Download Perspective: How the conflicts between Thomas Jefferson and

Perspective: How the conflicts between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander
Hamilton resulted in the emergence of two political parties.
Introduction:
George Washington’s time as President of the United States of
America was surrounded by political debate. Today, we assume that a
President will face a debate on every issue they make. It seems obvious
that Democrats and Republicans will argue different sides of any given
issue, and that both with try to make their collective voice heard.
This was not obvious to George Washington or our nation’s first
“leaders”. A look at Washington’s writings shows that he truly thought
political arguments could split his country apart. A close study of
Washington’s cabinet can help us understand how political debate went
from “revolutionary” in the 1790s to “common” in the 2010s.
Many times, George Washington’s Secretary of Treasury, Alexander
Hamilton, and Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, gave him conflicting
advice concerning the welfare of the United States. Such differences in
opinion became arguments that made Washington’s Cabinet meetings a
hostile place. Members of Congress, the press, and interested members
of the public became aware of Hamilton’s and Jefferson’s seemingly
opposite political philosophies, their perspectives on government’s role
in society. By the end of the 1790s, private citizens and organizations
were choosing sides, Hamilton’s or Jefferson’s, and this resulted in the
emergence, a gradual growth in strength, of our nation’s first two
political parties: the Federalists who were “led” by Hamilton and the
Democratic Republicans who were led by Jefferson.
Let’s take a look at several issues that faced our young nation,
and try and see if we can see how the first two political parties
developed.
Issue #1: Economic Policy
Alexander Hamilton studied at King’s College in New York City
(known today as Columbia). If we were to simplify his economic policy,
think about the city where he went to college; Wall Street, merchants,
some say the banking and manufacturing capital of the world. He
believed that an energetic American government should link the interests
of wealthy citizens with the government’s success. In essence, he argued
that the better the wealthy are doing the better the country is doing:
“Industry is increased, commodities are multiplied, agriculture and
manufacturers flourish: and herein consists the true wealth and
prosperity of a state.”
Alexander Hamilton, Report on a National Bank, December 13, 1790
Thomas Jefferson became extremely wealthy at birth. As a member of
one of Virginia’s most powerful families, his higher education combined
with great intelligence gave him a unique perspective on life.
Jefferson’s writings showed that he valued a simple life. A life where
books and philosophy held as much importance as bank accounts did. Some
called him the “Farmer Philosopher” because to him the ideal place for a
man’s hands was in the soil by day and books by night. Economically,
Jefferson mistrusted organizations that restricted the farmers’
lifestyle, such as banks and a government that placed too many
restrictions on its people.
Issue #2: Funding and Assumption of the Revolutionary Debt
The most pressing problems facing the new government were
economic. As a result of the revolution, the federal government had
acquired a huge debt: $54 million including interest. The states owed
another $25 million. Paper money issued under the Continental
Congresses and Articles of Confederation was worthless. Foreign credit
was unavailable.
Hamilton’s advice to the President was to assume all debts owed
by Americans into one place, the federal government. He argued that
this action would encourage foreign investment in the United States,
because it would show other countries that America was one country and
not 13 small independent ones. It would also show the world that we
would take steps to repay our debts.
Jefferson’s advised George Washington that such a step would
create a division along geographical lines within the country. Many
southern states had already repaid their debts, and thus they would
see a “national debt” as showing favoritism towards northern
interests. Jefferson, remember he distrusted banks, warned that a
national debt would make farmers have to pay unfair taxes that pulled
northern manufacturers out of debt.
Issue #3:
National Bank
The next issue that divided Washington’s cabinet was Hamilton's
next objective, the creation of a Bank of the United States, modeled
after the Bank of England. A national bank would collect taxes, hold
government funds, and make loans to the government and borrowers. One
criticism directed against the bank was "un-republican"--it would
encourage speculation and corruption. The bank was also opposed on
constitutional grounds. Adopting a position known as "strict
constructionism," Thomas Jefferson and James Madison charged that a
national bank was unconstitutional since the Constitution did not
specifically give Congress the power to create a bank.
Hamilton responded to the charge that a bank was unconstitutional
by formulating the doctrine of "implied powers." He argued that
Congress had the power to create a bank because the Constitution
granted the federal government authority to do anything "necessary and
proper" to carry out its constitutional functions (in this case its
fiscal duties).
In 1791, Congress passed a bill creating a national bank for a
term of 20 years, leaving the question of the bank's constitutionality
up to President Washington. The president reluctantly decided to sign
the measure out of a conviction that a bank was necessary for the
nation's financial success.
Issue #4:
Foreign Policy
War between England and France left the United States in quite a
bind. If they kept their existing alliance with France they would
distance themselves from their largest trading partner, Great Britain.
On the other hand, France helped the United States win their revolution.
Additionally, the French had overthrown their monarch just like the
Americans. Did not they deserve the same type of help they gave the
Americans?
Jefferson’s advice was characterized by our textbook as pro-French,
while Hamilton’s was termed as pro-British. Why was that so? Well, we
have to remember their cabinet positions. As Secretary of Treasury,
Alexander Hamilton was most concerned with our nation’s economy. As
Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson dealt with foreign relations. The
people of the United States, like Jefferson, saw the similarities in the
French and American causes: romance, “common sense”, liberty.
Issue #5:
Alien and Sedition Acts
In 1796, Washington finished his second term in office and the
United States had its first Presidential election with political
parties. The Federalists choose John Adams as their candidate,
Alexander Hamilton was too controversial of a choice, and the
Democratic-Republicans choose Thomas Jefferson as their candidate.
Adams won with 71 votes versus Jefferson’s 68 votes.
In 1797, Adams first year as president, French warships attacked
over 300 US ships. Still, Adams choose to maintain a policy of
neutrality between France and Britain. Newspapers across the country
mocked Adams, his party, and their policies. To silence these critics
the Federalist led Congress passed a series of laws called the Alien and
Sedition Acts. These acts targeted aliens, immigrants who were not yet
citizens (Fear, spies, etc.). One act outlawed sedition, saying or
writing anything false or harmful about the government.
Jefferson and his party responded to the Alien and Sedition Acts by
writing the “Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions”, which argued that
States did not have to follow national laws that the state declared
unconstitutional. This statement was unconstitutional, but it did not
matter because two years later a Democratic-Republican led Congress
would repeal the Alien and Sedition Acts.