Despite being one of the pre-eminent Founding Fathers, James Madison gets less biographical attention than do George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin. Prior to reading this biography by Ralph Ketcham, I wondered why that was. After reading it, I think much if not all of the lack of attention has to do with Madison's understated personality. Washington is commonly referred to as the father of the country, willingly gave up power not once but twice, and had a dominant, magnetic personality. Jefferson was a man of the world, well-traveled (especially for his time) and author of the Declaration of Independence. Franklin was so many things other than a Founder that, had his life ended in 1775, he still would have been famous for his scientific, printing press, and public service deeds, not to mention Poor Richard's Almanac. But Madison was not like these men, although he was - like Washington and Jefferson - a wealthy Virginia planter and slave-owner.
Ketcham is slow to get this book going. Much time is spent on Madison's youth and education. Sickly from when he was a boy, Madison was prone to periods of ill health and fevers, yet he lived to age 85. Madison was born into wealth and privilege but went north for college, to the College of New Jersey (later renamed Princeton). He did not really want to practice law, although he studied it, and eventually drifted into public service first at the local level, then the state level, and finally nationally. While the creation of the Constitution and the subsequent Amendments have Madison's fingerprints on them as much or more than any other man's, he preferred to remain in the background, grinding out his work in committees, not seeking the limelight. Also, unlike Franklin and Jefferson, or John Adams and James Monroe, Madison steadfastly refused any overseas assignment, repeatedly citing ill-health and (his own) weak constitution.
It is well past halfway through the book before Ketcham gets to when Madison becomes Jefferson's Secretary of State. Much time is devoted to Madison's labors in the Constitutional Convention, in the Virginia House of Delegates, and his collaboration with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay on The Federalist Papers. Be prepared for lots of analysis surrounding political theory and constitutional issues. You can't learn about Madison without reading this part of his life as it is essential to both he and the nation. But it sure is dry! I found myself struggling to get through these sections - the material is dense and not easily absorbed on the first pass. I'm not sure if Ketcham could have made it more interesting - possibly, as his writing style will not be confused with Ron Chernow's, but there is only so much you can do to enliven such a subject.
Also, even though Madison went on to be Secretary of State for eight years, and then President for eight more years, I think that he actually peaked in the late 1780s/early 1790s with his superb work on the Constitution and his subsequent campaign, with Hamilton, to try to sell it to the new country. He later came to opposite conclusions on federal vs state power than Hamilton did, which helped usher in factions, which quickly became political parties (with Madison being a Republican, and Hamilton a Federalist). I found Madison inconsistent in his positions concerning that issue - originally he advocated for a strong central government as the the weak Articles of Confederation weren't working for anyone during most of the 1780s. Later on though, he moved towards the states' rights camp, although never all the way there. I think he saw Hamilton over-reaching on the federal scale and he felt that he needed to provide a counter-balance to him, with the end result Madison moving too far towards the states.
The big event during his years at the State Department was the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Given Jefferson's known views that the executive branch did not have the authority to do something like buy a gigantic chunk of land from France and make it part of the United States, he (and Madison) somehow seemed to set aside their constitutional scruples and not kick a gifted horse in the face when they saw one. Jefferson seemed to have more trouble with it than Madison did, but I still found Madison somewhat waffling from situation to situation as it related to what powers the federal government did or did not have.
As for his time as President, honestly Madison was not one of our best. Actually, I don't think he was very good. The War of 1812 occurred on his watch, and just about everything that could go wrong, did. While Madison did not inherit an easy situation from Jefferson as it concerned British impressment of American sailors, and French destruction of American ships, he allowed himself to be goaded into a war declaration by Congressional militants such as Henry Clay. The U.S. was nowhere close to prepared to take on Britain, with a very small army and almost non-existent navy. Was all of this Madison's fault? Not at all. Congress bears much of the blame as many members wanted war but refused to adequately fund it.
But Madison really made things worse by making awful selections for Cabinet secretaries. John Armstrong could not have done a worse job as Secretary of War, running William Henry Harrison out of the army because he didn't like him, trying to circumvent Madison's orders, bickering with generals, failing to take the British threat to Washington D.C. seriously, and fleeing the scene of battle when it happened. Madison should never have appointed him, and was painfully slow to fire him. He had to make James Monroe, his Secretary of State, do double duty as acting Secretary of War. Monroe himself made mistakes during the war, although he remained loyal to Madison and personally put himself in harm's way. The other Cabinet members, aside from Albert Gallatin who was sent to Europe as one of the peace commissioners, were not helpful to Madison. Washington D.C. was ransacked and pretty well destroyed by the British. It is hard to think of much worse of an outcome for Madison, short of him being captured.
