Category: Alexander Hamilton

After the United State of America became independent on the 4th of July, one of the problems the new-born country was facing is the concerning financial situation. The federal government had received $54 million of debt as an aftermath of the Independence War fight with the British. With paper, cash issued becoming worthless and without foreign savings, the financial prospect of the nation was faint.

George Washington, the first president of the United States of America saw the high need to save the country from a dangerous situation. The man he chose is Alexander Hamilton, who had served with him throughout the Revolutionary War. As the secretary of the treasury, Alexander Hamilton designed a four-part financial plan in order to build a solid financial foundation of the newly born country. Proposing that the government should assume the whole debt of the federal government and the states, Hamilton came up with a sketch to borrow new money at a relatively low-interest rate.

Hamilton came up with a plan to pay debts at par and at assumption. At par means the debts would be paid off by the federal government and at assumption means that all debts would be paid off at face value. However, the sketch Hamilton came up with stirred conflicts in Congress and deepened distances among states. States like Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia had had their debts paid off. They saw no reason to be taxed by the federal government in order to help to pay off debts for states that were still in debt. Hamilton’s critics claimed that his scheme would bring tremendous profits to speculators while eroding the benefits of the majority of the people.

Debates raged in Congress for nearly a half year. People had divided stances over whether or not the economic plan proposed by Hamilton should be implemented. Conflicts accelerated until a compromise was engineered. The capital of the nation will be created on the border between two southern states, Virginia and Maryland for balancing the power of Southern states and the Northern States.

Hamilton’s scheme for redirecting the U.S. away from debts was an exceptional success. By demonstrating Americans’ willingness to repay their debts, he made the United States investments attractive to overseas investors. Capital poured into, paving a brighter future for the newborn country.

Hamilton’s next goal was once to create a Bank of the United States. A countrywide financial institution would perform the role of stabilizing the financial situation in the States. Examples were collecting taxes, maintaining government funds, and making loans to the governments and borrowers. The whole plan looked alluring and well-developed but people in the States held a strong opinion against taxation by the government resulting from years of reigning of Great Britain. Critics claimed the bank to be unrepublican and unconstitutional. Other figures like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison stated that the Constitution did not specifically render Congress the power to create a bank. Nevertheless, Hamilton responded to the charge by formulating the doctrine of ‘implied powers.’ He argued that Congress had the power to create a bank due to the authority granted by the Constitution to the federal government to do anything ‘necessary and proper to carry out its functions. In the case of the bank, the constitutional function was to stabilize the country fiscally. Finally, in 1791, a bill was passed granting the federal government the right to create a national bank for a term of 20 years. The bank of the United States largely stimulates and stabilizes the nation’s financial well-being.

Other than his financial plan and his idea of creating a bank, Hamilton supported aiding the nation’s infant industries. Protective tariffs and government subsidies for certain industries were already designed to guard American enterprises against fierce overseas competition. Hamilton hoped to wreck Britain’s manufacturing remains in America. He believes the best way to do so was to build up American’s own industry. Thomas Jefferson, who believed in the values of an agrarian way of life, was one of the strongest opponents of Hamilton’s scheme. Hamilton’s imaginative and prescient of America’s future challenged Jefferson’s blueprint of a nation of farmers.

Alexander Hamilton drew a blueprint of a remarkably contemporary economy based on investment, industry, and expanded commerce. Most strikingly, the financial vision had no place for slavery. Before the 1790s, the American economy was largely based on a trans-Atlantic trade of slavery. States south of Pennsylvania depended on slave labor to produce tobacco, rice, indigo, and cotton. The northern states performed their most profitable change with the slave colonies of the West Indies. As a member of New York’s first antislavery society, Hamilton wanted to reorient the American economy away from slavery.

Hamilton is commonly viewed as the greatest Secretary of Treasury in American history. Rather than political legacies left by Hamilton, what humans centered more were those ideas left out or even attacked via the mainstream at his time. However, these thoughts are certainly standpoint when we, humans in the 21st century, seem to appreciate and understand. Alexander Hamilton was an

During the late 1700s, there was a heated debate between the Federalists and the Republicans. While both political parties had different ideas of what the government should become, it was ultimately Alexander Hamilton’s that eventually bested Thomas Jefferson’s vision. Hamilton was the first treasury secretary and had a great influence on President Washington over Thomas Jefferson. Alexander Hamilton was one of the most important founding father figures in the late 1700s. Thomas Jefferson believed in decentralized government, freedom of religion from government influence, and education.

