Mcculloch Vs Maryland Case Study

The creation of the first national bank in the United States was of utmost importance in setting precedence for how much power the constitution actually grants the government. The debate over whether to create a national bank raised many questions over the constitution that hadn’t been tested before. It also raised questions about what the government can do when the constitution has no written clause on a certain subject. In looking at the arguments from Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson regarding a national bank, people can find out more about how some of the leading founders of the Constitution wanted to see the United States government run.

The Bank of the United States was designed to make money and build an economy. It was designed by men like Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris, but did not benefit the common citizen as much as wealthy investors. Why did a fledgling government need to borrow millions from overseas in order to invest in a “national” bank, to turn around and then borrow the same money back and pay interest on it? The banking system developed by Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris was prime pickings for speculators, and laid the groundwork for a history of unscrupulous activity regarding our nation’s money supply that continues to this day. The signatures on the Constitution were barely dry before corruption and

In many ways, the opinion in this case represents a final step in the creation of

However, the state of Maryland tried to block the activity of the national bank by imposing tax to all the notes that were issued. The branch manager of the bank in Baltimore refused to pay taxes and lawsuits were filed in the Maryland Court. However, the case was brought up to the U.S Supreme Court as the Constitution did not subjectively describe that Federal Government had the authority to establish a bank. The U.S Supreme Court led by Chief Justice John Marshall ruled out the case that acknowledges that the Congress has the rights to establish a national bank under Article 1 Section 8 in the American Constitution. This shows that the US Constitution was vaguely described and gave the Congress an insight to pass laws as long as it is within the Constitution. However, this gave the Federal Government to create the mentality to indirectly gain more power which restricts the States sovereignty.

There are several cases that have gone through the United States Supreme Court where prosecutors have not disclosed evidence to the defense, that could in turn help the defense’s case such as in the case of

During George Washington’s presidency of our new nation, there was a large disagreement between his Secretary of Treasury, Alexander Hamilton and his Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson on several economic and political challenges.To get the nation out of extreme debt, Hamilton came up with a financial plan that included the creation of a national bank. This national bank would be a safe place to deposit government funds, a source of loans for the government and businesses, and the creation of a national mint. However, Jefferson was strongly opposed to the idea of a national bank, he believed it was strictly against the Constitution and would give the federal government too much power. Hamilton argued that Article I Section 8 of the Constitution

Hamilton’s creation of the first bank in the United States continues to exist in today’s economic environment. However, at that time Hamilton’s proposal was met with widespread resistance from individuals such as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson who considered the creation of a federal bank as unconstitutional. The analysis made by Gordon in his book is consistent with arguments made by to have a bank that would be effective in order to implement the powers authorized by the government as it was implied in the constitution

Out of all the obstacles that the federalists had faced, the economy was, by far, the most problematic and the most difficult to find a solution for all parties. The country was not in a very stable position because of the recent crises like the whisky rebellion, or money-producing ideas such as bonds. Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson played major roles in establishing the economy of the United States at the time, and also had a large role in the development of today’s government and economy. Without the ideas of these men, the United States economy may have the same problems today that the federalists faced then. And in the end, even though the idea of a national bank was redundant, that is what removed the United States from

In McCuloch v Maryland, the court turned to the "necessary" and "proper" clause which grants Congress enumerated powers which include the power to regulate collect taxes. President Jackson explains the necessity in regards to the functions that the bank is trying to fulfill: The "degree of its necessity,”

C). This Act completely cut off commerce with foreign nations until the British and the French repealed their trading restrictions on neutral shippers. As a result the American export trade and its profits dried up. Many people deemed this Act unconstitutional; the constitution only grants congress the power to regulate commerce, it does not however state that they have the power to completely cut it off. This by itself contradicts everything Jefferson stood up for. Albert Gallatin, one of the best financial minds in the Republican Party, convinced Jefferson that the Bank of the U.S. was essential for financial stability. Although the creation of the Bank of the U.S. reduced the nation’s debt from 83 million in 1800 to 57 million by 1809 , the creation in its self shows a great deal of broad constructionism. Although the bank was a reasonable means of carrying out powers related to taxation and the borrowing of funds, nowhere in the constitution does it state that congress has the power to charter a bank. John Randolph, a Republican congressman from Virginia, claimed that “this government (Jeffersonian) created and gave power to congress to regulate commerce and equalize duties in the whole of the U.S, and not to lay a duty but with a steady eye to revenue”. What John Randolph was trying to say was that

Secondly, out of the twenty-five stockholders of the Bank, five of these were government owned. Thus showing support of the Bank by subscribing to one-fifth of its $35 million (Schlesinger 74). In addition, among the Bank’s functions was to hold all government money, sell all government bonds, and make commercial loans. However, no voters could dictate its policies or reign in its power, due to its privately owned status (Roughshod 2). Finally, the government also allowed bank notes to be used as payment for taxes.

In addition to saving the integrity of the Federalist-dominated Supreme Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison, John Marshall also promoted certain Federalist principles, including the idea of a strong national government. From the years when the Constitution was being created, Alexander Hamilton fought for the creation of a national bank since he believed it was “necessary and proper” for the growth and development of the United States (“The Marshall Court”). As Hamilton and the Federalist Party had hoped, a national bank was created and one of its branches was placed in Baltimore, Maryland. State legislators from Maryland were not satisfied with the progress the bank was making because the negligent behavior of its bank officials was bringing the bank under (Newmyer, 295). To save their citizens from having to deal with the bank’s faulty leadership, the legislators attempted to drive the branch out of the state by placing a tax on all the banknotes issued by the bank. When the tax was purposely left unpaid, Maryland sued the cashier of the bank--James McCulloch. In the state courts, Maryland won its case,

One of Jefferson’s and Hamilton’s first disagreements began with the idea of a National Bank. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the Bank of the United States Jefferson protested because this was not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and stated that the Constitution’s writers could not have predicted the need of a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank of the United States was stated in the “elastic” or the “necessary and proper” clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. “This dilemma revisits the ever lasting dispute between the “strict constructionists” (Jefferson) who believed in the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond its clearly expressed provisions, and the “loose constructionists” (Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it said”. Just a few years later, under President Jefferson, the federal government of the United States

Was an argument between McCulloch vs Maryland. The argument was a battle between whether the constitution allows a national government to run a bank. As well as does the constitution allow state governments to tax a national bank operating within its borders? However the Supreme Court ruled in favor of banks being able to be built and run by the national government. However they ruled that state governments are unable to tax a national bank that is within their borders.

After the Revolutionary War, many of the country’s citizens were in great debit and there was widespread economic disruption. The country was in need of an economic overhaul and the new country’s leaders would need to decide how to do this to ensure the new country did not fall apart. After two unsuccessful attempts at a national banking system, the Federal Reserve System was created by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Since its inception, the Federal Reserve System has evolved into a central banking system that grows with the country. The Federal Reserve System provides this country with a central bank that is able to pursue consistent monetary policies. My goal in this paper is to help the reader to understand why the Federal