in urging a claim, while the witness who could prove its injustice was still alive.
"Again: In the first list in the National Intelligencer 20 is claimed as Mr. Madison's, as well as 64. In the second in the City Gazette, 20 is allowed to Mr. Hamilton, as 64 is to Mr. Jay.
"In the second list 17 and 21 are both claimed by Mr. Madison, but in the first both these numbers, 17 and 21, are given to Hamilton.
"Thus we see irreconcileable discrepancies in the two 'indisputably correct' lists, and yet it is boldly asserted that both are placed beyond all controversy, and both derived from a source that admits of no doubt. 'The collision of one falsehood with another,' says an able polemic divine, 'has often demonstrated the falsity of both.' To sum up the whole in a word: a particular mode of proof is pointed out as conclusive, and by this it has appeared that one paper claimed by Mr. Madison, viz. 64, was written by Mr. Jay; that three other papers claimed by Mr. Madison, viz. 18, 19, and 20, were written by Hamilton and himself jointly; and that ten others, viz. from 40 to 58, and 62, 63, now claimed by Mr. Madison, were not any part of them written by him, but solely by Mr. Hamilton. Instead, therefore, of the statement that 50 were by Mr. Hamilton, 30 by Madison, and 4 by Mr. Jay; it appears, by evidence of their own selection, that 62 were written by Hamilton, 3 by him and Madison jointly, 5 by Mr. Jay, and the residue, viz. 16 only by Mr. Madison.
"How must every generous mind revolt at this ruthless attempt to wrest any portion of his just fame, from as able and disinterested a friend to this country and its liberties, as ever breathed? Alas! he has left no other patrimony to his children! In the name of justice as well as of mercy, then, seek not to lessen it."