Alexander Hamilton spoke for the Federalists and believed firmly that trade and manufacturing were the keys to successful progression as well as a strong military power. Although this would be difficult because it was hard to assemble the appeal to artisans and workers because they still remained faithful to the mother country in the New England States. Hamilton brought to light public policies and ideas that would help with the government’s effectiveness and the public economy. Hamilton insisted on taking on full the national debt of the war, and that the federal government shouldered unpaid debts from the states from the revolutionary war. Hamilton emphasized strong government, public credit, and a centralized national bank system. Hamilton believed that tariffs, and protecting new firms could help the nation develop industrial businesses. The systems Hamilton put into place helped the federal government grow to become a robust industrial stronghold, and helped others to realize we need a strong central government. Alexander Hamilton foresaw America becoming a manufacturing country, and also told others to view America, not as a country, but to think as a nation united ‘continentally’. Hamilton suggested stated that the national government had the right to collect debts, borrow money, and taxes, therefore, making a national bank extremely efficient in these takings.

Thomas Jefferson spoke for the Republicans and was more interested in strong agriculture, smaller militias than a standing army, and a smaller federal government impact. He believed that bankers couldn’t be trusted, had little interest in manufacturing, and believed in the opposite of a strong centralized government. He opted for a more rural society where a country was able to be more self-sufficient without the big government stepping in. Thomas Jefferson thought more in terms of being able to express freedom. Thomas Jefferson was against the national bank system arguing that the Constitution had no say in a federal government. Jefferson believed that instead of a national bank that the states could print money should be chartered instead. He argued that a national bank would slow down the progress of the state banks. He also argued that it would be run by the rich, and would impact the local farmers while the rich got richer, the poorer got poorer.

In conclusion, looking at the United States today, it was Alexander Hamilton’s philosophy in building what America is today. Alexander Hamilton was one of the most important founding fathers, and so important that the government in 1929 put his face on the $10 bill. Hamilton helped convince others through paper and pen that the Constitution needed to be ratified. The debate over the national bank system went on for 2 years, and after finally answering the question in 1791 was the bank was unconstitutional, it was built. Even though Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson hated each other, it was Hamilton who helped Thomas Jefferson win the election in 1800 because of a tie with Aaron Burr. At the time they may have been enemies of political parties, but they fundamentally helped shaped the political parties of today. Hamilton gathered with their fellow federal lobbyists and encouraged them to support Thomas Jefferson. He said that Aaron Burr only mainly cared about himself. Alexander Hamilton helped shape what America is today, and at the time even with a nation divided was able to convince the people that no matter what state you’re from that we can come together to be a united nation with a national bank to stabilize the nation’s finances. Without Hamilton’s philosophy, the United States wouldn’t have bloomed to become the largest economy in the world before the end of the 19th century.

During the 1780s and early 1790s, the American debt was super high, both state debts which total 21.5 million dollars, and the national debt was very high. You’re probably going to say 21.5 million dollars are really not that much money anymore. You are correct today but back then in the late 18th century that was enormous. Money was worth little. Remember under the Articles of Confederation, each state could print its own money its own currency, so there were 13 different currencies going around and a lot of them were worth next to nothing, so Hamilton rates 2 different reports and the first is a report on public credit, so he calls for dealing with the debt problem. It’s basically his pamphlet to say “hey, here’s this economic problem that we face and here’s how we’re going to fix it” and he saw to gain the support of the wealthy while writing this report, he also writes another report called the report on manufacturing and this is going to be a federalist idea and certainly an Alexander Hamilton idea until the day he dies. He favors a Maine American manufacturing industry. He believed that industry and merchants were the backbones of the American economy and in this report, he sought to protect and stimulate American businesses, and a way to achieve this was through tariffs.

