Alternatively, Madison so no need to do so because the British actually held DC
and he had no power to suspend HC; your notions are not based on history or an
analysis.  I am not sure what a "good" Virginian is.  I suppose Nat Turner would
qualify, however.

[log in to unmask] wrote:

>         On the War of 1812 point, it shows that Madison had a better
> understanding of the Constitution than Mr. Lincoln.  That was an attack on
> the US by a foreing enemy, they burned Washington DC, but you didn't see Mr.
> Madison panicing, suspending habeas corpus without the consent of the
> Congress, attempting to arrest the Chief Justice of the United States for
> disagreeing with his authority, and arresting everyone in site who might have
> been associated with the British (including those New Englanders who
> considered leaving the Union in favor of becoming a part of Britan once
> again).  The War of 1812 is a good case to point out the folly of Mr.
> Lincoln's actions.  Madison was a Virginian, after all.
>
> JDS
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

--
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, OK  74104-3189

phone 918-631-3706
Fax   918-631-2194
e-mail:   [log in to unmask]

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html