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

To: Yeti
James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:

"With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. If the words obtained so readily a place in the "Articles of Confederation," and received so little notice in their admission into the present Constitution, and retained for so long a time a silent place in both, the fairest explanation is, that the words, in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted."

95 posted on 04/07/2003 5:55:35 AM PDT by gorush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: gorush
"in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted." - James Madison

Contrary to popular Libertarian sentiment, the American Republic was never a dictatorship run by Madison. Instead, Madison was merely *one* minority vote among numerous Founding Fathers.

Moreover, the "alternative" is not between "everything" or "nothing", but rather somewhat less stark than that, as countless court cases over the last 2 centuries reveal.

103 posted on 04/07/2003 10:05:22 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

To: gorush
... worth repeating several times ...

"James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:

""With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. If the words obtained so readily a place in the "Articles of Confederation," and received so little notice in their admission into the present Constitution, and retained for so long a time a silent place in both, the fairest explanation is, that the words, in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted.""

138 posted on 04/09/2003 7:43:26 AM PDT by Countyline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | 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