ALEXANDER HAMILTON

Alexander Hamilton, the son of a Scottish merchant in the West Indies, was born in 1757 on the island of Nevis. He early showed unusual promise, and in 1772 friends sent him to New York to be educated. Landing during the period of bitterest controversy between colonists and crown, he was not long in taking sides; a visit to Boston and the hospitality of new friends decided him to throw in his lot with the American party. In 1774-5, as a seventeen-yearold student in King's College (now Columbia University), he showed his sympathies by opposing Samuel Seabury, ablest of the tory pamphleteers and better known as the "Westchester Farmer." Hamilton's contributions to the controversy, A Full Vindication and The Farmer Refuted, hardly equalled his opponent's in satirical force or clever invective, but they showed a logical, astute mind, clear in its analysis, and sure in detecting real issues.

During the Revolution Hamilton served on Washington's staff with distinction, although somewhat dissatisfied with his dependent position. In 1780, before hostilities ceased, he married Elizabeth Schuyler, member of an influential New York family; and in a short time he became highly successful in the practice of law. As early as 1779, he had begun the political activities which deservedly brought him fame. Clearly perceiving the weaknesses of the Confederacy, he was among the first to point them out, and among the first, too, to advocate the change which came later with the adoption of the Constitution. In the words of Chancellor Kent, "he surpassed all his contemporaries in his exertions to create, recommend, adopt, and defend the Constitution of the United States." As a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, he entered the ranks of the stronggovernment party; and after the work of the Convention was completed, he went home to New York to defend it.

This he did so ably in The Federalist, a series of essays written jointly with John Jay and James Madison, that this work still remains a classic commentary on American law and governmental principles.

As the first secretary of the treasury, Hamilton placed the nation on a safe financial basis, thus generating confidence in the new government. He became Washington's most influential adviser, and in the early days of the republic was able largely to formulate the political creed of the Federalist Party, of which he remained to the end perhaps the strongest, if not the most popular, leader. In 1804 he was killed in a duel with Aaron Burr, long his political rival.

As a writer, Hamilton was clear, logical, forcible, rather than witty or graceful. His legal mind showed to greatest advantage in expository writing-notably in The Federalist. His works have been best edited by H. C. Lodge (twelve volumes, 1904). A commendable biography of him is that by W. G. Sumner. Interesting, also, and accurate historically, is Gertrude Atherton's romance of Hamilton, The Conqueror (1902).

THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM

[FROM "A FULL VINDICATION OF THE MEASURES OF THE CONGRESS." 1774]

A little consideration will convince us, that the Congress, instead of having "ignorantly misunderstood, carelessly neglected, or basely betrayed the interests of the colonies," have, on the contrary, devised and recommended the only effectual means to secure the freedom, and establish the future prosperity of America upon a solid basis. If we are not free and happy hereafter, it must proceed from the want of integrity and resolution, in executing what they have concerted; not from the temerity or impolicy of their determinations.

Before I proceed to confirm this assertion by the most obvious arguments, I will premise a few brief remarks. The only distinction between freedom and slavery consists in this: in the former state, a man is governed by the laws to which he has given his consent, either in person, or by his repre

sentative; in the latter he is governed by the will of another. In the one case his life and property are his own; in the other, they depend upon the pleasure of a master. It is easy to discern which of these two states is preferable. No man

in his senses can hesitate in choosing to be free, rather than a slave.

That Americans are entitled to freedom, is incontestible upon every rational principle. All men have one common original: they participate in one common nature, and consequently have one common right. No reason can be assigned why one man should exercise any power or preeminence over his fellow creatures more than another, unless they have voluntarily vested him with it. Since, then, Americans have not by any act of theirs empowered the British Parliament to make laws for them, it follows they can have no just authority to do it.

COMMERCIAL INDEPENDENCE

[FROM THE SAME]

The colonies contain above three millions of people. Commerce flourishes with the most rapid progress throughout them. This commerce Great Britain has hitherto regulated to her own advantage. Can we think the annihilation of so exuberant a source of wealth, a matter of trifling import. On the contrary, must it not be productive of the most disastrous effects? It is evident it must. It is equally evident, that the conquest of so numerous a people, armed in the animating cause of liberty, could not be accomplished without an inconceivable expense of blood and treasure.

We cannot therefore suspect Great Britain to be capable of such frantic extravagance as to hazard these dreadful

consequences.

But should we admit a possibility of [another] course, as our pamphleteer supposes, that is, the endeavoring to bring us to a compliance by putting a stop to our whole tradeeven this would not be so terrible as he pretends. We can live without trade of any kind. Food and clothing we have within ourselves. Our climate produces cotton, wool, flax,

and hemp, which, with proper cultivation, would furnish us with summer apparel in abundance. The article of cotton indeed would do more; it would contribute to defend us from the inclemency of winter. We have sheep, which, with due care in improving and increasing them, would soon yield a sufficiency of wool. The large quantity of skins, we have among us, would never let us want a warm and comfortable suit. It would be no unbecoming employment for our daughters to provide silks of their own country. The silk-worm answers as well here as in any part of the world. Those hands, which may be deprived of business by the cessation of commerce, may be occupied in various kinds of manufactures and other internal improvements. If by the necessity of the thing, manufactures should once be established and take root among us, they will pave the way, more, to the future grandeur and glory of America, and by lessening its need of external commerce, will render it still securer against the encroachments of tyranny.

still

Upon the whole, it appears, that the supplies of flax-seed, which Ireland might draw elsewhere, could be trifling in comparison with those received from us, and not at all equivalent to her wants. But if this were not the case, if she might procure a sufficiency without our help, yet could she not do without us. She should want purchasers for her linens after they were manufactured; and where could she find any so numerous and wealthy as we are? I must refer it to the profound sagacity of Mr. A. W. Farmer, to explore them; it is too arduous a task for me.

AMERICA FACED BY A SOBERING
RESPONSIBILITY

[FROM "THE FEDERALIST," No. I.]

After full experience of the insufficiency of the existing Federal Government, you are invited to deliberate upon a new Constitution for the United States of America.

The subject speaks of its own importance; comprehending in its consequences, nothing less than the existence of the UNION-the safety and welfare of the parts of which it is composed-the fate of an empire, in many respects, the most

interesting in the world. It has been frequently remarked, that, it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, to decide by their conduct and example, the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not, of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend, for their political constitutions, on accident and force. If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis, at which we are arrived, may with propriety be regarded as the period when that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act, may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind.

THE NEED OF A CHANGE IN GOVERNMENT [FROM "THE FEDERALIST," No. XV.]

In pursuance of the plan, which I have laid down for the discussion of the subject, the point next in order to be examined, is the "insufficiency of the present confederation to the preservation of the union."

We may indeed, with propriety, be said to have reached almost the last stage of national humiliation. There is scarcely anything that can wound the pride, or degrade the character, of an independent people, which we do not experience. Are there engagements, to the performance of which we are held by every tie respectable among men? These are the subjects of constant and unblushing violation. Do we owe debts to foreigners, and to our own citizens, contracted in a time of imminent peril, for the preservation of our political existence? These remain without any proper or satisfactory provision for their discharge. Have we valuable territories and important posts in the possession of a foreign power, which, by express stipulations, ought long since to have been surrendered? These are still retained, to the prejudice of our interest not less than of our rights. Are we in a condition to resent, or to repel the aggression? We have neither troops, nor treasury, nor government.1 Are we even in a condition to remonstrate with dignity? The just imputations on our own faith, in respect to the same treaty, 1 I mean for the union.