided upon the Constitution.
Letter to James K. Paulding, July 24, 1818 (Madison 1865, III, pages 99-100)

Election to the House

I shall leave this place [Philadelphia] in a day or two for Virginia, where my friends, who wish me to co-operate in putting our political machine into activity as a member of the house of Representatives, press me to attend. They made me a candidate for the Senate, for which I had not allotted my pretensions. The attempt was defeated by Mr. Henry, who is omnipotent in the present Legislature, and who added to the expedients common on such occasions a public philippic against my federal principles. He has taken equal pains in forming the Counties into Districts, for the election of Representatives, to associate with Orange [County, Madison's home] such as are most devoted to his politics, and most likely to be swayed by the prejudices excited against me.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, Jany 14, 1789 (Madison 1865, I, pages 443-444)

I fear, from the vague accounts that circulate, that the Federalist candidates are likely to stand in the way of each other. This is not the case, however, in my district. The field is left entirely to [James] Monroe and myself. The event of our competition will probably depend on the part to be taken by two or three descriptions of people, whose decision is not known, if not yet to be ultimately formed. I have pursued my pretensions much further than I had premeditated, having not only made great use of epistolary means, but actually visited two counties, Culpeper and Louisa, and publicly contradicted the erroneous reports propagated against me. It has very industriously inculcated that I am dogmatically attached to the Constitution in every clause, syllable, and letter, and therefor not a single amendment by my vote, either from conviction or a spirit of accommodation.
Letter to George Washington, Decr 8, 1788 (Madison 1865, I, pages 449-450)

Bill of Rights

It appears to me that this house is bound by every motive of prudence, not to let the first session pass over without proposing to the state legislatures some things to be incorporated into the constitution, as will render it as acceptable to the whole people of the United States, as it has been found acceptable to a majority of them. I wish, among other reasons why something should be done, that those who have been friendly to the adoption of this constitution, may have the opportunity of proving to those who were opposed to it, that they were as sincerely devoted to liberty and a republican government, as those who charged them with wishing the adoption of this constitution in order to lay the foundation of an aristocracy or despotism. It will be a desirable thing to extinguish from the bosom of every member of the community any apprehensions, that there are those among his countrymen who wish to deprive them of the liberty for which they valiantly fought and honorably bled. And if there are amendments desired, of such a nature as will not injure the constitution, and they can be ingrafted so as to give satisfaction to the doubting part of our fellow citizens; the friends of the federal government will evince that spirit of deference and concession for which they have hitherto been distinguished.
Proposing Bill of Rights to House, June 8, 1789

[T]hose safe, if not necessary, and those politic, if not obligatory, amendments…
Letter to John G. Jackson, Dec. 27, 1821 (Madison 1865, III, pages 243-247)

Marriage to Dolley

Present my best respects to Mrs. Monroe and Eliza, and tell them I shall be able on their return to present them with a new acquaintance, who is prepared, by my representations, to receive them with all the affection they merit, and who, I flatter myself, will be entitled to theirs. The event which put this in my power took place on the 15th of Septr.
Letter to James Monroe, December 4, 1794 (Madison, 1865, II, page 27)

Alien and Sedition Acts

The Alien bill proposed in the Senate is a monster that must forever disgrace its parents.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, May 20, 1798 (Madison, 1865, II, page 142)

The Virginia Resolutions

Concert among the States for redress against the alien and sedition laws, as acts of usurped powers, was a leading sentiment; and the attainment of a concert was the immediate object of the course adopted by the [Virginia] Legislature; which was that of inviting the other States "to concur in declaring the acts to be unconstitutional, and to co-operate by the necessary and proper measures in maintaining unimpaired the authorities, rights, and liberties reserved to the States respectively and to the people." [See the Virginia Resolutions of 1798]…[B]y the necessary and proper measures to be concurrently and co-operatively taken, were meant measures known to the Constitution, particularly the ordinary control of the people and Legislatures of the States over the Government of the United States…
Letter to Edward Everett, August, 1830 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 105)

The Election of 1800

It is not to be denied that the Constitution might have been properly more full in prescribing the election of the President and Vice President…
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, March 15, 1800 (Madison, 1865, II, page 157)

