'^.vV? 5

Yale Universitv Library

39002005452942 \

" ILIlIBI^^IEir »

Bought with the Income
ofthe
Ellen Battell Eldridge Fund

A STUDY IN
ALEXANDER HAMILTON

iii

A STUDY IN
ALEXANDER HAMILTON
BY
FONTAINE T. FOX
OF THE LOUISVILLE BAR

New York and Washington
THE NEALE PUBLISHING COMPANY
1911

Cop3n:iBht. 1911, by
The Neale Publishing Company

Cb. 4^'. '^^O

TO
HON. BOYD WINCHESTER
Form.er Congressman from Kentucky, Minister
to Switzerland, and my class-mate a-nd
lifelong friend, this book is
dedicated by
THE AUTHOR

CHAPTEE I
In the study of history and in the study of
the lives of great men the moral nature" of the
facts of both studies seems to escape the
thoughtful attention of many readers. All men,
it is true, read with their eyes ; but equally is it
true that only a few read with their minds. That
history is philosophy teaching by example has
been long accepted as a truism. Indeed, if his
tory be merely a chronicle of past events, it is
as useless as worn out furniture, and should be
stored in the attic of the mind.
The facts in the lives of great men are the
true interpreters of their real characters.
Through these facts we may penetrate to the
motives of men. Through the moral nature of
these facts, correctly analyzed, we may solve the
problems of the lives of the great of the past
with the unerring certainty of a mathematical
demonstration. The injustice that is done to the
character of some men is due more to the ab
sence of thought in the mind of the reader than
to hate, envy, or to prejudice, while the enthusi
astic admiration so generally given to others, by

10 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
which they get the start of this majestic world,
may be attributed to the same cause. Facts
are the test, the true index to the character of
men. The smaller and, apparently, the more insig
nificant the facts in their nature, the surer and
the more indisputable their evidence against
men. It is only in trifles that we let go of our
selves, get off guard, act out of our inner na
ture, and are as God made us, gxiided by the
promptings of the act alone, with no thought of
its effect.
I began the study of the life and the character
of Alexander Hamilton with a feeling similar
to that of a surgeon who, scalpel in hand, ap
proaches the table upon which lies the body
that he intends to make the subject of a surgical
analysis. Taught to respect and to admire Ham
ilton from my earliest years by my father, to
whom Hamilton was almost an ideal man, I had
accepted, with unquestioning faith, his estimate
of the man as just. The shock was great when
I found myself rejecting all the fabrication of
writers who were dazzled by Hamilton's im
modest assertion of his own abilities. From
intense admiration, I came to hold the man in
contempt for his life, for his conduct, and for
his motives.

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 11
In intellect Alexander Hamilton was a giant ;
in character he was morally a weakling. With
out a father, without a country, without a God,
he could have been nothing less than what he
was. The facts of his career prove the truth of
this summary of the man.
And it is time that the truth should be told
about this adventurer in American politics.
More dazzling in manner than Benjamin Dis
raeli, except as a writer, more magnetic in char
acter, more eloquent in debate, and more ac
complished in letters, his career outshines that
of the great Englishman, whom he somewhat
resembles. He possessed to an eminent degree
those qualities of mind that in public men have
in all ages and in all countries been so attractive
to their fellowmen, and for which they have al
ways been forgiven every misdoing. Where the
misdoings of such men could not always be con
cealed, always they have been defended long and
vigorously, until they have never failed to dwin
dle to insignificant faults, or to mere acts of
thoughtless imprudence.
Hamilton's character in private life will be
found to correspond with his political principles,
the former in reality being the correlative of the
latter. I shall consider his character solely upon the

12 A STUDY IN ALEXANDER HAMILTON
statements made in the "vindication" of the
charge of speculating in Treasury warrants
that was published by himself, which vindication
now lies before me.
Before making any extracts from Hamilton's
vindication, or confession, I desire to state that
I have in my library the vindication, Callender's
two books, the statements in one of which caused
Hamilton to publish his vindication, and also
the original autograph letter of Beverley Ran
dolph, about the trial of Callender for libel.
The title page of the vindication is as follows :
Observations on Certain Documents Contained
in No. V and VI of "The History of the United
States for the Year 1796," in Which the Charge
of Speculation Against Alexander Hamilton,
Late Secretary of the Treasury, is Fully Re
futed. Written hy Himself. Philadelphia:
Printed for John Fenno, hy John Bioren. 1797.
My extracts will be taken from the original
sources, not from other books and pamphlets.
Before giving the statements made in his vin
dication I shall quote from two authors, of
whom one refers to Hamilton as a man, the
other to the vindication. I quote first from
Gouvemeur Morris, who delivered Hamilton's
funeral oration :

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON IB
"The first point of his biography is that he
was a stranger of illegitimate birth — some mode
must be contrived to pass over this handsomely.
He was indiscreet, vain and opinionated — these
things must be told or the character will be in
complete, and yet they must be told in such
manner as not to destroy the interest. He was
in principle opposed to republican and attached
to monarchial government, and then his opinions
were generally known, and have been long and
loudly proclaimed. His share in forming our
Constitution must be mentioned, and his un
favourable opinion can not therefore be con
cealed. The most important part of his life was
his administration of the finances. The system
he proposed was in one respect radically wrong ;
moreover, it has been the subject of some just
and much unjust criticism. Many are still hos
tile to it, though on improper ground. I must
not either dwell on his domestic life ; he has long
since foolishly published the avowal of conjugal
infidelity." — Memoirs of Gouvemeur Morris, 2
vols., pp. 456, 457.
I now quote from the Federalist System, by
I. S. Bassett, one of the historical series in The
American Nation — A History, pp. 215, 216:

14 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
"Soon after his arrival in America Monroe
gave a savage blow to Hamilton, probably in
retaliation for the latter's influence on his recall.
In 1792 one Eeynolds had been suspected of
frauds against the government and the affair
had taken such a turn as to suggest that Hamil
ton was compromised with him. The evidence
was embraced in certain letters whose real im
port was far different from what appeared on
the surface. The matter was referred to three
members of Congress — Monroe, Venable, and
Muhlenberg. To them Hamilton owned in con
fidence that the letters were written in connec
tion with an illicit relation with Mrs. Eeynolds
which had been carried on with her husband's
knowledge, and by reason of which Hamilton
had paid Eeynolds about twelve hundred dollars
for blackmail. The three men were satisfied,
and assured the public that Hamilton was inno
cent. The papers were placed in Monroe's
hands, all promising to keep them secret. To
them Monroe added a statement by Eeynolds
which was not submitted to Hamilton, the pur
port of which was to confirm the original charge
of complicity in fraud. It was a piece of bad
dealing on Monroe's part, and came near in
volving the two men in a duel at a later date.

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 15
When Monroe went to France he left the papers
tn the hands of a friend in Virginia whose name
has never been revealed, but when Callender's
annual register appeared in 1797 they were
given to the public. Hamilton called on the
three custodians for an explanation. Muhlen
berg and Venable promptly and explicitly ex
onerated themselves, but Monroe halted and
shifted his excuses in such a manner that it is
evident that he was responsible for the revela
tion. It is assumed that he disclosed them in
revenge for his own sufferings."
In considering the statements of this extract
I have been at a loss to find what suffering Mon
roe could have felt by reason of Hamilton's dis
honorable conduct towards his own wife, or
from his complicity in the fraudulent transac
tion, with Reynolds as his agent, to speculate in
Treasury warrants, or from his adulterous
amour with Mrs. Eeynolds. The letters men
tioned in the foregoing extract can be found in
Callender's History of the United States for
1796, beginning on page 209.
Page 9 : " The charge against me is a connec
tion with one James Eeynolds fdr purposes of

16 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
improper pecuniary speculation. My real crime
is an amorous connection with his wife, for a
considerable time with his privity and conni
vance, if not originally brought on by a combina
tion between the husband and wife with the de
sign to extort money from me."
Aaron Burr was never accused by his bitter
est enemy of kissing and then telling.
A critical examination of the vindication no
where discloses such a juncture of events con
nected with the charge as would render this
statement in any way logically necessary in re
futing the charge of speculation.
Pages 9 and 10: "This confession is not
made without a blush. I can not be the apologist
of any vice because the ardour of passion may
have made it mine. I can never cease to con
demn myself for the pang, which it may inflict
in a bosom eminently entitled to all my grati
tude, fidelity and love. But that bosom will ap
prove, that even at so great an expense, I should
effectually wipe away a more serious stain from
a name which it cherishes with no less elevation
than tenderness. The public too will, I trust,
excuse the confession. The necessity of it to

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 17
my defence against a more heinous charge could
alone have extorted from me so painful an in
decorum." Why drag his wife, the mother of his children,
into this nauseous and disgusting muddle ? His
character, not hers, had to be burnished anew.
What was his conduct? At the worst, in his
opinion, "an indecorum" only. What is the
statement in this extract? It is simply the cant
of a sanctimonious hypocrite striving to use a
noble sentiment in his own service, in the hope
that its invocation would regain for him the re
spect and the confidence of the public.
But is the charge of speculation in Treasury
warrants "a more heinous charge" than treach
ery to his conjugal vow?
Suppose his wife had been so false to her
conjugal vow, would he have considered her
offense less heinous than that charged against
him? Taking his own estimate of his honor as a
man, a husband, and as a father, you have the
clew to this creature's despicable character.
He sat for his own portrait. And he has
painted himself in fadeless colors to the verv
life.

18 A STUDY IN ALEXANDER HAMILTON
Page 17: "Some time in the summer of the
year 1791 a woman called at my house in the
City of Philadelphia and asked to speak with
me in private. I attended her into a room apart
from the family. With a seeming air of affliction
she informed me that she was the daughter of
a Mr. Lewis, sister to a Mr. G. Livingston of the
State of New York, and wife to a Mr. Reynolds
whose father was in the commissary department
during the war with Great Britain, that her hus
band, who for a long time had treated her very
cruelly, had lately left her, to live with another
woman, and in so destitute a condition, that
though desirous of returning to her friends she
had not the means — that knowing I was a citizen
of New York, she had taken the liberty to apply
to my humanity for assistance."
Humanity seems a strange word to use in this
connection. Charity, I believe, is the word gen
erally used by well regulated minds.
Page 18 : "I replied that her situation was a
very interesting one — that I was disposed to af
ford her assistance to convey her to her friends,
but this at the moment not being convenient to
me (which was the fact) I must request the place

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 19
of her residence, to which I should bring or send
a small supply of money. She told me the street
and number of the house where she lodged. In
the evening I put a bank bill in my pocket and
went to the house. I enquired for Mrs. Reynolds
and was shewn upstairs, at the head of which
she met me and conducted me into a bed room.
I took the bill out of my pocket and gave it to
her. Some conversation ensued from which it
was quickly apparent that other than pecuniary
consolation would be acceptable."
Note that this meeting is the first one between
Hamilton and Mrs. Reynolds, and also note that
this meeting occurred in the summer of the year
1791. Hamilton's statement is the pivotal point
of the whole matter as to her husband and his
charge against Hamilton.
Page 21 : "On the 19th, I received the prom
ised letter (No. IV-b) the essence of which is
that he was willing to take a thousand dollars
as the plaister for his wounded honour.
"I determined to give it to him, and did so in
two payments, as per receipts (No. V and VI)
dated the 22nd of December and 3rd of January
[1791]."

20 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
Appendix, p. xv : "No. V.
"Eeceived December 22 of Alexander Hamil
ton six hundred dollars on account of a sum of
one thousand dollars due to me.
"James Eeynolds.
"No. VI.
"Eeceived Philadelphia January 3 1791 of
Alexander Hamilton four hundred dollars in
full of all demands. James Reynolds."
The amounts specified in these two receipts
make the $1,000 mentioned in the extract of
page 21, while the receipts are those mentioned
in the same extract. They are so fully described
that no one can be mistaken as to their identity.
This $1,000 is "the plaister for his [Reynolds's]
wounded honour."
The first receipt, No. V, is dated December
22, which must be December of the year 1790,
because receipt No. VI, which was for the bal
ance of the $1,000, was dated January 3, 1791.
Consequently Hamilton plastered Reynolds's
wounded honor at least six to eight months be
fore he had ever seen Mrs. Eeynolds, "some
time in the summer of 1791, ' ' unless the summer

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 21
of 1791 came ahead of time in Philadelphia, be
fore December 22, 1790, and certainly before
January 3, 1791. Comment is unnecessary.
Hamilton seemed to be absolutely uncon
scious of the baseness of character as disclosed
by the facts that he himself brought forward in
his defense.
Page 18: "After this I had frequent meet
ings with her, most of them at my own house;
Mrs. Hamilton with her children being absent
on a visit to her father. ' '
Did any other man claiming to be a gentleman
ever sink to such degradation, to such debauch
ery, then publicly confess it in print? Yet this
unscrupulous creature has been held up to
American youth by American writers of biog
raphy and of history and by American states
men and by American ministers of the Gospel
' ' as the glass of fashion and the mould of form"
— the one ideal gentleman known to American
history, to American society, and to American
politics. Hamilton turned his home into a
bawdy house.
Immediately following the extracts relative to
the two receipts I find this sentence :

22 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
Page 22: "It is a little remarkable that an
avaricious speculating secretary of the treasury
should have been so straitened for money as to
be obliged to satisfy an engagement of this sort
by two different payments. ' '
There is in the statement in this extract the
artistic touch of delicate satire, as the last re
ceipt, No. VI, being "in full of all demands"
and the last installment of the "plaister" ap
plied to Reynolds's wounded honor, would in
clude the wages due Mrs. Reynolds for her
physical services as well as the amount due her
husband as shown by the balance sheet struck
on the speculative venture of Messrs. Hamilton
& Reynolds. But Reynolds could see what was
in Future's womb. No one with an impartial
mind, critically reading this vindication, can
conceive that Hamilton, though a great lawyer,
had the slightest conception of the probative
value of a fact upon the issue as to what was
offered in evidence, or that he was conscious of
the effect that his own statements would have
upon public opinion. To his friends this con
fession must have produced an intense feeling
of pity, of sympathy, and of regret ; to his ene
mies, a feeling of unutterable contempt and

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 23
scorn as well as of fiendish delight ; to those who
were neither friend nor foe, a feeling of won
derment that he had not submitted the manu
script before publication to a true friend, who
would have had every statement relative to
Mrs. Reynolds eliminated.
While all the loathsome incidents coimected
with Hamilton's connection with Mrs. Reynolds
are given publicly, without the least reserve, at
the same time the reader is told by Hamilton of
his injury to his wife, to his own conscience, and
to his honor. Not one statement about Mrs.
Reynolds, nor his own wife, nor his honor, nor
his conscience tends in the slightest degree to
disprove the charge of his speculative venture
with Reynolds. The charge of speculation was
abroad, in the world of politics, in society, at
that time.
One reading the vindication at this day does
not wonder that Hamilton's descendants have
been buying it up for over a hundred years, to
suppress it. Only at very long intervals can a
copy be found, in some old book store, by one
whose curiosity is aroused by the narratives of
writers that have never seen it.
The literary world has been shocked by the
confessions of Rousseau. But what are they

24 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
when compared to the confessions of Alexander
Hamilton! This RejTiolds episode seems con
sidered by him, as it was certainly treated, as
only an "indecorum" in his private and social
life.

CHAPTER II
Bearing in mind these two pivotal facts, that
Alexander Hamilton first met Mrs. Reynolds
"some time in the summer of the year 1791,"
and that for her services in that behalf (excuse
the language of the bar, but it is so expressive,
so descriptive), he paid to her husband $1,000,
the first payment being made December 22, 1790,
"on account of a sum of one thousand dollars
due to me, ' ' and the second, and last, being made
January 3, 1791, "in full of all demands." It
will be observed that these receipts bear evi
dence of the touch of a legal hand. If Hamilton
owed Reynolds $1,000 on December 22, 1790, the
debt could not have been created by any services
rendered to Hamilton by Mrs. Eeynolds, be
cause at that time Hamilton had not seen her ;
nor did he see her for at least six months after
December 22, 1790. The pertinent question
springs at once to a thoughtful reader, Upon
what account did Hamilton owe Eeynolds that
sum of money? The entire transaction, no mat
ter to what it related, was closed by the payment
of January 3, 1791, because that receipt was "in
25

26 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
full of all demands. ' ' This money was not paid
to Eeynolds on account of any connection be
tween Hamilton and Mrs. Eeynolds, because if
it had been so paid, Hamilton was a deliberate
liar in giving incorrect dates as to the payments.
He had no motive to give wrong dates if he in
tended this money as a "plaister" to Eeynolds 's
wounded honor. Dates subsequent to the sum
mer of the year 1791 alone would prove any re
lation of these payments to a connection between
Hamilton and Mrs. Eeynolds.
Pages 10 and 11: "But the present accusa
tion imputes to me as much folly as wickedness
— ^AU the documents show, it is otherwise matter
of notoriety, that Eeynolds was an obscure, un
important and profligate man. Nothing could
be more weak, because nothing could be more un
safe, than to make use of such an instrument ; to
use him too without any intermediate agent
more worthy of confidence who might keep me
out of sight, to write him numerous letters re
cording the objects of the improper connection
(for this is pretended and that the letters were
burnt at my request), to unbosom myself to him,
with a prodigality of confidence, by very un
necessarily telling him, as he alleges, of a con-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 27
nection in speculation between myself and Mr.
Duer. It is very extraordinary, if the head of
the money department of a country, being un
principled enough to sacrifice his trust and his
integrity, could not have contrived objects of
profits sufficiently large to have engaged the co
operation of men of far greater importance than
Reynolds, and with whom there could have been
due safety, and should have been driven to the
necessity of unkennelling such a reptile to be
the instrument of his cupidity."
Are men of "far greater importance than
Reynolds" accustomed to be willing tools or
intermediate agents in such speculative transac
tions ? Would Alexander Hamilton have dared
to approach any man of known honesty, any gen
tleman, to engage in this speculation ? As to his
connection with Duer, I believe it to be true that
Hamilton escaped exposure in the dishonest
speculation with Duer by Duer's very fortunate
death, before the congressional committee in its
investigation had reached Hamilton's connec
tion with the Hamilton-Duer speculation.
But would it have been possible for a man of
despicable character and of low social position
to have injured in any way, or for any purpose.