So how did Ketcham treat Madison? While he did criticize Madison for some of his failings, especially later in the book, overall I think he was too generous. For example, he went far too easy on Madison as a slave-owner. On page 148, he writes "...he abhorred the institution of slavery and sought to have as little as possible to do with it." Yet on page 272 he gets a "Negro servant boy" at the request of a French woman. Well, if he didn't want to have anything to do with slavery, I doubt he would have been as obliging to the lady. Yet Ketcham continues to paint Madison with a friendly brush on this topic, saying on page 374 "Evident, too, in Madison's farm papers is his continuing humaneness toward his slaves...". Well, I am truly am glad that he was kind to them and that he didn't beat them. Truly. Because other owners certainly did. Yet, how much credit do you give someone like Madison, when the bottom line is that he did own other people and, despite stating that he wanted to, never freed his slaves either during his lifetime or upon his death (as Washington did with some of his slaves).
I do feel compelled to point out, in fairness to Ketcham, that late in the book he is more circumspect on this subject and is not as friendly towards Madison on it. On page 629, he writes: "Beyond his invariably humane treatment, which made a slave's life at Montpelier as tolerable as possible, Madison failed utterly to do anything about what he always regarded as a moral evil and an economic catastrophe. He depended all his life on the labor of slaves; he did nothing effective to diminish the baneful place of the despised institution in the social fabric of Virginia...". I think this, while still too rosy for my liking, is a more accurate reading of Madison's relation to slavery than what Ketcham wrote earlier in the book.
On a different subject, I also found Ketcham to be too pro-Madison. No matter who his partner was, it always seemed that Madison was the greater intellect, the one with the brains behind the operation, the one pushing others towards a solution. One example is the aforementioned Louisiana Purchase. On page 422 Ketcham writes that "In effect, Madison joined Jefferson (perhaps led him) in insisting that the circumstances surrounding particular acts must guide the degree to which strict construction was carried.... One suspects that in their discussions at Monticello in September 1803, Jefferson and Madison covered these points, and that more than once the secretary brought the President around to his more flexible view." So, credit Madison, not so much Jefferson, for the Louisiana Purchase. Perhaps so. But even Ketcham admits we don't know. This was a pattern that Ketcham repeated in Madison's relationships with Washington and Hamilton. Generally I am skeptical of one person always looking better than everyone else they collaborate with.
I would be remiss if I did not mention the impressive Dolley Madison. She was integral to Madison finding happiness, and despite not having any children of their own together, she brought him into her large family, and for the most part (except one irresponsible younger relative) this enriched Madison's life. Ketcham goes out of his way to describe Dolley in detail, including her family life prior to marrying Madison. While I appreciate him adding the personal part of Madison's life to the narrative, as he should have, sometimes he tended to get carried away with describing parties that Dolley hosted: who dressed in what, who attended, what the food was, those types of things. A little of that can go a long way.
Despite this being a long book and lengthy read, I found a few things missing that I wish had been included. Ketcham does not really examine how Madison's relationship with Washington soured. I know why it did, but only from reading books on Washington, not really from Ketcham. Equally, Ketcham does not delve too deeply into the estrangement and then reconciliation that Madison experienced with Monroe. And finally, Madison was a titanic figure in American history. What he said and did still matters today, as much as it ever did. We are living in the system that he bears a significant contribution to. Even today - perhaps especially today - people argue over what he and others meant while writing the Constitution. I say this to point out that Ketcham gives no final review of Madison's life and accomplishments, no discussion of the legacy he left behind. This was disappointing. Although, at the same time, I must admit that I was more than ready to finish this book by the time I got to the end on page 671. This is a solid effort on Madison, and I learned much about him, but the narrative is frequently dry and the subject matter sometimes even drier. While I would have preferred a more neutral look at Madison, Ketcham provides enough criticism at times to keep it honest. I am giving it three stars because he obviously put a ton of work into it and in many spots he did strive to be fair and honest about Madison even though he did not always succeed at that in my view.
Grade: C+