Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
Yes, because the founding fathers believed in the natural right of rebellion. The exact same right that they used against the British. However, the founding father that wrote the constitution believed it could be adopted only in toto and forever.

From James Madison to Alexander Hamilton

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 Constitution requires an 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

Another founding father, Alexander Hamilton, said the same thing in the federalist papers.

“Let the thirteen States, bound together in a strict and indissoluble Union, concur in erecting one great American system” Alexander Hamilton Federalist 11

82 posted on 01/10/2020 4:18:09 AM PST by OIFVeteran
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]


To: OIFVeteran
Yes, because the founding fathers believed in the natural right of rebellion. The exact same right that they used against the British. However, the founding father that wrote the constitution believed it could be adopted only in toto and forever.

These two ideas contradict each other. One cannot have a right to Independence, and then claim "except for this government we have subsequently created."

85 posted on 01/10/2020 11:31:56 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no oither sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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