Madison, in a letter to Jefferson, in 1780 wrote:
"Where ever the real power in Government lies there is a danger in oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the Community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of the Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of constituents."
Madison then went on:
"…only a minority can be interested in preserving the right of property…"
The Magna Carta was a contract, a written document, and it was the true basis of English and then American law. Words meant something and the memorialization of words mean much more. The English Baron's at Runnymede wanted the document, because they now had something of sustainable value. The Constitution was created as a direct successor to that document signed by King John. It was written knowing full well that a Legislature was all too movable by its constituents and the times and that the immutable document of a Constitution and in turn the Antifederalists demand for a Bill of Rights, gives us that same contract of permanence.
In the past few months we have seen disregard for contracts, documents, and property. Madison would needless to say be concerned. For in many ways it was the usurpation of property rights that led the Colonials and especially the founding fathers to do what they did to create this country.
Thus, as we look at the dissolution of General Motors, we see its parts going, on the one hand, to the Russians in Europe, and now to the Chinese in the areas of military transports. The rights of the bond holders, those contracts and written documents, are thus made ephemeral adjuncts to a political process. The question is how far are we going from those men whose brilliance and strength created this country?
"Where ever the real power in Government lies there is a danger in oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the Community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of the Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of constituents."
Madison then went on:
"…only a minority can be interested in preserving the right of property…"
The Magna Carta was a contract, a written document, and it was the true basis of English and then American law. Words meant something and the memorialization of words mean much more. The English Baron's at Runnymede wanted the document, because they now had something of sustainable value. The Constitution was created as a direct successor to that document signed by King John. It was written knowing full well that a Legislature was all too movable by its constituents and the times and that the immutable document of a Constitution and in turn the Antifederalists demand for a Bill of Rights, gives us that same contract of permanence.
In the past few months we have seen disregard for contracts, documents, and property. Madison would needless to say be concerned. For in many ways it was the usurpation of property rights that led the Colonials and especially the founding fathers to do what they did to create this country.
Thus, as we look at the dissolution of General Motors, we see its parts going, on the one hand, to the Russians in Europe, and now to the Chinese in the areas of military transports. The rights of the bond holders, those contracts and written documents, are thus made ephemeral adjuncts to a political process. The question is how far are we going from those men whose brilliance and strength created this country?
Posts