So let’s actually break down his plan, there are five parts that you should be very very familiar with. The first is an excise tax which is a tax on manufactured goods, notably during this time, there was a tax on whiskey, which leads to the whiskey rebellion, and remember the whiskey rebellion was quickly crushed and it shows the strength of the new federal government under the Constitution. Arguably, the most important part of this play was the Bank of the United States certainly the most controversial. This would be a private bank with the government owning roughly one-fifth of the stock, so 20% of the bank would be owned by the United States. This leads to a conflict between Hamilton and Jefferson. He wants to fund all debt at par both state and national, which means pay off the debt at face value, so if the debt is twenty one and a half million dollars for the states, they’re going to pay all twenty-one and a half million dollars plus interest, he wasn’t going to try to negotiate the debt lower, pay it all off at once plus interest, speculators, people who went out, bought up bonds from average everyday Americans and they bought them very cheap because these people were afraid that the government would not repay the debt, they made lots of money. Sometimes speculators would buy there’s a dollar bond, they would buy for about 10 cents, and then the government came in paid that full value back, so they’ve made lots of money and Hamilton was criticized for this. You want to take on state debts under the national government so that the 21 and a half million dollars again would be assumed by the national government and many of these states incurred debt during the Revolutionary War. Now, states with large debt, like Massachusetts, are going to love this, because now the federal government is coming and saying we will now take on your debt, so it’s like a get out of jail free card for these states and debt. Virginia, a state that does not have a lot of debt, is not going to like this. Like, oh, Alex! what’s in it for us, why are you helping Massachusetts, the state in the north, when here in the south, because we did it wrack up all this debt, we now have to help pay off Massachusetts debt. That’s not very fair, so there were upsets. This is a kind of conflict between different states. Now, on a side note, Hamilton advocated for or favored having debt. He believed that the more people we owed money to, the more people would want to see us succeed. It’s actually kind of ingenious. He thought okay, our government doesn’t debt to people, there’s no way those people will want to see the US government fail at least until they get their money back, so he actually a vision, us always being a debt to somebody at some point so that these people would support the government succeeding. Another part of his plan was a tariff and this was designed to raise revenue for the government so when that tax is added on to a good when it comes, that will go straight to the American government and it would also protect American industries because now foreign goods would be more expensive.

All right, let’s talk about that bus or the national bag and there is a painting from the first bus located in Philadelphia. All right, was it constitutional? Well, here is the big question. There are two different interpretations: one is held by Hamilton, one is held by Jefferson, and the strict interpretation says the Constitution does not specifically allow something that cannot happen, so if you’re reading that Constitution and you see no mention that the Constitution says that the government can create a bacon states then it cannot create a Bank of the United States, that’s the strict interpretation. The loose interpretation takes the opposite approach and says: look, unless the Constitution says you cannot create a Bank of the United States, then you are allowed to, so whatever the Constitution does not forbid, it will allow. Jefferson on the left is going to advocate a strict interpretation. Hamilton on the right is going to advocate a loose interpretation. Hamilton will point to the elastic clause, also known as the Necessary and Proper Clause which allows Congress to make laws that are in the best interest of the country to keep up with the change in times. Now, on a side note in 1819, there is a famous court case McCulloch v. Maryland that deals would be the second bus, not the first one because the first one the Charter only lasts for 20 years. But the Supreme Court has a chance in 1819 to say that the bus is unconstitutional and they do not. They uphold the bus. And Washington ends up siding with Hamilton and he signs the bus into law. All right, let’s talk about the passage of the plan, so how does this actually pass Congress has 2 different views. Well, there is something called log rolling and what this is is voting for a bill that favors the opposition to ensure the other side will vote for a bill that favors your cause. In other words, Hamilton says to Jefferson, look, you vote for the bus that you hate but it helps us out. We will vote for something that we may not like that’ll help you out, so it’s kind of like, I scratch your back, you scratch mine, but what really helped Jefferson come along to Alexander Hamilton’s plan was this idea of Washington DC. In the constitution, it stipulated that a new Capital would be created and the capital was moved to the south on the Potomac River to gain support for the financial plan from the south, so the south agreed we will vote for this plan. All those parts as long as we get the capital in the south thought that would give them more power in the federal government, so the promise of Washington DC being in the south is what makes the south vote for this plan.

To begin this study, it will be worth noting that both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson had their individual differences in ideologies especially in the way of thinking and politically. As a result, the study was quick to reveal that there were huge differences in the programs they started when they were in government.

Their family background could have been a determining factor to each of their program considering that Jefferson came from a wealthier and aristocratic family compared to Hamilton’s family. In addition, Jefferson was once a leader of Democratic-Republican Party whereas Hamilton served under the leadership of Federal Party. The political differences were the major source of the hatred the two had regarding their programs.

