James Madison Books

I really love the layout of this Bible. It is very easy to read and understand the commentary. The tabbed version is great as well. I was happy to find it's notes come from a literal 6 day Creationist point of view, but sadly, I'm sorry to say that the author is a Calvinist Babtist, Cessationist (does not believe that Gifts are for today). This is evident in the interpretation of certain OT and NT scriptures. Unlike others have stated, DR Morris DOES have a personal opinion about these things, and is not just basing the commentary on other scripture. Well, I love the Bible and Pray for Morris to live in all of God's goodness he has for him :)

I am very impressed with this study Bible - gives wonderful commentary information on many subject to give a better understanding of certain text. I do have a few disagreements; however, as I don't believe there are any mistakes or contradications in the KJV and only misunderstanding and limited knowledge on the readers part. Docy

The Defenders Study Bible by Dr. Henry Morris is THE BEST Bible I have ever owned. I have been a Christian for most of my life and I own several different study Bibles but they all pale in comparison. Why? Because they compromise the word of God. In most of my other study Bibles, they make you doubt Gods word, especially in regarding the creation in Genesis by adding that the creation could have occurred over a longer period of time.

Dr. Morris verifies the six day creation with other bible verses. He doesn't rely on his beliefs, he relies on other scriptures for verification. The Lord would not need longer periods of time to create the world because he did it right the first time and does not need more time to let things "correct" themselves. He is a perfect God and he created a perfect world in six days. Why would God say six days when he meant something else? This is where faith plays a vital role in reading and interpreting the scriptures. You either believe God means exactly what he says or you don't. Satan compromised the word of God to Eve and look what happened. God means exactly what he says. Exactly.

Another plus is the scientific analysis of creation and the great flood. He describes using other scripture how the flood occured and the effects of the flood on the world scientifically. It really strengthens Gods word.

Having this Bible in the King James Version is comforting also because it is as close to the original Hebrew and Greek text as we can get. There is no interpretations. I compare verses from this Bible to my other Bibles and the changes are dramatic and sometimes entirely different. To me this can be dangerous.

In Job, some of my Bibles change the words Behemoth to Hippo or elephant and Leviathan to Alligator..... Now I have never seen a hippo or an elephant with a tail the size of a ceder tree, and I have never seen an alligator have smoke and fire come out of his mouth and nostrils.

I recommend this Bible and all of Dr. Morris' other books to all Christians, both new and old.

The Morris footnotes are as conservative as Schofield's, but much easier to read and understand, and less dispensational. Neither I nor my minister and missionary friends can fault the doctrinal position of Morris, who believes that the Creator of the universe was able to state exactly what He meant, and able likewise to preserve His word for us today. Morris, the author of the standard text on creation, offers scientific background to dispense with the modern myth of evolution, enabling those who believe God rather than the humanistic fantasies of Darwin ample and irrefutable arguments for God's truth. A fine gift or presentation Bible, I received mine from my church when I trusted Christ as Savior. One of my missionary friends has won many souls to the Lord with his copy - may God grant you and I the grace to do the same with ours! There is no version of the Scripture that I can recommend more highly, especially now that the John R. Rice reference Bible seems no longer available. Signed, a redeemed sinner

Bonus points for the larger type, easier to read than a lot of other bibles. Extensive notes that defend the accuracy and infallibilty of the Bible. A must have for anyone who is serious about studying the Authorized version of the Word of God.

Book was shipped promptly; generally as described. There was a minor bend in the cover not indicated; but acceptable.

In a biography on Madison I read that every day of his life after the Consitutional Convention he was asked to reveal the notes he had taken of the debates, and not until well after he and every one else present at the convention died, in 1840, did Madison allow these notes to become public. Others had surrepticiuosly taken notes of the procedings, but none were substantial. Everyone knew Madison's notes would reveal the truth about what happened during the Constitutional debates.

I actually didn't have that hard a time reading the text, as I was expecting the worst. Admittedly, I only read the first two hundred pages and scattered sections. The text is over 600 pages long, though it is nicely broken up by days during the four month long marathon.

The text of the debates does have its entertaining moments. It was fascinating to hear the leading men of the day discuss the plusses and minuses of various rules for structuring their nation to be.

