Still, this comes down to one man's opinion, but he was the authority on the intent and meaning of the Constitution.
James Madison talks out both sides of his mouth. His actions contradict his own statements.
James Madison was on the Virginia committee which created Virginia's ratification statement, which explicitly says that Virginia has a right to leave the Union if it perceives the government as being oppressive to the people of Virginia.
If James Madison disagreed that Virginia had a right to leave the Union, he should have made that opinion known to the Virginia legislature instead of later claiming that Virginia did not have the right to leave.
Perhaps he did and they didn't agree? In such a case, Madison is but a single man, with the actual authority resting in the body of the Legislature. It is what *THEY* say which determines legal legitimacy, not what Madison says or said.
As for evidence on the other side, there are THREE US States that specifically articulate a right to recall their powers from the Federal government. They are New York, Virginia and Rhode Island.
This is in black and white and represents the will of the legislative bodies of those states. It's not an opinion such as Mr. Madison has, it is the word of authority from the recognized lawful ruling body of their respective states.
Additionally, the Declaration of Independence absolutely articulates a right to secede. It declares it a right given by God and one that cannot be take away from the people.
In contrast, the US Constitution says absolutely nothing which claims that states cannot leave. It is utterly silent on the topic and with good reason. It was only 11 years earlier that the entire nation and all it's legislatures declared that Independence is a *RIGHT* and you cannot take it away.
Furthermore, Massachusetts and Connecticut both asserted a right to secede during the Hartford convention of 1814. This was only 27 years after the constitutional convention and many of the original framers were still alive. They did not object to the claims of Massachusetts or Connecticut.
There is other evidence, but this is all I wish to put forth off the top of my head, and what do you have to support your side?
Two statements by Madison, both contradicting what he did in 1788 (Virginia ratification committee and convention) and one made 40 years after the fact.
That is not much to hang your argument on. What i've put forth is better evidence, and more authoritative.
So your argument is that people can't "evolve" their thinking, that we are all locked into the things we said 40 years ago?
Didn't the Framers admit that the Constitution wasn't perfect and they may not have gotten it all correct, hence the amendment process to enable it to adapt to growth, technology advances, and social change?
There is other evidence, but this is all I wish to put forth off the top of my head, and what do you have to support your side? ...What i've put forth is better evidence, and more authoritative.
What about SCOTUS with Texas vs. White (1868)? See here and here.
-PJ