To start with, Hamilton preferred a strong central government. As a result, his program evolved around issues to strengthen the government. That is why he was determined to settle the debts on the government before working on a stronger central government.

In this regard, Hamilton came up with means of settling the debts in which the citizens were supposed to buy some securities in form of bond to help the government pay off the debts.

The financial program was the central role of Hamilton as he empowered the local agricultural sector and banking sector to overpower the British trading activities in the United States. This led to initiation of Bank of United States and Central Bank that was similar to that in the United Kingdom. This reduced over reliance to British government.

On the other hand, Jefferson was a strict constructionist politically and he believed in very weak central government. His program pioneered to champion the states’ right and civil liberties. This meant that his program was meant to empower the people unlike the Hamilton’s program that given the central government the power.

The burden to advocate for people’s presence can be related to some of the statements made by Jefferson. For instance he said, “A government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases” (Dolbeare, & Cummings, 2009, p. 150).

In addition, “The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first” (Dolbeare, & Cummings, 2009, p. 151).

The above programs presented two different ideas that require critical analysis before endorsing any of them. However, the Hamilton’s program was and still the preferred program because it led to economic independence in the United States.

The introduction of banking and settling the previous debts helped the United States to recover economically. In addition, the central government has been fundamental ruling this super power nation.

More so, the Jefferson’s program had some issues likely to help the citizens but his proffered government was not applicable in the United States. There has been tendency of strong central governments that can finance various programs such as health, education, security among others. Therefore, it was expected that weak government could not be carried out hence the increased hatred between the two leaders.

From the above programs, it seemed that the current American government has been centered at the Hamilton’s program. This come up with many achievements to the United States as it enjoys the global presence in banking, and strengthening of the government.

In fact, it is among the super power nations based on the governance achievement. Despite the critics and antagonism from Jefferson, Hamilton’s program had gone beyond a vision on centralized banking country.

Reference

Dolbeare, K.M., & Cummings, M. S. (2009). American Political Thought (6th ed.). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Hamilton’s Argument in Federalist 70

Alexander Hamilton is considered as the founder of principles that govern Federal Governments in the United States of America and thus the true architect of the modern administrative state. Hamilton’s most significant argument in Federal 70 was the creation of a strong executive.

Hamilton in Federalist 70 believed that good governance could only be attained through an energetic and accountable executive. A critical look at Hamilton’s argument that was attached to the structure of government, administration and rule of law as well as policies is still relevant in the contemporary United States of America.

Hamilton expressed that a strong executive is a fundamental requirement for a nation’s economic prosperity, a view he held so dearly that he made political rivalry between him and people who held different views. It is imperative to note that during constitutional convention which was held in 1787, he advocated for a government in the form of an elected monarchy.

This opinion was shot down by delegates in the convention. In spite of the defeat, he continued advocating for creation of a strong executive. Hamilton’s views of a strong executive were anchored on the failures of the confederation plan which aimed at over-devolution of government affairs. It was evident that a plan of devolution that gave states maximum discretion over the federal government was improper.

This was because of difficulties in formulating and ratifying rules to govern the same which took years to come up with largely due to disagreements in boundaries and commerce.

In order to support the views of Alexander Hamilton, failure among states to work under the terms of the Paris Treaty that ended the Revolutionary War made leaders to agree on making a strong government that would supervise affairs of the states. This agreement was reached after states started formulating their own independent foreign policies while other states fought on whom to control the western land.

By 1787, it was evident that the devolution plan was not working and the solution to this would be formulating a strong federal government that would have executive powers over the states’ governments.

Hamilton’s Argue in Favor of a Single Executive

The quest for a strong executive was echoed by Alexander Hamilton and being the first treasury secretary, he planned and wrote reports on modalities of creating strong executive government. His reports included reports on public credit, manufacturing, and creation of a national banking system. Hamilton considered three basic principles in his views regarding the newly agitated public administration structure and strategy.

Firstly, Hamilton considered independence, responsibility, and power as key principles that would indeed play a role if a strong executive agenda would succeed and give good results. According to Hamilton, the laws that had been ratified by the congress posed limitations on the independence of the federal government. It was his wish that for the executive to be able to implement laws, it required independence and freedom.