My major criticism of this particular edition is that there is no background information given on each of the "combatants" at the debates or explanatory footnotes within the text. The more I read on the founding of the United States, the more I realize that there were many politicians besides Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, etc. These lesser-known men's lives are very relevent and interesting, too, and I felt that I would have gotten more out of the reading if I had known more about the characters and the local background of the issues at that time. I do plan on returning to the Notes of the Debates in the future.

Othewise, the text can only be rated at 5 stars.

add (2/12/06): I would highly suggest reading "Decision in Philadelphia" by Collier and Collier if you are unfamiliar with the participants and issues in the 1787 Consitutional Convention. It is an excellent book and an extremely easy read.

~Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Reported by James Madison~ is an insightful chronicle of the proceedings of the Philadelphia Convention. There is no denying the immense historical value of Madison's notes from the Convention to draft the Constitution. It's an excellent study tool to understand the framing of the United States Constitution, and follow the debates and see how the document was shaped and who influenced it. As a matter of fact, Madison offered a salient defense of the compact nature of the Union, as opposed to the nationalist theory of Joseph Story and Daniel Webster. Among the other note-takers at the Convention (e.g. Robert Yates), James Madison offered the most thorough exposition of the proceedings. He apparently nearly wore his hand ragged transcribing all of this stuff in such detail, but he had an intuitive sense that they were really making history in 1787. The problem I have with modern constitutional historiography is that it does accurately portray the purpose of the Convention or its power and authority. As a result, the ambiguous special pleadings for ratification known as the Federalist Papers are overvalued while the subsequent state ratifying conventions are ignored and marginalized. The fact that the people of the several states never ratified Hamilton's opinions, and the fact that Hamilton had offered a plan for complete consolidation at Philadelphia only to leave that Convention early also discounts the value of his special pleading for adoption of the Constitution as the be-all and end-all summation of original intent. In Federalist #40, Madison accurately stated that the Philadelphia Convention had no authority but to draft a Constitution and its powers were "merely advisory and recommendatory." Madison also disclaimed the value of his notes and contended that we should look for original intent not in the deliberations and proceedings of the convention to draft the Constitution, but in the text itself and in the proceedings of the state ratifying conventions. Madison observed, "...the legitimate meaning of the Instrument must be derived from the text itself; or if a key is to be sought elsewhere, it must be not in the opinions or intentions of the Body which planned & proposed the Constitution, but in the sense attached to it by the people in their respective State Conventions where it received all the authority which it possesses." In point of emphasis, "all the authority which it possesses." John Taylor in the Virginia House of Delegates debates expressed a similar sentiment, noting that the proceedings of the state ratification debates "ought to be looked upon as a contemporaneous exposition... constitution." In other words, Madison's and Yate's notes are helpful, but serious students of the Constitution would gain insight on original intentions by studying the proceedings of the various state ratifying conventions as well. Thankfully, the Wisconsin Historical Society has produced the Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution.

This book is an excellent historical account of the decisive event that created our American form of government-the democratic republic.A complete understanding of the nature of the debate between the conservatives(George Washington,Alexander Hamilton,Thomas Jefferson,James Madison,Benjamin Franklin,John Jay)and the Libertarians(George Mason,William Randolph,Thomas Jefferson,Patrick Henry,Thomas Paine,and,for a time,John Hancock)is necessary in order to fully grasp what was at stake in 1787.A reader who purchases this book is also urged to purchase The Federalist Papers,written by Hamilton,Madison, and Jay.The great and inherently conflicting differences between Conservatism and Libertarianism , given that they are different political and economic philosophies, were put on full display at this convention in 1787.For instance,the conservatives favored a strong central government,strong executive branch,a strong,independent central bank to regulate currency and banking,and the establishment of federal excise taxes in order to fund the federal government.Hamilton later instituted an economic development and industrial-manufacturing growth policy based on high tariffs(import taxes).The Libertarians favored an extremely weak "federal"government, like that established by the Articles of Confederation,a weak executive branch,free banking,no national currency,and no federal government power to tax.This last issue was not decided until Washington ,acting as our first elected president, had to personally lead Federal troops to put down the Libertarian revolt, called the Whiskey rebellion, in Western Pennsylvania in 1793-1794.The revolt was based on the claim that the federal excise tax on whiskey,a tax that had been passed by the first Congress ,was an illegal seizure of private property.This revolt had a number of similarities to the earlier 1786-1787 revolt led by Daniel Shays that had revealed the major weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation.Fortunately,the conservatives(Washington and Hamilton) won the day while the libertarians lost.