I cannot apprehend any danger of a surprize that would throw Mr. Jefferson out of the primary station. I cannot believe that any such is intended, or that a single republican vote will abandon him. The worst, therefore, that could possibly happen, would be a tie, that would appeal to the House of Representatives, where the candidates would certainly, I think, be arranged properly, even on the recommendation of the secondary one.
Letter to James Monore [Governor of Virginia], November 10, 1800 (Madison, 1865, II, page 162)

There can be no danger, I presume, but that in such an event [election in the House of Representatives], a proper one [choice] will be made; but it is more desirable that it should be precluded by the foresight of some of the Electors.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, Decr 20, 1800 (Madison, 1865, II, page 157)

The situation of Mr. Jefferson during the critical period of the Presidential contest in the House of Representatives was equally marked by its peculiarity and its importance. He saw the whole Government in a state of convulsion; he saw the danger of an absolute interregnum in its Executive branch, the consequences of which could not be foreseen; he saw as what he regarded as the will of the people about to be trampled on…
Letter to Robert Walsh, Jany 25, 1831 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 157)

Louisiana Purchase

Intelligence has come through several channels which makes it probable that Louisiana has been ceded to France.
Letter to James Monroe, June 1, 1801 (Madison, 1865, II, page 174)

France and Spain cannot be too deeply impressed with the necessity of revising their relations with us thro' the Mississippi…
Letter to James Monroe, March 1, 1803 (Madison, 1865, II, page 178)

We have just received the message of his Brittanic Majesty, which is represented as the signal of a certain rupture with France.
Letter to James Monroe, May 1, 1803 (Madison, 1865, II, page 182)

The purchase of Louisiana in its full extent, tho' not contemplated, is received with warm, and, in a manner, universal approbation…It will be of great importance…to take the regulation and settlement of that Territory out of other hands into those of the U.S.…By securing, also, the exclusive jurisdiction of the Mississippi to the mouth, a source of much perplexity and collision is effectually cut off.
Letter to James Monroe, July 30, 1803 (Madison, 1865, II, pages 183-184)

[T]he real cause of the success is to be found in the sudden policy suggested to Napolean by the foreseen rupture of the peace of Amiens, and, as a consequence, the seizure of Louisiana by G[reat]. Britain, who would not only deprive France of her acquistion, but turn it, politically or commercially, against her, in relation to the United States or Spanish America.
Letter to J. W. Francis, Novr 7, 1831 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 201)

War of 1812

The command of the Lakes by a superior force on the water ought to have been a fundemental point in the national policy from the moment the peace [end of Revolutionary War?] took place.
Letter to Majr Genl Dearborne, October 7, 1812 (Madison, 1865, II, page 545)

It was not declared on the part of the United States until it had been long made on them, in reality though not in name; until arguments and postulations had been exhausted; until a positive declaration had been received that the wrongs provoking it would not be discontinued; nor until this last appeal could no longer be delayed without breaking down the spirit of the nation, destroying all confidence in itself and in its political institutions, and either perpetuating a state of disgraceful suffering or regaining by more costly sacrifices and more severe struggles our lost rank and respect among independent powers.
On the issue of the war are staked our national sovereignty on the high seas and the security of an important class of citizens whose occupations give the proper value to those of every other class. Not to contend for such a stake is to surrender our equality with other powers on the element common to all and to violate the sacred title which every member of the society has to its protection. I need not call into view the unlawfulness of the practice by which our mariners are forced at the will of every cruising officer from their own vessels into foreign ones, nor paint the outrages inseparable from it. The proofs are in the records of each successive Administration of our Government, and the cruel sufferings of that portion of the American people have found their way to every bosom not dead to the sympathies of human nature.
Second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1813

On Lake Erie, the squadron under command of Captain Perry having met the British squadron of superior force, a sanguinary conflict ended in the capture of the whole. The conduct of that officer, adroit as it was daring, and which was so well seconded by his comrades, justly entitles them to the admiration and gratitude of their country, and will fill an early page in its naval annals with a victory never surpassed in luster, however much it may have been in magnitude.
State of the Union, 1813

The war [of 1812] has proved…that our free Government, like other free Governments, though slow in its early movements, acquires, in its progress, a force proportioned to its freedom…
State of the Union, 1813

