During the Constitutional Convention, and the years to follow, the Anit-federalists heavily disputed with Federalist Party. One of the longest and most important arguments throughout this time period were the debates between Alexander Hamilton of the Federalists and Thomas Jefferson of the Anti-Federalists. The controversial issue discussed was over the establishment of a national bank.
Alexander Hamilton, at the time George Washington’s Secretary of Treasury, explained before the Congress that the U.S. Government’s need for a national bank was imperative for the survival of the nation. Hamilton stated that besides having “expressed” powers, it possesses “implied” powers designated into Constitution. Hamilton states in letter to Washington that “implied powers are to be equally delegated with expressed ones. Then it follows….that the erection of a corporation[such as a bank] may well be implied….it may as well be employed as an instrument….of carrying into action any specific powers….because the corporation has a natural relation to the government.” With saying this, Hamilton argues that a national bank in not unconstitutional because bank is a corporation which would regulate foreign trade, interstate commerce and government finances. One can use the implied power in this instance, because it is incident to a legislative power to regulate a thing, to employ all the means necessary is in fact legal.
Jefferson’s arguments provide a rationale for those who believed that states could overrule decisions of the federal government. The idea of a national bank would strip those rights of a states powers and this is what Jefferson argued. Jefferson believed strongly in the Articles of Confederation, and he was not willing to let go of its ideas, thus causing great tension between he and Alexander Hamilton. During his term of vice-presidency, Jefferson anonymously wrote the Kentucky Resolutions which expressed his views of politics. In here he states that “whenever a government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force….and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made Federal, will concur in declaring these acts void and of no force….
From 1787-1790 the development of the American Constitution was a battle between two opposing political philosophies. America’s best political minds gathered in Philadelphia and other cities in the Northeast in order to find common ground in a governmental structure. The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists had both some political thoughts that agreed as well as some political thoughts that disagreed. However, both parties would compromise and ultimately come together.
"It would swallow up all the delegated powers [of the states], and reduce the whole to one power. "-Jefferson referring to the Bank. He was strongly against big government and felt it would oppress the common man. "I am not a friend of a very energetic government.it places the governors indeed more at their ease, at the expense of the people." Jefferson was also a strong supporter of the Bill of Rights, which protected the rights of the people.
In various political addresses, Jefferson was seen as inseparable with strict interpretation and a contender for state rights. He tried to affirm the belief that domestic policies should be decided by the states and fears that the Federalists will change the Constitution (docum. A). By the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, Jefferson and Madison asserted that states were the foundation of the nation and therefore had suprem...
The issue of whether or not America should have a National Bank is one that is debated throughout the whole beginning stages of the modern United States governmental system. In the 1830-1840’s two major differences in opinion over the National Bank can be seen by the Jacksonian Democrats and the Whig parties. The Jacksonian Democrats did not want a National Bank for many reasons. One main reason was the distrust in banks instilled in Andrew Jackson because his land was taken away. Another reason is that the creation of a National Bank would make it more powerful than...
Federalists called for a national debt to be funded and hoped to create a large national bank credited by wealthy men. He defended it in a plan presented to Congress by claiming "where the authority of the government is general it can create corp...
Going hand in hand with his detestation of large, extremely controlling national governments, Jefferson was intent on having no national bank present in the US, but Hamilton was certain the country would benefit from one. For example, in a personal letter written by Alexander Hamilton, he wrote, “Mr. Madison, co-operating with Mr. Jefferson, is at the head of a faction, decidedly hostile to me, and my administration; and actuated by views... subversive of the principals of good government, and dangerous to the Union... Mr. Jefferson... [displays] his dislike of... funding [the] debt.” (Doc 2) Hamilton implied that by not advocating a national bank, Jefferson did not want to help the country pay off its debt. Jefferson, however, was dead set against having a national bank because he wanted the common people, such as the farmers, to have maximum influence on the government. This way, a strong central government could not have supreme political, economic, and social power, all of which together would open the doors for future corruption, even if the government was set up in the manner directed in the Constitution. Jefferson defended this judgement to the extent that he formed a political party so it could develop into a well-supported suggestion. Thus, the perspective on national banks could more efficiently progress into the point where it impacted the whole country and prevented the formation of a national bank. Equally, the excise tax proposed by Alexander Hamilton and carried out by Congress, factored in on Hamilton and Jefferson’s feud on having a national bank. In a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, he manifested his reaction to the excise tax by commenting, “The excise tax is an infernal one... [the public’s]
During 1787 and 1788 there were quite a few debates over the ratification of the United States Constitution. The issues disputed are outlined and explored in the Federalist Papers, an assortment of letters and essays, often published under pseudonyms, which emerged in a variety of publications after the Constitution was presented to the public. Those who supported the Constitution were Federalists, and those who opposed were Anti-Federalists. Their deliberations concerned several main issues.