He told us exactly what happened. No editorializing. No Political correctness. Lots of detail. Pure Honesty.

We get to see what the Constitution was meant to be from the point of view of the founders themselves. Before you read any popular media work on the Consitiution, Read this. You'll need to think a little, but well worth it.

--George Stancliffe

I do not think Library of the America has even put out a bad book and this is no exception. The contents are of great use to anyone interested in our government. The index in the back is exhaustive and helps greatly. Buy this book.

The American Founders are receiving a great deal of merited attention in popular histories such as "John Adams" and "The Founding Brothers." These books have the merits of readability and accesibility -- of providing knowledge and historical context of the early days of our country in a relatively short but informed compass.

The Library of America's series of writings by America's Founders -- including Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton and many others besides the book of James Madison's writings -- are longer and more difficult to read. They consist of original texts with only the slightest endnotes and historical chronology. (In this book of Madison's writings, the historical chrononogy is excellent) The disadvantage, if that is the correct word, of the Library of American's series is that reading these books takes substantial effort and digging. In addition, it is difficult to stop with one book, as each collection relates to and requires and understanding of the work of the other Founders. The advantage these books offer, though, can't be found anywhere else. They offer a chance to meet and encounter American's Founders in their own words and on their own terms and to see the development of their thoughts over time.

James Madison (1751-1836) was probably America's greatest political thinker. His career spanned the Revolutionary War, the formation of the Articles of the Confederation, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, the creation of party in America, the Louisiana Purchase, and the War of 1812, which occurred during his Presidency.

The Library of America's collection of over 900 pages offers a rare opportunity to read in one place the major writings of James Madison. It allows the reader an opportunity to assess his importance and to see the themes Madison developed throughout his life.

A major contribution of Madison was his insistence on freedom of religion in the United States and his opposition to any established sect. These theme pervades this volume from the Amendments Madison proposed to the Virginia declaration of rights in 1776, through the Bill of Rights, Madison's Presidency, and beyond.

Madison was also the architect of representative government. He was a member of the Constitutional Convention and took copious notes of its proceedings. He was the major draftsman of the Constitution. He spoke for both a strong National government and for representative government -- in which the people chose their leaders.

Together with Alexander Hamilton, Madison wrote the Federalist papers which explained the Constitution to the people of New York but in a larger sense to the United States in his day and in succeeding days as well. This collaboration was significant in that Madison and Hamilton would later quarrel and be the founders of the party system. Madison and Jefferson spoke for what has become the Democratic Party (the "democracy) with its emphasis at the time on individual rights and participatory democracy and a narrow reading of Federal power while Hamilton became the spokseman for a strong central government and for economic development.

The book chronicle's Madison's efforts in supporting and drafting the Bill of Rights. Subsequently, Madison wrote a lengthy article for the State of Virginia expressing opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts that Congress enacted during the Presidency of John Adams. The opposition was based on the inconsistency of the act with the freedom of speech set forth in the First Amendment and to the lack of authority for these Acts in the original constitution.

The book has comparatively little on Madison's career as Secretary of State under Thomas Jefferson and on Madison's own relatively unsuccessful Presidency during the War of 1812.

Upon leaving the Presidency, Madison enjoyed a long retirement at Montpelier. This collection gives a good view of Madison's continued activity during this time. It discusses his views on slavery and on the impending Missouri compromise (Madison opposed it -- an opposition that would haunt the United States in the later Dred Scott decision) and on Judicial Supremacy -- the power of the Supreme Court to declare laws unconstitutional. (Madison agreed the Court had this power but he disagreed with the way Chief Justice Marshall used it.)

One of the final items in this book is a short, two paragraph article entitled "Advice to my Country" written 1n 1834 as a parting before Madison's death. Looking at the impending conflict between North and South, but speaking to our time as well Madison wrote:

"The advice nearest to my heart and deepest in my convictions is that the Union of the States be cherished and perpetuated."

This is an important wish for our country now as then.

This book will repay reading and study. The study of our Founders is, I think, one of the best ways to learn to love and understand our country.

The history of the making of our Constitution can be read here. Much valuable insight into contemporary constitutional questions, including separation of Church and State (Madison was a fervent exponent of 'the wall'). A must have and must read for today's politically minded citizen. Surprises abound.

I suspect the idea of reading a collection of writings by Madison, Washington, Hamilton and Jefferson to feel a little too much like home work for most of us to want to do it. I also believe fervently that if you really want to learn the history of this country that such a reading is a necessity.
Several years ago, I found a useful way around this paradox. Buy the Library of America volumes of the above individuals and keep them around for when you read contemporary works about the Founders.
I have recently read several books on Madison (right now I am going thru McCoy's excellent The Last of the Fathers). Whenever an author like McCoy mentions one of Madison's writings I go to my LOA Madison volume and read that writing first.
I have found this procedure to have several advantages. It allows me to form my own ideas about the document before McCoy (or whomever I am reading) can influence me. Thus I am provided a quick check on what they are asserting. Over time, this procedure has led me through much of the Jefferson and the Madison volumes. Sometimes I find myself bouncing back and forth between the volumes following a series of letters. (As an aside, it would be a great service if someone were to provide a well-chosen edition of their letters to each other.)
In general, I have found the Madsion volume to be extremely well-selected. I find about 80% of the documents referred to to be contained in this volume. Unlike the others, my major complaint is that there are not any of his notes on the debates during his tenure in the Continental Congress. I would have taken the more controversial route of leaving out Madison's essays from The Federalist. They are easily obtained and take up over 20% of this volume. Those 190 pages would have afforded a nice overview of his Continental Congress service and his Secretary of State and Presidential service (only 50 pages of material!)
But this is a minor complaint. Rakove as stated by all of the reviewers below has done a great job. Whether you use it like I do or work your way through assiduously this is a necessary volume to own for any American history fan.

Rakove's contribution to Madisonian scholarship is well advanced, despite the great heights at has already achieved, by this collection. An erudite reviewer mentioned this might have benefited from stage setting by Rakove and this is true, for Rakove is among the few who could have set the stage for so precise and capacious a topic as Madison's refelctions. Despite the absence of background it is an excllent collection. In this 250 th year of Madison's birth and considering the recent scholarship by Rakove, Banning, McCoy, Rosen,and Mattern, the time may have arrived for Madison to be transformed from a forgotten lieutenant, or a keeper of arcanum, to a state of appreciation by all.

It's a book for my masters program, I have no opinion, it's a requirement.

An essential book for every American both young or old, male or female, Democrat or Republican. A delightful discovery on the need of God and guns (or perhaps swords) in the United States and the intolerance of a government in charge of all but answerable to noone. An undeniably perfect fit for todays culture.

Discover your roots from the men that gave their lives for the signing of the Constitution; true heroes. Their resolve was unquestionable and the love for country without reproach.

They brought us so far. We've walked away. Read it and weep. BK

The Federalist was an astonishing political document. Written for public consumption during the debate over adoption of the U.S. Constitution, it combined immense learning and sophistication with shrewd insights into the nature of politics in a republic. It's an essential text for anyone interested in American political history or constitutional theory. In fact, the Federalist should be essential readingt for any educated American: it remains an unparalleled example of realistic political analysis being placed in the service of political ideals.

After more than 200 years, the Federalist has lost little of its relevance. The sections on judicial review and Presidential nominations, for example, could have been written about current controversies over judges. Likewise, the discussion of Presidential war powers, or the emphasis on checks and balances as essential to the preservation of liberty, are eerily topical in an age of pre-emptive war and one-party control of Washington. Even when the analysis is wildly dated -- as with the Commerce Clause or slavery -- the reader can see how far Constitutional doctrine has wandered from the "intent" of the Founders.

The Federalist is also superb as literature: the writing is droll and eloquent, once you get used to the long, convoluted sentences. The introduction by Benjamin Wright is excellent and helps to place the text in political and intellectual context. I don't know why I wasn't forced to read the Federalist at law school! Six stars.

Note: Contrary to one review below, God is hardly mentioned in the Federalist, and then only as a rhetorical flourish. The Federalist has countless references to ancient Greece and Rome, but none to the Old or New Testaments. It is a thoroughly secular document. Religious nationalists and other conservatives should actually read it.

When you read this, you can't help but wonder where all the great minds have gone. This assessment of basic human rights and freedoms should be required reading for all kids, and repeat reading for adults with any appreciation of history and/or politics. Its lessons and statements are universal, and should not be examined as simply a part of US history, but rather how the lessons may be applied elsewhere in parts of the world that are still stuck in the Dark Ages.