Send…a commission of Brigadier and a brevet of Major General for General Jackson.
To the Secretary of War, May 17th, 1814 (Madison, 1865, III, page 398)

If the power of France be broken down, which is more than probable, for a time at least, and the allies of England can be prevailed on to acquiesce in her measures against us, which is possible, we may calculate on the utmost extension she can give them, both on our Atlantic and inland frontier.
To the Secretary of War, May 24, 1814 (Madison, 1865, III, page 401)

You are not mistaken in viewing the conduct of the Eastern States [New England] as the source of our greatest difficulties in carrying on the war; as it is certainly the greatest, if not the sole inducement with the enemy to persevere in it.
Letter to Wilson C. Nicholas, Novr 25, 1814 (Madison, 1865, II, page 593)

In Spain, every thing suffers under the phrenzy of the Throne and the fanaticism of the people. But for our peace with England, it is not impossible that a new war from that quarter [Spain] would have been opened against us. The affair at New Orleans [Jackson's victory], will perhaps, be a better guaranty against such an event.
Letter to Thomas Jefferson, March 12, 1815 (Madison, 1865, II, page 601)

War with Algiers

Your predecessor made war without cause on the United States; driving away their Consul, and putting into slavery the Captain and crew of one of their vessels, sailing under the faith of an existing treaty. The moment we had brought to an honorable conclusion our war with a nation the most powerful in Europe on the seas, we detached a squadron from our naval force into the Mediterranean to take satisfaction for the wrongs which Algiers had done to us. Our squadron met yours, defeated it, and made prize of your largest ship and a smaller one. Our Commander proceeded immediately to Algiers, offered you peace, which you accepted and thereby saved the rest of your ships…
Letter to the Dey of Algiers, August, 1816 (Madison 1865, III, page 16)

Missouri Compromise

It appears to me, as it does to you, that a coupling of Missouri with Maine, in order to force open the entrance of the former through the door voluntarily opened to the latter, is, to say the least, a very doubtful policy.
Letter to President Monroe, February 10, 1820 (Madison, 1865, III, page 164)

I find the idea is fast spreading that the zeal with which the extension, so called, of slavery is opposed, has, with the coalesced leaders, an object very different from the welfare of the slaves, or the check to their increase; and that their real object is, as you intimate, to form a new state of parties, founded on local instead of political distinctions, thereby dividing the Republicans of the North from those of the South, and making the former instrumental in giving to the opponents of both an ascendency over the whole.
Letter to President Monroe, February 10, 1820 (Madison, 1865, III, page 164-165)

Controversy over Protective Tariff

The power to regulate trade is a compound technical phrase, to be expounded by the sense in which it has usually been taken, as shewn by the purpose to which it has usually been applied. To interpret it with a literal strictness, excluding whatever is not specified, would exclude even the retaliating and extorting power against the unequal policy of other nations, which is not specified, yet is admitted by all to be included. The custom-house has, in fact, been more generally used as the instrument for establishing and protecting domestic manufactures, than for enforcing liberality or reciprocity abroad.
Letter to W. C. Rives, January 10, 1829 (Madison, 1865, IV, pages 3-4)

[T]he tariff, in its present amount and form, is a source of deep and extensive discontent, and I fear that without alleviations separating the more moderate from the more violent opponents, very serious effects are threatened. Of these, the most formidable and not the least probable would be a Southern Convention…
Letter to Henry Clay (confidential), March 22, 1832 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 216)

The more the question of the tariff is brought to the test of facts, the more it will be found that the public discontents have proceeded from the inequality than from the weight of its pressure, and more from the exaggerations of both than from the reality…
Letter to Professor Davis {not sent}, 1832(?), (Madison, 1865, IV, page 262)

Nullification

In comparing the doctrine of Virginia in '98-'99 [Virginia Resolutions concerning alien and sedition acts] with that of the present day in S. Carolina [Nullification], will it not be found that Virginia asserted that the States, as parties to the constitutional compact, had a right and were bound, in extreme cases only, and after a failure of all efforts for redress under the forms of the constitution, to interpose in their sovereign capacity for the purpose of arresting the evil of usurpation and preserving the Constitution and the Union whereas the doctrine of the present day [Nullification] in S[outh]. Carolina asserts, that in a case of not greater magnitude than the degree of inequality in a operation of a tariff in favor of manufactures, she may of herself finally decide, by virtue of her sovereignty, that the Constitution has been violated, and that if not yielded to by the Federal Government, though supported by all the other States, she may rightfully resist it and withdraw herself from the Union.
Letter to Joseph C. Cabell, August 16, 1829 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 44)

The error in the comments on the Virginia proceedings has arisen from a failure to distinguish between what is declaratory of opinion and what is ipso facto executory; between the right of the parties to the Constitution and of a single party; and between resorts within the purview of the Constitution and the ultima ratio which appeals from a Constitution, cancelled by its abuses, to original rights paramount to all constitutions.
Letter to Edward Livingston, May 8, 1830 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 80)

[T]he present charge of usurpations and abuses of power is not that they are Measures of the Government violating the will of the constituents, as was the case with the alien and sedition acts, but that they are measures of a majority of constituents themselves, oppressing the minority through the forms of the Government. This distinction would lead to very different views of the topics under discussion. It is connected with the fundamental principles of Republican Government, and with the question of the comparative danger of oppressive majorities from the sphere and structure of the General Government and from those of the particular Governments.
Letter to E. Everett, April 1830 (Madison, 1865, IV, pages 72-73)

Longevity

[A]fter the canonical age of three-score-and-ten, (and few weeks will add another decade to mine,) a writer will find his arguments, whatever they be, answered with an "I wonder how old he is?"
Letter to Theodore Sedgwick, Junr, Feby, 12, 1831 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 162)

It is quite certain that since the death of Col. Few, I have been the only living signer of the Constitution of the U. States. Of the members who were present and who did not sign, and of those who were present part of the time, but had left the Convention, it is equally certain that not one has remained since the death of Mr. Lansing… I happen, also, to be the sole survivor of those who were members of the Revolutionary Congress prior to the close of the war; as I had been, for some years, of the members of the Convention in 1776, which formed the first Constitution for Virginia. Having outlived so many of my contemporaries, I ought not to forget that I may be thought to have outlived my self.
Letter to Jared Sparks, June 1, 1831 (Madison, 1865, IV, pages 181-182)

Declining Fortune

Among the effects of the transmigration from the Atlantic region to the ultra-montane, it is not to be overlooked that besides reducing the price of land in the former, by diminishing the proportion of inhabitants, it reduces it still further by reducing the value the value of its products in glutted markets.
Letter to N.P. Trist, Jany 26, 1828 (Madison, 1865, III, page 616)

How could it otherwise happen than that a superabundant offer of more fertile land…in one quarter should depress the value of the less fertile land in another quarter? How could it happen otherwise than that thousands would sell their less productive lands…and transfer their labour to a region easily accessible, and whence its trebled fruits would be almost as cheaply transported to the common market as from the region abandoned? How…could it fail to happen that these causes should have the impoverishing effect on the old [lands] which have been experienced from them?
Letter to Professor Davis (not sent), 1832? (Madison, 1865, IV, page 261)

Infirmity

In explanation of my microscopic writing, I must remark that the older I grow the more my stiffening fingers make smaller letters, as my feet take shorter steps; the progress in both cases being, at the same time, more fatiguing as well as more slow.
Letter to James Monroe, April 21, 1831 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 179)

The increasing pressure of my infirmities obliges me to dictate this acknowledgment of your kind attention to another pen, instead of employing my own, in the clumsy state of my fingers.
Letter to W. C. Rives, April 19, 1836 (Madison, 1865, IV, page 432)

Advice to My Country

As this advice, if it ever see the light, will not do so till I am no more, it may be considered as issuing from the tomb, where truth alone can be respected, and the happiness of man alone consulted. It will be entitled, therefore, to whatever weight can be derived from good intentions, and from the experience of one who has served his Country in various stations through a period of forty years; who espoused in his youth, and adhered through his life, to the cause of its liberty; and who has borne a part in most of the great transactions which will constitute epochs of its destiny.
The advice nearest to my heart and deepest in my convictions is, THAT THE UNION OF THE STATES BE CHERISHED AND PERPETUATED.
(Madison, 1865, IV, following page 435)