Summary
Despite the growing concern throughout the nation over a string of acts
asserting national over state power, the Washington administration remained
dominated by Federalists, led by Secretary of Treasury Alexander
Hamilton. Hamilton's initiatives aroused the ire of those who maintained the
politics of the Anti-federalists. Hamilton's main goals were to achieve the
financial stability necessary to fight another war should one arise with the
foreign threats of Britain and Spain, and to dull assertions of state power that
might diminish national power. In his Report on Public Credit, submitted to
Congress in January 1790, Hamilton calculated the US debt at $54 million, with
individual states owing an additional $25 million. American credit abroad was
poor, and continued to fall with every day the debt was left unpaid. Hamilton
suggested funding the debt by selling government bonds, and further proposed
that state debts be assumed by the national government.
Hamilton advocated the selling of western land to pay off US debt to European
nations in order to rebuild credit, but suggested that the debt to US creditors
be maintained as a perpetual debt. He argued the US could continue paying
interest on its domestic debt, thus maintaining good credit, if the US creditors
would accept the debt as a secure investment which paid yearly interest. This
plan generated opposition from many, objecting to the fact that under the plan,
astute wealthy speculators who had bought the debt certificates of others, many
at great discounts, would benefit, while the Americans who actually financed the
war would lose out.
Heavy opposition arose to Hamilton's proposal that the national government
assume the debts of the states as well. Opposition ran especially high in the
South, which, excluding South Carolina, had paid off 83 percent of the region's
debt. Southern states saw in Hamilton's proposal a plan to alleviate the tax
burden on northern states lagging in their debt payments, while southern states
had already reduced their debt at great internal cost. In the end, Hamilton
pushed his proposals through Congress with the aid of much political
wheeling and dealing. The nation reaped the economic rewards of Hamilton's
efforts to improve credit, as Europeans increasingly purchased US government
bonds and invested elsewhere in the US economy.
In December 1790, Hamilton began his second controversial policy campaign.
Having increased the amount of capital available for investment, he planned to
establish a national bank. One-fifth of the bank's stock would be owned by the
US Treasury, which would have one-fifth control of the board of directors. The
remainder would fall into private hands. Hamilton claimed the Bank of the
United States would, at negligible cost, provide a secure depository for federal
revenue and a source of federal loans, as well as issue currency. The bank
would regulate the activities of the nation's banks and extend credit to US
citizens in order to expand the economy.
The proposal for the national bank brought Hamilton more opposition than had any
previous initiative. Most notably, Thomas Jefferson, the Secretary of
State, joined the ranks of Hamilton's opponents. Jefferson and other political
leaders recalled how the Bank of Britain had undermined democracy, and feared
that the creation of the bank would tie private individuals too closely to
public institutions. They predicted that politicians would manipulate bank
shareholders and that members of Congress who held bank shares would vote for
the best interests of the bank over those of the nation. Hamilton's opponents
further pointed out that the Constitution did not grant the federal
government the power to grant charters. Despite this opposition, Congress
approved the bank by a thin margin, and the Bank of the United States obtained a
twenty-year charter in February 1791.
Alexander Hamilton, a veteran of the Revolutionary
War, was an idealist who had become disillusioned
by the faltering morals that many of his countrymen had exhibited during the
revolution and following decade. He believed that Americans could not be
motivated by self-sacrifice, but rather, had to be motivated by appeals to their
own self-interest. Thus he advocated building ties between the government and
wealthy and influential individuals, who he believed would support the nation
were it in their own interest. Distrustful of the masses, he argued for the
consolidation of power in the hands of the national government.