We want our founders to be demi-gods and our original texts to be divinely inspired. For an example of this nonsense, please see the first review on this page.
I want to offer a vision of The Federalist in historical context. I will argue that to see it thus enlarges its greatness will allowing us to admit its faults.
In many ways, the developments that led to the Constitution of 1787 started as soon as colonists reached our eastern shores. We had at least 150 years of experimentation in writing charters and in representative governance behind us by 1787. After the Declaration of Independence the States either wrote new constitutions or reaffirmed old charters. The national government wrote the Articles of Confederation and we lived under that from 1781 to the late 1780s.
The Federalist should be seen as part of that ongoing development. More specifically, it should be seen as part of the ratification debates in New York. Largely written by Madison and Hamilton, these papers reflect the compromises that the founders made in regards to the Constitution. Madison had wanted the President to have a veto over any state laws. Hamilton had favored a President for life during good behavior (read #78 in re the appointment for life of federal judges to sense the fervor that Hamilton felt for the benefits of lifetime tenure). Neither man believed in the necessity of a Bill of Rights. Madison eventually saw the political necessity of such amendments. During the first United States Congress he wrote up the Bill of Rights and guided them through passage. This way he could make sure they did not grow too numerous.
As a whole then The Federalist should be seen as rhetorical and political arguments for passage of a Constitution that the authors had some doubts about.
Of course, as Publius they could express no doubts. Madison, Hamiltion and Jay used this pseudonym which was a typical rhetorical device of elite writers at the time. (See Saul Cornell's The Other Founders for a nice discussion of the variety of rhetorical strategies used by writers during the ratification debates.) The idea was that hiding their identities would allow readers to focus on the quality of their arguments. As a result, there are many passages that can strike the modern reader as duplicitous because Publius pretends to know nothing of what went on during the convention. Madison and Hamilton, of course, were instrumental throughout the Constitutional Convention.
Publius works his explication of the need for the Constitution by critiquing the Articles of Confederation then by going thru the new document, article by article supposedly answering all objections. His counterarguments are largely of two types. In the first type, he will state a political principle so "obvious" that any "candid" reader will instantly agree to it. Publius then builds his arguments from there. The famous paper #10 is one such chain of argument. Or Publius will demolish the arguments offered against the Constitution by pointing out that the article objected to is contained in some or many of the States' constitution and have resulted in no such problems. Many of these arguments are justly famous. Number 10 is very much worth reading. (Although I still find it curious that when Madison asserts that a man's property holdings has a great influence on the way he thinks it is celebrated as political realism but when Marx says much the same thing it is decried as class warfare. But that's just me.)
But the reader really does get a sense at to how much thought went into the various checks and balances and the competing claims of the states and the new national government. To me this is where the glory of the book lies. We as a people thought our way out of the failure of our first experiment in nation building. We avoided civil war (for a while) and did not become the victims of foreign manipulation. We don't have to make our founding fathers and mothers demi-gods. In their fully flawed humanity, they dazzle aplenty.
Finally, it should be noted that The Federalist as a piece of political rhetoric avoided some issues entirely. The main problem that most Anti-Federalists had with the proposed Constitution in re jury rights had to do with the following phrase: "such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed" (Article 3, Sec.2, Para. 3). Whig thought at that time insisted on juries being as local as possible. Blackstone stated that jury trials should be held within the county of the crime. This guaranteed that local knowledge of the crime, the defendant and the victim would be maximized in the jury pool. Trying cases in distant jurisdictions or without juries had been some of the main provocations of the British prior to the revolution. Men like Patrick Henry saw that phrase in the Constitution as a clarion of the tyranny to come from the new national government. The Federalist does not speak to this issue at all. Instead, Hamilton focuses on arguments about whether jury trials are guaranteed for civil cases and even has Publius argue that maybe we should limit jury trials a little because juries are so bad with complicated issues, blah, blah.
Should all Americans read this book? Yeah, probably. Are we the worse if they don't? Again, probably yes, but what we really need as a people is more of a sense of our history. I would rather have more people read a good series of books on our history as a whole (I recommend the Oxford History of the United States as one excellent ongoing series).
But if you want to get to know two great minds at work on political issues that are still relevant then this is your book. Forget Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau. Their philosophies are antiquarian in a way that Publius is not.

