While the pivotal federalist parties came to a demise, many believed the conflicting opinions of government would begin to settle down; unfortunately this was inevitable. Shortly after the rise of the Democratic-Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson, and the Hamiltonians with their main speaker, Alexander Hamilton; their differing opinions of the two political parties, were lead by their interpretations of the United States Constitution. Thomas Jefferson believed in a strict interpretation, the government shall hold only those power granted to them by the constitution. Alexander Hamilton however, believing in a loose interpretation, signifying the government holds all the powers that are not specifically denied to them in the constitution. The …show more content…
With that in mind, Louisiana and New Orleans were owned by France, so President Thomas Jefferson sent Robert Livingston and James Monroe to negotiate and purchase as much of $10 million of land including Louisiana and New Orleans, and the surrounding area. With the initial offer refused, they continued to renegotiate the price, upon knowledge of Napoleon trenching his plan to take over North America. Livingston and Monroe return home, accepting the offer of the entire Louisiana territory for $15 million, overstepping their bounds, however taking a great opportunity. The pressing concern was whether or not this was constitutional or not. Jefferson choice was in question due to his belief to strictly interpret the constitution, many believed he was being hypocritical. Nowhere in the constitution did it supply any laws on accepting foreign territories for their gain. The government did not have the power to do this, however it was not forbidden. Jefferson had then sanctioned the louisiana purchase using a loose interpretation of the constitution. However, with this one transaction between the U.S and france. The size of the country nearly doubled. It gave control over the port of new orleans, provided a vast amount of territory for westward expansion, enabled a rapid growth of population, and the U.S. acquired an …show more content…
Within his plan, he called for a creation of a national bank, modeled after the bank of england. The bank would be in charge of collecting taxes, keeping the government funds secure, make government and business loans, and issue bank notes. The debate again within this situation, is whether or not the establishment of a national bank is constitutional. Hamilton favored a loose interpretation of the constitution, and believed a national bank was necessary to stabilize and improve the federal government. He responded to these accusations, with the initial response that congress had the power to form a bank, because the constitution, gives the authority to them to do anything “necessary and proper” (Elastic Clause). With this, Hamilton was able to win the debate, and then congress forming a bill that created a national bank for 20 years. The establishment of a Federal Bank, was to improve the federal government with everything Hamilton had said, as well as improving the doctrine of implied powers. The National Bank also creates a stronger bond between the state and federal governments, and further strengthening the government by creating a strong national credit. Alexander Hamilton was able to use his loose interpretation of the Elastic Clause in the Constitution, thus enhancing the power of the federal
During the early 1800s, two parties were developed having different perspectives on government and the Constitution. The Democratic Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, were always characterized by following the strict construction of the constitution. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, were characterized by following the broad construction of the constitution. The presidencies of Jefferson and Madison proved this characterization to be somewhat accurate. Although the Democratic Republicans and the Federalists did support their own ideas and views, they also did many things that contradicted them.
Jefferson recognized that the purchase would be “beyond constitutional,” (Jefferson) but his desire to expand America undermined his “legal scruples” (book). The Republicans and Thomas Jefferson supported the acquisition, because it was favorable to the “immediate interests of” the “western citizens” (book). The also believed it would create a more safe and peaceful environment, in a way that would separate French and American authorities. The federalists on the other hand, disagreed with the treaty for various reasons. They were worried that westward expansion would increase wages on the Atlantic coast by “reducing and lowering the value of real estate in their region” (book). The federalists knew that the states to that would be created from the new land would be settled by Jeffersonian Republicans, ultimately establishing a stronger Republican foothold in the country. Despite the feuds between the two groups, the Senate ratified the treaty with a vote of twenty-six to six, and on December 20, 1803, America took possession of the Louisiana
It also allowed for continued easy trade through New Orleans, which was a major motivation to make the Purchase (History). However, it did have its negative consequences, namely that, while France may have sold the land, many Native Americans still considered it their home, and for Jefferson’s plan to fill the land with farmers to succeed, they would have to be removed, additionally much of the wildlife on this frontier suffered. Though this probably would have happened even if Jefferson did not make the purchase, his action did speed up the
Jefferson believed in a strict interpretation of the Constitution. In “Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank” Jefferson says, “all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people.” This means that if the federal government wants to do something, and it is not mentioned in the Constitution, the federal government does not have the power to do whatever they wanted to do. Jefferson clearly does not follow this during the Louisiana Purchase. There is no clause in the Constitution that justifies the purchase of new land to the United States. So to justify the purchase, Jefferson, in a letter to John C. Breckinridge Monticello, wrote, “I did this for your good; I pretend to no right to bind you: you may disavow me, and I must get out of the scrape as I can: I thought it my duty to risk myself for you.” Here Jefferson says that he used his implied Constitutional powers to purchase Louisiana because he felt it was for the good of the people. This is totally against his Constitution principles because looking back at the first document he is totally against implied powers, but that is what he uses to justify the purchase.
