FREE ESSAY ON JACKSONSONIANS VS JEFFERSONIANS

JACKSONSONIANS VS JEFFERSONIANS

The Washington administration was the first to bring together in the 
cabinet of the United States, the Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and the 
Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson and Hamilton began to 
take different views when the government began to address the issue of the 
old war debts and the worthless paper money left over from the days of the 
Confederation. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the 
Bank of the United States, which would be a public-private partnership with 
both government and private investors. The Bank of the United States was to 
handle the government's banking needs. Jefferson protested because this was 
not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and 
stated that the Constitution's writers could not have predicted the need of 
a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank 
of the United States was stated in the "elastic" or the "necessary and 
proper" clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to 
pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. " This began the 
argument between the "strict constructionists" (Jefferson) who believed in 
the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond 
its clearly expressed provisions, and the "loose constructionists" 
(Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it 
said". Hamilton and Jefferson began to disagree more and more. Hamilton wrote 
nasty anonymous articles in John Fenno's Gazette of the United States and 
Jefferson responded to him in Philip Freneau's National Gazette. Jefferson's 
Notes of the State of Virginia in 1787 stated that rural life was beneficial 
to the government because cities and other areas of large population created 
poverty, disease, and corruption. Jefferson believed that the small farmers 
where the backbone of the United States. While in the Report on Manufactures 
of 1791,Hamilton stated that the government should be used to develop cities, 
industries, and trade Hamilton believed that "government's function is to 
maintain order in a potentially chaotic society. It needs to be remote and 
secure from the people's emotional uprisings".Jefferson believed the 
government "needs to be limited in its powers and completely responsive to 
the needs and desires of the people".Hamilton was strongest among merchants 
in the cities and throughout New England while Jefferson was strongest among 
artisans in the cities and throughout the South. These conflicting views 
would develop in two political parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and 
the Democratic-Republicans led by Jefferson. Although both political parties 
presented enticing aspects, Hamilton's views would be the more reasonable 
because Jefferson's views were idealistic and too strict in reference to the 
constitution. 
The Jeffersonian beliefs were extremely idealistic. Jeffersonians' 
supported a country of farmers which in theory would end famine and the 
spread of disease that was commonly found in cities. However, without the 
development of cities and industries there would not be a trade industry 
which would allow the farmers to trade and prosper. With no trade, farmers 
would not be able to market their surplus and the surplus in the American 
economy would cause prices to fall. This situation would produce little 
profit for farmers and eventually an stagnant economy. An economy totally 
based on farming would also encounter problems if droughts and other natural 
disasters interfered with their harvests. The Hamiltonian belief is more 
realistic. Hamiltonians' supported the expansion of economic endeavors in 
cities, in areas such as trade and other crafts. This would help keep the 
economy stable and growing if the farming lands were not up to their 
potential. Jefferson's belief that the decisions in government should be 
made by the people is very unrealistic and perhaps even naive. It is 
sometimes human nature to change one's views and beliefs in a wince and 
citizens might follow the views of an irrational and incompetent person which 
would lead the country to ruin. Hamilton said that some of the power should 
be kept out of the hand of the people in order to protect the people from 
making a change in government that would cause possible disasters. 
Jefferson's view would only would have worked in an perfect world. 
Jefferson's ideals for the government were too strict as it pertains to 
the interpretation of the Constitution. Jefferson did not realize that the 
Constitution was written in a broad manner. The Constitution was written in 
such a broad way that not the laws, but the interpretation of them would 
change according to the times. The interpretation was for the government of 
turn to recognize what the laws are and to enforce them. The Constitution 
called for freedom of speech, religion, and press. It only applied at the 
time to white males while in the present it applies to men and women of all 
races. Jefferson's "strict constructionism" would have led to the downfall 
of the government because the Constitution does not have the denotative 
solution for every problem that the government would have encountered. 
Hamilton's view that the Constitution could not have anticipated the details 
to deal with different crises, and that a wide interpretation of the 
Constitution was necessary in order to carry out the government's duties.