While it lacks the depth of a Blue Guide, this book is a helpful tool for negotiating many of Egypts sites. We used it for our 8 day trip to Cairo, Luxor, Aswan and Abu Simbel, and it served us well as an addition to the Lonely Planet guidebook.

Not since the famous Baedeker guide of 1929 has someone written such a comprehensive and lucid book about Egypt. Michael Haag writes with reassuring authority -- clearly he knows and loves the country well -- and with an eye for revealing detail and with a narrative ability that makes this book as enjoyable to read and as unputdownable as a good novel. This is the book to take with you to Egypt, and to read before you go and after you have returned. You could have no better companion.

The only way to really know the value of a guide book is to use it, and that is what I most thoroughly did during my five weeks of travel through Egypt. A marvellous book! A comprehensive, assured and thoroughly readable historical and cultural account of five thousand years of civilization, as well as being entirely practical for the traveler in every respect, so that whether concerning accommodations or ways of moving about the country or where to eat or to shop, I came to trust Mr Haag entirely. A trip to Egypt is the journey of a lifetime and you owe it to yourself to have with you this incomparable companion.

Michael Haag's Egypt is a substantive compendium of practical travel advice noting more than 240 hand-picked places for the traveler to stay, as well as over 150 quality tested restaurants, bars and cafes. Enhanced with color maps of Egypt and the city center of Cairo, 47 additional maps and site plans, full coverage of the new, state-of-the-art library at Alexandria, and a completely revised chapter on Nubia (including full details of cruise itineraries on Lake Nasser), and with a thoroughly "reader friendly" and eloquent text, Egypt is the complete, comprehensive, dependable, portable, indispensable travel guide recommended to tourists, businessmen, students, and anyone else planning a trip to the fabled lands, cities, and monuments of Egypt.

This book was written by a union soldier from a Michigan unit, as the subtitle indicates. He wrote this as a "Defense of Major Henry Wirz." Unlike many of the books written about incarceration in southern POW camps, this soldier was rather positive in terms of the treatment he received by Confederate soldiers during his inprisonment at Belle Isle and Andersonville. He had several personal interviews with Major Wirz, the Commandant of Andersonville prison, petitioning for better conditions for his fellow prisoners. He claims that the Major was as gracious to his requests as the limited supplies of the Confederacy would allow, considering the Union blockade of all supplies including medical. He also includes some information in what appears to be transcripts and letters relevant to Major Wirtz's trial that led to his hanging, which are quite revealing in terms of Secretary of War Stanton's, vendetta against Jefferson Davis and other prominant leaders of the defeated South.

James Madison Page was my husband's great grandfather and we own a copy of the original edition. Mr. Page went on to be a Montana pioneer and surveyor. The book was very controversial when it was published, but to his dying day Mr. page stood by what he had written. It is quite a contrast to the generally accepted view of Andersonville Prison. Possibly, the prison conditions were not uniform at all times or in all places of the prison. The rather antiquated, but clear, prose alone is reason to read the book and get a taste of the past.

Lt. James Madison Page was captured by Confederate forces in 1863 and eventually was shipped to Andersonville Prison. There he observed Major Henry Wirz firsthand as well as life in this famous Confederate prison for Union prisoners of war. After the war, Major Wirz was tried by military tribunal, found guilty of "war crimes" and hanged. Forty years later, in 1908, Page wrote his memoir to tell "the true story of Andersonville," which was quite different from the popular view, namely, that Wirz and those in his command were deliberately cruel to their captives. Page explains how the prison was designed to hold, at most, 10,000 prisoners at any one time, and then only temporarily while awaiting prisoner exchange. When the exchange was stopped, the prison population quickly swelled to 30,000 prisoners, overwhelming the South's ability to feed, clothe and house the Andersonville prisoners. Although the North advanced many self-serving reasons for stopping the exchange, the real truth was later admitted by Ulysses S Grant in his memoirs, i.e., that the Union POWs were expendable, and that exchanging them for Rebel soldiers would prolong the war by reinforcing the Confederate army. This was a legitimate and understandable strategy of war, one that undoubtedly brought the war to a faster close. In 1865, however, it would have been political suicide to tell the truth to grieving families, that their sons and husbands and fathers were not exchanged because they were considered expendable. The story as Page saw it, was that Wirz was made a scapegoat to appease the wrath of the Northern people over the Andersonville dead (13,000 POWs died out of 45,000 prisoners due to disease and diet).

