Letter from Thomas Jefferson to James Madison (1787)

What does Jefferson mean by the phrase “mend a small hole by covering the whole garment” when discussing the potential for excessive Congressional veto power over the states? What reasons does he give to justify this view?
Jefferson’s letter reveals criticism regarding proposed aspects of the new government. How might these concerns foreshadow public reception of the Constitution, particularly among those who felt strongly about maintaining state authority? What does this letter suggest about the challenges the framers might face when presenting the nation with a more powerful central government?

“From Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 20 June 1787,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://teachingamericanhistory.org/wttg.


The idea of separating the executive business of the confederacy from Congress, as the judiciary is already in some degree, is just and necessary. I had frequently pressed on the members individually, while in Congress, the doing this by a resolution of Congress for appointing an Executive committee to act during the sessions of Congress, as the Committee of the states was to act during their vacations. But the referring to this Committee all executive business as it should present itself, would require a more persevering self-denial than I supposed Congress to possess. It will be much better to make that separation by a federal act. The negative proposed to be given them on all the acts of the several legislatures is now for the first time suggested to my mind.  Prima facie I do not like it. It fails in an essential character, that the hole and the patch should be commensurate. But this proposes to mend a small hole by covering the whole garment. Not more than 1. out of 100. state-acts concern the confederacy. This proposition then, in order to give them 1. degree of power which they ought to have, gives them 99. more which they ought not to have, upon a presumption that they will not exercise the 99. But upon every act there will be a preliminary question. Does this act concern the confederacy? And was there ever a proposition so plain as to pass Congress without a debate? Their decisions are almost always wise: they are like pure metal. But you know of how much dross this is the result. Would not an appeal from the state judicatures to a federal court, in all cases where the act of Confederation controlled the question, be as effectual a remedy, and exactly commensurate to the defect. . . . 

Teacher Programs

Conversation-based seminars for collegial PD, one-day and multi-day seminars, graduate credit seminars (MA degree), online and in-person.

Coming soon! World War I & the 1920s!