The conflicting views of Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton have been the

subject of heated debate. With differing interpretations of matters such as the constitutionality of

the Bank of the United States, the role of the government in society, and assumption of debt. The

two main schools of thought were the federally controlled business perspective and the

decentralized equality and human advancement. Hamilton thought that the common man was

incompetent and incapable of governing themselves, so a strong central government had to be

established. He, along with other believers of this notion formed the Federalist Party. On the

other end of the political spectrum, Thomas Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans emerged.

Favoring freedom of the press and speech, the ideal government for Jefferson was more

democratic than England. He felt that the common man was willing and capable of governing

themselves. Democratic-Republicans believed in a concept called “strict construction” which

meant closely following the Constitution, while Hamilton and the Federalists believed in “loose

construction”.

The feud between these two men can be traced all the way back to their childhood.

Hamilton was born in Charlestown, the capital of the island of Nevis (located in the British West

Indies). He was born to Rachel Faucett Lavien and James A. Hamilton out of wedlock. Because

there was no marriage, Hamilton and his mother were never financially sound and often did not

know how they would get their next meal. This lifestyle can be greatly contrasted to the

childhood of Thomas Jefferson. His father, Peter Jefferson, was a very successful farmer, planter

and surveyor. Jefferson’s mother, Jane Randolph was a member of one of Virginia’ s most

prestigious families. Jefferson enjoyed a lavish childhood in Shadwell, Virginia.

After the failure of the Articles of Confederation, two conflicting views of how the

country should move forward emerged. John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison

(leaders of the Federalist Party) wrote in a newspaper called The Federalist, voicing their

concern about the current government. In the historic Federalist No. 10, Madison, a proponent
of Hamilton, said that “… most people would not put public virtue first, but would serve their

self-interests, which grew out of their individual liberty, above all else.” (Gillon 264) This

beautifully illustrates the point that Federalists believed in a strong central government. Their

argument was that people are inherently selfish, and will do things for themselves over the needs

of the general public. Antifederalists, also known as Democratic-Republicans, took a different

approach to the Constitution. They thought that all Americans had fought too hard for rights to

give them away to a few, powerful politicians. Their concept of an ideal government involved a

larger role of state’s government and minimized central power.

After the Revolutionary War, there were tremendous debts still remaining. The Tariff Act

of 1789 solved that problem. Congress taxed all imports and exports enough to make a profit, but

not enough to deter overseas expansion. This established a secure source of income, and allowed

Hamilton to try and work on the issue of internal debt. To combat this issue, he submitted the

“Report of the Public Credit”. In this report, he outlined three main types of debt that had to be

repaid: $12 million to foreign countries, $30 million to American citizens, and another $25

million that the individual states owed to private citizens. Hamilton proposed that the nation

should assume the outstanding state debt. This did not go over well in the Southern states. With

the exception of South Carolina, all South states repaid their debt. A national debt assumption did

not seem fair to them. Au contraire (yeah I just said that..), the North loved the concept. Most of

their debts were unpaid, and according to Hamilton, a national assumption would “… enlarge

America’s reputations in a ‘world of watching nations’ and secure the support of the country’s

wealthiest citizens to the goals of the federal government.” (Gillon 269) His most radical move,

however, was his proposal of the Bank of the United States (BUS). He proposed to President

Washington that the U.S. sell $10 million in stocks, and put the money into the BUS. This bank

would loan money to merchants, issue notes to investors, and stimulate the economy. The

President approved the opening and placed it under a 20 year charter. Hamilton then successfully
added taxes on wine, tea, coffee, and distilled spirits. Alexander Hamilton had a vital role in

shaping the nation economically. Thanks to him, the financial status of America greatly improved

in a short amount of time.

Thomas Jefferson, being a southerner, strongly opposed Hamilton’s ideas. He came from

Virginia, a place that already paid back their post-war debts. He did not see the practicality of

combining the debt of all the states, and believed the true way to get out of debt was through

agrarian methods. An inhabitant of Virginia, where the primary crop was tobacco, Jackson saw

the potential profit of tobacco. Also scared of returning back to the British ways, he feared that if

one bank had all this money, it would be unconstitutional.

To conclude, it is apparent that Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson had opposing

views of the nation. Hamilton felt strongly towards central authority while Jefferson wanted

smaller, state power. Economically, Hamilton thought business was the key to success and

longevity, while Jefferson thought farming would lead the nation to success. To get the nation out

of debt, Alexander Hamilton created a charter for a Bank of the United States, which Thomas

Jefferson despised. Both of these men were vital parts of the growth of America. Who was

better? Who’s to say.