Page tells how many Northern myths about Andersonville simply aren't true, e.g., that the Confederate guards would get a 30 day furlough as a reward for shooting a prisoner, or that the reason the prisoner exchange between North and South was stopped was because of the North's protest against the South's refusal to exchange black Union POWs -- the truth was that blacks were a miniscule number of Union POWs and the exchange was stopped before there were any black POWs.

Page describes the trial and the accusations against Wirz, and refutes them convincingly. The trial, as described by Page who was there, was a sham. The prosecution could call any witnesses it wanted, but the defense could only call witnesses approved in advance by the prosecution! The prosecution's key witness was a perjurer who claimed to be former Union POW "Felix de la Baume," but was actually a deserter from the 7th NY infantry named Felix Oeser who was paid off for his false testimony with a job in the Dept of the Interior. Oeser had never even been to Andersonville.

James Madison Page's book closely jives with Confederate sources, like the memoir of Confederate guards and officers, who say the same things. Page ends his narrative with "I am just as committed to the preservation of the Union today as I was in 1861, but after forty years we can at least afford to tell the truth." This book wasn't popular in 1908 nor will it be popular in 2001 with those who don't want to hear it.

I gave this book a 5-star rating only because I have to take into account the writer's opinion at the time. I agree that the trial of Henry Wirz was deplorable, however, the writer's account of his stay at Andersonville is questionable. Perhaps he was one of the "chosen few" that did receive special treatment. This I am assured of based on his writings alone. I liked this book because it gave a different perspective of life as a POW in the Civil War. I would highly recommend you read the book but would also recommend you read "Sarah Morgan: The Civil War Diary of a Southern Woman", along with "Mary Chestnutt". There are quite a few discrepancies as to how the Northern prisoners were treated. After reading this book and those mentioned, it leaves us to draw our own conclusions as to fact or fiction.

This was an eye opener for learning how many options were considered and how many compromises were made to resolve the regional and economic differences of the fifty-five delagates. Very sobering, to consider how close the USA came to making very different choices. Highly reccommended for all! This is real history, as recorded by Madison, exactly as it evolved.

This was an eye opener for learning how many options were considered and how many compromises were made to resolve the regional and economic differences of the fifty-five delagates. Very sobering, to consider how close the USA came to making very different choices. Highly reccommended for all! This is real history, as recorded by Madison, exactly as it evolved.

This was an eye opener for learning how many options were considered and how many compromises were made to resolve the regional and economic differences of the fifty-five delagates. Very sobering, to consider how close the USA came to making very different choices. Highly reccommended for all! This is real history, as recorded by Madison, exactly as it evolved.

James Madison: Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Volume One as reported by James Madison, who was a delegate from the State of Virginia, covers the constitutional debate from its start in May 1787 where the main body of the House of Delegates was to meet on the fourteenth, but as usual the delegates were convened on May 25, 1787, to the adjournmnt on July 6, 1787.

This volume is very interesting as it is the way things were preceived by Madison. Madison was not the only delegate to take notes of this convention, but his notes are the most complete by far. Reading these notes gives the reader a sense of being there and participating... albeit distant and by proxy, nevertheless you still get the feeling that you are there.

As Madison gives the reader, in his notes, who was at each debate and discussion, and what was being discussed and debated. Not only that, but this first volume has been divided into two parts. Part One has the Antecedents of the Federal Convention of 1787... in it are the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, and the List of Delegates Appointed by States Represented in the Federal Convention.

Part Two is the Federal Convention of 1787 itself conclusive till the adjournment. Madison's Preface... a sketch never finished nor applied; and the debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 which framed the Constitution of the United States of America.

Interestingly enough, in Madison's preface we see Madison's library of thought taking hold and his sense of history, as he writes of the necessity of political confederacies, Meeting of colonial deputies at Albany in 1754, Congress in 1774, of 1775, Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, Franklin's plan, and the difficulties in the way of a confederation. Reading this first volume, puts things in perspective as to the magnitude and gravity of the time, and most importantly why there was a need for a constitution.

For all those interested in the Constitution of the United States, reading this nuts and bolts debate will give all a better appreciation for the people who found it necessary to give posterity a workable fair government.

James Madison: Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Volume One as reported by James Madison, who was a delegate from the State of Virginia, covers the constitutional debate from its start in May 1787 where the main body of the House of Delegates was to meet on the fourteenth, but as usual the delegates were convened on May 25, 1787, to the adjournmnt on July 6, 1787.

