A

CHAPTER VIII.

THOMAS JEFFERSON.

LTHOUGH Washington's cabinet consisted of but four men, no other cabinet in American history has contained so large a number of men of the first order of ability; for Hamilton was not the only remarkable man in it. The Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, was also a political genius, and, like Hamilton, he impressed his individuality so powerfully upon the institutions of the country that his personality is a question of the first importance to the student of our history.

Contrast be

and Jefferson.

It would be difficult to find two men more perfectly devoted to what they conceived the welfare tween Hamilton of the country, and at the same time more unlike than Hamilton and Jefferson. The leading trait of Hamilton, we have seen, was his love of justice, stability and order; the leading trait of Jefferson was his love of liberty and his belief in its practicability to a greater extent and on a larger scale than the world had ever seen. The one thought the supreme need of society was a government strong enough to do justice and preserve order; the other regarded liberty, and a government too weak to interfere with it, as the supreme political good. The one regarded anarchy as the greatest enemy of society; the other saw in tyranny its greatest foe.

Hamilton was also devoted to liberty. But he thought it impossible unless it was under the protection of a strong government. Jefferson was also a friend to stability, but he believed that the intelligent self-interest of men was a sufficient guarantee of it. The one thought it better to risk the tyranny of a strong central government than to put order and stability in jeopardy. The other would. risk the anarchical tendencies of a weak central government rather than endanger liberty.

Almost every act of Jefferson's public life may be traced, more or less directly, to his love of Influence of

liberty. His bills in the Virginia House of

Burgesses to abolish the laws of entail and

Jefferson's love

of liberty upon his political career.

primogeniture, and to provide for the gradual emancipation of slaves; his efforts in Congress to have slavery prohibited in all the territories of the United States, anticipating by seventy years the platform upon which the present Republican party first stood, had their origin in this characteristic. As soon, therefore, as Jefferson understood the trend of Hamilton's financial policy, when he saw how it tended to strengthen the central government, it was impossible for him not to oppose it.

He did indeed, as we have seen, lend his influence to the passage of one of its measures, but that

was because he did not understand its ten

dencies. When he arrived in March, 1790,

Why he gave his influence for assumption.

at the seat of government, and entered upon the duties of his office, the laws providing for the payment of the

foreign and domestic debts had already passed, and Congress was angrily debating the bill for assumption. He heard on all sides threats of dissolution, and rightly came to the conclusion that the Union was in danger. So while he was of the opinion, as he said, "that Congress should always prefer letting the states raise money in their own way," when it could be done, yet in that instance he saw "the necessity of yielding to the cries of the creditors in certain parts of the country for the sake of union," and "to save us from the greatest of all calamities, the total extinction of our credit in Europe." Accordingly, he consented to use his influence for assumption in consideration of the location of the capital on the Potomac.

But when he came to see the trend of Hamilton's financial policy, he regretted his act as he never did any other in his political career. By the time the whole country began to see the outlines of Hamilton's policy, it provoked the antagonism of a well organized political party, and Jefferson was its leader. But before stating its creed, it is desirable to summarize the arguments presented by Hamilton and Jefferson, the one for, the other against, the constitutionality of the bill providing for a national bank.

When the bill was before the House of Representatives, Madison made a strong speech in opposition to it His opinion of on the ground that it was unconstitutional. the constitution

to incorporate

ality of the bill Impressed by these arguments, when the bill was submitted to him, Washington

a bank.

called on Jefferson and Hamilton for their written opinions. Jefferson's opinion began as follows: "I consider the foundation of the constitution as laid on this ground, that all powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people. To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition."

He then attempted to show that the power to incorporate a bank was not one of the powers conferred upon Congress by the constitution, because (1) it was not one of the specially enumerated powers. The constitution gives Congress the power to impose taxes, borrow money, regulate commerce, declare war, etc., but does not say that it can incorporate a bank. Hence, (2) if the power was conferred at all, it must be capable of being deduced by a fair method of interpretation from one or the other of the two general clauses in the section enumerating the powers of Congress. But it cannot be inferred from the first, which authorizes Congress "to levy taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States," because "the levying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to levy taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do

anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to levy taxes for that purpose." Nor can it be inferred from the second general clause, which provides that Congress shall have power to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper" for carrying into effect the enumerated powers, because they can all be carried into execution without a bank. But if they can, a bank is not necessary, and consequently not authorized by this clause. In brief, Jefferson interpreted this clause as if it had been written as follows: And Congress shall have power to pass all laws which shall be absolutely and indispensably necessary for carrying into effect the foregoing powers.

Hamilton's opinion.

Hamilton's argument was based on the principle that power to do a thing implies power to use appropriate means. To say that Congess had power to achieve certain ends and yet was prohibited from using the fittest means unless they were absolutely necessary, or had been specifically granted, he regarded as an absurdity. From his point of view, to prove the constitutionality of the bill providing for a bank, no more was necessary than to show that a bank would be useful in borrowing money or collecting taxes. If it was a convenient means of executing any of the powers conferred upon Congress, and had not been prohibited by the constitution, it was constitutional.