Thomas Jefferson And Alexander Hamilton Summary

One of the biggest arguments in favor of a national bank was that of paying of the debts to the soldiers of the revolutionary war. The government owed a lot of money to soldiers that had fought in the revolutionary war and had not been payed what they were promised. Jefferson was worried about setting up a national bank to pay them back because he thought that the ‘I owe yous’ created had depreciated in value. He did not want to set up a system of banking that would cheat war veterans out of the money they had rightfully earned. (1)

The relationship between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson was one of the most iconic and symbolic relationships in American history not only for its many ups and downs, but also for its great effects on the founding and governing of America.

and thus pave the way for the modern national state that would emerge after the

Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were key Founding Fathers of America who contributed to its freedom and independence. Both men were influential leaders of their time whose visions for the future of the country were clearly contrasting. Hamilton believed for a strong federal government and an economy based on banking. While Jefferson desired for a nation to be controlled by the states and its people. Their competing visions for the United States are still in debate until this day. Although Jefferson’s ideas were significant to America, many of Hamilton’s philosophy still holds in today’s government.

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

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 This Act completely cut off commerce with foreign nations until the British and the French repealed their trading restrictions on neutral shippers.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

In the 18th century, the fate of Americas political structure was uncertain. In George Washington's Farewell Address in 1796, the president advised that the creation of political parties sharpened by the spirit of retaliation, would inevitably cause long term mistreatment. Despite his words, two of his closest advisors, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, formed the gatherings that started the dual-party system in which the United States operates today.

Jackson’s reelection convinced him that his opposition to the bank won all of the national support. The Second Bank was established in 1816, as a success from the First Bank of the United States, whose charter was permitted to expire in 1811. The name “The Bank War” was given to the campaign, started by President Andrew Jackson in 1833, to destroy the Second Bank of the United States, this was the start to a very hateful Bank War.

The validity of President Andrew Jackson’s response to the Bank War issue has been contradicted by many, but his reasoning was supported by fact and inevitably beneficial to the country. Jackson’s primary involvement with the Second Bank of the United States arose during the suggested governmental re-chartering of the institution. It was during this period that the necessity and value of the Bank’s services were questioned.

April 13, 1743 Albemarle County in the English colony of Virginia was the start of an American historical giant. Thomas Jefferson was born in affluence to his father, Peter Jefferson, a rising young planter in the Virginia colony, and his mother, Jane Randolph, who held a high status within the colony as well. Due to his father’s prosperity Jefferson was afforded the absolute best in the ways of education, starting with private tutors at the age of five, then moving on to learn how to read Greek and Roman in there original text and finally taking his studies to the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg which he would say is “…what probably fixed the destinies of my life…” pg 5. On the other side of the spectrum, a few years later

Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were completely at odds in their vision on how America was to develop. Hamilton wanted to concentrate power in a centralized federal government with limited access and Jefferson wished to diffuse it among all the eligible freemen of the time. Alexander Hamilton feared anarchy and distrusted popular rule while Jefferson feared tyranny and thought in terms of liberty and freedom.

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

There have been many controversies since the United States declared independence in 1776. One of the many domestic issues that divided American citizens was developing the First National Bank in the late 1700s. Hamilton was in favor, while Jefferson opposed and American citizens chose their side based on what they believed what was best for the country. Hamilton proposed a Report on a National Bank in December of 1790 announcing what the National Bank would include. Hamilton’s proposal included, “The bank’s stock would be worth $10,000,000. 20,000 shares would be sold privately at $400 per share ... 5,000 shares or $2,000,000 of bank stock would be bought by the U.S. government. The bank would be run by a 25-man board of directors - 20 chosen by the shareholders and 5 by the government. The bank’s president would be elected by the board of directors. Notes and bills (money) issued by the bank would be redeemable on demand ... and would be accepted by the U.S. government for all payments due. The bank’s charter would run for 20 years and would be subject to renewal by Congress. The bank would be allowed to establish branch offices in other cities; its main branch would be in Philadelphia, the nation’s capital” (http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/teachers/lesson_plans/pdfs/unit3_ 4.pdf). Although the first part of the bank bill, establishing a national mint, did pass with ease, supporters and opposers debated the rest of the bill, which included the development of

Developing a country and its principals comes with many debates, arguments, and many decisions to be made. In the end of the eighteenth century the Founding Fathers of the newly established America dealt with the difficulties of creating a country with strong political, social, and economic power. With the writing of the Articles of Confederation the country had now developed a national government, but was weak and ineffective. The top leaders of the country knew the flaws of the Articles and gathered together to rewrite the draft. When these decisions makers met in Philadelphia for the Convention the Constitution of the United States was written. This Constitution developed the foundation of the American governmental system. Along with

During the twenty years it was in place the First Bank did change the economic downturn of the country after the war. The First Bank had branches in eight influential port cities and had a wide geographic existence. It influenced the lending policies of the state banks’ lending practices. The First Bank was like the state banks in that it made business loans, accepted deposits, and issued notes that circulated as currency and were convertible into gold or silver. But it differed from the state banks because its