![]() ![]() Although Madison’s Notes have “integrity,” they report only a small fraction of what was actually said on any given day. ![]() After demonstrating convincingly that Madison did not doctor his Notes and that Yates’ Notes are unreliable-thus I use only Madison’s Notes for my own argument in this paper-Hutson nevertheless raises serious questions about relying on Madison’s Notes as our source. Hutson’s pessimism (1984) now seems to border on skepticism (1986) over a possible way out of this situation. Into the vacuum created by the protracted war between conflict and consensus historians, statisticians like Calvin Jillson have entered. ![]() Scholarship, says Hutson, is at a standstill because there is no consensus on how to interpret what took place at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Hutson concludes his valuable 1984 survey of two hundred years of Constitutional scholarship on a pessimistic note. Therefore, the paramount question which guided the deliberations was: What is justice? The paramount issue facing the Constitutional Convention was how to secure the safety and happiness of the people. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |