|
|
These forums are being phased out. The new, improved Alexander Hamilton Forum is at americanhistoryforums.com.
Posted by Kevin B. on December 15, 19101 at 20:02:50:
In Reply to: hamilton vs madison posted by MONICA H on November 26, 19101 at 13:13:06:
: i need info on the federalism paper with the contrast of hamilton vs madison
If there ever existed to Intellectual giants at war it was these two, although the Madison Hamilton conflict was surely overshadowed by the Jefferson, Hamilton antagonism.
Both can be considered framers as well as Founders of the Constitution, and cooperated in The Federalist Papers, the Papers were surely the idea of Hamitlon though and Madison was not originally part of the project.
On June 18th 1787 in the Constitutional Convention Hamilton was propmpted into speaking
, as the result of the New Jersey Plan, which outlined a strengthening of the Artciles of Confederation. Hamilton went on to outline a stronger Government that exceeded the outlines being dicussed under the ia Plan presented by Randolph, the ia Plan had been the outline since the Conventions convening in May.
Hamilton's plan for government was strong and very centralized, the President, as well as the Senate were to serve during good behaviour ( for some reason he included for a period of not less then 14 years for the senate), and he praised 'The British Constitution was the best form- he did this quoting Neckar, Montesquieu, his speech was met with silence, no arguments, he was an excellent speaker, well versed, and he acknowleged, he was in an odd postiton. His odd position was the fact of being in a delegation of three, the other two were against doing anything but improving the " Articles of Confederation', so Hamilton's home state, being allowed one vote, put him out of the loop so to speak.
Madison rose the next day to argue against the New Jersey Plan, reinforcing the the Viriginia Plan, most of which he seems to have authored. No aspersions were cast at Hamilton. The ia Plan, reamined the paradigm for discussions, which yeilded a much more confederated government, partly naional, partly federal, limted terms for senators, as well as the executive.
Hamilton departed the Convention in Late June, the 29th I think, writng to Washington he did not like the lack of energy in the government being proposed, adn thought he was wasting his time, he did return August 13th for a day, and was there form September 5th till the signing of the Constitution September 17th, even then he stated he did not like the republican form, but was signing because it surely was a better form then the 'Articles.'
There can be noted differences between to the two authors in the Fed Papers, but overall they remain the greatest exertion of writing in politics in American history, if Hamilton did not like the propsed government, he admitted it, and in patriotic fashion went on to defend it brilliantly, and was the key speaker at the New York ratifying Convention in 1788.
The dilemma between the two came when they started puttng this Government into practice. Madison was Representative, and Hamilton was Secretary of the Treasury. Hamilton's first proposal, paying off the debts, agreed by both as a great idea, included some of Hamilton's friends buying soldiers debt at a discount, and making a financial killing, the Madison idea was 'discrimination' which gave those who fought the revolution some more money out the deal. Some of the soldiers had to sell to survive since war salaries were not paid for the period of 1781 to 1787. They split there, Hamilton never figured out why, he even claimed Madison had abondoned him. Next debts were to be reimbursed as of a current day, well ia lost
out there due to ther paying off their debt, while M. made out beacuse they never paid off anything. The the 'Bank" Bill. Hamilton wanted a National Bank, Madison could not find Constitutional validity for establishing a Bank, Hamilton one this one, to be candid that established much of our monetrary thought.
At the heart of this was Constitutional exegesis. Madison wanted a supreme national government in a limted area, Hamilton wanted a strong central government that had alttitude to do things implied in the Constitution. Jefferson is crdited with founding the Democratic-Republican party, but on the floor of the Congress it was Madison advocating a strict adherence to the sense of the Constitution as ratifed and understood by the people. One group who adhered to madison's beliefs called themselves "Madisonian's". Hamilton had strong freinds, he was kind of arrogant but he was agian brilliant, a war hero, and made frenids with people with money, whom he belived were the best guys to get involved with government. Madison saw this as leading to aristocracy, and in some part I am sure remembering Hamilton's speech at the Convention, and not liking England much at all.
I am prone to Madison, I have studied him quite awhile, yet Hamilton had integrity, his vision fit the economic bill very well. When it comes down to Constitutional exegesis I would follow Madison first, although I disagree with Hamilton's visions I still admire his brilliance, he did an amazing establishing the financiall recovery of the Sates after the Government got going. It came down to this, pliant constutional construction, and strong central government, for Hamilton, Madison wanted a strong, yet limted government, exacting Constituional reading. Hmailton put his appeal to the propitious, Madison to the 'people'.
READ THE GREAT BOOKS
TERM PAPERS, RESEARCH PAPERS, ESSAYS
DR. ELLIOT'S NORTH AMERICAN GREAT BOOKS TOUR--COMING TO A BOOK
STORE NEAR YOU
[Shakespeare Forums]
[Bible Forums]