It was also evident that Hamilton in his later works (such as in Federalist71) showed that there was need for separation of powers between the executive and the legislature. In addition, he showed that it was important to vest adequate authority to the executive such as freedom to determine how best to implement and administer laws.

Hamilton was strongly convinced that a weak government was bound to deliver poor results mainly due to bad policies. He also believed that there was much need for a decisive organ that would drive policies on behalf of states’ governments. In addition, Hamilton held the view that it required a strong government to protect the people’s interests if they required to rule and be served at the same time.

It is evident that The Federalist 70 (a book by Hamilton) was probably the first of its kind on the subject of public administration whose relevance was noted almost a century later. The book outlined what was entailed by “energy in the executive”.

On the principle of power, Hamilton outlined that a strong executive required unity and that there ought to have been a president as the leader of the government who should be in power for a definite duration of time. Also, he said that the president was supposed to be competent enough to be able understand and push policies for the good of the nation.

The third principle of responsibility was aimed at keeping the executive government accountable so that it didn’t exhibit or exercise too much power. Hamilton suggested that for the executive to be accountable, it required Congress that would supervise it.

Although Hamilton’s view on separation of powers between the legislature and executive was received well, he suggested that it could not be enough to vest all the authority to the Congress to check the executive. There was need for a stronger executive branch (Congress) that could have power to impeach even the president.

There was strong need to check the executive so that it does not exercise too much power. Therefore, the proposed government would be responsible for its actions for the good of the citizens of the nation.

In order to prove that his argument was the only way to push for the economic development agenda and a change from agrarian dependent economy to manufacturing, Hamilton in the capacity of treasury secretary was instrumental in the planning and creation of the First Bank of the United States of America which was government-supported.

Hamilton’s view on a long-term vision was that when an executive government is in place, it is possible to formulate policies that can change even the economic position of the nation. His vision of a manufacturing-driven economy was that it would play a major role for America to engagement in global commerce compared to an economy driven by agriculture.

Hamilton’s strong support for a powerful government led by an executive leader was envisioned in the future of America in the sense that an economic transformation would only be possible when a strong executive was is in place to push the agenda forward.

Hamilton’s values for the administration of the United States of America can be summarized as a system that blends a strong executive (monarchy), a strong legislature (democratic), and an independent judicial system which has powers to overrule the will of the majority if liberty is destroyed (aristocracy).

To enable this kind of system to flourish peacefully, there is need to balance them in such a way that none becomes more superior to the other or vice versa.

Comparisons of Hamilton to the Roman

It was evident that Alexander Hamilton admired and also had passion for Rome. His envisioned America resembled what used to be the administration in the Ancient Roman Republic. Rome portrayed a history whose greatness was achieved through trade and commerce. In addition, this history was established and strongly supported by military of elite.

It is generally viewed that Rome’s administration was strategized to command and conquer. The empire in Rome was mandated to protect the interests of the people led by a central figure. This was the exact vision that Hamilton had for American administration. In his era, Caesar was referred to as a destroyer of republics and thus never enjoyed the admiration of many people.

However, Hamilton admired him and referred to him as “the greatest villain and the founder”. As mentioned earlier, Humiliations view was to have an executive leader whose mandate was to give an informed leadership by pushing forward the policies that would make America great. The Roman Empire shared the same setup.

Hamilton’s vision would be put into operation by employing policies and mechanisms that would reduce poverty through funding and assumption or through empowering the rich and employing mechanisms of expanding trade throughout the world. The latter would be put in place while still enforcing domestic fiscal authority.

This strategy would be possible if a strong executive was put in place to push for these agendas. Hamilton’s vision encompassed a strong government’s quest to empower members of the political elite that would transform the administration from within.

To date, America’s administration reflects the foundation that was laid by the founder of modern administration, Alexander Hamilton. His argument regarding the Roman Republic and his admiration of the system of administration in Rome is indeed warranted.

Hamilton participated in the enactment of some of his proposals in the constitution that changed the administration of the United States. Therefore, he can be rightfully referred to as the founder of modern administration in the United States of America.

Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were the most influential men during the early days of American Republic (Cunningham). The divide between the two men coming from varied backgrounds was mostly evident during their tenure as cabinet ministers to President George Washington – Jefferson as the Secretary of State and Hamilton as the Secretary of the Treasury. The difference that was observed between the two leaders was ideological rather than personal, as many historians believe (Foner; Harrell, Harrell Jr. and Gaustad; Brogan).

Christopher Hollis has described the conflict with intricate details over which the two disagreed, showing that the main differences lay in the field of tariff policy, foreign policy and in matters financial discretion (the question of making of a Bank of United States). However, most importantly, it was over the question of the nature of the government that they departed ways; one favored strong central government, while the other argued in favor of a strong state. Jefferson was in favor of a government of the people, alliances with France, and agrarian economy. He also emphasized upon decentralized power, which was refuted by Hamilton who believed in power in the hands of the aristocrats. Hamilton also stressed on alliances with Great Britain, manufacturing and banking system. He intended to have a strong central government with close relation with business (Foner). This made Jefferson to believe that Hamilton was aiming to make a monarchial system in the Unites States of America in the lines of the British system, which he eulogized (Ferling). Thus, according to D. W. Brogan the differences the two men demonstrated led the path to the creation of two different political parties in the Unites States of America – the Federalist Party following Hamilton and the Republican Party following Jefferson.

Election of 1800

John Adams followed Washington to the Presidency had in and around the 1790s. He diligently toed the dictions of Washington. Like a true Founding Father of the nation, he opposed “The notion of political parties” (Harrell, Harrell Jr. and Gaustad 234). The 1796 elections showed the divide between the two parties. The main issue that evolved for Adam’s presidency was the war between England and France and the US foreign policy. The election of 1800’s main issue and a concern for Jefferson was the Alien and Sedition Acts, which restricted the freedom of speech, assembly and press. The Electoral College voting ended with a tie between Jefferson and Aaron Burr, both representing Democratic-Republicans. The final decision was on the House of Representatives dominated by the Federalists and Hamilton supported Jefferson (Foner). The election of 1800 brought to power a Republican candidate, Thomas Jefferson. The event was so momentous that Jefferson himself described it as a “revolution” as it ended the oppressive policies of the Federalists (Maier).

Presidency of Jefferson

When Jefferson assumed power he first slashed military expenditures, cut budget, eliminated taxes on whiskey, yet he was able to reduce national debt by a third. During his tenure, Jefferson witnessed the successful expansion of the nation, with his momentous conclusion of the Louisiana Purchase, from Napoleon in 1803 (Foner). His pro-French foreign policy was indeed used by the opposition to tarnish his character and Presidency, but such was the aura of his character that rode past such attempts, smoothly. In his second term Jefferson was preoccupied to keep the increasing European intervention and his solution was an embargo of the American shipping, was widely unpopular, Jefferson’s end of term and the election of 1809 brought another Republican to power.

References

1. Brogan, Denis William. An introduction to American politics. Michigan: H. Hamilton, 1954.
2. Cunningham, Noble E. Jefferson vs. Hamilton: confrontations that shaped a nation. Boston: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000.
3. Ferling, John E. Adams vs. Jefferson: the tumultous election of 1800. New York: Oxford University Press US, 2004.
4. Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty: An American History. New York: WW Norton, 2005.
5. Harrell, David Edwin, et al. Unto a Good Land: A History of the American People Volume 1: To 1900. Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005.
6. Hollis, Christopher. The American Heresy. New York: Minton, Balch, 1930.
7. Maier, Pauline. Inventing America: A History of the United States. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2003.

Introduction

History knows a lot of examples, when people born in simple families managed to gain respect and love of the whole nation. Alexander Hamilton was one of such people. This person was rather all-rounded, his inner world and the ability to attract attention helped him to reach the highest levels of the political career, to be a good leader and to remain a good person. Alexander Hamilton is the person, who even after so much time has passed, remains one of the most notable and respected people in the history of American politics.

Before considering the contribution of Alexander Hamilton into the political life of America, the life way of this person should be followed. Focusing the attention on Alexander Hamilton’s life it is possible to understand why and how he, person born from simple people, managed to reach so much in political and economical structure of American government. Being born in the island of Nevis in the West Indies on January 11, 1757, he was killed on the duel by Aaron Burr in 1804. He was born in the family of Scotch merchants, and his father was regarded most by him. The extraordinary precocity of the boy, his curious mind and strong character gave way to his abilities. The main qualities of his character may be taken from the letter, which was written by Alexander Hamilton to his friend Edward Stevens,

I condemn the groveling condition of a clerk, or the like, to which my fortune condemns me, and would willingly risk my life, though not my character, to exalt my station. I am confident, Ned, that my youth excludes me from my hopes of immediate preferment, nor do I desire it; but I mean to prepare the way for futurity (Lodge 2).