The Hamiltonian views were much more effective in dealing with the 
government. The Hamiltonian broad interpretation ensured that the 
Constitution is not considered as a 200 year old body of rigid and inflexible 
laws, that make no room for improvement in an ever changing American 
society.The Washington administration was the first to bring together in the 
cabinet of the United States, the Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and the 
Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson and Hamilton began to 
take different views when the government began to address the issue of the 
old war debts and the worthless paper money left over from the days of the 
Confederation. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the 
Bank of the United States, which would be a public-private partnership with 
both government and private investors. The Bank of the United States was to 
handle the government's banking needs. Jefferson protested because this was 
not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and 
stated that the Constitution's writers could not have predicted the need of 
a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank 
of the United States was stated in the "elastic" or the "necessary and 
proper" clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to 
pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. " This began the 
argument between the "strict constructionists" (Jefferson) who believed in 
the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond 
its clearly expressed provisions, and the "loose constructionists" 
(Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it 
said". Hamilton and Jefferson began to disagree more and more. Hamilton wrote 
nasty anonymous articles in John Fenno's Gazette of the United States and 
Jefferson responded to him in Philip Freneau's National Gazette.. 
Jefferson's Notes of the State of Virginia in 1787 stated that rural life 
was beneficial to the government because cities and other areas of large 
population created poverty, disease, and corruption. Jefferson believed that 
the small farmers where the backbone of the United States. While in the 
Report on Manufactures of 1791,Hamilton stated that the government should be 
used to develop cities, industries, and trade Hamilton believed that 
"government's function is to maintain order in a potentially chaotic society. 
It needs to be remote and secure from the people's emotional 
uprisings".Jefferson believed the government "needs to be limited in its 
powers and completely responsive to the needs and desires of the 
people".Hamilton was strongest among merchants in the cities and throughout 
New England while Jefferson was strongest among artisans in the cities and 
throughout the South. These conflicting views would develop in two political 
parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led 
by Jefferson. Although both political parties presented enticing aspects, 
Hamilton's views would be the more reasonable because Jefferson's views were 
idealistic and too strict in reference to the constitution. 
The Jeffersonian beliefs were extremely idealistic. Jeffersonians' 
supported a country of farmers which in theory would end famine and the 
spread of disease that was commonly found in cities. However, without the 
development of cities and industries there would not be a trade industry 
which would allow the farmers to trade and prosper. With no trade, farmers 
would not be able to market their surplus and the surplus in the American 
economy would cause prices to fall. This situation would produce little 
profit for farmers and eventually an stagnant economy. An economy totally 
based on farming would also encounter problems if droughts and other natural 
disasters interfered with their harvests. The Hamiltonian belief is more 
realistic. Hamiltonians' supported the expansion of economic endeavors in 
cities, in areas such as trade and other crafts. This would help keep the 
economy stable and growing if the farming lands were not up to their 
potential. Jefferson's belief that the decisions in government should be 
made by the people is very unrealistic and perhaps even naive. It is 
sometimes human nature to change one's views and beliefs in a wince and 
citizens might follow the views of an irrational and incompetent person which 
would lead the country to ruin. Hamilton said that some of the power should 
be kept out of the hand of the people in order to protect the people from 
making a change in government that would cause possible disasters. 
Jefferson's view would only would have worked in an perfect world. 
Jefferson's ideals for the government were too strict as it pertains to 
the interpretation of the Constitution. Jefferson did not realize that the 
Constitution was written in a broad manner. The Constitution was written in 
such a broad way that not the laws, but the interpretation of them would 
change according to the times. The interpretation was for the government of 
turn to recognize what the laws are and to enforce them. The Constitution 
called for freedom of speech, religion, and press. It only applied at the 
time to white males while in the present it applies to men and women of all 
races. Jefferson's "strict constructionism" would have led to the downfall 
of the government because the Constitution does not have the denotative 
solution for every problem that the government would have encountered. 
Hamilton's view that the Constitution could not have anticipated the details 
to deal with different crises, and that a wide interpretation of the 
Constitution was necessary in order to carry out the government's duties.
The Hamiltonian views were much more effective in dealing with the 
government. The Hamiltonian broad interpretation ensured that the 
Constitution is not considered as a 200 year old body of rigid and
inflexible laws, that make no room for improvement in an ever changing 
American society.