The federalist versus anti-federalist opposition to begin the political differences. Federalists were a group of people who pushed for a strong central government and weak state governments, while anti-federalists were a group of people who pushed for power in the states and not the central government. Hamilton, a Federalist, was a firm believer in the construction of a strong central government and a broad interpretation of the Constitution. A broad interpretation of the Constitution meant more government control of the people. Hamilton believed that if a government were to operate efficiently, it would have to be conducted by the educated. Although at the time period, being educated was an expectation for only white men and a limitation for men of color and women. Through Hamilton’s position as being the Secretary of the Treasury, he was able to propose the idea of a national bank. His proposition of the bank was to serve as a way to help America back onto its feet after the Revolutionary War.The bank would regulate currency, help control the American currency, and prevent any singular group from having the most power. According to the Necessary and Proper Clause located in article 1, section 8, clause 18 of the United States Constitution, Hamilton believed the government had the implied powers to use it in order to help and protect the American people.Not only would the bank
Hamilton's Federalist Party and the Democratic Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson had polarized views on the majority of the important political issues. These two political parties which possessed differing opinions and views pertaining to the future of the U.S. government were persistent in their respective arguments against each other. The strongly contrasting views of these two parties are the foundation of the puissant and sometimes callous attacks by the Republicans against Hamilton and his economic plan. Although Alexander Hamilton was viewed as an arrogant self-promoting individual, the primary reason he faced fierce opposition from the Democratic Republicans against his economic plans was strictly rooted in the fundamental differences that Hamilton and the Republicans held when debating their proposed structures of the U.S. government.
Subsequently following the ratification of the constitution, two leading groups formed; the Federalists and the Antifederalists, each believing in exact opposite interpretations of the Constitution. The Federalist Party was headed by the newly appointed Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, who thought the interpretation of the Constitution should be very loose. Hamilton believed the Constitution encompassed powers other than those authorized or enumerated. These hidden powers, claimed Hamilton, were implied powers. Hamilton stated it would be essential that the federal government should gain control over any later added account to the nation. Significantly, Hamilton aspired to put these implied powers to use in requisition to build a powerful and domineering central government.
The acquisition of the Louisiana territory by Thomas Jefferson from the French in 1803, was too good a deal to pass up. Primarily interested in the strategic port city of New Orleans, and unrestricted use of the Mississippi River for trade, when offered the entirety of the territory by Napoleon, Jefferson saw an opportunity for the expansion of his “empire of liberty”. However, this treaty, made official on July 4th, 1803, which would give to the United States 828,000 square miles of new land, and cost 15 million dollars (almost doubling the federal spending of that year), would push the boundaries of the constitution. Given only six months to ratify the treaty, Jefferson knew that it would be impossible to pass an amendment to the Constitution in time, that would allow the purchase. He himself remarked, “The ge...
One such issue was that of the National debt and creating a National Bank. In 1790, Alexander Hamilton proposed that Congress should establish a national bank, in which private investors could buy stock, could print paper money, and keep government finances safe. Washington signed the bill establishing a national bank and started a strong foundation for a thriving economy and a stable currency.
The Louisiana Purchase was the largest land transaction for the United States, and the most important event of President Jefferson's presidency. Jefferson arranged to purchase the land for $11,250,000 from Napoleon in 1803. This land area lay between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains, stretching from the Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian border. The purchase of this land greatly increased the economic resources of the United States, and proved Jefferson had expansionist dreams by doubling the size of the United States. Jefferson believed that the republic must be controlled by ambitious, independent, property-holding farmers, who would form the incorruptible bedrock of democracy (LaFeber 179). In order to complete his vision the country needed more land.
Throughout the period dating from 1801 to 1817, the United States government was primarily controlled by the Jeffersonian Republican party, whereas the Federalist Party began to slowly fade away from public view. The Jeffersonian Republican party, led by Thomas Jefferson, professed to favor a weak central government through the support of more states' rights, "...that the states are independent... to...themselves...and united as to everything respecting foreign nations." (Document A). The Federalists of the United States were known as the loose constructionists, where if there is something which the constitution does not state, then it should be allowed to be done. The Jeffersonian Republicans were known as strict constructionists for their views towards the constitution that if there is anything that is not in the constitution, then it cannot be done. The Jeffersonian Republican party centered many of their political moves on the basis of creating a strong agricultural society with a weakly centralized government where each of the states have more rights to govern themselves, where the Federalist party believed more strongly on industrializing the nation and creating a strong central government. Even though strict constructionism was the idea behind the Jeffersonian Republican party, both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both have evidence against them which can prove that they were not strict constructionists. This is based on different political moves made by these two presidents which are more towards the Federalist side of things opposed to their own Republican and strict constructionist ideas.
As the young colonies of America broke away from their mother country and began to grow and develop into an effective democratic nation, many changes occurred. As the democracy began to grow, two main political parties developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. Each party had different views on how the government should be run. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict construction of the Constitution. The Federalists opted for a powerful central government with weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. Throughout the years, the political parties have grown, developed, and even dispersed into totally new factions. Many of the inconsistencies and changes can be noted throughout the presidencies of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.
Jefferson’s beliefs in local self government created differences between himself and Alexander Hamilton which created the Federalists (Hamilton followers) and the Democrat Republican’s (Jefferson followers).
With Jefferson leading the way, Republicans took on the position of a strict interpretation of the Constitution, which did not allow the federal government to take any action that was not specifically addressed by the Constitution. The Federalists, however, advocated by the ideas of Hamilton, remained steadfast to the approach of broad interpretation, which permitted the government to do anything, not expressly prohibited by the Constitution. However, both parties were quick to stray to their political ideologies. Republicans and Federalists adhered to their bureaucratic philosophies in political addresses and speeches, yet both parties varied with cause, straying from their own civic principles.
In “From Notes on the State of Virginia,” Thomas Jefferson includes some proposed alterations to the Virginia Laws and discusses some differences between blacks and whites. First, he describes one of the proposed revisions regarding slavery: All slaves born after the enactment of the alteration will be freed; they will live with their parents till a certain age, then be nurtured at public disbursement and sent out of state to form their own colonies such that intermarrying and conflicts can be avoided between blacks and whites. Next, Jefferson indicates some physical differences between blacks and whites, including skin color, hair, amount of exudates secreted by kidneys and glands, level of transpiration, structure in the pulmonary organ, amount of sleep, and calmness when facing dangers. As he notes, these differences point out that blacks are inferior to whites in terms of their bodies. In addition, Jefferson also asserts that the blacks’ reasoning and imagination are much inferior to the whites’ after he observes some of the art work and writings from the blacks. As a result, based on his observation, he draws a conclusion that whites are superior to blacks in terms of both body and mind. However, Jefferson’s use of hasty generalization, begging the question, and insulting language in his analysis is a huge flaw which ruins the credibility of his argument and offenses his readers.