28 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
a man of Hamilton's social standing, profes
sional character, and political influence? If the
charges against Hamilton were all false, and
known by him to be false, would he not have
treated them with the silent contempt of an hon
orable, self-respecting, and courageous man,
trusting to the impenetrable shield of his own
honesty? I quote from "Observations," etc. — really a
preface to the vindication.
"The spirit of Jacobinism, if not entirely a
new spirit, has at least been clothed with a more
gigantic body and armed with more powerful
weapons than it ever before possessed. It is
perhaps not too much to say, that it threatens
more extensive and complicated mischiefs to the
world than have hitherto flowed from the three
great scourges of mankind, Wae, Pestilence
and Famine. To what point it will ultimately
lead society, it is impossible for human fore
sight to pronounce ; but there is just ground to
apprehend that its progress will be marked
with calamities of which the dreadful incidents
of the French revolution afford a very faint
image. Incessantly busied in undermining all
the props of public security and private happi-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 29
ness, it seems to threaten the political and moral
world with a complete overthrow.
"A principal engine, by which this spirit en
deavours to accomplish its purposes is that of
calumny. It is essential to its success that the
influence of men of upright principles, disposed
and able to resist its enterprises, shall be at all
events destroyed. Not content with traducing
their best efforts for the public good, with mis
representing their purest motives, with inferring
criminality from actions innocent or laudable,
the most direct falsehoods are invented and
propagated, with undaunted effrontery and un
relenting perseverance. Lies often detected and
refuted are still revived and repeated, in the
hope that the refutation may have been forgotten
or that the frequency and boldness of accusation
may supply the place of truth and proof. The
most profligate men are encouraged, probably
bribed, certainly with patronage if not with
money, to become informers and accusers.
And when tales, which their characters alone
ought to discredit, are refuted by evidence and
facts which oblige the patrons of them to aban
don their support, they still continue in corrod
ing whispers to wear away the reputation which
they could not directly subvert. If, luckily for

30 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
the conspirators against honest fame, any Ut
tle foible or folly can be traced out in one whom
they desire to persecute, it becomes at once in
their hands a two-edged sword, by which to
wound the public character and stab the private
felicity of the person. With such men, nothing
is sacred. Even the peace of an unoffending and
amiable wife is a welcome repast to their in
satiate fury against the husband.
"In the gratification of this baleful spirit, we
not only hear the Jacobian newspapers continu
ally ring with odious insinuations and charges
against many of our most virtuous citizens ; but,
not satisfied with this, a measure new in this
country has been lately adopted to give greater
efficacy to the system of defamation — ^periodi
cal pamphlets issued from the same presses, full
freighted with misrepresentation and falsehood,
artfully calculated to hold up the opponents of
the Faction to the jealousy and distrust of the
present generation and if possible, to transmit
their names with dishonour to posterity. Even
the great and multiplied services, the tried and
rarely equalled virtues of a Washington, can
secure no exemption.
"How then can I, with pretensions every way
inferior expect to escape? And if truly this be,

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 31
as every appearance indicates, a conspiracy of
vice against virtue, ought I not rather to be
flattered, that I have been so long and so pecu
liarly an object of persecution? Ought I to re
gret, if there be anything about me, so formid
able to the Faction as to have made me worthy
to be distinguished by the plentitude of its ran
cour and venom?
"It is certain that T have had a pretty copious
experience of its malignity. For the honour of
human nature, it is to be hoped that the ex
amples are not numerous of men so greatly
calumniated and persecuted, as I have been,
with so little cause. * * *
"Relying upon this weakness of human na
ture, the Jacobin Scandal-Club, though often
defeated, constantly return to the charge."
As a very striking contrast to the noble and
elevated sentiments expressed in the preceding-
extracts, so creditable to Alexander Hamilton,
who could so easily and naturally act a virtue
that he had not, I copy a confidential letter that
he wrote to Justice John Rutiedge, one of
Aaron Burr's relatives. Alexander Hamilton
evidently had a Jacobin scandal club of his own,
of which he was the sole member. This letter.

32 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
with editorial introduction, is taken from The
Century Magazine of June, 1900.
[The following letter of Alexander Hamilton, though
addressed to John Rutiedge, Associate Justice of the Su
preme Court, was found among the papers of Francis Hop
kinson, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independ
ence. It is here printed from the manuscript. Although a
small portion of it has been published before, as a whole it
has not appeared before.
The enclosed characterization of Burr, it Is believed,
has not before been published, though in large part it is
similar in expression to letters addressed by Hamilton to
his contemporaries in opposition to Burr's political aspira
tions. — Editor.]
"New York Jany. 4, 1801.
"My Deae Sie
' ' My extreme anxiety about the ensuing elec
tion of President by the House of Eepresenta
tives will excuse to you the liberty I take in ad
dressing you concerning it without being con
sulted by you. Did you know Mr. Burr as well
as I do, I should think it unnecessary. With
your honest attachment to the country and cor
rectness of views, it should not then be possible
for you to hesitate, if you now do, about the
course to be taken. You would be clearly of
opinion with me that Mr. Jefferson is to be pre
ferred. As long as the Federal party preserve
their high ground of integrity and principle, I

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 33
shall not despair of the public weal. But if they
quit it and descend to be the willing instruments
of the Elevation of the most unfit and most dan
gerous man of the community to the highest
station in the Government I shall no longer see
any anchor for the hopes of good men. I shall
at once anticipate all the evils that a daring and
unprincipled ambition wielding the lever of
Jacobinism can bring upon an infatuated coun-
try. ' ' The enclosed paper exhibits a faithful sketch
of Mr. Burr's character as I believe it to exist,
with better opportunities than almost any other
man of forming a true estimate.
' * The expectation, I know, is that if Mr. Burr
shall owe his elevation to the Federal party, he
will judge it his interest to adhere to that party.
But it ought to be recollected that he will owe it
in the first instance to the antlfederal party;
that among these, perhaps not in the House of
Eepresentatives, a numerous class prefers him
to Mr. Jefferson as best adapted by the boldness
and cunning of his temper to fulfill their mis
chievous views ; and that it will be the interest
of his ambition to preserve and cultivate these
friends. Mr. Burr will doubtless be governed
by his interests as he views it. But stable power

34 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
and wealth being his objects — and there being
no prospect that the respectable and sober Fed
eralists will countenance the projects of an ir-
I'egular ambition or prodigal cupidity, he will
not long lean upon them — but selecting from
among them men suited to his purpose, he will
seek with the aid of these, and of the most un
principled of the opposite party to accomplish
his ends. At least such ought to be our calcu
lation. From such a man as him, who practices
all the maxims of a Catiline, who, while despis
ing, has played the whole game of democracy,
what better is to be looked for? 'Tis not to a
chapter of accidents that we ought to trust the
Government peace and happiness of our coun
try. 'Tis enough for us to know that Mr. Burr
is one of the most unprincipled men in the U.
States in order to determine us to decline be
ing responsible for the precarious issues of his
calculations of interest.
' ' Very different ought to be our plans. Under
the uncertainty of the event we ought to seek
to obtain from Mr. Jefferson these assurances :
1. That the present Fiscal system will be main
tained. 2. That the present neutral plan will
be adhered to. 3. That the Navy will be pre
served and gradually increased. 4. That Fed-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON do
eralists now in office not being Heads of the
great departments will be retained. As to the
heads of Departments and other matters he
ought to be free.
"You can not in my opinion render a greater
service to your country than by exerting your
influence to counter-act the impolitic and impure
idea of raising Mr. Burr to the Chief Magis
tracy. "Adieu my dear sir, Yrs. with
' ' sincere affecn & regard
"A Hamilton
"J. Eutlege, Esqr."
[The enclosure also in Hamilton's handwriting.]
' ' Confidential.
"A Burr
"1. He is in every sense a profligate, a
voluptuary in the extreme, with uncommon hab
its of expense, in his profession extortionate to
a proverb, suspected on strong grounds of hav
ing corruptly served the views of the Holland
Company in the capacity of a member of our
legislature;* and understood to have been
guilty of several breaches of probity in his pe-
"¦He co-operated in obtaining a law to permit aliens to hold
and occupy lands.

36 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
cuniary transactions. His very friends do not
insist upon his integrity.
"2. He is without doubt insolvent for a large
deficit. All his visible property is deeply mort
gaged and he is known to owe other large debts
for which there is no specific security. Of the
number of these is a judgment in favour of Mr.
Angerstien for a sum which with interest
amounts to about 80,000 dollars.
"3. The fair emoluments of any station un
der our government will not equal his expenses
in that station ; still less will they suffice to ex
tricate him from his embarrassments. He must
therefore from the necessity of his situation
have recourse to unworthy expedients. These
may be a bargain and sale with some foreign
power or combination with public agents in pro
jects of gain by means of the public monies;
perhaps and probably to enlarge the sphere —
a war. "4. He has no pretensions to the station
from services. He acted in different capacities
in the last war finally with the rank of Lt. Col.
in a regiment and gave indications of being a
good officer ; but without having had the oppor
tunity of performing any distinguished action.
At a critical period of the war, he resigned his

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 37
commission, assigning for cause ill health and
went to repose at Paramus in the State of New
Jersey. If his health was bad, he might without
difficulty have obtained a furlough and was not
obliged to resign. He was afterwards seen in his
usual health. The circumstances excited much
jealousy of his motives. In civil life he has
never projected nor aided in producing a single
measure of important public utility.
"5. He has constantly sided with the party
hostile to Federal measures before and since
the present constitution of the U. States. In
opposing the adoption of this Constitution he
was engaged covertly and insidiously; because
as he said at the time 'it was too strong and too
weak' and he has been uniformly the opposer
of the Federal Administration.
' ' 6. No mortal man can tell what his political
principles are. He has talked all around the
compass. At times he has dealt in all the jargon
of Jacobinism ; at other times he has proclaimed
decidedly the total insufficiency of the Federal
Government and the necessity of changes to one
far more energetic. The truth seems to be that
he has no plan but that of getting power by any
means and keeping it by all means. It is prob
able that if he has any theory tis that of a simple

38 A STUDY IN AI-iEXANDEB HAMILTON
despotism. He has intimated that he thinks
the present French Constitution not a bad one.
"7. He is of a temper bold enough to think
no enterprise too hazardous and sanguine
enough to think none too difficult. He has cen
sured the leaders of the Federal party as want
ing in vigour and enterprise, for not having es
tablished a strong government when they were
in possession of the power and influence.
"8. Discerning men of all parties agree in
ascribing to him an irregular and inordinate
ambition. Like Catiline he is indefatigable in
courting the young and the profligate. He
knows well the weak sides of human nature and
takes care to play in with the passions of all
with whom he has intercourse. By natural dis
position, the haughtiest of men, he is at the same
time the most creeping to answer his purposes.
Cold and collected by nature and habit he never
loses sight of his object and scruples no means
of accomplishing it. He is artful and intriguing
to an inconceivable degree. In short all his con
duct indicates that he has in view nothing less
than the establishment of supreme power in
his own person. Of this nothing can be a surer
index than having in fact high-toned notions of
government, he has nevertheless constantly op-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 39
posed the Federal and courted the popular
party. As he never can effect his wish by the aid
of good men, he will court and employ able and
daring scoundrels of every party and by avail
ing himself of their assistance and of all the bad
passions of the society, he will in all likelihood
attempt an usurpation.
"8 [sic]. Within the last three weeks at his
own table he drank these toasts successively:
1. The French Eepublic. 2. The commission
ers who negotiated the convention. 3. Buona
parte. 4. LaFayette : and he countenanced and
seconded the positions openly advanced by one
of his guests that it was the interest of this coun
try to leave it free to the Belligerent powers to
sell their prizes in our ports and to build and
equip ships for their respective uses ; a doctrine
which evidently aims at turning all the naval
resources of the U. States into the channel of
France ; and which by making these states the
most pernicious enemy of G. Britain would com
pel her to go to war with us.
"9. Though possessing infinite art, cunning
and address, he is yet to give proofs of great
or solid abilities. It is certain that at the bar
he is more remarkable for ingenuity and dexter
ity than for sound judgment or good logic.

40 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
From the character of his understanding and
heart it is likely that any innovations which he
may effect will be such as to serve the turn of his
own power, not such as will issue in establish
ments favourable to the permanent security and
prosperity of the Nation — founded upon the
principles of a strong, free and regular Govern
ment." This letter is a brief chronicle and abstract
of Alexander Hamilton's character and na
ture, of his acts and their motives, of his life
and the means by wliich he undertook to gain
his ends. Of the adroitness with which he could
turn his own intentional misconstruction into an
apparent fact, we take one instance which is all
sufficient, because facts are stronger, though
not so polished, than the figures of rhetoric.
In subsection No. 1, Hamilton says: "* * *
suspected on strong grounds of having corruptly
served the views of the Holland Company in the
capacity of a member of our legislature." In
explanation of this act of Burr I quote again the
foot-note appended by the editor of The Cen
tury Magazine: "He co-operated in obtaining a
law to permit aliens to hold and convey lands. ' '
In other words, Burr tried by legislation to offer

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 41
inducements to the very best men to come and
settle in this country. The law was wise, patri
otic in its purpose, and very judicious in its
means. A man so cowardly as to write such a confi
dential letter could conceive and undertake any
enterprise save one that would compel him to
lead an honest life or oblige him to tell the
truth. The letter itself furnishes indisputable
evidence — it is self-evident — that its source, its
cause, is envy. And all men know how soon, how
quickly, how permanently, envy curdles into
hate. Envy is the father of that form of cow
ardice which often shows itself with courageous
freedom in words confidentially spoken.
To attempt a critical analysis of all the va
rious statements in this remarkable letter, — all
the more remarkable because written to a justice
of the United States Supreme Court, — or to dis
cuss in its fullness the principle of morals in
volved in it, would be simply to lay bare the pov
erty of the Enghsh language to express one's
thoughts when one's moral nature is assailed
and shocked by statements made in a way so
infamous, so cowardly. What purpose could
Hamilton effect, what advantage could he se
cure, what injury could he do to Burr, by a con-

42 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
fidential letter to a federal judge ? Did he expect
Judge Eutledge to yield to the temptation to
give it publicity, that Hamilton himself might
escape its responsibility by asserting that the
judge had betrayed a confidence? He ought to
have remembered that there was not one drop
of blood such as his in Judge Eutledge 's veins.
Take each statement as it is written. Each is
stated, and is intended to be received, as a fact.
Nothing may be added to a fact. The orna-
violent language. To the eighth page of the
beauty, but seldom increases the power, of a
statement. In his vindication Hamilton poured out upon
Eeynolds and two other men, Clingman and
Fraunces, the vials of his wrath, expressed in
violent language. To the eighth page of the
vindication he appended this footnote:
"Would it be believed after all this, that Mr.
Jefferson, Vice-President of the United States,
would write to this Fraunces friendly letters?
Yet such is the fact as will be seen in the Ap
pendix, Nos. XLIV and XLV."
Would it have been believed that Alexander
Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury, would
have vindicated his betrayal of his honor and

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 43
his treachery to his wife by his adulterous amour
with Mrs. Eeynolds? "Yet such is the fact as
will be seen, ' ' in this vindication.
Why go out of the line of his argument, evas
ive and inconclusive as it is, to speak in this
way of Mr. Jefferson ? What had he to do with
Hamilton's connection with Mrs. Reynolds, or
with her husband, or with Clingman, or with
Hamilton's troubles with Fraunces? With the
scent and the nature of a bloodhound Hamilton
pursued the man who did his own thinking and
had the courage to reach a conclusion different
from his. When his thoughts became crystal
lized into acts he discharged his calumnies and
slanders in confidential words, spoken or writ
ten, with the accuracy and directness of riflemen
shooting at a target.
The act of writing letters to Fraunces by Jef
ferson was dishonorable because Jefferson was
Vice-President of the United States! Hamil
ton's treachery to his amiable and loving wife
was a less "heinous offence" in his eyes than a
speculative venture in Treasury warrants, and
his adulterous amour with Mrs. Reynolds was
"only an indecorum" because Alexander Ham
ilton was Secretary of the Treasury of the
United States.
Consider the noble sentiments expressed in

44 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
the preface to his vindication and his terrible
and well-deserved strictures upon the Jacobin
Scandal-Club, then consider the statements in
his confidential letter to Judge Rutiedge, his
motives, his object! What can be, what will
be, the judgment of every honest and impartial
man in his estimate of Hamilton's moral nature,
as a man, as a gentleman, and as a statesman?
In what literature of any civilized country can
another production be found to equal this vindi
cation — reflecting as it does the baseness of its
author ? How could any man have written such
a letter, then assert a right to be admitted to the
society of gentlemen ? Only a coward could have
written it. In using the word "coward" in this
connection I leave out of all consideration the
courage that is in nearly all men, which is pro
duced by the influence of public opinion upon
their minds, their lives, their conduct, and their
characters. In this letter to Judge Rutiedge
Hamilton describes his true character. No one
may misread it. As shown by it, his baseness,
his depravity, his cowardice, is without a par
allel in the annals of any country, ancient or
modern.

CHAPTER III
I do not purpose to make any defense of
Aaron Burr nor attempt a refutation of the
charges that Were brought against him, mali
cious, malignant, and malevolent as they were.
Alexander Hamilton himself must have known
them to be untrue. None of Burr's enemies has
yet asserted, nor even hinted, that he was ever
in any way disloyal to his wife during her life
time. Nor in all my reading, extensive and im
partial as it has been, have I discovered any con
fidential letters written by Mm solely to indulge
and gratify that malignant hate that is bred in
the womb of Envy, and that may be bred no
where else.
Home life is a true test of character, home
manners the test of a gentleman.
To the impartial mind the feeling involun
tarily comes up that, succumbing to Alexander
Hamilton's magnetism of character and to his
fascinating manners, Mrs. Reynolds seduced
herself while Hamilton yielded the needed con
solations due to her in her unfortunate condi
tion. His conduct consequently was only "an
indecorum." That it may be shown that this
45

46 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
opinion is not unjust to him, that it is not based
on a desire to deal unfairly, nor to put a forced
construction upon his statements, I quote from
his vindication that I may prove the truth of
this judgment upon his conduct :
Page 20 : "All the appearances of violent at
tachment, and of agonizing distress at the idea
of a relinquishment, were played off with a most
imposing art. This, though it did not make me
entirely the dupe of the plot, yet kept me in a
state of irresolution. My sensibility, perhaps
my vanity, admitted the possibility of a real
fondness ; and led me to adopt the plan of a grad
ual discontinuance rather than of a sudden in
terruption, as least calculated to give pain, if a
real partiality existed. * * *
"Mrs. Reynolds, on the other hand, employed
every effort to keep up my attention and visits. ' '
Page 31 : " The variety of shapes which this
j^woman could assume was endless."
Then, immediately following, he gives the
points and statements between her and a gentle
man whose name he is not at liberty to give to
the pubhc. "His name would evince that he is
an impartial witness," he says. "And though

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 47
I am not permitted to make a public use of it,
I am permitted to refer any gentleman to the
perusal of his letter in the hands of William
Bingham, Esquire."
This statement is an illustration of a distinc
tion without a difference. Hamilton could not
make a name known to the public, but his friend,
William Bingham, Esquire, is permitted to do it
for him, in his name. These extracts refer to
the condition of his connection with this woman
long after he had, according to his vindication,
discovered that his intrigue with her was well
known to her husband, and after Clingman was
a particeps criminis in the whole affair.
Did any other man of such acknowledged in
fluence in public life, and of such high recognized
position in genteel society, with wife and chil
dren, ever before or since confess to the public
in print such weakness of character, such vacilla
tion of judgment, and such puerile inability to
show any manhood, any self-respect, or any
courage, physical, moral, or mental? Indeed
has he drawn his own picture, painted in fade
less colors.
A careful study of his vindication fails to
disclose a single statement in it, in positive

48 A STUDY IN ALEXANDER HAMILTON
terms, that he did not speculate in government
warrants. He makes an elaborate argument
to disprove his guilt, but nowhere asserts in
positive words that he engaged in no specula
tive venture. In his argument he makes these
points : First, that Reynolds was a base rascal,
an obscure, an unimportant, and a profligate
man ; Second, that he would have selected as his
intermediate agent one more worthy of his con
fidence; Third, page 11, "It is very extraor
dinary, if the head of the money department of
a country, being unprincipled enough to sacrifice
his trust and his integrity, could not have con
trived objects of profit sufficiently large to have
engaged the co-operation of men of far greater
importance than Reynolds, and with whom there
could have been due safety, and should have
been drawn to the necessity of unkennelling such
a rei)tile to be the instrument of his cupidity."
It was not possible, unless the men of "far
greater importance than Reynolds" had been
just as dishonest and serviceable as the reptile
he unkenneled, to be the instrument of his cu
pidity. Even in this day of universal corrup
tion, state and federal, one may not find such
men of ' ' far greater importance than Reynolds ' '
to do such work — such disreputable jobbery.

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 49
As an example of Hamilton's denial of the
grave charge of speculation, I quote an extract
referring to the interview had with him on this
subject by Venable, Muhlenberg, and Monroe.
Page 28: "I deny absolutely, as alleged by
the editor of the publication in question, that I
intreated a suspension of the communication to
the President, or that from the beginning to the
end of the inquiry, I asked any favour or indul
gence whatever, and that I discovered any symp
toms different from that of a proud conscious
ness of innocence."
This statement is simply an argument — not
a statement of a fact. Such statements can be,
and are, made by criminals when discussing the
charges against them when they desire to con
ceal their guilt from the attorney employed to
defend them. Every lawyer that defends crimi
nals is acquainted with such subterfuges, and
such conduct is invariably considered as evi
dence of guilt, unless coupled with indisputable
proof of innocence or positive disproof of-the
charge based on the assertion that the accused
did not commit the act charged, and is treated
as such.

50 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
I turn to Hamilton's interview with Venable,
Monroe, and Muhlenberg. This interview re
lates to the charges against Alexander Hamil
ton, the talk of all circles, social and political, of
that time.
Page 27 : " Mr. Muhlenberg and Mr. Venable,
in particular, manifested a degree of sensibility
on the occasion. Mr. Monroe was more cold but
entirely explicit. ' '
But subsequently it seems that Mr. Monroe
received other information that possibly justi
fied him in thinking that Hamilton was not en
tirely innocent. It does not appear from the
vindication that in this interview Hamilton
made to these gentlemen a positive assertion
that he had not engaged in speculations in gov
ernment warrants. He simply argues the ques
tion of his innocence, as he does all through the
devious course of his argument.
Page 27 : "I insisted upon going through the
whole, and did so. The result was a full and un
equivocal acknowledgment on the part of the
three gentlemen of perfect satisfaction with the
explanation and expressions of regret at the

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 51
trouble and embarrassment which had been oc
casioned to me."
Pages 28, 29 : " Thus the affair remained till
the pamphlets No. V and VI of the History of
the United States for 1796 appeared, with the
exception of some dark whispers which were
communicated to me by a friend in Virginia, and
to which I replied by a statement of what had
passed. "When I saw No. V though it was evidence
of a base infidelity somewhere, yet firmly be
lieving that nothing more than a want of due
care was chargeable upon either of the three
gentlemen who had made the inquiry, I imme
diately wrote to each of them a letter of wliich
No. XXV is a copy, in full confidence that their
answer would put the whole business at rest.
I ventured to believe, from the appearances on
their part at closing our former interview on
the subject, that their answers would have been
both cordial and explicit.
"I acknowledge that I was astonished when
I came to read in the pamphlet No. VI the con
clusion of document No. V, containing the equiv
ocal phrase, ^We left him under an impression
our suspicions were removed,' which seemed to
imply that this had been a mere piece of manage-

52 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
ment, and that the impression given me had not
been reciprocal. The appearance of duplicity
incensed me ; but resolving to proceed with cau
tion and moderation, I thought the first proper
step was to inquire of the gentlemen whether
the paper was genuine. A letter was written
for this purpose a copy of which I have mis
laid." With his character involved, he mislaid this
letter, or its copy. Marvelous negligence in a
gentleman who was so sensitive about Ms honor
that he considered a speculation in Treasury
warrants a more heinous offense than an adul
terous connection with a woman that he took
into his home for illegal enjoyment, involving
treachery to his wife and a betrayal of Ms mar
riage vow! One was only an indecorum, wMle
the other a crime.
Before making any extracts from the docu
ments referred to and from the letters wMch
passed between these gentlemen, I shall make
some quotations from the vindication imme
diately following Ms references :
Page 33 : "But it is observed that the dread
of the disclosure of an enormous connection was

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 53
not a sufficient cause for my humility, and that
1 had nothing to lose as to my reputation for
chastity concerning wMch the world had fixed
a previous opinion.
' ' I shall not enter into the question what was
the previous opinion entertained of me in tMs
particular — ^nor how well founded, if it was in
deed such as it is represented to have been. It
is sufficient to say that there is a wide difference
between vague rumours and suspicions and the
evidence of a positive fact — no man not indeli
cately unprincipled, with the state of manners
in this country, would be willing to have a con
jugal infidelity fixed upon Mm with positive cer
tainty — he would Imow that it would justly in
jure Mm with a considerable and respectable
portion of the society — and especially no man,
tender of the happiness of an excellent wife
could without extreme pain look forward to the
affliction wMch she might endure from the dis
closure, especially a puhlic disclosure, of the
fact. Those best acquainted with the interior
of my domestic life will best appreciate the force
of such a consideration upon me. ' '
TMs last sentence contains a very tactful and
delicate reference to those rapturous moments

54 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
of ecstatic happiness when he and Mrs. Eey
nolds, in the absence of Ms wife, made Mrs.
Hamilton's home the temporary dwelling of a
woman of whose charms and fascinations the
gentleman desired a monopoly.
Why is it that his most far-fetched and un
necessary allusion to Mrs. Eeynolds always
brings a reference of Ms excellent wife? Did
each woman have her several and distinct ex
cellencies of character and conduct, that to men
tion one always should bring to his mind the
other? If so "tender of the happiness of an excellent
"wife" and conscious of the extreme pain a pub
hc disclosure of his debauchery would bring to
her "throbbing and palpitating bosom," why
make it? What light did it throw on his inno
cence in these speculations? Did his publicly
-acknowledged guilt in the one case prove his
innocence in the other? His connection with
Mrs. Reynolds, disreputable and debauched as
he was, did not disprove his speculative venture
with Mr. Reynolds, dishonorable as it was. He
admitted the former — ^put in into print and pub
lished it to the world. He published an argu
ment to prove his innocence; but it is an argu
ment, and notMng more.

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 55
Page 33 : " The truth was, that in both rela-
tions and especially the last, I dreaded ex
tremely a disclosure — and was willing to make
large sacrifices to avoid it. ' '
Page 34: "Candid men will derive strong
evidence of my innocence and delicacy from the
reflection, that under circumstances so peculiar,
the culprits were compelled to give a real and
substantial equivalent for the relief which they
obtained from a department over which I pre
sided." What was the real and substantial equivalent
wMch they gave for the relief obtained from
Hamilton's department? If true it be that his
connection with Mrs. Reynolds was in a great
measure due to the connivance of her husband,
this amour sinks into an ordinary commercial
transaction, stale, flat, and improfitable in all
its uses. He simply strikes a balance between
his speculative losses with the husband and the
rapturous moments of enjoyments of the wife.
Pages 35, 36: "Relative character and the
written documents must still determine. These
could decide without it, and they were relied
upon. But could it be expected, that I should

56 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
so debase myself as to think it necessary to my
vindication to be confronted with a person such
as Reynolds? Could I have borne to suffer my
veracity to be exposed to the humiliating com
petition?" Hamilton was utterly unconscious that Ms
very statements about his intimate relations
with Mrs. Eeynolds at his own home and else
where, to be found in his vindication, destroy
all the value and influence of "relative char
acter. ' ' He had already debased Mmself by his
business transactions with her husband. It was
no longer a question of his veracity. His inter
view with the gentlemen that are brought into
tMs vindication disclosed that there was no
question of his veracity. The issue was his per
sonal and official integrity. Hamilton has not
in this vindication vindicated either — ^much less
both. In Ms vindication he alludes to Ms letter No.
XXV, dated July 5, 1797, from which I quote :
"They [certain attacks on Mr. Monroe] are
ungrateful, because he displayed on an occasion,
that will be mentioned immediately, the greatest
lenity to Mr. Alexander Hamilton, the prime

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 57
mover of the Federal party. * * * The pe
culiar nature of this transaction renders it im
possible that you should not recollect it in all
parts and that your own declaration to me at
the time contradicts absolutely the construc
tion which the editor of the pamphlet puts upon
the affair."
Was Mr. Monroe the editor of the pamphlet?
If he was not, how could he be held responsible
for his construction of it? He was seeking an
explanation. The letter continues :
"And I shall rely upon your delicacy that the
manner of doing it will be such that one gentle
man has a right to expect from another — espe
cially as you must be sensible that the present
appearance of the papers is contrary to the
course wMch was understood between us to be
proper and includes a dishonourable infidelity
somewhere — I am far from attributing it to
either of the three gentlemen ; yet the suspicion
naturally falls on some agent made use of by
them. ' '
Hamilton is far from attributing it to any of
the three. Yet he suspects each, and all three

58 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
made use of an agent. Another of his distinc
tions without a difference. Upon the ground
of a mere suspicion of conduct, wMch he dis
claims attributing to any of them, Hamilton de
mands an explanatory statement from Mr. Mon
roe of conduct which he, Hamilton, does not
attribute to Monroe. The question inevitably
follows, Upon what ground could Hamilton,
claiming to be a gentleman, make this demand
of Mr. Monroe? The real object of tMs letter
will be shown in a short time. I quote from Mr.
Muhlenberg's reply:
Page xxxvii : "At the same time permit me to
remind you of your declaration also made in
the presence of Mr. Wolcott that the infor
mation and letters in our possession justified
the suspicions we entertained before your ex
planation took place, and that our conduct to
wards you in this business was satisfactory.
Having no share or agency whatever in the pub
lication or comments you are pleased to cite I
must beg to be excused from making any re
marks thereon. ' '
I quote from Mr. Venable 's letter:

A STUDY in; ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 59
Page xxxviii: "I have endeavoured to recol
lect what passed at the close of the interview
which took place with respect to this transac
tion ; it was said I believe by us in general terms
that we were satisfied with the explanation that
had been given, that we regretted the necessity
that we had been subjected to in being obliged to
make the inquiry, as well as the trouble and
anxiety it had occasioned you, and on your part
you admitted in general terms that the business
as presented to us bore such a doubtful aspect
as to justify the inquiry, and that the manner
had been satisfactory to you.
"I have now to express my surprise at the
contents of a letter published yesterday in Fen
no's paper, in which you endeavour to impute
to party motives the part which I have had in
this business and endeavour to connect me with
the releasement of persons, committed as you
say for heinous crimes."
Then, giving the real facts as to Eeynolds and
Clingman, which are in substance the same as
those stated by Hamilton himself, Mr. Venable
continues :
"If you will take the trouble to examine the

60 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
transaction you will find this statement correct,
and you cannot be insensible of the injury you
do me when you say, this was an attempt to re
lease themselves from imprisonment by favour
of party spirit, and that I was one of the per
sons resorted to on that ground. I appeal to
your candour, and ask you if any part of my
conduct in this whole business has justified such
an imputation."
Pages xl and xli (from a joint letter by Muh
lenberg and Monroe): "We think proper to
observe that as we had no agency in or knowl
edge of the publication of these papers till they
appeared, so of course we could have none in the
comments that were made on them.
[Then, referring to the object and demand
of information, they answer :]
" * * * and to which we readily reply,
that the impression which we left on your mind
as stated in that number, was that wMch rested
on our own, and which was that the explanation
of the nature of your connection with Eeynolds
which you then gave removed the suspicions we
had before entertained of your being connected
with him in speculation. Had not this been the
case we should certainly not have left the im
pression on your mind, nor should we have de-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 61
sisted from the plan we had contemplated in the
commencement of the inquiry, of laying the
papers before the President of the U. States."
There the shoe was pinching. Washington
was then President, to whom the matters of that
interview were not communicated. Hamilton
resigned his secretaryship the last of January,
1795, — his conduct was a prudent forecast, verg
ing on the certainty of a prophetic vision. The
vindication was not published until 1797. There
follows an important statement in this letter:
"We cannot conclude this letter without ex
pressing our surprise at the contents of a paper
in the Gazette of the United States of the 8th
instant, which states that the proceedings in
the inquiry in question were the contrivance of
two very profligate men who sought to obtain
their liberation from prison by the favour of
party spirit. You will readily recollect that one
of these men, Mr. Clingman, was never impris
oned for any crime alleged against him by the
department of the Treasury, and that the other,
Mr. Eeynolds, was upon the point of being re
leased and was actually released and without
our solicitation or even with, by virture of an

62 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
agreement made with him by that department
before the inquiry began."
In a letter from Monroe (page xliv) he says
it was impossible to trace back all the impres
sions on his mind at the different periods, occu
pied as he was with other concerns; "but I well
remember that on entering the one which bears
my single signature, altho' I was surprised at
the communication given, yet I neither meant to
give or imply any opinion of my own as to its
contents. I simply entered the communication
as I received it, reserving to myself the liberty
to form an opinion upon it at such future time
as I found convenient, paying due regard to all
the circumstances connected with it. ' '
In letter No. XXXVII Hamilton says that
Monroe's letter was unsatisfactory, then writes :
"It appears to me liable to this inference that
the information of Clingman had revived the
suspicions which my explanation had removed.
TMs would include the very derogatory suspi
cion, that I had concerted with Eeynolds not only
the fabrication of all the letters and documents
under Ms hand but also the forgery of the let-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 63
ters produced as those of Mrs. Eeynolds — since
these last unequivocally contradict the pretence
communicated by Clingman. I therefore re
quest you to say whether the inference be in
tended. ' '
Mr. Monroe replied in substance just what he
stated in his letter last quoted.
I quote from Hamilton's letter in answer:
Page xlv: "In my last letter to you I pro
posed a simple and direct question, to wMch I
had hoped an answer equally simple and direct."
[After discussing Clingman, he concludes in
these words:] "To have given or intended to
give the least sanction or credit after all that
was known to you, to the mere assertion of either
of the three persons Clingman, Reynolds or his
wife would have betrayed a disposition towards
me which if it appeared to exist would merit
epithets the severest that I could apply."
To which Mr. Monroe replied, in part as fol
lows: Page xlvii: "It is proper to observe that in
the explanation you gave, you admitted all the

64 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
facts upon wMch our opinion was founded,
but yet accounted for them, and for your con
nection with Eeynolds upon another principle.
'Tis proper also to observe that we admitted
your explanation upon the faith of your own
statement, and upon the documents you pre
sented, though I do not recollect they were
proved or that proof was required of them.
' ' You will remember that in this interview in
which we acknowledged ourselves satisfied with
the explanation you gave, we did not bind our
selves not to hear further information on the
subject, or even not to proceed further in case
we found it our duty to do so. ' '
After the two had exchanged other letters of
similar import, Mr. Monroe wrote :
Pages Ivi and Ivii : "I have stated to you that
I had no wish to do you a personal injury.
The several explanations which I have made
accorded with truth and my ideas of propriety.
Therefore I need not repeat them. If these do
not yield you satisfaction, I can give no other,
unless called on in a way which for the illustra
tion of truth, I wish to avoid, but which I am
ever ready to meet. TMs is what I meant by

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 65
that part of my letter wMch you say you do not
understand." To which Hamilton replied, undertaking, in a
circuitous way, to blame Monroe with the pres
ent situation of the affair. Concluding, he says :
Page Ivii: "On the supposition that it so in
tended, I have authorized Major Jackson to
communicate with you and to settle time and
place." In reply Monroe said, page Ivii: "I do not
clearly understand the import of yours of the
4th instant and therefore desire an explana
tion. With this view I will give an explanation
of mine which preceded."
Seeing no cause > why he should send a chal
lenge to Hamilton, it was not Monroe's intention
to provoke one by anything in his letters. He
refers Hamilton to Col. Burr, to make the ar
rangements suitable to the occasion.
To Monroe's letter Hamilton replied as fol
lows: "Sir, The intention of my letter of the 4th in-

66 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
stant, as itself imports, was to meet and close
with an advance towards a personal interview,
which it appeared to me had been made by you.
"From the tenor of your reply of the 6th,
wMch disavows the inference I had drawn, any
further step on my part, as being inconsistent
with the ground I have heretofore taken, would
be improper. ' '
An impotent conclusion to Ms amour with
Mrs. Eeynolds and to his speculative venture
with her husband ! To the most impartial mind
the picture which Hamilton draws of his own
character is one so unconscious of his own base
tergiversations throughout his vindication, that
it involuntarily recalled the rough doggerel
lines I often heard in my youth :
"It wired in and wired out.
And left the mind still in doubt.
Whether the snake that made the track
Was going south or coming back."
In the quotations, so numerous as they are, I
have tried to be just, impartial, and judicial, —
setting down notMng in malice nor prejudice.
From the statements in his vindication and the
letters in Ms appendix to it, it is clear that Alex
ander Hamilton never conceived, and from his

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 67
moral nature was utterably unable to conceive,
much less to appreciate, the three great out
standing facts in all human affairs — ^no man ever
told a lie and killed it ; no man ever committed
a dishonest act and so covered it that it was not
brought to light at some future time; no man
ever perpetrated a fraud and destroyed all the
evidences of it. Why did Hamilton drop out
of all consideration Venable and Muhlenberg?
All three (Monroe, Venable, and Muhlenberg)
took part in the interview, and substantially
agree as to what was said and done by Hamilton
and by them. Was Hamilton in doubt about
Monroe's courage and hoped to win again the
confidence of the public by a display of bravery
which Monroe would shrink from meeting ? The
other two were equally involved in the subse
quent events. I can offer no solution of tMs
mystery. In justice to the subject of this writing, let us
take a glance at Mstory contemporaneous with
Hamilton, which I shall do in my next chapter.

CHAPTEE IV
This study has been confined exclusively to
the vindication until now. In glancing at the
history of Hamilton's time I desire again to
mention the dates at which this trouble began.
Hamilton first met Mrs. Reynolds "some time
in the summer of the year 1791." He plastered
her husband's wounded honor twice — December
22d, the plaster costing Mm $600 ' ' on account of
a sum of one thousand dollars due to me" (Rey
nolds), and January 3rd, 1791, the plaster cost
ing him $400 "in full of all demands." Both
plasters were applied fully six months before
Hamilton first met Mrs. Reynolds. The inter-
wew between Hamilton and Monroe, Venable,
and Muhlenberg occurred in December, 1792.
Hamilton resigned his secretaryship the last of
December, 1795. Callender published his two
books in 1797, described as a History of the
United States for 1796, the last, or No. VI, as it
is usually called in these documents, some time
in the fall of that year, as the preface bears date
of July 17, 1797. The vindication was written
in refutation of the charges contained in Cal
lender's history, especially those contained in
68

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 69
No. VI, so the vindication was published after
July, 1797, more than six years after Hamil
ton's first tryst with Mrs. Reynolds,
In the intervals between these dates James
Reynolds disappeared, and the inference justi
fied by the surrounding circumstances is that
he disappeared between the interview in De
cember, 1792, and Ms resignation in December,
1795. The real cause of this mysterious disap
pearance has not yet been discovered, but one
fact has been made public by Hamilton's vindi
cation and the interviews and the Callender
book No. VI — that Reynolds disappeared that
Hamilton's official honor might be protected,
and possibly that Hamilton might be saved from
a criminal prosecution. No history, no reminis
cence, no memoir of those times has ever dis
closed to the American public the bitterness and
the hatred that gave life and venom to the po
litical strife of those days as do these books.
No. V and No. VI, which were given to the world
as history.
I quote from the preface to No. VI :
"When the fifth number of this book was pub
lished, Mr. Alexander Hamilton printed, in Mr.
Fenno's gazette, a denial of his connection with

70 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
Reynolds. He has now come from New York
to complete a satisfactory statement. Like the
pot whitewashing the kettle, he has already re
ceived from Mr. Wolcott a certificate of his vir
tue. He is, at present, also soliciting Mr. Mon
roe and Mr. Muhlenberg, on both of whom he
had heaped mountains of calumny. Mr. Hamil
ton entreats them, to attest Ms innocence, that is
to say, their belief of his having dehauched Mrs.
Reynolds." Alexander Hamilton was furnishing not only
topics for social gossip, but subjects for dis
cussion in commercial as well as in political
circles. I now desire to call attention to some
letters published in the vindication and in Cal
lender's Mstory, wMch letters supposedly were
written by Reynolds. I will take a short letter
from each publication, copying them exactly as
they are printed :
From the vindication, page 21 :
Philadelphia 7th, April 1792.
Sir.
"I am sorry to inform you my setivation is
such. I am indebted to a man in this town about
45 dollars which he will wate no longer on me.
now sir I am sorrey to be troubleing you So

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 71
offen. which if you Can Oblige me with this to
day. you will do me infenate service, that will
pay Nearly all I owe in this town except yourself.
I have some property on the North River which
1 have Wrote to my Brother sell which as soon
as it Come in my hands. I pay you every shil
ling with the strictest Justice you Oblige me
with, the inclose is the Receipt, for the amount
"I am sir with due Regard, your humble ser
vant James Eeynolds.
' ' Alexr. Hamilton Esqr. ' '
Examine the spelling, the use of capital letters
in the middle of a sentence where they are not
correct, and the misuse of words in the letter.
Can it be possible that Eeynolds was so igno
rant, illiterate and so uneducated as this letter
indicates? Reynolds disappeared in a myste
rious manner, at an unexpected moment, shortly
after this letter is dated.
I copy a letter written by Reynolds from the
Callender history, No. VI, page 221 :
' ' Thursday one o 'clock
"13th December 1792
"My dear Mr. Clingman:
' ' I hope I have not forfeited your friendship,
the last night's conversation, don't think any-

72 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
tMng of it, for I was not myself. I know I have
treated * * * friend ill, and too well I am
convinced [here about three lines are torn out]
to have satisfaction from Ms at all events, and
you onely I trust too. I will see you this evening.
He has offered to furnish me and Mrs. Reynolds
with money to carry us off. If I will go, he will
see that Mrs. Reynolds has money to follow me,
and as for Mr. Francis, he sas he w'li! make him
swear back what he has said, and will turn him
out of office. TMs is all I can say till I see you.
"I am, dear Chngman, believe me, forever
your sincere friend, "James Reynolds.
"Mr. Jacoh Clingman."
Give to these letters a just and impartial com
parison. Did the same Reynolds write both let
ters? If so, point to the internal evidence that
proves it other than the name signed to both.
If he wrote them both, what object did he have
in exhibiting in the letter to Hamilton such igno
rance — a lack of even ordinary common school
education? Knowing that Reynolds was gone,
no one knew where, never to return, did Hamil
ton forge this letter to furnish internal evidence
that he was giving a description full and accu-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 73
rate of th i man's character when he called him a
reptile and a rascal?
If this 'nference be not justified by the facts,
why did It eynolds change his style, his language,
his rhetoric, and his spelling when he wrote to
Clingman? The letters "sas" are evidently in
tended for the word "says," and it is just as
evidently a misprint, for he uses the same word
in the second line following and spells it cor
rectly. The letter to Hamilton, beyond all dispute, is
a forgery — a forgery by Alexander Hamilton,
who knew, as a lawyer, the impossibility of any
one proving it to be such.
These two letters never were written by the
same man. Callender could have had no motive,
no reason, no gain, no protection, from the for
gery of the letter. Hamilton had — his charac
ter, his social position, his political influence, in
fact, everything near and dear to him was at
stake, if, indeed, there was anything or anybody
near enough to him to be dear, or dear enough
to him to be near. Reynolds was gone. He
could not be suborned as a witness, and Hamil
ton therefore was obliged to furnish positive,
undisputed internal evidence that he, Hamilton,
would not have employed such a reptile and a

74 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
rascal in his speculative ventures in Treasury
warrants. I could give other letters written by "'Reynolds
to substantiate this charge. There is a state
ment dated PMladelpMa, 15th December, 1792,
signed by James Monroe, Abraham Venable,
and F. A. Muhlenberg, published in Callender's
Mstory, which I cannot find in the vindication,
although Hamilton pretends to have published
in the vindication every document relating to
its subject. It is indeed a very important docu
ment, signed as it is by all three, and therefore
the individual statement of each as well las their
joint statement. I quote from Callendex' : >

No. VI, pp. 216, 217, 218: /"Tna^c Reynolds,.
at the same time, told Mm [:^eferring to a con
versation between Clingman/ and Reynolds] he
had been received by Mr. Hamilton, the morning
of that day, when they parted, about sunrise.
That he was extremely agitated, walking back
ward and forward the roo^n, and striking alter
nately, his forehead and Ihis thigh; observing
to him, that he had enenfiies at work, hut was
willing to meet them, oii fair ground, and re
quested him not to stayl long, lest it might he
noticed. \

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 75
"Mr. Clingman also informs us, that he re
ceived a note from Mr. Wolcot, to meet him, on
Friday morning, at half past nine (which note
we have). That he attended, and had an inter
view with him, in presence of Mr. Hamilton;
when he was strictly examined by both, respect
ing the persons, who were inquiring into the mat
ter, and their object ; that he told Mr. Hamilton,
he had been possessed of his notes to Reynolds,
and had given them up to these gentlemen : and
to which, he replied, he had done very wrong.
That he also told Mr. Hamilton of the letter he
had received from Reynolds, since his enlarge
ment, mentioning that he (Mr. Hamilton) would
make Francis swear back what he had said ; and
to which Mr. Hamilton rephed, he would make
him imsay any falsity he had declared.
"Mr. Hamilton said, Reynolds was a villain,
a rascal, and he supposed, would swear to any
thing. ' ' Mr. Wolcot said, that unless Clingman used
the same candour to him, that he had done to
Clingman, he should not consider Mmself bound.
"Mr. Hamilton observed, he had had some
transaction with Reynolds, which he had before
mentioned, as well as Clingman remembers, to
Mr. Wolcot, and need not go into detail.

76 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
"Mr. Clingman also informs us, that Rey
nolds told him, since his enlargement, that when
he was about to set out to Virginia, on his last
trip to buy up cash-claims of the Virginia line,
he told Mr. Hamilton, that Mr. HopMns would
not pay upon those powers of attorney; and to
which he (]\Ir. Hamilton) replied, he would write
to Hopkins, on the subject.
"Last night we waited on colonel Hamilton,
when he informed us of a particular connection
with Mrs. Reynolds: the period of its commence
ment, and circumstances attending it ; his visit
ing her at Inskeep's; the frequent supplies of
money to her and her husband, on that account ;
his duress by them from fear of a disclosure,
and his anxiety to he relieved from it and them,.
To support this, he shewed a great number of
letters from Reynolds and herself, commencing
early in 1791. He acknowledged all the letters
in a disguised hand, in our possession, to he his.
We left him under an impression, our suspicions
were removed. He aclmowledged our conduct
toward him had been fair and liberal : he could
not complain of it. He brought back all the
papers, even his own notes, nor did he ask their
destruction. "He said, the dismission of the prosecution

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 77
against the parties, Reynolds and Clingman,
had been in consideration of a surrender of a
list of pay improperly obtained from his office,
and by means of a person, who had it not in Ms
power now to injure the department, intimating
he meant Duer ; that he obtained this information
from Reynolds; owned that he had received a
note from Reynolds in the night, at the time
stated in Mr. Clingman's paper, and that he had
likewise seen Mm in the morning following:
said he had never seen Reynolds before he came
to this place; and that the statement in Mr.
Clingman's paper, in that respect was correct.
"January 2nd, 1793 [TMs statement, imme
diately following the one just quoted is signed
by James Monroe alone.] Mr. Clingman called
on me this evening, and mentioned, that he had
been apprised of Mr. Hamilton's vindication, by
Mr. Wolcot, a day or two after our interview
with him. He farther observed to me, that he
communicated the same to Mrs. Reynolds, who
appeared much shocked at it, and wept immod
erately. That she denied the imputation, and
declared, that it had been a fabrication of colonel
Hamilton, and that her husband had joined in it,
who had told her so, and that he had given Mm
receipts for money and written letters, so as to

78 A STUDY IN AI.EXANDEE HAMILTON
give countenance to the pretence. That he was
with colonel Hamilton, the day after he left the
jail, when we supposed he was in Jersey. He
was of opinion she was innocent, and that the de
fence was an imposition."
I shall comment upon a few of the statements
that Hamilton made.
In the interview the subject of which is given
in this extract: "To support this [referring
to Hamilton's explanation], he shewed a great
number of letters from Reynolds and herself
commencing early in 1791."
He had surely forgotten tMs assertion, made
to these gentlemen, when he said in his vindica
tion, published subsequently, that he first met
Mrs. Reynolds at his own home "some time in
the summer of the year 1791."
TMs difference in dates may seem to be a
small matter, but it is not. It goes far to prove
that Hamilton always made Ms statements ac
cording to the necessity of the occasion. "He
acknowledged all the letters in a disguised hand,
in our possession, to he his."
Why did he disguise his writing? Was it to
escape Ms guilt, or to destroy its evidence ? Was

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 79
it fear of detection and consequent exposure?
What business was he engaged in, that it re
quired the protection of this cowardly subter
fuge? "Clingman also informs us, that Reynolds
told him, since his enlargement, that when he
was about to set out to Virginia, on Ms last trip
to buy up cash-claims of the Virginia line, he
told Mr. Hamilton, that Hopkins would not pay
upon those powers of attorney ; and to which he,
(Mr. Hamilton) replied, he would write to Hop
kins, on the subject. ' '
Hamilton was then Secretary of the Treasury.
Why should Reynolds have gone to Mm about
Hopkins's opinion if Hamilton was not inter
ested in speculation and if his influence was not
necessary to control Hopkins and ensure suc
cess to the venture? If Hamilton was not a
partner in the speculation, his duty to his office
and his country, to Ms official oath and Ms
honor, required him to decline to interfere in
Hopkins's discharge of Ms official duty. Rey
nolds could protect neither Hamilton nor his
own interest in the venture without some in
fluence strong enough to change, or to annul,
Hopkins's decision. If Hopkins should refuse

80 A STUDY IN ALEXANDER HAMILTON
payment of the claims when presented, Hamilton
could not afford to issue an order for their pay
ment without producing trouble and his own ex
posure. It was certainly a very remarkable dis
closure as to some business matters between
them. " * * * said, he had never seen Rey
nolds before he came to this place ; and that the
statement in Mr. Clingman's paper, in that re
spect. Was correct."
What does this statement mean? In the vin
dication, published in 1797, Hamilton refers to
frequent meetings between Reynolds and Mm
in 1791, of wMch Mrs. Reynolds was the cause,
and how, subsequent to that date, he went to
PMladelpMa. Then he says that he had never
seen Eeynolds until his' arrival there. No one
can fail fully to appreciate the significance of
Hamilton's course in omitting from the vindi
cation this statement by these gentlemen.
Hamilton denounced Eeynolds as a low and
profligate man, a rascal, a villain, a repile un
kenneled, and as an accomplice in Hamilton's
adulterous amour with his, Eeynolds 's, wife.
The world has seldom produced a human being
so base as these epithets describe the character

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 81
of Eeynolds to have been. But was there any
intimacy between imcongenial natures beyond
the relation produced by their speculative ven
tures ; or, rather, do men so far apart in social
and political life ever become so intimate as the
copy of the note that follows would indicate,
unless the tie is something more than the de
bauchery of the wife by the connivance of the
husband and the use of that husband as a com
mercial broker?
Callender, No. VT, page 19 : "It is utterly out
of my power I assure you, pon my honour, to
comply with your request. Your note is re
turned. ' '
Eeynolds evidently had asked for a loan.
If their intimacy had not eliminated all social
differences between them, upon what justifiable
ground could such a note be written by Hamilton
to one so far below Mm in rank as was Eeynolds ?
It is observable that there is in the first letter
not the slightest touch of official dignity nor per
sonal reserve. He is writing to a true, tried, and
warm friend. There is in it a slight tinge of un
expressed regret, wMch "pon my honour" he
does not wholly conceal, but he trusts that the
intelligence of this dear friend will appreciate

82 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
the expression of regret the more deeply in that
it is not revealed.
Yet it seems that at this very time Hamilton
wanted to get rid of both Mrs. Eeynolds and her
husband, so "offered, if they would leave these
parts, not to he seen here again, to give some
thing clever."
What must have been Hamilton's pain and
agony when he found that if he would clean Ms
official character he would have to tear Mmself
from the tender and loving embraces of his fasci
nating mistress? It has occurred to me, in the
critical examination of tMs vindication and the
Callender books, that Mrs. Hamilton must have
been the most amiable, the most charitable, and
the most angelic woman that had ever lived,
and had fully and conscientiously accepted as
true her husband's double standard of morals,
in domestic as well as political affairs. She
would be an excellent model for a statue to Char
ity, to be erected in some ideal hall of fame, or
a statue to the domestic virtues.
Hamilton was naturally vindictive. At times
Ms temper was furious, although generally kept
well under control when reflected by spoken
words, wMch could be repeated, and to which at
that day a certain personal responsibility was

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 83
always attached. It was in his confidential let
ters only that he poured out the vials of his
wrath and gave ample room to Ms hate, Ms
malice, and to Ms calumnies. It is inconceivable
that such a man could have borne the treatment
of which he complained from a rascal, a villain,
and a reptile, yet have kept himself in such a
Christian frame of mind — ready to forgive,
ready to forget, if only the Reynoldses would be
gone. Yet, transient as this attachment to Mrs.
Reynolds is asserted by him to have been, he put
it in the balance against Ms official integrity, his
personal honesty, and the confidence of the pub
lic. From the very hour that Mr. Monroe and
his colleagues saw Reynolds Hamilton must have
known that his honor, Ms standing, his reputa
tion, everything that is held dear by an honest
man and a gentleman was at stake — except the
charity of that loving wife.
Upon what basis or proof has the charge of
a speculative venture been made against Ham
ilton, Reynolds being used as Ms intermediate
agent or broker ? The financial condition of the
country was such that many despaired of the
Republic. The soldiers had not been paid; the
creditors were clamoring for the payment of
their debts ; the Government, in truth, was bank-

84 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
rupt. It was the day of the speculator. Hamil
ton, knowing better and more fully than any
other man in the whole country, from his official
position, the exact state of the Treasury, the
amount of the public debt, and also the indebt
edness of the different States, concluded that
with tact he could make his fortune without be
ing caught in the act. His amour with Mrs.
Reynolds suggested her husband to him as his
broker, and when his connection with her became
so close that it was discovered by her husband,
he realized the risk that he was running in com
mitting with the husband a more heinous offense
than an "indecorum" with the wife.
I take this extract from Callender, and make
no excuse for its length :
Callender, No. VI, pp. 224, 225 : "If we con
sider the magnitude of the object before them,
it was highly commendable in the gentlemen con
cerned in these enquiries to trace the matter as
closely as they did. The funding of certificates
to the extent of perhaps thirty, or thirty-five
millions of dollars, at eight times the price which
the holders had actually paid for them, presents,
in itself, one of the most egregious, the most
impudent, the most oppressive, and the most

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 85
provoking bubbles that ever burlesqued the leg
islative laroceedings of any nation. The debt
that could have been discharged for ten or fif
teen millions of dollars, was funded at forty
millions. "But as the universal suspicion and hatred
which the formation of tMs mass had excited,
niight, at some future period, endanger its ex
istence, the assumption act was brought for
ward. This law incorporated into the form of
stock those debts contracted by individual states
during the war. Hence each of them became,
for its own sake, interested in the support of
public credit which implicated a riddance of the
debt especially due by itself. Thus the certifi
cate funds were inseparably embodied with a
powerful and popular ally, under the shelter
of whose reputation they might hope for some
degree of longevity. This artful measure was
pushed through Congress by the same party,
who funded the half-crown certificates at twenty
sMUings. But, even in tMs project, it is enter
taining to notice the blindness and precipitation
of conscious guilt. The paper-jobbing junto
were in such a hurry to shelter their speculations
under the wings of the above assumption law,
that they acted the measure in the most profli-

86 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
gate or bungling manner which can be imagined.
Take notice ! They pledged the public faith for
twenty-two millions of dollars instead of eleven
millions of dollars; for, the latter sum would
have settled the claims, if a reasonable degree
of time, of judgment, or of method had been em
ployed upon it."
This extract contains a true picture of the
financial conditions of the times and of the trans
actions of men connected with them. A calm and
impartial survey of all the parties involved in
Hamilton's vindication can lead to but one con
clusion — that Reynolds was Hamilton's broker
in Ms speculations in the public debt, wMch he,
as Secretary of the Treasury, had funded. Mon
roe, Venable, and Muhlenberg, who had heard
of these charges against Hamilton, had under
taken, from justifiable patriotic motives, to in
vestigate them.
Hamilton explains. If innocent, and if con
scious that no dishonest or disreputable act as
Secretary could be proved to have been done by
him, why did he not at once confront his accusers
with Reynolds and his wife ? They had accused
Hamilton of fraudulent conduct— dishonest offi
cial acts. Instead of taking the only course that

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 87
would forever have closed the lips of gossip, of
malice, of hatred and of enmity, he sent Rey
nolds and his wife away.
Reynolds disappeared almost immediately
after his discharge from prison. Did Ms wife
have any reason to cause him to disappear? Did
Monroe, Venable, Muhlenberg, or Clingman
have any reason to desire Ms flight ? Reynolds,
and he alone, had in Ms possession the indisput
able evidences of Hamilton's guilt. Hamilton,
and he alone, was deeply interested in Rey
nolds's disappearance. Hamilton's safety from
disgrace, and possibly from a public prosecu
tion, could be secured by Reynolds's flight only.
To have been confronted with Reynolds, was to
bring home to Hamilton his guilt, in all its con
sequences. His name and his fair fame would
have been gone forever. He would lose his page
in history. Why was the mass of the corre
spondence between Hamilton and Reynolds by
the desire of Hamilton committed to the flames?
He was then Secretary of the Treasury; re
signed in 1795; Callender's books were pub
lished in 1797 ; the vindication was given to the
public in the early fall of 1797. And what does
Hamilton do in the argument so full of prevari
cations, evasions, and abusive calumnies upon

88 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
all these people, coupled with xmmanly insinua
tions, as to Monroe, Venable, and Muhlenberg?
I answer my own question : — he simply took ref
uge behind the petticoats of Mrs. Reynolds,
knowing that James Reynolds was too far away
to protect those skirts from the cowardly use to
which Hamilton had put them.
I shall turn now to the history of the period
as to Hamilton's stock- jobbing operations in
government certificates. That Mstory will be
found in the Journal of William Maclay, senator
for the short term from Pennsylvania, and was
published by his grandson in 1890, some portions
of which h£!,d been previously published, for dis
tribution among the members and friends of the
family, and which had been jealously guarded
from public scrutiny by Maclay 's descendants.
This Journal, one of the most remarkable books
in the whole range of English literature, begins
April 24, 1789, and ends March 3, 1791, when
Maclay retired from the senate. It establishes
beyond a doubt that William Maclay was the
true founder of the Democratic party. It ends
before Hamilton began his connection with
either Mrs. Reynolds or her husband, and of the
information that it contains neither Monroe,
Venable, Muhlenberg, nor Callender had any

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 89
knowledge. If such knowledge had been theirs,
it would not have been necessary to have used
Reynolds as a witness, nor for Hamilton to have
given publicity to his amour with Mrs. Reynolds.
Page 177: "The business of yesterday (rec
ommendation for funding certificates of the pub
lic debt) will, I think, in all probability damn
the character of Hamilton as a minister forever.
It appears that a system of speculation for the
engrossing certificates has been carrying on
for some time. WMspers of this Mnd come from
every quarter."
Page 179: "Wadsworth has sent off Ms
small vessels for the southern states on the er
rand of buying up certificates. Nobody doubts
but all commotion originated from the Treas
ury, but the fault is laid on Duer but respondeat
superior." Page 188 : " If I needed proof of the baseness
of Hamilton, I have it in the fullest manner.
This day Ms price was communicated in manu
script as far as Philadelphia. Thomas Willing
in a letter to the speaker of the Representatives,
after passing many eulogiums on Hamilton's
plan, concludes, ' For I have seen in manuscript
his whole price' and it has been used as the basis

90 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
of the most abandoned system of speculation
ever broached in our country."
Page 268: "The most villainous and aban
doned speculation took place last winter from
the Treasury. Some resolutions have passed
the House of Representatives and are come up to
us." Page 269 : "I can see Mm warping over in
the case of the Baron [Steuben's extra pension
case] to get a sum of money on Ms account or
rather only in his name wMch would sink imme
diately into the jaws of Hamilton and his crew."
Page 329 : ' ' Here are their best interests sac
rificed to the vain wMm of fixing congress and
a great commercial town (so opposite to the
genius of the southern planter) on the Potomac
and the President has become in the hands of
Hamilton, the disclout of every dirty speculation
as his name goes to wipe away blame and silence
all murmuring."
Page 331: "The Secretary [Hamilton] and
his group of speculators are at last, in a degree
triumphant. EverytMng, even to the naming
of a committee, is pre-arranged by Hamilton and
Ms group of speculators."
Page 377 : "I had told the Treasurer [Hamil
ton] some time ago that I wanted to sell him

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 91
some stock. When I came home from meeting
I found note from him imploring that he would
buy to-morrow. TMs in a great measure, con
firms my former suspicions with respect to the
Treasury. ' '
In tMs transaction Hamilton did not use either
Reynolds or any other man as a broker. These
extracts are surely sufficient to carry conviction
to any impartial mind. But if they do not, could
that conviction be produced if I piled Pelion on
Ossa? TMs remarkable Journal, self-evidently the
utterance of an honest man, draws a picture of
Hamilton in comparison with which Callender's
books are only daubs. As Maclay retired March
3, 1791, Ms Journal does not touch upon the pro
ceedings between Hamilton and Eeynolds, wMch
Hamilton, emboldened by impunity in the past,
felt that he could conduct with more openness,
and with certainty of greater profit, through an
intermediary. Having, there is reason to sus
pect, discharged Duer, Hamilton selected Eey
nolds as Ms agent. If Maclay had remained in
the Senate Hamilton's interview with Monroe,
Venable, and Muhlenberg would have had a
more tragic ending. Possibly Washington

92 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
might have heard of these transactions, not only
from these gentlemen, but from Maclay, in Ms
official character as Senator. Hamilton's resig
nation would have been tendered before Decem
ber, 1795, and Mrs. Eeynolds might have es
caped the infamous avowal of his amour.
Imagination fails in its usual office when it
deals with the conduct and character of such a
creature as Hamilton disclosed himself to be in
his own vindication. These extracts from
Maclay are the evidences of Hamilton's tact and
shrewdness in Ms not asserting in so many
words that he had never bought or speculated
in government certificates. Maclay was still
alive, living in or near Philadelphia, and might
have been called as a witness. What then?

CHAPTER V
During the War of the Revolution many citi
zens, true to their allegiance to the English
crown, open and avowed in their loyalty, were
called Tories. Many of them desired independ
ence for the colonies in some measure, but did
not desire, and would not agree to, an entire
severance of all the political ties that bound them
to the mother country. As soon as the Federal
constitution was finally adopted by all the col
onies, now become states, a party, under the
leadersMp and formative power of Alexander
Hamilton, came into existence, with ideas of
government almost as much English as Ameri
can. TMs party was created by Hamilton, and
was called the Federalists, or Federal, party.
Hamilton inspired and guided its every move
ment, its every thought, and its every ambition.
Alexander Hamilton begat the Federal party,
the Federal party begat the WMg party, the
Whig party begat the Republican party, and
these three parties were one and the same yes
terday, they are one and the same to-day, and
they will be one and the same forever and for
ever. Hamilton's sole object was to create a
93

94 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
government outside the Federal constitution,
and to-day that is the cMef object of the Repub
lican party. TMs new government was to be
made out of the doctrine of "implied powers."
Under the constructive decisions of the Supreme
Court of the United States, which always has
been merely the exponent of Hamilton's politi
cal opinions, as it is to-day the exponent of those
opinions, no restrictions hmit the Mnd of gov
ernment that may be established under the doc
trine of implied powers. John Marshall was the
judicial exponent of Alexander Hamilton — ^no
more, no less.
A few quotations from Maclay 's Journal will
give some startling facts to my readers.
John Adams was then Vice-President. The
subject before the senate was the official form
of addressing the President.
Page 10: "Mr. Adams rose in his chair and
expressed the greatest surprise that anything
should be objected to on account of its being
taken from the practice of that government un
der wMch we had lived so long and happily for
merly ; that he was for a dignified and respect
able government and as far as he knew the senti
ments of people, they thought as he did: that

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 95
for Ms part he was one of the first in the late
contest [the Revolution] and if he could have
thought of this he never would have drawn Ms
sword. ' '
Page 12: "The unequivocal declaration that
he would never have drawn his sword etc. has
drawn my mind to the following remarks : that
the motives of the actors in the late Revolution
were various cannot be doubted. The abolish
ing of royalty, the extinguishment of patronage
and dependencies attached to that form of gov
ernment, were the exalted motives of many revo
lutionists and these were the improvements
meant by them to be made of the war wMch was
forced on us by British aggression — ^in fine the
amelioration of government and bettering the
condition of manMnd. These ends and none
other were publicly avowed and all our consti
tutions and public acts were formed in tMs spirit
yet there were not wanting a party whose mo
tives were different. They wished for the loaves
and fishes of government and cared for notMng
else but a translation of the diadem and sceptre
from London to Boston, New York, or PhUadel
pMa, or, in other words, the creation of a new
monarchy in America and to form niches for-
themselves in the temple of royalty."

96 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
Page 389: "AnniMlation of state govern
ment is undoubtedly the object of these people."
Page 116 : ' ' Grayson made a speech. It was
not long but he had in it this remarkable sen
tence — the matter predicted by Mr. Henry is
now coming to pass — consolidation is the object
of the new government and the first attempt will
be to destroy the senate, as they are the repre
sentatives of the state legislatures."
Page 393 : ' ' The new constitution by the in
strumentality of the judiciary etc. aims at the
government of individuals, and the states, unless
as to the conceded points and with regard to
their individual sovereignty and independence,
are left upon stronger ground than formerly
and it can only be by implication or inference
that the general Government can exercise con
trol over them as states. Any direct or open at
tack would be termed usurpation. But whether
the gradual infiuence and encroachments of the
General Government may not gradually swallow
up the state governments is another matter. ' '
Page 392: "Henry of Maryland joined with
him ; said the constitution of the United States
implied everything; it was a most admirable
system. Thus did these heroes vapour and boast
of their address in having cheated the people

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 97
and establishing a form of government over
them which none of them expected. ' '
These are sufficient — they tell the tale as
never before in an American history. Once
more: Page 393 : ' ' The general power to carry the
constitution into effect by a constructive inter
pretation would extend to every case that Con
gress may deem necessary or expedient."
Substitute the federal supreme court for con
gress, and you have political conditions as they
are to-day.
These are Alexander Hamilton's political
doctrines, not avowed or put into acts until he
became Secretary of the Treasury. If Ribot or
some other scientist of Europe or of America
is yet searcMng the annals of the human race,
studying the traits of human character, with the
purpose of proving the laws of heredity to be
absolutely true, and is not yet fully convinced of
its truth, fixed as the laws of the Medes and
Persians, let Mm devote a few spare moments
to an impartial study of Alexander Hamilton's
career, private and public, and of the hfe of Ms

98 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
child, the Federal party, of his grandcMld, the
Whig party, and of his great-grandchild, the Re
publican party, and he will find nothing truer
than the old maxim: Like father, like son; or,
this old saying: Water never rises above its
source. Alexander Hamilton resurrected the
doctrine of ' ' implied powers. ' ' In England that
doctrine was called the "prerogative of tho
crown." Its exercise cost Charles I his head. Its
constant exercise brought about the revolution
of the seventeenth century in England. In
France it was crystallized into a living fact by
Louis XIV, who proclaimed: "I am the state,
or the state is myself. ' ' It was the cause of the
French Revolution.
In this country the doctrine of implied powers
was in reality the real cause of our colonial
grievances, and was in very truth the mother
of the American Revolution. It has appeared in
all countries, and it has the singular power to
change its name and its appearance to suit its
surroundings to the nature of the government
under which it operates. It is the backbone of
usurpation by the executive, as it is the source
of his unlawful power. Under our written con
stitution the doctrine of implied powers must
first be put into the form of a law, wMch, when

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 99
tested by our federal supreme court, is decided
to be constitutional. Thus through the opera
tion of a judicial opinion another power is given
to congressional legislation. In this way doubt
ful powers can be made certain, and their exer
cise be justified, by a judicial decision. In the
case of the doctrine of ' ' implied powers ' ' in our
government under a written constitution, power
actually denied to Congress has been decided
by the Supreme Court to have been imphedly
granted. Where is the limit to this constructive
enlargement of congressional power? There
can be none, unless the Supreme Court sees fit
to fix it.
But when will that court draw the line of
demarcation, and where? Alexander Hamil
ton's fame rests on two things: — his essays in
defense of the Constitution in The Federalist;
and his resurrection of the royal doctrine of im
plied powers. Although there is not a dot of
an "i" nor the cross of a "t" in our entire or
ganic law that belongs to him, yet he defended
it with masterly ability. He called it a rope of
sand — because he could make no better law. He
attended the constitutional convention at inter
vals, and then only for very short periods.
WMle many public men desired the independ-

100 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
ence of the colonies, and in every way contrib
uted to the success of the conflict between
Great Britain and the colonies, yet the antagon
ism of their opinions as to the nature and pow
ers of the government, after the colonies had
won their independence and had emerged from
the conflict, each an independent, separate state
or sovereignty, divided them into two radical and
distinct parties. The same antagonisms exist
to-day. One party desired an imperialism un
der the form of a republic. These men became
Federalists, then Whigs, and now they are Ee
publicans, of whom Alexander Hamilton, the
father, is still the inspiration and the idol. The
othei" party demanded a true and genuine re
public, in form, in power, and in nature. These
men became Democrats, and they are still Demo
crats, of whom Senator Maclay, of Pennsyl
vania, was ihe true organizer and founder, but
of whom Jeffei'son became the real leader. The
principles which formed these men into dis
tinct and different political parties are the same
to-day. I again quote from Basststt, Nation series,
page 28 :
"Hamilton's scheme had also a political pur-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 101
pose, which was more important than its finan
cial side. He saw that pursuing a strong fiscal
pohcy he would draw to his party-following the
moneyed classes. In this respect he profited by
his knowledge of English history, for he knew
that since the days of Walpole the wealthy part
of the population had exercised a political in
fluence out of proportion to its numbers. The
real object in forming a written constitution was
to define the rights and powers so that the gov
ernment could not usurp or exercise any power
not expressly granted — in other words, forever
to kill, destroy, and exclude from the American
system the doctrine of implied powers, which in
one form or another, as a prerogative of kings,
or as the necessity of government, had caused
so much bloodshed in England. I quote Crom
well Army, by C. H. Firth, chap. 'Politics in the
Army,' page 354: 'The demand for security for
the future necessarily led to direct interference
in the political settlement of the Kingdom. For
the soldiers held that they could not be secure
if the King was restored to his authority without
proper restrictions or the parliament left in
possession of the unlimited powers it had
abused. All wise men may see,' declared the
Army, 'that parliament privileges as well as

102 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
royal prerogatives may be perverted or abused
to the destruction of those greater ends for
whose protection and preservation they were in
tended, to wit : the rights and privileges of the
people and safety of the whole.' "
Firth, page 355, referring to the "Heads of
the Proposals of the Army," says: "Its chief
characteristic was that it aimed at permanently
limiting not only the power of the King but also
the power of parliament, and, therefore, it nat
urally failed to commend itself to either. ' '
The basic principle of the American Eevolu
tion involved the sovereignty of the people.
Consequently the people, and the people alone,
had the right to make the government by wMch
they were to be governed, according to a form
to be selected by themselves. Under the opera
tion of this fundamental principle the govern
ment was their agent. The government ceased
then and there to be sovereign, and became
based on the personality of man.
This fundamental principle was the beginning
of a new dispensation in politics. It owes its
origin to the political side of Calvinism, for
John Calvin, and he alone, discovered the per
sonality of man. He found man a slave; he

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 103
made Mm a freeman. He found him a subject;
he made him a citizen.
The nullification of tMs feature of the federal
constitution was the moral treason of Alexander
Hamilton and Jolm Marshall. To create a cor
poration under the old theory was an act of
sovereignty; hence Hamilton advocated a fed
eral bank, although he knew personally that the
power to organize a bank expressly had beeu
denied to the federal government. John Mar
shall announced that a charter passed by a state
government was a contract, therefore protected
by the federal constitution. The next step was
to decide that the federal congress had the im
plied power to create a corporation, and Mar
shall did so decide. The work was accomplished.
The treasonable design of Alexander Hamilton
and John Marshall was a judicial success, and
the grand work of the American Revolution was
undone, and once more in defiance of God and
human rights, Man was sunk to a subject, and
Government, with its divine right to reign, was
announced as the monarchy of the world. Con
sequently the old conflict that has surged
through all human Mstory — the conflict between
freedom and tyranny — has not yet been settled.
In this country — free America — Hamilton

104 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
and Marshall threw our government back upon
the highway of English history, behind the par
liament that made the English monarchy a con
stitutional government, to the time of Charles I,
who lost his head by asserting that the preroga
tive of the king contained implied powers of sov
ereignty, with respect to which he was the sole
judge by right divine.
It is necessary to this argument to quote in
full the clause of the federal constitution that
gives in detail the powers granted to congress.
They are as follows :
"Sect. VIIL
' ' The Congress shall have power
"1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts,
and excises ; to pay the debts and provide for the
common defense and general welfare of the
United States: but all duties, imposts, and ex
cises shall be uniform throughout the United
States :
"2. To borrow money on the credit of the
United States :
"3. To regulate commerce with foreign na
tions, and among the several states, and with
the Indian tribes:

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 105
"4. To establish a uniform rule of naturali
zation, and uniform laws on the subject of bank
ruptcies throughout the United States :
"5. To coin money, regulate the value
thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard
of weights and measures :
"6. To provide for the punishment of coun
terfeiting the securities and current coin of the
United States:
"7. To establish post offices and post roads :
"8. To promote the progress of science and
useful arts, by securing, for limited times, to au
thors and inventors the exclusive right to their
respective writings and discoveries:
"9. To constitute tribunals inferior to the
supreme court :
"10. To define and punish piracies and fel
onies committed on the high seas, and offenses
against the law of nations :
' ' 11. To declare war, grant letters of marque
and reprisal, and make rules concerning cap
tures on land and water :
"12. To raise and support armies; but no
appropriation of money to that use shall be for
a longer term than two years :
"13. To provide and maintain a navy :

106 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON

l^^

'14. To make rules for the government and
regulation of the land and naval forces :
' ' 15. To provide for calling forth the militia
to execute the laws of the Union, suppress in
surrections, and repel invasions:
' ' 16. To provide for organizing, arming, and
disciplining the militia, and for governing such
part of them as may be employed in the service
of the United States, reserving to the states re
spectively the appointment of the officers, and
the authority of training the militia, according
to the discipline prescribed by Congress :
' ' 17. To exercise exclusive legislation, in all
cases whatsoever, over such district (not ex
ceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of
particular states, and the acceptance of Con
gress, become the seat of government of the
United States, and to exercise like authority
over all places purchased by the consent of the
legislature of the states in wMch the same shall
be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals,
dock-yards, and other needful buildings: And
"18. To make all laws wMch shall be neces
sary and proper for carrying into effect the fore
going powers, and all other powers vested by
this constitution in the government of the United
States, or in any department or officer thereof."

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 107
The last clause, ' ' and to make all laws wMch
shall be necessary and proper for carrying into
effect the foregoing powers and all other jjowers
vested by this Constitution in the government
of the United States or in any department or
officer thereof," has been called "the elastic
clause. ' ' A better name for it would be ' ' Trojan
Horse," because it holds in itself that enemy to
the state — the doctrine of imphed powers. A
government outside of our written constitution,
with its expressly enumerated powers, has been
built up in this country, from those words, by
Hamilton and Marshall, a government under
which its citizens now live, which was never
thought of by the members of the federal con
vention. Take each subdivision of this section :
can any man draw the conclusion that a bank
was necessary to carry into effect the power
mentioned? A bank could not be organized
without an act of incorporation, defining and
limiting its powers and their exercise. An aet
of that sort was both a financial and govern
mental necessity. Kasson, in his Evolution of
the Federal Constitution, page 126, gives an
enumeration of twenty-one different powers
proposed by Madison to the convention. Among
them was the power "to grant charters of incor-

108 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
poration. ' ' And Kasson then says that the pow
ers proposed were referred to the committee of
detail, but were not reported.
Kasson, page 149 : ' ' There is no trace in the
recorded debates of the belief of a single mem
ber that under the power to borrow money con
gress could exercise the power of making their
bills a legal tender for private debts. There is
rather the contrary indication that they consid
ered this authority non-existent unless it should
be enumerated among the express powers
granted. The authority as assumed in later
years appears to have been an unwarranted de
duction from the general power to provide for
carrying into effect other powers that were
granted. The Convention, while prohibiting the
power to the States, supposed it sufficient to sim
ply withhold the authority from the Congress
of the United States."
This analysis as to this particular power, if
applied to any or all the other powers, would
reach the same logical conclusion as to the crea
tion of a national bank under any of the other
powers expressly enumerated and granted in
section VII. But what are the facts as to the

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 109
action of the convention upon tMs important
subject, with wMch Hamilton was himself as
well acquainted as any man in that convention
or out ? He knew well, thoroughly, the mind of
the convention on the matter. Bearing in mind
that Hamilton was a member of the convention
and signed the Constitution, what are the facts
relative to this subject?
I quote from Madison's letter to Edmund
Pendleton, Madiso^n Papers, Vol. 1, page 104^5 :
"Yesterday was opened for the first time the
bank instituted under the auspices of Congress.
The competency of Congress to such an act had
been called in question in the first instance; but
the subject not lying in so near and distinct a
view, the objections did not prevail. On the last
occasion the general opinion, though with some
exceptions, was that the confederation gave no
such power, and that the exercise of it would
not bear the test of a forensic disquisition and
consequently would not avail the institution.
SometMng like a middle way finally produced
an acquiescing, rather than an affirmative vote.
A charter of incorporation was granted, with a
recommendation to the States to give it all the
necessary validity witMn their respective juris-

110 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
dictions. As this is a tacit admission of a defect
of power, I hope it will be an antidote against
the poisonous tendency of precedents of usurpa
tion." This fact is furnished by the history of the
struggle under the confederation. It is very
significant in its political nature, and important
in its bearing upon the convention, which did
not meet till 1787.
Madison Papers, Vol. 3, page 1,576: "Mr.
Madison suggested an enlargement of the motion
into a power ' to grant charters of incorporation
where the interest of the United States might
require and the legislative provisions of indi
vidual states may be incompetent. ' Col. Mason
was for limiting the power to the single case of
canals. He was afraid of monopolies of every
sort, which he did not think were by any means
already implied by the Constitution, as supposed
by Mr. Wilson."
The motion being so modified as to admit a
distinct question, specifying, and limited to, the
case of canals, the vote stood Pennsylvania,
Virginia, Georgia, aye 3 ; the others, 8, no. * ' The

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 111
other part fell, of course, as including the power
rejected." These are the facts. They are the only true
guides to a correct exposition of the powers of
congress. The facts that underlie contracts, on
account of which laws are enacted to redress
grievances produced by them or to protect
rights which have been invaded, alone can fur
nish the rules to expound and interpret those
laws and contracts ; and when they are ignored,
discarded, or denied the exposition points to a
direct usurpation of power, having its birth in
the imagination, — a mental bastard, sui generis.
The federal constitution was germinated out of
the historic facts that preceded the revolution
of 1776. When the Constitution was before
South Carolina for adoption or for rejection,
Colisworth Pinckney used these words: "By
this settlement we have secured an unlimited
importation of negroes for twenty years. The
general government can never emancipate them,
for no such authority is granted, and it is ad
mitted on all hands that the general government
has no powers but what are expressly granted
by the Constitution. ' '
The statement made by Pinckney was of fact,
and was so recognized by every member of the

112 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
federal convention. When the members re
turned to their several states to plead for the
adoption of the Constitution, not one of them
would have dared to intimate in any way the
doctrine of implied powers. If he had, the con
stitution would never have been adopted by a
single state. How did it happen that this in
iquitous doctrine, — ^which in England had cost
Charles I his head, in France under Louis XIV
had sowed the seeds that blossomed in their
full growth when they produced the French
Revolution, and which in this country will yet
produce a similar revolution, in order to recover
from the grasp of the federal supreme court
those rights and principles for which our pa
triotic forefathers rebelled against the British
crown and fought the war of 1776, — how is it
that a doctrine so iniquitous became fastened
upon us? That question in a measure can be
answered by the words of Hamilton himself, to
be found in Vol. 3, page 106, Madison Papers:
"No man's ideas were more remote from the
plan than his own were known to be ; but is it
possible to deliberate between anarchy and con
vulsion on one side and the chance of good to be
expected from the plan on the other ? ' '

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 113
Note those significant words, "the chance of
good. ' ' Hamilton was prepared to sign the Con -
stitution on this ground, and on none other, little
dreaming that he would ever have the "chance of
good" that came to him as Secretary of the
Treasury to start that radical movement that,
under John Marshall, was to wrench the Consti
tution from constitutional government, then cre
ate a government by judicial opinion outside
that constitution, to gratify Hamilton's British
proclivities, and to make the federal supreme
court the political and judicial autocrat of dem
ocratic America. The American people, through
the doctrine of implied powers, are living not
under the federal constitution, but under the
government of the federal supreme court, — a
government created of its own imagination, and
in defiance of the constitution which that court's
judicial oath required it to support and to de
fend. And that court is to-day, and never has
been other than, the exponent of Alexander
Hamilton's political principles, through John
Marshall's judicial decisions, which have been
accepted and followed as infallible.
Madison Papers, Vol. 3, page 1507: "Mr.
Hamilton said, that he had Ibeen restrained from

114 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
entering into the discussions by Ms dislike of the
scheme of government in general; but as he
meant to support the plan to be recommended
as better than nothing, he wished in this place to
offer a few remarks. ' '
The impudent vanity of these words is re
freshing when one calls to mind that Hamilton
was addressing the most remarkable body of
men of brains, culture, and sagacity that ever
assembled on this globe, and at the same time
showing to those men his cloven foot, which was
then limping back to England. During the Revo
lution he fought for the colonies, but as soon as
their independence was won and acknowledged
his loyalty to the monarcMcal principles and
form of the English government burst forth in
all its pristine vigor, refreshed, rejuvenated, and
reinvigorated by the rest of the Revolutionary
struggle. I will close this chapter with the
words of Pierce Butler, of South Carolina, "We
were always following the British Constitution
when the reason of it did not apply. ' '

CHAPTER VI
Hamilton's own words are indisputable evi
dence of his political principles. They show
why he resurrected from its English grave the
crown 's prerogative, brought it to America, and
then gave to it the name of "implied powers."
I quote from Madison Papers, Vol. 2.
Page 885, speaking of the states, Hamilton
said: "They are not necessary for any of the
great purposes of commerce, revenue or agricul
ture, subordinate authorities, he was aware,
would be necessary. There must be district
tribunals — corporations for local purposes. But
cui bono the vast and expensive apparatus now
appertaining to the states.
"In his private opinion he had no scruple in
declaring, supported as he was by the opinion
of so many of the wise and good, that the British
government was the best in the world ; and that
he doubted much whether anything short of it
would do in America."
Page 888 : "Let one branch of the legislature
hold their places for hfe or at least during good
behaviour. Let the Executive, also, be for life. ' '
115

116 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
Page 889: "It will be objected, probably,
that such an Executive will be an elective mon
arch and will give birth to the tumults which
characterize that form of government. He
would reply that 'monarch' is an indefinite term.
It marks not either the degree or duration of
power. If this executive magistrate would be
a monarch for life, the other proposed by the re
port from the committee of the whole would be
a monarch for seven years. The circumstances
of being elective was also applicable to both. It
had been observed by judicious writers, that
elective monarchies would be the best, if they
could be guarded against the tumults excited by
the ambition and intrigues of competitors. He
was not sure that tumults were an inseparable
evil. He thought this character of elective mon
archies had been taken rather from particular
cases than from general principles."
Page 890 : "But he sees the Union dissolving
or already dissolved — he sees evils operating
in the states which must soon cure the people of
their fondness for democracies — he sees that a
great progress has been already made and is
still going on in the public mind. He thinks,
therefore, that the people will in time be un
shackled from their prejudices, and whenever

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 117
that happens they will themselves not be satis
fied at stopping where the plan of Mr. Eandolph
would place them, but be ready to go as far at
least as he proposes."
Page 905 : "He had not been understood yes
terday. By an abolition of the States, he meant
that no boundary could be drawn between the
national and state legislatures — that the former
must therefore have indefinite authority. If it
were hmited at all, the rivalship of the states
would gradually subvert it. As states he
thought they ought to be abolished. But he ad
mitted the necessity of leaving in them subordi
nate jurisdictions. ' '
If the states were abohshed the government
would indeed be a really national government,
not federal, acting directly upon the people, re
gardless of state rights, and touched with the
poison of the English disease, from which, in
the secret chambers of his profound intellect,
Hamilton entertained marvelous hopes in the
future. Under the influence and the guidance of
Hamilton 's political principles, by the decisions
of the federal supreme court at the present rate
of the development and application of the doc
trine of implied powers, the states soon will be

118 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
abolished— but empty shells on our political
ocean. In only a few more years, if the Supreme
Court does not go baek to the Constitution, the
states will be in American history what Junius
is in English literature — stat nominis umbra.
The senate to-day represents the states and their
sovereignty, and that fact alone is indisputable
proof that our government is a federal union.
The dullest man in the convention could see the
drift of Hamilton's thoughts and intentions —
that the states would not, could not, be ignored
in their sovereignty. That was the reason that
Hamilton advocated their abolition.
From these quotations, coupled with his opin
ion that the chief executive of our government
should hold office for life, — a republican king un
der a pretended democratic constitution, — and a
senate whose members should hold their seats
for a similar term, or during good behavior, —
a republican house of lords, — you have the pic
ture of Hamilton as a statesman painted by his
own hand, a picture by a man that fought dur
ing the Eevolution, in open and hostile rebellion,
that these very institutions be not fastened upon
the colonies. When the colonies by their blood
had won their independence and had become in
dependent sovereignties, Hamilton advocated

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 119
the restoration of the institutions against which
he had fought. Let us take a glance as tMs man,
advocating in The Federalist the adoption of
this same constitution, and you will have a pic
ture of Mm as an advocate ready to engage in
any cause. The picture will be in strong con
trast to the eulogies and the biograpMes of
Hamilton by writers who have taken Mm at his
own estimate, without reflection or without criti
cal examination of the facts. With the vast ma
jority of men mental attainments are not the re
sult of digestive thought, but the reality of a
retentive memory only. Their minds are only a
warehouse, into wMch they gather the thoughts
of other men, to be used by them as occasion de
mands. They read mechanically, and they think
automatically with their memories. Their in
vestigations travel the old beaten highway of
accepted opinion, and if they accidentally
stumble upon a new fact they are so enraptured
with the discovery that they neither observe its
bearing nor ascertain its truth. Even Hudibras
has told the story thus:
"That we should all opinions hold authentic,
that we can make old."
The Federalist (Dawson's edition), page 50:
"So far are the suggestions of Montesquieu

120 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
from standing in opposition to a general union
of the states that he explicitly treats of a Con
federate Eepublic as the expedient for extend
ing the sphere of popular government and rec
onciling the advantages of monarchy with those
of Eepublicanism. ' '
Here follows a quotation from Montesquieu:
"It is very probable that mankind would have
been obliged, at length, to live constantly under
the government of a single person, had they not
contrived a kind of constitution, that has all the
internal advantages of a Eepublican, together
with the external force of a Monarchical govern
ment. I mean a Confederate Eepublic. This
form of government is a convention by which
several smaller states agree to become members
of a larger one, which they intend to form. It
is a kind of assemblage of societies that con
stitute a new one, capable of increasing by
means of new associations, till they arrive to
such a degree of power as to be able to provide
for the security of the United body. A Republic
of this kind, able to withstand an external force,
may support itself without any internal cor
ruptions. As this government is composed of
small Republics, it enjoys the internal happiness

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 121
of each ; and with respect to its external situa
tion it is possessed by means of the association,
of all the advantages of large monarchies."
I have thought proper to quote at length these
interesting passages, because they contain a
luminous abridgment of the principal argu
ments in favor of the union, and must effectu
ally remove the false impressions which a mis
apprehension of other parts of the work was
likely to make. And could Hamilton himself
have written a stronger argument to refute his
doctrine of implied powers than is stated in
these extracts?
The Federalist, Dawson's edition:
Page 108: "But let it be admitted, for argu
ment's sake, that mere wantonness and lust of
domination would be sufficient to beget that dis
position; still it may be safely affirmed, that
the sense of the constituent body of the National
representatives, or, in other words, of the Peo
ple of the several States, would control the in
dulgence of so extravagant an appetite. It will
always be far more easy for the State Govern
ment to encroach upon the State authorities,
than for the National Government to encroach

122 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
upon the State authorities. The proof of the
proposition turns upon the greater degree of
influence which the State Governments, if they
administer their affairs with uprightness and
prudence, will generally possess over the Peo
ple; a circumstance which at the same time
teaches us, that there is an inherent and intrinsic
weakness in all Federal Constitutions; and
that too much pains cannot be taken in their
organization, to give them all the force which is
compatible with the principles of liberty."
Page 199: "An entire consolidation of the
States into one complete National sovereignty
would imply an entire subordination of the
parts; and whatever powers might remain in
them, would be altogether dependent on the gen
eral will. But as the plan of the Convention
aims only at a partial union or consolidation,
the State Governments would clearly retain
all the rights of sovereignty which they before
had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively
delegated to the United States. This exclusive
delegation, or rather this alienation, of State
sovereignty, would only exist in three cases:
where the Constitution in express terms granted
an exclusive authority to the Union; where it
granted in one instance an authority to the

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 123
Union, and in another prohibited the States from
exercising the like authority: and where it
granted an authority to the Union, to which a
similar authority in the States would be abso
lutely and totally contradictory and repugnant."
Pages 597, 598, 599: "It has been several
times truly remarked, that Bills of Rights are,
in their origin, stipulations between kings and
their subjects, abridgements of prerogative in
favour of privilege, reservations of rights not
surrendered to the prince. Such was Magna
Chaeta, obtained by the Barons, sword in hand,
from King John. Such were the subsequent
confirmations of that charter by succeeding
princes. Such was the Petition of Right as
sented to by Chaeles I, in the beginning of his
reign. Such, also, was the Declaration of Eight
presented by the Lords and Commons to the
Prince of Orange, in 1688, and afterwards
thrown into the form of an Act of Parliament
called the Bill of Eights. It is evident, there
fore, that, according to their primitive signifi
cation, they have no application to Constitutions
professedly founded upon the power of the Peo
ple, and executed by their immediate represent
atives and servants. Here, in strictness, the
People surrender nothing; and as they retain

124 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
everytMng, they have no need of particular res
ervations. 'We, the People of the United
States, to secure the blessings of liberty to our
selves and our posterity, do ordain and establish
this Constitution for the United States of Amer
ica.' Here is a better recognition of popular
rights, than volumes of these aphorisms which
make the principal figure in several of our State
Bills of Eights, and wMch would sound much
better in a treatise of ethics, than in a Constitu
tion of Government.
"But a minute detail of particular rights is
certainly far less applicable to a Constitution like
that under consideration, which is merely in
tended to regulate the general political interests
of the Nation, than to a Constitution which has
the regulation of every species of personal and
private concerns. If, therefore, the loud clam
ours against the plan of the Convention, on this
score, are well founded, no epithets of reproba
tion will be too strong for the Constitution of
this State. But the truth is, that both of them
contain all which, in relation to their objects, is
reasonably to be desired.
" I go further, and afiirm, that Bills of Eights,
in the sense and to the extent in which they are
contended for, are not only unnecessary in the
proposed Constitution, but would even be dan-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 125
gerous. They would contain various exceptions
to powers not granted ; and on this very account,
would afford a colourable pretext to claim more
than were granted. For why declare that things
shall not be done which there is no power to do ?
Why, for instance, should it said, that the lib
erty of the press shall not be restrained, when
no power is given by whicii restrictions may be
imposed? I will not contend that such a pro
vision would confer a regulating power ; but it
is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed
to usurp, a plausible pretence for claiming that
power. They might urge with a semblance of
reason, that the Constitution ought not to be
charged with the absurdity of providing against
the abuse of an authority, which was not given,
and that the provision against restraining the
liberty of the press afforded a clear implica
tion, that a power to prescribe proper regula
tions concerning it was intended to be vested
in the National Government. This may serve
as a specimen of the numerous handles which
would be given to the doctrine of constructive
powers, by the indulgence of an injudicious zeal
for Bills of Rights."
Were these Hamilton's real opinions, or were
they merely written and published by him for a

126 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
definite purpose, like the argument of the paid
advocate? The question is pertinent, because
when he became Secretary of the Treasury these
opinions were all dropped, and Ms official acts
showed his true opinions on government and
the federal constitution. Hamilton ought to
have gone to England after the Revolution. His
magnetic character and his brilliant intellect
would have soon found ample room for Ms tow
ering ambition.
Did any other public man of that day state
the organic nature of our government under the
Constitution in such clear language, or prove
so indisputably that the government was not a
na tional government ?
But this significant statement on this subject
is to be found :
Page 185 : "It may safely be received as an
axiom in our political system, that the State
Governments will, in all possible contingencies,
afford complete security against invasions of
the public liberty by the National authority.
Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under
pretences so likely to escape the penetration of
select bodies of men, as of the People at large.
The Legislatures will have better means of in-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 127
formation. They can discover the danger at a
distance ; and possessing all the organs of civil
power, and the confidence of the People, they
can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition,
in which they can combine the resources of the
community. They can readily communicate
with each other in the different States; and
unite their common forces, for the protection of
their common liberty."
In no number of The Federalist can any one
detect even a hint of the doctrine of implied
powers. In his discussion of this "elastic
clause" he hints in the most adroit manner at
the powers of congress to carry into practical
effect the powers granted in this entire section ;
but he uses words to conceal his ideas.
When Hamilton proposed the incorporation
of a national bank Washington at first had se
rious doubts on the subject, so asked the opinion
of his cabinet. Why ? As president of the con
vention he had kept a watchful eye upon all its
proceedings. He knew that Madison had pro
posed by resolution to grant the power to con
gress to create corporations, and that the reso
lution had been lost by a very large majority.
Hamilton I was a member of that convention, so

128 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
knew the same fact. Hamilton proposed to in
corporate a national bank; hence Washington
doubted. Jefferson strongly opposed the measure. Our
subsequent history is indisputable proof that a
national bank is not, and never was, a necessity
to the government in the conduct of its fiscal
affairs. Suppose a federal bank were in exist
ence to-day, with its vast subtle, undetected in
fluence in our public affairs through Congress
and in other ways, what would be our political
condition, not only at Washington, but through
out this broad land, where there are open and
undisguised corruption in high places, fawning
sycophancy and cringing cowardice, when pub
lic decency cannot walk the streets of our federal
capital without blushing, and while a politician
to be honest in public life is self-evident proof
that he is an impracticable in practical politics ?
But the bank was proposed with a well defined
object in Ms view.
His point gained, this measure carried, Ham
ilton supported by Washington's supreme in
fluence and by public approval, the doctrine of
implied powers, concealed under the adroit argu
ment of fiscal necessity, burst forth fully grown
like Minerva from the brain of Jupiter. What

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 129
then became of the position that the Constitu
tion had only created a government of enumer
ated powers ? The true political object of Ham
ilton 's measure was to build up a government
outside the federal constitution and by that
means to fling our government back along the
pathway of English history, until possibly Ham
ilton might realize his hope of seeing his model
of the best government on earth in practice here
despite the restrictions set forth in hae verba
in the constitution itself.
I quote from Gordy 's Political Parties, Vol. 1,
page 130 :
"The bill to incorporate a national bank was
first introduced in the senate. When it reached
the house, it was opposed by Madison with great
ability, on constitutional grounds. He declared
that 'the exercise of the power asserted in the
bill involves all the guilt of usurpation and es
tablishes a precedent of interpretation, ' leveling
all the barriers which limit the powers of the
general government and protect those of the
State governments."
Gordy, page 131: "Hamilton doubtless be
lieved, and rightly, that a bank would be of great
service to the government in performing the

130 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
duties imposed upon it by the Constitution. But
the political purposes to be served by it were
probably quite as important from his point of
view. We remember how unwilling he was to
withhold from the owners of property a means
of defending themselves against the violence
and turbulence of democracy. Hamilton doubt
less wished by the incorporation of a Bank to
array upon the side of the government all of the
wealthy men whose pecuniary interests in the
bank would give them an interest in supporting
the government. But what he probably wished
to accomplish most of all was to bring into play
the implied powers of the Constitution. ' '
Gordy, page 133: "Hamilton, despite Ms
fundamental allegiance to order, was devoted
to liberty, but he thought the centrifugal tend
encies of society were so powerful that liberty
would degenerate into anarchy unless it should
be kept in bounds by a strong government — a
government in wMeh the intelligent and prop
erty owning classes should be given so large a
share of power that they could be used as a dike
against the rising tide of democracy."
Gordy, page 135 : ' ' Jefferson 's opinion began
as follows: 'I consider the foundation of the
Constitution as laid on this ground — that all

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 131
powers not delegated to the United States by
the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the'
States, are reserved to the States or to the peo
ple. To take a single step beyond the boundaries
thus specially drawn around the powers of
Congress, is to take possession of a boundless
field of power no longer susceptible of any defini
tion.' "
Gordy, page 136: "In brief, Jefferson inter
preted this clause as if it had been written as
follows — And Congress shall have power to
pass all laws which may be absolutely and in
dispensably necessary for carrying into effect
the foregoing powers. ' '
As to Hamilton, Gordy, page 137, comments
as follows :
' ' From Ms point of view, to prove the consti
tutionality of the bill providing for a bank, no
more was necessary than to show that a bank
would be useful to the government in borrowing
money or collecting taxes, and that the Constitu
tion had not prohibited Congress from creating

Yet Hamilton did know it to be an actual fact

132 A STUDY IN ALEXANDER HAMILTON
that the federal convention had in the most posi
tive manner flatly refused to grant that very
power to congress, by a very large majority.
Gordy, page 138: "They [Jefferson and
Madison] saw a plain connection between Ham
ilton's speech in the federal convention and his
financial policy and the theory of constitutional
interpretation upon wMch it was based. Upon
such facts as foundation for such opinions it
was certainly not unnatural for Jefferson and
Madison (to say nothing of men of less discern
ment) to conclude that Hamilton and the party
which recognized him as its leader intended to
subvert the Constitution, either openly or prac
tically, by interpretation. ' '
Gordy, page 139: "TMs opinion was
strengthened during the next session of Con
gress when Hamilton submitted to that body
his report on manufactures. According to the
doctrine of that report. Congress has unlimited
power to do anything which can be done by
money to promote the general welfare."
Such an interpretation of the Constitution
conferred upon Congress the power which in his
convention speech Hamilton had declared ought

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 133
to belong to it. According to that speech. Con
gress ought to have the right to pass laws on
any subject whatever ; according to the report.
Congress had the right to pass laws on any sub
ject that requires the application of money. No
wonder Madison declared that according to
that interpretation, the government is no longer
a limited one, possessing enumerated powers,
but an indefinite one, subject to particular re
strictions. Upon the subject of enumerated powers the
Supreme Court has rendered a recent opinion
which is so refreshing that I can not resist the
temptation to quote it. In Hodges vs. U. S., 203
U. S. R. 16, Justice Brewer used these w*ords:
"Notwithstanding the adoption of these three
amendments the national government still re
mains one of enumerated powers and the tenth
amendment wliich reads — 'the powers not dele
gated to the United States by the Constitution
nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved
to the states respectively or to the people' is
not shorn of its vitality. ' ' To that opinion Jus
tice John Marshall Harlan dissented. What a
revival of ancient history is contained in these
words ! Justice Brewer must have found this
nugget of constitutional gold in the rubbish of

134 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
the lumber room of judicial Mstory. What was
he doing in that room? Did he bear a permit
from John Marshall? If not, he was an officious
intruder. Then, he deserves a reprimand for
such a blasphemy on the name and fame of John
Marshall. The following very striMng words are taken
from MacDonald's Jacksonian Democracy:
Page 77 : " The advocates of strict construc
tion in 1828 felt, though not all of them clearly
perceived, that their opponents had shifted their
ground, and that instead of seeking the author
ity for federal action in the words of the Con
stitution, or in a reasonable implication there
from, loose construction had come to mean the
right of the Federal government to do whatever
was not forbidden by the Constitution, provided
the act was deemed to be for the general good.
If such a theory of constitutional construction
were to prevail and the original notion of the
Constitution as a grant of powers, under which
everything not granted was withheld, were to be
replaced by the theory that everything not with
held was granted, the federal government would
be admittedly supreme, and the reserved rights
of the states would speedily become only a form
of words."

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 135
From John Fiske, a Massachusetts man. Har
vard bred, it was hardly to be expected, of all
the men who have written about Hamilton, the
most just and critical estimate of his public char
acter and career and of the aim of Ms political
principles. But such is the fact, as is clear from
his brilliant essay on Hamilton, from wMch I
quote. Fiske's Essays, Vol. 1, "Hamilton," page
115: "He was a devoted friend to free government ;
not, however, to that kind of free government
in which the people rule, but the kind in which
they are ruled by an upper class, with elaborate
safeguards against the abuse of power."
Fiske, page 113 : ' ' He had already pondered
deeply on those subjects and had already con
ceived the scheme of an alliance of interests be
tween the federal government and the moneyed
class of society. One of the instruments by
which the alliance was to be effected was a na
tional bank, which was to be a corporation in
private hands, but to some extent supported
and controlled by congress."
Fiske, page 130 : ' ' Every day showed more
clearly that Hamilton's aim was to insure the
stabiUty of the government through a firm

136 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
alliance with capitalists, and the fear was nat
ural that such a policy, if not held in check,
might end in transforming the government into
a plutocracy — that is to say, a government in
which political power is monopolized by rich
men and employed in furthering their selfish
interests without regard to the general welfare
of the people. Those who expressed such a fear
were more prescient than their Federalist ad
versaries believed them to be, for now, after a
lapse of a hundred years, the gravest danger
that threatens us is precisely such a plutocracy.
It has been one of our national misfortunes that
for three-quarters of a century the mere main
tenance of the Union seemed to call for theories
which, when put into operation, are very far
from making a government that is in the fullest
sense 'of the people, by the people, for the
people.' "The only party that ever extricated itself
from the dilemma and stood at one and the same
time unfiinchingly for the Union and against
paternal government in every form was the
party of Jackson and Van Buren, between 1830
and 1845. But with Hamilton paternal govern
ment was desirable not only as a means of
strengthening the Union but as an end in itself.

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 137
He believed that a part of the people ought to
make laws for the whole. ' '
What did Fiske intend to say, which he lacked
the moral courage to publish to the world ? Only
this, that Hamilton meant that by a national
bank he would build up classes of men, in busi
ness and in politics, who would corrupt the peo
ple, by money to get office, and control the gov
ernment, and by money corrupt the people, and
thus retain control of the government.
Why has this unscrupulous creature been
fondled and dawled like an infant in its swad
dling clothes, guarded from every wind that
blows, by the men that pretend to write history
for the American youth? AVhy is it that his char
acter, public and private, has been protected
from the shafts of truth? This very protection
to him has been the potent means of concealing
from the people his iniquitous doctrine of im
plied powers. "Old Hickory" understood, and
appreciated to the full, the extent of the evil
that Hamilton was spreading through our land.
The rugged old statesman had the courage to
remove the deposits of the bank, thus destroy
ing it.
That act was mobocratic and revolutionary;

138 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
but no man dared to impeach him. That was
the only possible way by wMch the bank could
be "killed" in practical politics.
The leaders of the Democratic party, blinded
by the ignis fatuus of their own principles,
thought that more completely to popularize our
system of government in the states would en
able them to break the force of the doctrine of
implied powers. Consequently they advocated
new constitutions in the different states, under
which the judiciary should be elective. The
Whigs opposed.
TMs movement (to speak in general terms)
began about the year 1845. No matter what
may have been its motive and object, it never did
control the Supreme Court, nor should it have
done so, though this doctrine of implied powers
has been made a part of the federal constitution.
What has been the result of the movement ?
The Democratic party owes its origin and its
continued life to the very nature of our govern
ment. The latter is the mother of the former,
while the Federal, the Whig, and the Republican
parties have all been drawn along different lines,
and represent entirely different purposes and
interests. The Republican party has ever stood
for money and for power and its exercise in

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 139
political affairs, under the fostering care of its
godfather, the Supreme Court of the United
States. And this movement, unintentionally
acting against the true interests and the perma
nent stability of our dual form of government,
culminated in an elective judiciary.
And what has the elective judiciary done for
the country, its patriotism, its idrtue, its hon
esty, and its purity? Nothing — absolutely noth
ing! The movement was in some measure due
also to the desire of the Democratic leaders of
the day to destroy the Whig party, by showing
that the Whig party had no confidence in the peo
ple. The elective system has degraded and debased
the bar, debauched the judiciary, made a law
school of the judicial office, corrupted the poli
tics of the country, and made the great mass of
the people indifferent to the import of current
events. Meanwhile the greed of money, coupled
with indifference as to the character of our
judges, is fast making moral cowardice a trait
of the American people.
A bold, learned, and independent state judi
ciary, beyond the touch of corporations, beyond
the influence of scheming politicians, might have
had the brains to note, and the courage to ex
pose, the constant and increasing attacks upon

140 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
the federal constitution by the federal supreme
court. "What will an elective judiciary do to
protect the states in the enjoyment of their re
served rights under our dual system?" "Wait
till after the next election." And the next elec
tion, and to-morrow, never comes.
May I give a reason for the faith that is in me
on this the most important movement ever
started in American politics, the most radical,
the most far reaching, and the most fraught with
evil to the American people, with immediate dis
aster now at hand — disaster to our system of
government ? It is absolutely clear to my mind,
if Mstory be a reliable guide, that its effect will
be soon to turn over to the federal supreme court
our entire government. That court, having al
ready introduced into our political system the
prerogative of the crown, under the doctrine of
implied powers, will soon claim the power and
the right to control the official action of the chief
executive of our republic, will rob the state
courts of all jurisdiction over corporations by
a fiction of the law, — a fiction of the law origi
nated by itself for that very purpose, and will
soon announce the principle that this govern
ment is not a compact between the states, that
its sovereignty does not rest in the people of

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 141
the different states as political bodies, but in
the federal government, whose powers are to be
found enumerated and stated in the judicial
opinions of the Supreme Court of the United
States. A state judiciary, independent in its origin,
unamenable to current politics, unapproachable
by corporations through their influence on elec
tions, as firm and as fixed in office as the judges
of the federal supreme court, would have pro
tected the states from such opinions. But, over
come by intense desire to retain office, they are
unable to emancipate themselves from the domi
nating power of the wire-puller and the political
boss. The result: the office has become politi
cal in its tenure, and the state judges themselves
are politicians, — a condition so disastrous to the
principles of the old Democratic party that we
are confronted with this serious question. Has
the Democratic party any principle? At the
time that we deplore this result we more greatly
lament the other, that the state governments are
at last entirely at the will of the federal supreme
court, by whose decisions every point now
mooted in a state court can easily be made a fed
eral question. TMs means that the ultimate
jurisdiction of the case is in the federal courts.

142 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
What is to be the end of this destruction
of state sovereignty the finite mind of man may
not foresee. But if Mstory does repeat itself,
the revolution of 1776, in its fundamental prin
ciples, will have to be fought again. If the act
of Jackson was mobocratic in its nature, as it
unquestionably was, it was a mob of one man
who had the courage of his conviction. If he
broke down the doctrine of implied powers in
that instance, he could not get at the federal su
preme court in any other way, the court that has
maintained the doctrine of implied powers from
that day to the present. Who will lead the
"mob" when it again undertakes to rid our
courts of this violent usurpation of rights that
do not belong to the United States through any
l^rinciple ?
But the present condition of affairs in our
states courts and in our practical politics may
not remain in statu quo — they must progress,
developing along present lines, unless arrested
and thown back to the Constitution. Can the
present condition result in any movement that
will not inevitably produce a "mob" or a revo
lution? Mobs when successful become known in
history as revolutions; when unsuccessful, as
unlawful assemblies.

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 143
When considered from the standpoint of his
tory, why should an American or an Englishman
stand aghast, looking with horror at such an
assembly of men determined to right their
wrongs and defend their rights and protect
their liberties? For what is the history of the
Anglo-Saxon race, from the dawning of the day
when it emerged from the Black Forest of Ger
many to the present time, but the Mstory of a
mob? Let us take a passing glance at the well-estab
lished facts of recorded history. The Barons at
Runnymede were a mob ; then there was the be
ginning of government according to law enacted
by a legislative assembly. Simon de Montfort
led a mob ; then there was the beginning of the
English House of Commons; Wat Tyler led a
mob ; then there was the origin of the great com
mon people — a people known only to the Eng
lish-speaking race. Charles I was beheaded by a
mob, and the divine right of kings passed away,
never again to be known in human history, and
with it prerogative of kings. Oliver Cromwell
led a mob; then followed the first assertion of
all true governmental principles by the common
people — that government rests on the consent
of the governed, from wMch comes that other

144 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
great principle, the personality of man, which
is abroad in the world to-day. The convention
parliament was a mob wMch drove King James
from England ; then the English monarchy be
came a constitutional government, and the pow
ers and rights of the people have been steadily
increasing from that day to tMs. A mob threw
tea into Boston harbor ; then began the Ameri
can Revolution. George Washington led a mob ;
and the American colonies became sovereign
states. The Declaration of Independence was
promulgated by a mob, and its voice is yet being
heard, re-echoing around the globe, giving vital
ity to the dead rights of the dead. Abraham
Lincoln led a mob, and, thanks be to Almighty
God, not a human being on the habitable globe
that speaks the English language as his native
tongue is a slave to-day.
The federal courts have carried their enforce
ment of Hamilton's principles far enough. The
American people have had enough of the bril
liant bastard.