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 1787 Constitutional Convention was paramount in unifying the states after the Revolutionary War. However, in order to do so, the convention had to compromise on many issues instead of addressing them with all due haste. This caused the convention to leave many issues unresolved. Most notably were the issues of slavery, race, secession, and states’ rights. Through the Civil War and the Reconstruction, these issues were resolved, and in the process the powers of the federal government were greatly expanded.
After the first War for Independence, The United States was approximately $52 million in debt. Due to having such bad financial problems, the United States created a national Bank to create one unified currency, to take away all state debts, and to issue loans to the people to promote growth. This National Bank was created by Alexander Hamilton who was a Federalist, and once Jefferson came to be the President, he continued the idea of the national bank because it was helping to reduce the national debt. The primary reason for the National Bank being a representation of a Federalist idea was because since it was issuing loans to people it was able to promote industrial growth which was one of the main goals of the Federalist party. From Jefferson continuing the use of the National Bank thru his presidency he demonstrates his need to continue a loose constructionist idea.
By the late eighteenth century, America found itself independent from England; which was a welcomed change, but also brought with it, its own set of challenges. The newly formed National Government was acting under the Articles of Confederation, which established a “firm league of friendship” between the states, but did not give adequate power to run the country. To ensure the young nation could continue independently, Congress called for a Federal Convention to convene in Philadelphia to address the deficiencies in the Articles of Confederation. While the Congress only authorized the convention to revise and amend the Articles the delegates quickly set out to develop a whole new Constitution for the country. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the new Constitution called for a national Executive, which was strongly debated by the delegates. There were forces on both sides of the issue trying to shape the office to meet their ideology. The Federalists, who sought a strong central government, favored a strong National Executive which they believed would ensure the country’s safety from both internal and external threats. The Anti Federalists preferred to have more power in the hands of the states, and therefore tried to weaken the national Executive. Throughout the convention and even after, during the ratification debates, there was a fear, by some, that the newly created office of the president would be too powerful and lean too much toward monarchy.
In creating the Constitution, the states had several different reactions, including a rather defensive reaction, but also an understanding reaction. As a document that provided the laws of the land and the rights of its people. It directs its attention to the many problems in this country; it offered quite a challenge because the document lent itself to several views and interpretations, depending upon the individual reading it. It is clear that the founders’ perspectives as white, wealthy or elite class, American citizens would play a role in the creation and implementation of The Constitution.
The American Revolution stirred political unity and motivated the need for change in the nation. Because many Americans fought for a more balanced government in the Revolutionary War, they initially created a weak national government that hampered the country's growth and expansion. In the Letter from Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Mrs. Adams complained about the inadequacy of power that the American government had to regulate domestic affairs. The Articles of Confederation was created to be weak because many had feared a similar governing experience that they had just eliminated with Britain. The alliance of states united the 13 local governments but lacked power to deal with important issues or to regulate diplomatic affairs. Congress did not have the power to tax, regulate trade, or draft people for war. This put the American citizens at stake because States had the power to refuse requests for taxes and troops (Document G). The weakened national government could not do anything about uprisings or small-scale protests because it did not have the power to put together an army. The deficiencies of the confederation government inspired the drafting of the American Constitution. The document itself embodied the principle of a national government prepared to deal with the nation's problems. In James Madison's Federalist Paper, he persuades the American public to adopt the Constitution so that the government can protect humans from their nature and keep them out of conflicts.
The Articles of Confederation was the first government of the United States. The Articles had created a very weak national government. At the time the Articles were approved, they had served the will of the people. Americans had just fought a war to get freedom from a great national authority--King George III (Patterson 34). But after this government was put to use, it was evident that it was not going to keep peace between the states. The conflicts got so frequent and malicious that George Washington wondered if the “United” States should be called a Union (Patterson 35). Shays’ Rebellion finally made it evident to the public that the government needed a change.
Even before the Constitution was ratified, strong argument were made by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison in the Federalist Papers urging the inclusion of a federal form of government to replace the failed confederation. In Federalist Paper No. 9 Hamilton states, “This form of government is a convention by which several smaller states agree to become members of a large one, which they intend to form. It is s kind of assemblage of societies that constitutes a new one, capable of increasing, by means of new associations, until they arrive to such a degree of power as to be able to provide for the security of a united body” (Usinfo.state.gov). The people of the United States needed a central government that was capable of holding certain powers over the states.