Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
“Madison didn't accept that.”

Prove it! Nowhere did Madison ever claim that States ( under ALL circumstances must ask ‘mother may I’) Bring out you Trist letter or any letter from his Golden years!

I'll save you the trouble....
James Madison to Nicholas P. Trist
no State can at pleasure release itself therefrom, and set up for itself. The compact can only be dissolved by the consent of the other parties, “””or by usurpations or abuses of power justly having that effect.””””

Federalist 43
A compact between independent sovereigns, founded on ordinary acts of legislative authority, can pretend to no higher validity than a league or treaty between the parties. It is an established doctrine on the subject of treaties, that all the articles are mutually conditions of each other; that a breach of any one article is a breach of the whole treaty; and that a breach, committed by either of the parties, absolves the others, and authorizes them, if they please, to pronounce the compact violated and void.

1,097 posted on 03/23/2010 5:48:18 PM PDT by Idabilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1096 | View Replies ]


To: Idabilly
Prove it! Nowhere did Madison ever claim that States ( under ALL circumstances must ask ‘mother may I’) Bring out you Trist letter or any letter from his Golden years!

Yo, bonehead. First you say Madison never claimed that and then you bring up the letter where he does? Did you miss something?

James Madison to Nicholas P. Trist

Don't forget similar letters to William Rives and Daniel Webster.

It is an established doctrine on the subject of treaties, that all the articles are mutually conditions of each other; that a breach of any one article is a breach of the whole treaty; and that a breach, committed by either of the parties, absolves the others, and authorizes them, if they please, to pronounce the compact violated and void.

"It surely does not follow, from the fact of the States, or rather the people embodied in them, having as parties to the Constitutional compact no tribunal above them, that, in controverted meanings of the compact, a minority of the parties can rightfully decide gains the majority; still less than a single party can decide against the rest; and as little that it can at will withdraw from its compact with the rest...The characteristic distinction between free Governments and Governments not free is, that the former are founded on compact, not between the Government and those for whom it acts, but between the parties creating the Government. Each of those being equal, neither can have more rights to say that the compact has been violated and dissolved, than every other has to deny the fact, and to insist on the execution of the bargains." - James Madison

1,101 posted on 03/23/2010 7:06:38 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1097 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson