N. York Sunday Evening [20 July 1788]
My Dear Sir
Yours of yesterday is this instant come to hand & I have but a few minutes to answer it. I am sorry that your situation obliges you to listen to propositions of the nature you describe. My opinion is that a reservation of a right to withdraw if amendments be not decided on under the form of the Constitution within a certain time, is a conditional ratification, that it does not make N. York a member of the New Union, and consequently that she could not be received on that plan. Compacts must be reciprocal, this principle would not in such a case be preserved. THE CONSTITUION REQUIRES AND ADOPTION IN TOTO AND FOR EVER. It has been so adopted by the other States. An adoption for a limited time would be as defective as an adoption of some of the articles only. In short any condition whatever must viciate the ratification. What the New Congress by virtue of the power to admit new States, may be able & disposed to do in such case, I do not enquire as I suppose that is not the material point at present. I have not a moment to add more than my fervent wishes for your success & happiness.
James Madison
>>OIFVeteran wrote: That is not the end of the story. Can you not read? From James Madison to Alexander Hamilton
I can read. But you obviously cannot. You get stuck on a phrase or two, and cannot see the whole picture. I’ll try one more time:
Madison told Hamilton that, once the Constitution was constructed — once it left the Convention — the document was unalterable. Conditional ratifications that would alter the document were not allowed. From that point forward, the document could ONLY be changed by appending amendments (which has happened many times.)
Therefore, the original document has remain intact until this day.
Note: the document could also be “changed” by a blood-thirsty dictator, like Lincoln; but he corrupted only the original intent, not the written words themselves.
That is my last word on that letter.
Mr. Kalamata