Princeton honors famous alumnus

A February snowstorm that brought traffic to a near standstill on Interstate 95 threatened to spoil the opening of the James Madison symposium, held in conjunction with Princeton University's graduate school centennial events. Despite the paralyzing weather, several dozen scholars, historians and alumni made it to Brown University professor Gordon Wood's session "Is There a James Madison Problem?"

Wood maintained that Madison was far more than Jefferson's acolyte. Rather, he was the leading proponent of republican government who believed that aggressive war, monarchies, secret agreements and other threats to liberty could be eliminated through faithful adherence to such ideals. Wood argued that Madison's presidency was the culmination of his beliefs. Waging a war against the powerful Great Britain, Madison successfully recruited a 50,000-man army and guided the nation through its first constitutionally declared war. Although the nation's new capital was burned and New England dissent threatened the nation's unity, Madison still avoided high debts and taxes and resisted efforts to suppress civil liberties. In the end, the republic survived, true to its founding ideals.

The next day, professors Jack Rakove (Stanford University), John Stagg (U.Va.) Jennifer Nedelsky (Toronto University) and Pauline Maier (Massachusetts' Institute of Technology) spoke on different aspects of Madison's life, philosophy or significance.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the keynote address, "James Madison's Constitutional Interpretation." A small but vocal group of student demonstrators, upset about the role the Supreme Court played in the last election, protested outside the hall. Scalia claimed to be a Constitutional "textualist," explaining that much of the document is clear and concise in wording and not subject to interpretation. Moreover, Scalia said, Madison believed in governmental stability and permanence, fearing "democratic despotism" and the impulse of public opinion. As a result, the Constitution was carefully designed to be altered only through the difficult and deliberate amendment process.

By Phil Bigler ('74, '76M), James Madison Center director