638

ADULATION-INTEREST.

[CHAP. XV. stupendous projects of financial improvement. Wealth must always have an idol, and it now found a brilliant one in Hamilton. Nor was this all. A great party, rich in intellect and Revolutionary renown, had found at once its idol, its champion, its ruler.

Jefferson, as well as Madison, was in the habit of averring, that had a split taken place between Washington and Hamilton, on the financial schemes of the latter, the thorough Federalists would have followed Hamilton! It would be difficult, in truth, to conjecture where weaker and more obsequious men would stop, when Fisher Ames was in the habit of expressing himself as in the following letter to Hamilton (July 31, 1791). He was speaking of the effects of the United States Bank:

"People' here [Boston] are full of exaltation and gratitude. They know who merits the praise of it, and they are not loth to bestow it.

The success of the Government of the United States, and especially of the measures proceeding from your department, has astonished the multitude; and while it has shut the mouths, it has stung the envious hearts of the State leaders."

Hints of the avowed partisan uses to which Hamilton's financial projects were put, gleam clearly enough through the covering of conventional phrases, in the correspondences of the day. We take it for granted that in the following extract from the same letter of Ames to Hamilton, no one will understand the word "Union" to mean anything more or less than the general cr federal Government:

"The Bank and the United States Government at this moment possess more popularity than any institution or government can maintain for a long time. Perhaps no act of power can be done to destroy the State banks, but if they are willing to become interested, I mean the State stockholders, and to establish sub banks, so as to absorb the funds and contract the business of the local banks, why should any measures be adopted to support the local banks to the prejudice of my hypothesis? or why should cold water be thrown upon the plan of sub-banks?

"All the influence of the moneyed men ought to be wrapped up in the Union, and in one bank. The State banks may become the favorites of the States. They, the latter, will be pressed to emulate the example of the Union, and to show their sovereignty by a parade of institutions, like those of the nation." 1

1

Hamilton's correspondence at this period with prominent men of nearly every class-politicians, bankers, stock-jobbers,

1 For the letter entire, see Hamilton's Works, vol. v. p. 473.

CHAI XV.]

HAMILTON'S CHARACTER.

639

speculators of various species, etc.-in one respect uniformly speaks the same language. He and his correspondents seem under the undoubting impression that he is the maker and the dispenser; that in financial affairs, there is no other Cabinet, or President, or person, entitled to do any more than hear and obey, or, if such be their good luck, to gratefully receive. And both he and his correspondents seem equally under the impres sion that the control of banks, and stock-markets, and monetary affairs generally, is quite as much within the legitimate province of government-nay, is as much an absolute duty of government, as is the preservation of the peace, or the administration of criminal justice!

We have seen that Jefferson expressly exonerates Hamilton from the charge of personal corruption-of enriching himself by his public schemes-while he was shaking Fortunatus's cap into the laps of others. We suppose the same remark applies to many other Federal leaders-perhaps to a decided majority of the really conspicuous and able ones. While Ames sings poeans in praise of the Treasury department, and talks of appealing to the venality of the "moneyed men," we suppose him to have been himself entirely above being approached by gold. It is even probable that these men would have preferred to rule through higher and better motives. But it was their misfortune to believe that it was impracticable.

Jefferson's phrase, that "Hamilton was not only a monarchist, but for a monarchy bottomed on corruption," has been considered a peculiarly harsh one; and some have professed to be unable to see how this can be reconciled with the idea of his personal integrity. In the abstract, the reconciliation would indeed be a puzzling one. But the world has agreed to consider the two things compatible. It is notorious that a direct appeal to venality has been practised as a part of the undenied, if not unconcealed, machinery of the British Constitution, from the first existence of that Constitution. Without going back to those days of open and shameless profligacy which preceded the reign of William and Mary, it has been perfectly well understood that the wisest and purest ministers have, to a later day than George III.'s, as directly bought political adhesion and votes in Parlia ment by commissions, titles, sinecures, pensions, and jobs, as butchers buy cattle in the Smithfield market. If the Secretary

640

HAMILTON'S CHARACTER.

[CHAP. XV. of State, like Chatham,' is a little addicted to personal squeamishness, there is a premier like the Duke of Newcastle, to manage what the historian Macaulay terms the "jobbing department." This is the old convenient arrangement of certain other business firms. There is the gentleman partner, and the partner for dirty work. We ought by way of illustration to name another usual addition, or appendage to such "firms." There is not only the buyer but the bought! From the Ministry just named, from men he had bitterly opposed and abhorred, Foxa man of the first mark and rank in politics, and of scarcely less abilities than his illustrious son, Charles James Fox-received the wages of adhesion and ignominious silence, in the most lucrative office in the Government.

