Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did Woodrow Wilson read James Madison's debate notes?
PGA Weblog ^

Posted on 06/24/2017 9:22:13 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica

This is fully conjecture, but I'm convinced that the answer is yes.

During the time in which Wilson was inventing the concept of the "living and breathing constitution", Wilson made the following observations: (Constitutional Government, page 55)

The government of the United States was constructed upon the Whig theory of political dynamics, which was a sort of unconscious copy of the Newtonian theory of the universe [see: Newtonian government]. In our own day, whenever we discuss the structure or development of anything, whether in nature or in society, we consciously or unconsciously follow Darwin; but before Darwin, they followed Newton. Some single law, like the law of gravitation, swung each system of thought and gave it its principle of unity. Every sun, every planet, every free body in the spaces of the heavens, the world itself, is kept in its place and reined to its course by the attraction of bodies that swing with equal order and precision about it, themselves governed by the nice poise and balance of forces which give the whole system of the universe its symmetry and perfect adjustment. The Whigs had tried to give England a similar constitution.

The planets.

The sun.

Other celestial bodies that may or may not be seen in the sky or through a telescope.

What would possibly have urged Wilson to use this as his example, of all the things he could have used? Some might say "that's obvious", and I would tend to agree, but for completely different reasons. On Thursday, June 7th, 1787, John Dickenson made the following comment:

The preservation of the States in a certain degree of agency is indispensable. It will produce that collision between the different authorities which should be wished for in order to check each other. To attempt to abolish the States altogether, would degrade the Councils of our Country, would be impracticable, would be ruinous. He compared the proposed National System to the Solar System, in which the States were the planets, and ought to be left to move freely in their proper orbits. The Gentleman from Pa. [Mr. Wilson] wished he said to extinguish these planets. If the State Governments were excluded from all agency in the national one, and all power drawn from the people at large, the consequence would be that the national Govt. would move in the same direction as the State Govts. now do, and would run into all the same mischiefs. The reform would only unite the 13 small streams into one great current pursuing the same course without any opposition whatever. He adhered to the opinion that the Senate ought to be composed of a large number, and that their influence from family weight & other causes would be increased thereby. He did not admit that the Tribunes lost their weight in proportion as their no. was augmented and gave a historical sketch of this institution. If the reasoning of [Mr. Madison] was good it would prove that the number of the Senate ought to be reduced below ten, the highest no. of the Tribunitial corps.

Interesting. Of course, James Wilson's reply continued along the planetary theme. On Friday, June 8th, James Madison made the following comment:

Mr. MADISON seconded the motion. He could not but regard an indefinite power to negative legislative acts of the States as absolutely necessary to a perfect system. Experience had evinced a constant tendency in the States to encroach on the federal authority; to violate national Treaties; to infringe the rights & interests of each other; to oppress the weaker party within their respective jurisdictions. A negative was the mildest expedient that could be devised for preventing these mischiefs. The existence of such a check would prevent attempts to commit them. Should no such precaution be engrafted, the only remedy wd. lie in an appeal to coercion. Was such a remedy eligible? was it practicable? Could the national resources, if exerted to the utmost enforce a national decree agst. Massts. abetted perhaps by several of her neighbours? It wd. not be possible. A small proportion of the Community, in a compact situation, acting on the defensive, and at one of its extremities might at any time bid defiance to the National authority. Any Govt. for the U. States formed on the supposed practicability of using force agst. the unconstitutional proceedings of the States, wd. prove as visionary & fallacious as the Govt. of Congs. The negative wd. render the use of force unnecessary. The States cd. of themselves then pass no operative act, any more than one branch of a Legislature where there are two branches, can proceed without the other. But in order to give the negative this efficacy, it must extend to all cases. A discrimination wd. only be a fresh source of contention between the two authorities. In a word, to recur to the illustrations borrowed from the planetary system. This prerogative of the General Govt. is the great pervading principle that must controul the centrifugal tendency of the States; which, without it, will continually fly out of their proper orbits and destroy the order & harmony of the political System.

One of the things that Woodrow Wilson was, was a learned, well read man. He read the Founders in much the same way that I read his(Wilson's) words - for ways to deconstruct them.

This may only be my belief, but I believe it to be true. Wilson read the debate notes. And he hated every minute of it.


TOPICS: History; Reference
KEYWORDS: convention; founders; livingconstitution; presidents; progressingamerica; woodrowwilson

1 posted on 06/24/2017 9:22:13 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nicollo; Kalam; IYAS9YAS; laplata; mvonfr; Southside_Chicago_Republican; celmak; SvenMagnussen; ...
If anybody wants on/off the revolutionary progressivism ping list, send me a message

Progressives do not want to discuss their own history. I want to discuss their history.

Summary: With progressives, there are no coincidences.