Main Text

These words confirm the suggestion that Alexander Hamilton was a very powerful person and that the desire to be the first, the desire to reach something in his life was so strong, that he could make everything (except betraying himself) in order to be able to show all his potential. People who worked with him described his as a person of “lively imagination – a quick almost intuitive perception – profound and comprehensive views, a ready invention of expedients in cases of difficulty, with a solid and correct judgment” (Miller and Aldridge 226)

All these were the desirable dreams, as to become educated at Alexander Hamilton’s time could only wealthy or few fortunate people (Haugen 9). Alexander was none of them. But all these limitations in Alexander Hamilton’s life were not the borders for him in reaching his aim, he sill managed to become a powerful leader of the country thanks to his inborn talent. Hamilton was also a very clever and hard working person and people were found to help him. His desire to be successful gave him the opportunity to receive a good education, which opened him the way to the top.

When the revolutionary was began (1975), Hamilton was studying at the college, but he understood that the desire for freedom is higher than the degree and left college in favor of war. Hamilton did not afraid to show his leadership talent and he was put as the captain of the Continental Army, he was 21. This revolution was the first time, when Hamilton could show his talent, and he was noticed, for his ambitious character and the desire to be useful. All these actions were not just the desire to show his bravery, but to leave the impression of wise and courageous leader. During the war Hamilton was noticed by General Washington, who noticed his “quick thinking and bravery under the fire” (Haugen 33). The result – Hamilton was hired by him.

Alexander Hamilton showed himself greatly in the war, both as the leader and as a soldier, and this was his first step to the political top of the country. He took part in the political and economical life of the country, and no matter what part of the government he supported, the tendency was that the part became to be dominant and their views were taken into account.

The great leadership qualities of Hamilton were seen during the debates about Federalists or Anti-Federalist state (1788). Hamilton used his oratory abilities and all his leadership qualities in order to convince Anti-Federalists in the importance of Constitution. Such events in Hamilton’s life show that all he managed to achieve was his great desire, hard work and the confidence in his successful future (Haugen 60). The case with the Constitution adoption is one of the most significant in the life of Hamilton, as only by his great power of conviction and the true belief in what he did made it possible for him to make sure the whole New York in the necessity of constitution and to leave their opinion about Anti-Federalism and to join his considerations.

Focusing on the abilities of Alexander Hamilton as the political leader, it can be concluded that he behaved himself as the leader of the army, he made quick and reasonable decisions, his reaction to the situation was quick, and actions he provided wise and right. Having been acting among the other leaders, it can be proved that he was the leader among them all. His abilities in organizing people and in the conviction to act as it was necessary for him and for the direction of the politics, which he had chosen deserved a respect. It was impossible to argue with him as (Miller and Aldridge 227) as the arguments which were offered by him, his behavior, intonation, with which he imposed his opinion, was so convicting and reliable. “If the American people did not already know it, they were soon to be made acutely aware of the fact that Hamilton’s credo was audacity and yet more audacity” (Miller and Aldridge 227).

Conclusion

In conclusion, Alexander Hamilton was the leader of his epoch, his inborn qualities and the desire to provide the actions which he considered only reliable and trusted made it possible for him to become the person number one in the society he lived in. having come from the simple family without any links to the government, Alexander Hamilton managed to create his own career, to reach the heights, which seemed unreachable by him for the surrounding people. From the very beginning of his life, Alexander Hamilton knew that he will be a successful and respected person not only in the city he lived, but also in the whole society, and it is impossible to deny that he managed to reach his aim. The achievements he managed to succeed in just prove that he was the leader of the leaders and there are not so many people who can be placed on the same level with him.

Works Cited

Haugen, Brenda. Alexander Hamilton: Founding Father and Statesman. Minneapolis: Compass Point Books, 2006.

Lodge, Henry Cabot. Alexander Hamilton. London: Adamant Media Corporation, 2005.

Miller, John Chester A. and Aldridge, Owen. Alexander Hamilton and the growth of the new nation. London: Transaction Publishers, 2003