These illustrations might be swelled to any limits. The fact that the British administration had always resorted to corruption as a part of its necessary measures to obtain and secure strength, is contradicted by no British historian. He who would have abundance of details on this subject is referred to the pages of Mr. Macaulay. If he would see the subject treated at some length, by itself, he is referred to the same author's review of Thackeray's History of the Earl of Chatham. After inspecting the testimony of the native witnesses, our liberality, in the preceding remarks, will not be impeached.

No apologist of Alexander Hamilton has denied that "theoretically" he believed the British Constitution was the "best form"-" a model which we ought to approach as near as possible." This was the life-long burden of that song which Mr. Morris declares was repeated by him so persistently, and so much to the annoyance of his more prudent friends. These laudations involve the administration as well as the written form -for all know that the Constitution of England exists more in established practice than in written instruments. But independently of all questions of definition, do we, from the first to the last, ever hear Hamilton, like John Adams, excepting the system of government corruption when lavishing praises on the British government? Do we find him attempting to avoid those corruptions in practice? This question will be better

1 Then Mr. Pitt.

2 First published in Edinburgh Review, 1834. These are his words from the "brief" of a speech in the Convention of 1787, already cited from his biography.

CHAP. XV.]

HAMILTON'S CHARACTER.

641

settled at a later period, but it is not altogether premature now. The circumstances accompanying the Funding Bill, the manner of the Assumption, the history of other bills, the scenes which attended the organization of the United States Bank, furnish evidence which does not demand the hints of Ames and the broad avowals of Morris,' for its explanation.

Hamilton's mind was perspicacious, logical, and strong in the wisdom of a beaten circle of precedents. But he never transcended that circle-never was in the least degree inventivenever struck out a new path either in theory or practice-never, in the whole course of his life, proposed an original thought or plan. He adapted and re-combined with promptness; but he who deliberately examines the history of his public career will look in vain for a system or even a marked feature of a system, not as directly and literally transferred from England, as the differences in the structure of the governments, in the condition of those to be acted upon, and in the popular tone, would possibly admit. The highest attribute of the great statesman-to look forward, to adapt his measures to the progress of ideas, to create systems which will stand the test of a broader and deeper civilization was not vouchsafed to him. His wisdom, to use some one's striking comparison when speaking of another person, was like the stern-lights of a ship. It cast all its light backward, over the course already passed over, and not a ray forward!

As long as the tremendous struggle was going on between. the Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian construction of the United States Constitution-between the English theory of it and the democratic theory of it-Hamilton's plans, Hamilton's opinions, Hamilton's resounding name were on every tongue. When the outworks, all but the citadel of the seemingly massive structure, fell in 1801-when the citadel (the Supreme Court) was some years after carried over to the assailants by the death of a majority of its original defenders, what of Hamilton's remained? And now what great political truth, what important maxim in the science of government, what broad and benevolent view of human affairs, traces back to him as either its originator, or its practical developer, or its introducer on that part of the human theatre where his lot was cast? If there is one such, we confess

We mean Morris's avowals of his own views. See page 572. VOL 1.-41

642

HAMILTON'S CHARACTER.

[CHAP. XV.

it has eluded our scrutiny. To make a somewhat different application from the usual one of the often quoted words of Lucan: "Stat magni nominis umbra "-he stands but the shadow of a mighty name-apotheosized, as already remarked, by the American enemies of democratic theories, as the great type-man, the symbol of their idea.

A degree, and no inconsiderable degree, of "greatness" is here willingly conceded to Hamilton. It was not the greatness of a profoundly wise man in practice, who chances to entertain certain erroneous or inapplicable theories. He cannot be called wise in practice, all of whose structures, which could be rooted from our system without a breach of public faith, have already perished, as it were, in a night. Practical wisdom in the states man requires measures not only good in themselves, but suffi ciently adapted to existing circumstances to command something like permanent success. He certainly cannot be called wise in practice who "props" his edifice till he crushes it with the buttresses he builds against it-in other words, who, in his immoderate efforts to strengthen his system, provokes, nay, compels the opposition, which sweeps away much of it that might otherwise have been permitted to stand.

It is not to be denied that there were fair grounds for different constructions of the American Constitution. Nay, it did not prescribe, but left to the States a multitude of details, the settlement of which would virtually control that construction. Among the people of the States were three parties, the monarchical, the democratic, and the conservative republican. After the adoption of the federal Constitution, our opinion is that for a considerable period the two first were but handfuls that the last comprised the body of both leaders and people. Hamilton, Jefferson, and Washington were the representatives of these three parties. The rapid tendency of all popular governments in theory, is towards practical democracy. But our people were naturally and habitually cautious, and inclined to conservatism. They left beaten roads with reluctance. The opponents of pure democracy had the vantage ground, not only in numbers and the weight of names, but in the feelings of the people.

Had Hamilton understood the temper and character of the American people-had he identified himself with and prudently