[Non-Sequitur]

Sorry. You can't convince me that the recipient of a letter who insists on using a nom de plume [but they supposedly found who it was anyway] had an undated, unsigned letter that specified it not be published [moral turpitude, anyone?] can constitute any kind of evidence.

So you blame sloppy work on the part of Hunt when he edited Madison's writings into a 9 volume collection? Are you suggesting none of the letters in the collection are Madison's? Or just the ones that disagree with you?

[MamaTexan]

So you blame sloppy work on the part of Hunt when he edited Madison's writings into a 9 volume collection? Are you suggesting none of the letters in the collection are Madison's? Or just the ones that disagree with you?

Nice tap-dancing on your part. I see you again fail to address the very logical and reasonable question that would enable any rational-thinking person from judging the veracity of the letter in question for himself.

Have you EVER seen a correspondence by James Madison that was neither dated nor signed?