This volume is very interesting as it is the way things were preceived by Madison. Madison was not the only delegate to take notes of this convention, but his notes are the most complete by far. Reading these notes gives the reader a sense of being there and participating... albeit distant and by proxy, nevertheless you still get the feeling that you are there.

As Madison gives the reader, in his notes, who was at each debate and discussion, and what was being discussed and debated. Not only that, but this first volume has been divided into two parts. Part One has the Antecedents of the Federal Convention of 1787... in it are the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, and the List of Delegates Appointed by States Represented in the Federal Convention.

Part Two is the Federal Convention of 1787 itself conclusive till the adjournment. Madison's Preface... a sketch never finished nor applied; and the debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 which framed the Constitution of the United States of America.

Interestingly enough, in Madison's preface we see Madison's library of thought taking hold and his sense of history, as he writes of the necessity of political confederacies, Meeting of colonial deputies at Albany in 1754, Congress in 1774, of 1775, Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, Franklin's plan, and the difficulties in the way of a confederation. Reading this first volume, puts things in perspective as to the magnitude and gravity of the time, and most importantly why there was a need for a constitution.

For all those interested in the Constitution of the United States, reading this nuts and bolts debate will give all a better appreciation for the people who found it necessary to give posterity a workable fair government.

James Madison: Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Volume Two is the continuation of volume one as seen, recorded and reproted by James Madison as a delegate from the State of Virginia.

This volume continues on from July 7, 1787 through the conclusion on September 17, 1787 and is most remarkable. We see the delegates really working on the nuts and bolts of the Constitution of the United States. Debate is found on all points as resolution after resolution is hotly contested, debated and voted on with later inclusion into the final document. There is even an appendix to the debates which includes letters. plans and outlines from some of the most prominated people of that time.

There is a draft from Hamilton and a proposed compromise from Randolph, along with Madison's own notes and remarks. Giving the reader a real sense of prerequisite presence and respect for the contingencies that befell our Founding Fathers in creating the constitution. Remember all that they had to go on was failed superstructures of past governments as there was nothing else in the way of govenment that could compare to what the people at this convention ultimately came up with.

On to part three contained in this volume. Contained here is the constitution, its ratification and amendments. Also, there is and index to the debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 which will help in locating specific debates. All in all, this and the first volume are most informative. Those wanting to read about the process of forming the constitution should read these volumes and they will come away with a greater appreciation and admiration for the work involved.

These volumes are most unique as they are the most complete record available as to what really happened and offers fellow citizens of every generation a narrative so unique as to render it a major treasure of the Republic.

I found this book to be very entertaining. I recommend it to all my friends. Great job from the author.

Wow! At times I thought it was a great historical treatise at others Clancy at his best. An absolute hidden gem.

Wow! At times I thought it was a great historical treatise at others Clancy at his best. An absolute hidden gem.

This is a very good discussion of Madison's role in the development of the Consitution. Very readabl

The Busines of May Next is easily the best book I have ever read on James Madison's intellectual journey from his dismay over the ineffectiveness of the Articles of Confederation to his draft of the Virginia Plan, which was the underlying foundation of our Constitution.

The title is taken from a letter Madison wrote in which he discussed the "business" of the upcoming Constitutional Convention (in May of 1789), of which Madison--along with Alexander Hamiltion--was the prime mover.

Miller's book expertly and eloquently explores the influences on Madison's thinking, from his reading of David Hume's essays on the ideal conditions for a republic, to his correspondence with Washington, Jefferson and many others in which he fleshed out his ideas of how to turn the weak, ineffectual Articles into a government that had both power and staying power.

As Miller points out, Madison's genius was his understanding of human behavior, and his awareness that any government must be shaped in ways that take advantage of the "better angels of our nature," but also (more important) minimize, or at least accommodate, the darker side of our nature.

By fashioning a government with limited and shared powers; by holding frequent elections in which the leaders are held accountable; by ensuring that the people possess certain rights that no government can threaten (on pain of being altered or abolished), Madison was the first among equals in the creation of a truly representative government that has lasted more than 200 years and shows no signs of dying out.

Miller himself is one of the few (William Manchester is another) historians whose thorough research is matched by his delightful writing style. I have two copies of the book--a hardcopy for reading and a paperback for underlining.