James Madison: A Life Reconsidered Read Free

thought about a contest for the presidency, he became ever more convinced that the attacks on him had been orchestrated by Jefferson to get rid of him as a rival. He inundated John Fenno, editor of the
Gazette of the United States,
with letters written under a variety of pseudonyms that attacked Jefferson by name and told the story of Freneau’s being recruited to come to Philadelphia, work in Jefferson’s State Department, and begin a newspaper. This made Freneau, Hamilton wrote, “the faithful and devoted servant of the head of a party.” When Freneau responded that the modest pay he received for translating had nothing to do with the views he expressed in the
National Gazette,
Hamilton snipped his words into a seeming admission of guilt, then asked this pointed question: How could Jefferson continue to serve in an administration that he was attacking? 14
    Driving the knife in deeper, Hamilton cited the meddlesome letter that Jefferson had written prior to the Virginia ratifying convention, in which he had expressed the hope that nine states would ratify the Constitution but four hold out until amendments were agreed to. As Hamilton presented it, this meant that “Jefferson was in the origin opposed to the present Constitution.” Thus it made perfect sense that he should have established a paper to express views “virulently hostile both to the government and to its measures.” 15 By conflating opposition togovernment measures with opposition to the Constitution, Hamilton was at once reflecting the widely held view that government was above party and calling Jefferson disloyal.
    Madison was at Montpelier when he learned of Hamilton’s attacks on Jefferson, and he immediately rode to Albemarle to confer with Jefferson and Monroe. Madison and Monroe took on the task of fighting back in
Dunlap’s American Daily Advertiser
. They accused Hamilton (though not by name) of wanting to silence anyone who pointed out “the mischievous tendency of some of the measures of government.” They also published extracts of a number of letters that Jefferson had sent “to a particular friend” in order to show his support for the Constitution. Madison also defended Freneau, pointing out his Princeton friend’s education, his worthy character, and his suffering during the war, when he had been held in a British prison ship. 16
    Freneau needed some boosting. Skilled polemicist though he was, the assault on his journalistic integrity pained him. Nearly a decade later he would still be denying that he had been Jefferson’s “pensioner” or “confidential agent.” In the months ahead, as if to show his independence, Freneau would launch harsher attacks than either Jefferson or Madison thought wise on the president himself. A cartoon in the
National Gazette
that showed a kingly Washington paying for his misdeeds on the guillotine would cause the president to bring a cabinet meeting to a full stop while he raged about “that
rascal Freneau
.” 17
    While defending Jefferson and Freneau, Madison also continued his effort to shift public thinking about parties. In a
National Gazette
essay, he made their inevitability clear by placing them in historical context. They had been present when some argued for independence while others remained loyal to Britain. They had existed when some supported the Constitution and others opposed it. Now there was “a third division, which being natural to most political societies, is likely to be of some duration in ours.” Madison described one of the current parties as “more partial to the opulent than to the other classes of society; and having debauched themselves into a persuasion that mankind are incapable of governing themselves, it follows with them of course that governmentcan be carried only by the pageantry of rank, the influence of money and emoluments, and the terror of military force.” The other party, clearly needed as a check, believed “in the doctrine that mankind are capable