2 posted on 06/24/2017 9:24:49 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica (We cannot leave history to "the historians" anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Wilson gave us the Federal Reserve, Taxes and the Inquiry (which became the CFR a couple years later.) He was controlled by Col House (who was controlled by Samuel Untemeir, likely a Rothschild agent.)


3 posted on 06/24/2017 9:37:45 AM PDT by Vic S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

If he did, he obviously didn’t understand them.


4 posted on 06/24/2017 9:38:53 AM PDT by TBP (0bama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Karl Marx read Adam Smith’s works in order to deconstruct capitalism, so Wilson could very well have read James Wilson in the very same way.


5 posted on 06/24/2017 9:39:55 AM PDT by Slyfox (Where's Reagan when we need him? Look in the mirror - the spirit of The Gipper lives within you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Back then people were taught history, not PC.


6 posted on 06/24/2017 9:43:04 AM PDT by stars & stripes forever (Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. Psalm 33:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TBP

“If he did, he obviously didn’t understand them.”

Absolutely correct.

Woodrow Wilson was a misplace academic enemy of the nation.

CFR? Sucks.

(My X-son-in-law was an adjunct member of the CFR.)

James Madison was one of a kind incredible intellect. Small stature, cast huge shadow to this day.


7 posted on 06/24/2017 9:45:37 AM PDT by Texas Fossil ((Texas is not where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind & Attitude!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

....Woodrow Wilson was a misplace academic enemy of the nation...
Barack Hussein Mohammad Obama was his successor.
When it was pointed out on TV this morning that Obama never had a real job, an Obamaphile defender pointed out that he was once a law school professor. In reality, an adjunct one at that.


8 posted on 06/24/2017 9:51:42 AM PDT by Sasparilla ( I'm Not tired of Winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sasparilla

ComDems and their defenders always lie. They must, if they told the truth no one would ever give them power.


9 posted on 06/24/2017 9:56:35 AM PDT by Texas Fossil ((Texas is not where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind & Attitude!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Wilson’s verbiage is smoke and mirrors, intended to obscure the agenda: doing away with self-government.

Every approach to the law other than Originalism is an attack on the ability of the people to be governed by laws they have made.


10 posted on 06/24/2017 10:49:25 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan (https://youtu.be/IYUYya6bPGw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Bfl - thanks


11 posted on 06/24/2017 12:09:47 PM PDT by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vic S; All
"Wilson gave us the Federal Reserve, Taxes ..."

Hi Vic S. Regarding what Pres. Wilson gave us, given the remote possibility that you are not aware of the following MAJOR constitutional problems (imo) with the Federal Reserve and taxes, you may find them interesting.

Regarding the Federal Reserve, Thomas Jefferson had noted that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had decided not to expressly constitutionally delegate to the feds the specific power to regulate INTRAstate banking.

“A proposition was made to them to authorize Congress to open canals, and an amendatory one to empower them to incorporate. But the whole was rejected, and one of the reasons for rejection urged in debate was, that then they would have a power to erect a bank, which would render the great cities, where there were prejudices and jealousies on the subject, adverse to the reception of the Constitution [emphasis added].” —Jefferson’s Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791.

So no matter how Congress’s constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers are interpreted, it remains that nothing in Section 8 can be reasonably interpreted as an express delegation of power to regulate INTRAstate banking.

In fact, state sovereignty-respecting Supreme Court justices had also clarified, in terms of 10th Amendment (10A)-protected state powers, that powers not expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds are prohibited to the feds.

”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.

So regardless if the corrupt feds argue that the Federal Reserve (FR) is privately run, it remains that the FR wrongly ignores 10A-protected state sovereignty imo.

Pres. Wilson was also wrong about taxes (imo) for the following reason. A previous generation of justices had also clarified that Congress is prohibited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues, basically any issue that it cannot justify under its Section 8-limited powers.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."—Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.


Noting that the Founding States had established the federal Senate partly to kill bills, including House appropriations bills, that not only steal 10A-protected state powers, but also state revenues uniquely associated powers, consider this.

The ill-conceived 17th Amendment helped to foster unconstitutionally big federal government, state lawmakers foolishly giving up the voices of the state legislatures in Congress when they ratified that amendment, effectively repealing the whole Constitution by doing so imo.

More specifically, whereas the Founding States had expected the Senate to kill state power, revenue-stealing federal legislation, the corrupt Senate is now helping the House to pass such bills.

12 posted on 06/24/2017 12:26:11 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vic S

I would not say that Wilson gave us taxes, etc.. The movement for all those matters was swelling long before his presidency.


13 posted on 06/24/2017 9:56:53 PM PDT by Loud Mime (Liberalism: Intolerance masquerading as tolerance, Ignorance masquerading as Intelligence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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