[robertpaulsen]

"A tacit admission that your view and Madison's are not in acccord?"

(I wouldn't be the first person to disagree with Madison, you know.) We're in accord -- as to what he put down in the constitution.

But then Madison is silent on this issue for 50 years. Then he writes this private letter, not to Chief Justice Marshall who's having a field day with the Commerce Clause ... oh no ... to some Cabell guy who, according to inquest, already understood what Madison was trying to explain.

So I'm dismissive of the letter, and you can't understand why I would be?

[Ken H]

(I wouldn't be the first person to disagree with Madison, you know.)

Noted.

So I'm dismissive of the letter, and you can't understand why I would be?

I do understand why you are dismissive of the letter.

[inquest]

Then he writes this private letter, not to Chief Justice Marshall who's having a field day with the Commerce Clause

Marshall's views on that clause were not at variance with Madison's. His "field day" involved doing exactly what Madison was talking about: restraining the states from interfering with the commerce of other states, not imposing federal restrictions on the actions of private citizens.