teresting chapters which the constitutional history of any nation can lay before us. The formation of the Federal Constitution was, beyond doubt, the greatest and most arduous political experiment, and, if we measure the difficulties surmounted, may be fairly called the most successful one, which history records. In this, too, as in all great political changes, the interest does not end with the formal conclusion of the contest. The process by which the Federal Constitution was fashioned and determined really lasted through the presidencies of Washington and Adams, and only ended with the triumph of the Democrats under Jefferson.

If we had to single out one person who might fitly serve as a central figure for a political sketch of this period, our choice would probably fall upon Madison. This is due rather to the nature, than the extent, of his abilities. The generation of statesmen among whom he moved included many great names, and posterity will probably assign to Madison a place below at least three of his contemporaries. Even if he had possessed such qualities, his career gave him no opportunity of displaying the unwearied public spirit, the dauntless and patient courage, the pure and unselfish patriotism of Washington. He had none of that eager enthusiasm for party, that ardent faith in the future of his country, and that sympathy both with the nobler and the baser passions of mankind, which made Jefferson the founder and leader of American democracy. With Hamilton he had more in common. Yet Madison could claim but a small share in that far-sighted political wisdom to which every page of American history bears witness. But, in one sense, Madison was a more representative statesman than any of these. There probably was never a time at which he did not, better than any other living man, embody the views of a majority of educated American citizens. This it is which gives so much interest to the history of his political conduct and opinions, and it is from this point of view that we propose to consider his

career.

James Madison was born in Virginia in 1751. He was descended from one of the earliest settlers, Captain Isaac

Madison, the founder of a family, in which James Madison was only the foremost among several distinguished members. Of his early days there is little to tell. His education began at the school of a learned Scotch emigrant. In 1769 he was sent to the College at Princeton, beyond the limits of his native State. The principal, Dr. Witherspoon, was, like Madison's first teacher, a Scotch emigrant. A few years later he was called to a wider sphere of activity in the Revolutionary Congress, and his name is among those appended to the Declaration of Independence. We may suppose that his influence did something towards determining the future career of his pupil. Yet Madison's letters show no greater interest in the questions of the day than would be ordinarily found in an intelligent and well-educated lad. One characteristic anecdote of Madison's youth, significant of his future career, is oddly enough omitted by Mr. Rives, though it rests on no worse authority than that of John Quincy Adams. Dr. Witherspoon said of him that he never knew him say or do an indiscreet thing.' It is consoling to find that the case of a model young man is not always desperate. Probably, however, Mr. Rives has acted for the best interests of mankind in withholding so dangerous a precedent. With such a disposition it was well that the conditions of Madison's early life were not such as to stimulate mere intellectual precocity at the expense of his powers of action. His somewhat weak health and his retiring temper might have allowed him to settle down as a quiet student, had not his lot been cast in a time when

'The forward youth that would appear, Must now forsake his Muses dear.' Madison had little more than completed his college career when his country needed in some way or other the services of every patriotic citizen. In the actual events of the War of Independence Madison's part, though subordinate, was not unimportant. Even if it had been less prominent, we must remember that he and his contemporaries were trained into statesmen by the struggle for independence, and unless we take that influence into account we cannot justly appreciate their motives and