CHAPTER VII
The doctrine of state rights is beginning once
more to show its face to the American people.
One may hear its utterance on many unexpected
occasions, from many men who were scarcely
expected to touch that question in their public
utterances. The doctrine of state sovereignty
has not been wholly overthrown; home rule in
principle is not yet dead. An elective judiciary
may not be trusted. The people must look to
themselves for the protection of their rights.
God in His providence will yet send this people
a leader who will lead them from their house of
bondage and wrest our great federal constitu
tion from the treasonable grasp of the federal
supreme court of the United States and teach
the members of that court the true meaning of
their oath of office. Why does the possession
of power, growing by what it feeds on, so debase
the human character, so obscure the boundaries
between right and wrong, and so blunt the hu
man conscience? May man never be trusted?
Must he always be watched? "Eternal vigi
lance is the price of liberty." History does re-
145

146 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
peat itself. If the states have their reserved
rights, then the doctrine of implied powers has
no place under a written constitution. If the
doctrine of implied powers is correct, then the
states will, ex necessitate rei, be compelled to
exercise themselves as subordinate authorities —
to quote Hamilton, a sort of local police, — sine
qua non. Order will yet come out of all this con
fusion, although we read in our public prints
of one distinguished politician publicly advocat
ing government through the courts, and of an
other advocating governmental control and own-
ersMp of railroads, wMch have already blotted
state lines out of existence. These words by
Franklin in referring to the federal constitu
tion no longer seem to be the pessimistic utter
ance of an old man who had struggled in vain
for Ms liberty: "I am apprehensive, there
fore, — perhaps too apprehensive, — that the gov
ernment of these states may in future times end
in a monarchy." Admit the existence of gov
ernment through the courts, in what would the
stability of it consist? In the opinion of the
judges then forming the court? In the opinions
of subsequent judges overruling the opinions of
their predecessors ? They would have the right
to overrule their predecessors' opinions. The

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 147
government would be overturned. HoW? By
the stroke of a pen or by a few uttered words.
Suppose the federal government takes all the
railroads by purchase or assumes control of
them under the interstate commerce clause in
the Constitution, which it has the right to do if
tMs doctrine of implied powers is correct, what
would be the result in tMs the first quarter of
the present century? In the interests of peace
and good government the executive would sim
ply announce to this people, as Cromwell an
nounced to Ms people, that it was best for Mm to
continue in office, then proclaim Mmself pro
tector of the United States. One banquet, in
jest, has already been held to proclaim the com
ing of our first king. ' ' Coming events cast their
shadows before," and "many a true word is
spoken in jest."
What can prevent the absolute consolidation
of our government if the government should
control all our railroads? Centralization of all
governmental power at Washington would be
an actual necessity to tMs people, because in
terstate roads would not alone be involved, but
all the roads, even those strictly and geograpM-
cally confined to a state, would come witMn the
grasp of tMs all-powerful necessity. What

148 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
would that form of government be but a mon
archy, with a thin transparent varnish of de
mocracy, so called, or republicanism, in name, but
not in reality? This interstate clause is the only
clause in the federal constitution from which the
doctrine of implied powers could be deduced
or applied with any pretense to justification in
even illogical argument. And this clause will
yet be invoked in aid of this scheme when the
people have been more corrupted by money and
when they have become more indifferent to the
preservation of their political rights and their
personal liberties because they have money both
in their pockets and in the banks.
John Fiske, in his Critical Periods of Ameri
can History, page 237, utters these prophetic
words :
"Our federal government has indeed shown
a strong tendency to encroach upon the province
of the state governments, especially since our
late civil war. Too much centralization is our
danger to-day, as the weakness of the federal
tie was our danger a century ago. The rule
of the Federalist party was needed in 1789,
as the rule of the Republican party was needed
in 1861, to put a curb upon centrifugal tend-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 149
encies. But after federalism had fairly done its
great work, at the beginning of the nineteenth
century, it was well that the administration of
our national affairs should pass into the hands
of the party to which Thomas Jefferson and
Samuel Adanis belonged and wMch Madison, in
his calm, statesmanlike wisdom, had come to
join. And now that in our own day the disrup
tive powers have been even more thoroughly and
effectually overcome, it is time for the principles
of that party to be reasserted with fresh em
phasis. If the day should ever arrive (wMch
God forbid) when the people of the different
parts of our country shall allow their local af
fairs to be administered by prefects sent from
Washington, and when the self-government of
the states shall have been so far lost as that of
the departments of France, or even so far as
that of the counties of England, — on that day
the progressive political career of the American
people will have come to an end and the hopes
that have been built upon it for the future hap
piness and prosperity of mankind will be
wrecked forever."
Let the doctrine of implied powers, govern
ment through the courts, and the ownersMp of

150 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
the railroads by the government, — a revival and
a combination of Cicero, Csesar and Claudius, —
unite their infiuence, money, and power, and
that day will be here. And is it not to the mone
tary interests of these three forces to combine?
And when combined, who may resist them ? Only
a revolution more terrible than the French Revo
lution. And if the federal supreme court is true
to itself, to Alexander Hamilton, and to John
Marshall, such a combination would be sus
tained by that court. Its love of power, coupled
with the knowledge that judges cannot be im
peached and justly punished for opinions judi
cially uttered, would nerve them to be true to
their past and to their idols. Pertinent to tMs
subject, George Mason {Madison Papers, Vol. 2,
page 1065) uttered these wise and thoughtful
words in the convention : ' ' From the nature of
man, we may be sure that those who have power
in their hands will not give it up while they can
retain it. On the contrary, we know that they
will always, when they can, rather increase it."
I believe Charles V is the only monarch known
to history that ever resigned a crown.
The Enghsh origin of the doctrine of implied
powers is an established fact in English his
tory. Its American origin is too well Imown to

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 151
justify a current comment as to the date of its
beginning. We know why it was transplanted
from England and brought to this country; we
know the object of its resurrection from dead
history. We Imow what it has done and what
it is now in the free country whose noble men in
1776 fought, bled, and died that it might never
again assert itself in our government. I quote
from Gordy 's Political Parties, Vol. II, page 1:
"The ship of state was driving before a ter
rible storm when James Madison took the helm
in 1809.
"The Republicans had used their weapon of
peace against France and England and it had
broken in their hands. They had gained control
of the government because of their champion
ship of the liberty of the individual, because of
their opposition to every measure that tended to
increase the powers of the general government
at the expense of those of the states. To pro
tect the liberty of the individual at all hazards,
to vindicate the capacity of the people to govern
themselves, was their special mission. Could
they accomplish their mission and at the same
time act on the theory that the United States
was a nation ? Were the liberty of the individual

152 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
and the centralization of power required by the
assertion of nationahty compatible? The Re
publicans [now Democrats] had maintained that
they were not. Hence their theory of the central
government — the foreign branch of our govern
mental system, the domestic branch being vested
in the government of the states."
Read between the lines, and you will have
what this author ought to have written. This
horrible and imperial doctrine was then under
stood, feared, denounced, and fought success
fully before the people; but that contest could
not enter the federal supreme court and oust
from office judges who were striving to build up
a government outside the Constitution that
would control at their despotic will both the for
eign and the domestic branches of our dual sys
tem. Their constant assertion of this doc
trine is nothing less than an open declaration
of war against our dual system of government,
against the rights of our citizens under the sov
ereignty of the states, against the rights of the
states as pohtical sovereignties and as original
parties to the federal compact as fixed by the
federal constitution and as explained by the de
bates of the federal convention. But a day of
reckoning will come. "The mills of the gods

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 153
grind slowly, but they grind exceeding small."
The object of this doctrine as explained by its
introduction into our dual system was simply
to add to the powers of the federal government
— to which no limit could be fixed if submitted to
by the states; powers so added in the future
would destroy all the rights of the states, unless
checked in its growth, fixed in its limitations,
and thoroughly understood in its application,
both in political and in fiscal affairs. What pow
ers have the states to check its growth or to fix
its limitations? None — absolutely none. Its
growth, development, limitations, and applica
tions depend exclusively upon the opinions of
the federal supreme court, and that court, one
of the three departments into which our system
of government is divided, is not amenable to
either the executive or the legislative depart
ment. The will of the federal supreme court is
the law. Its opinions are the evidences of the
operation of the doctrine of implied powers.
Before quoting from Justice Gray's most re
markable opinion in Quillard vs. Greenman
(Vol. 110, U. S. R., page 421), in many points
possibly the most remarkable ever given to the
country by the Supreme Court of the United
States (it goes to the very verge of pronouncing
the rights of the states and their citizens as

154 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
merely the spontaneous and unmerited gifts of
the federal government, which that government
has the right to withhold at any time, or to pro
Mbit the enjoyment and exercise thereof at its
discretion), I quote three articles of the Consti
tution itself :
"The Constitution and the laws of the United
States wMch shall be made in pursuance thereof
— shall be the supreme law of the land. ' '
' ' The enumeration in the Constitution of cer
tain rights shall not be construed to deny or dis
parage others retained by the people. ' '
"The powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it
to the States are reserved to the states respect
ively or to the people."
I here offer a few definitions of the word ' ' dis
parage," used in the second of the articles just
quoted, as given by Webster:
"To dishonor by a comparison with what is
inferior, to lower in rank or estimation ; to un
dervalue ; to bring reproach on ; to vilify ; to de
base; syn. — to decry; depreciate; undervalue;
vilify; reproach; detract from; derogate from;
degrade. ' '
It would indeed be a curiosity in judicial logic

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 155
if the federal supreme court would undertake to
reconcile some of its opinions with both these
articles in the same argument. I have frequently
seen distant references to Art. 10 in the courts'
opinions, but never once to Art. 9, so far as I
now recollect, — and surely I would not have for
gotten if the opinion had made the most distant
allusion to the use and force of that word — Dis
parage. Vol. 110, U. S. R., page 438 : "No question of
the scope and extent of the implied powers of
Congress under the Constitution can be satisfac
torily discussed without repeating much of the
reasoning of Chief Justice Marshall in the great
judgment in McCuUough vs. Maryland (4
Wheat. 316), by which the power of Congress
to incorporate a bank was demonstrated and
affirmed, notwithstanding the Constitution
does not enumerate, among the powers granted,
that of estabhshing a bank or creating a cor
poration. ' '
Chief Justice Marshall did not demonstrate —
nor could he demonstrate — that Congress under
the Constitution had the power to create a bank
or any other corporation, for that power was
positively refused to Congress by a very large

156 A STUDY IN ALEXANDER HAMILTON
majority, and Chief Justice Marshall never was
other than the exponent or expositor on the
bench of Alexander Hamilton's English, uncon
stitutional and radical political opinions. This
statement by Justice Gray is a perfect illustra
tion of the intellectual cowardice and moral
slavery of the court to Hamilton's and to Mar
shall 's political opinions. How could John Mar
shall demonstrate that to be a fact which was not
true — affirm the existence of a right wMch had
been refused and the exercise of a power posi
tively and indisputedly withheld? Will that
court never do its own thinking? Some text
writers have gone to far as to excuse some of
the erroneous opinions on the theory that the
Madison Papers had not then been published,
consequently that Gray was unacquainted with
the important facts contained in them that bore
directly on Ms opinions. But possibly Justice
Gray had read them. If he had, they made no
impression on his mind.
Justice Gray makes this quotation from the
Chief Justice's opinion in the McCullough-
Maryland case : ' ' Let the end be legitimate, let
it be witMn the scope of the Constitution, and
all means which are appropriate, wMch are
plainly adapted to that end, which are not pro-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 157
hibited,* but consist with the letter and spirit of
the Constitution, are constitutional."
Analyze the loose language of that sentence.
Who is to be the judge of the scope of the Con
stitution and define that compact? The facts
which underlie its formation or the opinion of
a court that disregards those facts — in fact, log
ically denies their existence. "Let the end be
legitimate. ' ' Legitimate for what ? For a pur
pose not granted, but prohibited, to Congress.
Again, the opinion is the sole source from which
to ascertain if that end be legitimate. " "* * *
and all means which are appropriate, which are
plainly adapted to that end, which are not pro
hibited * * * " Alexander Hamilton knew
that the right and the power to create a bank
had been most positively prohibited to congress
by a large majority of the states. If appro
priate, and ;^lainly adapted to that end, how may
congress usurp the power to create a bank, and
John Marshall decide it to be constitutional,
when it had been prohibited? This instance is
not the only one in Marshall 's political opinions
in which, bhndly following Hamilton, Ms argu
ment logically refutes itself.
After referring to Elliott's Debates and the
Madison Papers, Judge Gray concludes the
?Italics are mine. — F. T. F.

158 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
paragraph of Ms argument to which I have re
ferred with tMs remarkable statement:
"As an illustration of the danger of giving
too much weight, upon such a question, to the
debates and votes in the Convention, it may also
be observed that propositions to authorize Con
gress to grant charters of incorporation for
national objects were strongly opposed, espe
cially as regarded banks, and defeated. The
power of Congress to emit bills of credit as well
as to incorporate national banks is now clearly
established by decisions to which we shall
presently refer."
If the proposition to incorporate a bank was
defeated, where did the power come from? It
was enacted, enumerated, and granted by Alex
ander Hamilton; it was adopted and approved
by John Marshall, and the decisions to which
Justice Gray shall refer were each and all de
livered after "Old Hickory" was dead and
buried. What is the danger in referring to the de
bates and votes in the federal convention that
formed the Constitution? Can a constitutional
question that relates to the powers of govern-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 159
ment under a written constitution be correctly
decided unless the consideration of that question
is based on the facts of the history from wMch
it springs and from which it gets its life, — its
privilege and its authority to do this act or that,
or to pass this law or that? The facts of Ms
tory as recorded in the Madison Papers are the
womb from which the constitution was born.
They, and only they, are its unerring interpre
ters. And why have they not been consulted and
followed as a guide by the federal supreme
court ? Because they would have checked the in
crease of the court's judicial power and su
premacy and have stopped the usurpations of
jurisdiction of matter and things which of right
belonged to the states. Why did Congress not
create a bank — a national bank — after "Old
Hickory" removed the deposits, until after the
war between the states, if a bank was legitimate,
appropriate, within the scope of the Constitu
tion, and plainly adapted to some good end?
Johnston, in American Politics, page 124, gives
the reason for the removal of the deposits,
among them, "that the bank's funds had been
largely used for political purposes," "that its
four government directors had been systematic
ally kept from knowledge of its management,"

160 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
and, on page 126, "that the majority report com
plained that the powers of the committee had
been so restricted by the bank that a full investi
gation had been impossible. ' '
One more citation from Justice Gray, p. 450 :
"To quote once more from the judgment
in McCuUough vs. Maryland, 'Where the law
is not prohibited and is really calculated to ef
fect any of the objects entrusted to the govern
ment, to undertake here to inquire into the de
gree of its necessity would be to pass the line
which circumscribes the judicial department and
to tread on legislative ground. ' ' '
Here is a complete and indisputable refuta
tion of Chief Justice Marshall's entire argu
ment, for, as the power to charter a bank was
positively prohibited to Congress, its necessity
could not be inquired into. What more can a
strict constructionist demand than this state
ment? John Marshall assumed himself to be a
(congress by his judgment. TMs celebrated de
cision was rendered in the year 1819. Jackson
removed the deposits in the year 1833, and by
that act repealed John Marshall's judicial legis-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 161
lative enactment. John Marshall died in the
year 1835. Andrew Jackson by his heroic act
usurped less power and authority than did
John Marshall by his legislative enactment. The
former ended where it began; the baleful in
fluence of the latter still survives.
Why did the government not need a bank in
those many and turbulent years after the old
bank was blotted out of existence ? Did not poli
ticians need money? Did not the government
need a corruption fund to give power and in
fluence to the wealthy classes and to buy offices
for the Federalists throughout the land? What
was the doctrine of implied powers (a political
bastard like its father ; but, imlike its father, it
knew its father) doing during all these years?
Was it strengthening its vital forces by that long
rest? It is refreshing to turn from such judicial
stuff as the argument of Justice Gray, which the
court allowed to go forth to the bar as its opin
ion, to the bold, manly, powerful, and patriotic
dissenting opinion of Justice Field, of which
the opening sentence is as follows : ' ' From the
judgment of the court in this case, and from all
the positions advanced in its support, I dis
sent." Another quotation: "There will be

162 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
many who will adhere to the teacMngs and abide
by the faith of their fathers. ' ' Possibly this man
had old-fashioned Calvinistic blood in Ms veins.
These questions are sufficient to this argu
ment. They expose the ambition and the object
of Hamilton's bank project and Marshall's ex
position of this his imported doctrine.
"But [Field, U. S. R., p. 466] beyond and
above all the objections wMch I have stated to
the decision recognizing a power in Congress
to impart the legal tender quality to the notes
of the government, is my objection to the rule
of construction adopted by the court to reach its
conclusions, a rule which fully carried out would
change the Whole nature of our Constitution and
break down the barriers wMch separate a gov
ernment of limited from one of unlimited
powers. "When the Constitution came before the con
ventions of the several States for adoption, ap
prehension existed that other powers than those
designated might be claimed, and it led to the
first ten amendments. When these were pre
sented to the States they were preceded by a
preamble, stating that the conventions of a num
ber of the States had at the time of adopting the

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 163
Constitution expressed a desire, 'in order to
prevent misconception or abuse of its powers
that further declatory and restrictive clauses
should be added.' One of them is found in the
Tenth Amendment, which declares that 'the
powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor proMbited by it to the States,
are reserved to the States respectively or to the
people.' The framers of the Constitution, as
I have said, were profoundly impressed with the
evils which had resulted from the vicious legis
lation of the States making notes legal tender,
and they determined that such a power should
not exist any longer. They therefore proMbited
the States from exercising it, and they refused
to grant it to the new government that they had
created. Of what purpose is it then to refer to
the exercise of the power by the absolute or by
the limited governments of Europe or by the
States previous to our Constitution? Congress
can exercise no power hy virtue of any sup
posed inherent sovereignty in the general gov
ernment.* Indeed, it may be doubted whether
the power can be correctly said to appertain to
sovereignty in any proper sense as an attribute
of an independent political community. The
power to commit violence, perpetuate injustice,
?Italics are mine. — F. T. F.

164 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
take private property by force without compen
sation to the owner, and compel the receipt of
promises to pay in place of money, may be exer
cised, as it often has been, by irresponsible au
thority ; but it can not be considered as belong
ing to a government founded upon law. But he
that as it may, there is no such thing as a power
of inherent sovereignty in the government of the
United States. It is a government of delegated
powers, supreme within its prescribed sphere,
but powerless outside of it. In this country sov
ereignty resides in the people, and Congress can
exercise no power which they have not, by their
Constitution, entrusted to it; all else is with
held.* "It seems, however, to be supposed that, as
the power was taken from the States, it could
not have been intended that it should disappear
entirely, and therefore it must in some way ad
here to the general government, notwithstand
ing the Tenth Amendment and the nature of the
Constitution. '^The doctrine, that a power not expressly
forbidden may be exercised, would, as I have
observed, change the character of our govern
ment. If I have read the Constitution aright,
if there is any weight to he given to the uniform
?Italics are mine. — F. T. F.

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON 165
teachings of our great jurists and of commen
taries previous to the late civil war, the true
doctrine is the very opposite of this.* If the
power is not in terms granted, and is not neces
sary and proper for the exercise of a power
which is thus granted, it does not exist. And in
determining what measures may be adopted in
executing the powers granted, CMef Justice
Marshall declares that they must be appropriate,
plainly adapted to the end, not prohibited, and
consistent with the letter and spirit of the Con-
stitution.-f Now, all through that instrument we
find hmitations upon the power, both of the
general government and the State governments,
so as to prevent oppression and injustice."
Comment on this master-argument is unneces
sary. Discussion will not strengthen its force ;
beyond all doubt the argument is the ablest in
behalf of strict construction ever made in this
country by judge, lawyer, or statesman. It does
not refute itself, as do so many of John Mar
shall's opinions, when critically analyzed.
Take the conclusion reached by Justice Gray
and accepted by the court as law, constitutional
?Italics are mine. — F. T. F. titalics are Justice
Fields'.

166 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
law in tMs country, which pretends to have a
written constitution, and what is it ? Only tMs :
any power or authority or right exercised, or
claimed to be exercised, by right in any foreign
land, under its form of government, unless each
and all were expressly denied hae verba to our
government, federal and state, by our Constitu
tion, can be constitutionally exercised by our
government, and a law passed by congress for
that purpose is constitutional by virtue of the
doctrine of implied powers. Neither Charles I
nor James ever stretched their prerogatives as
king of England further than did Justice Gray
this English doctrine of "implied powers," so
called in mock deference to our written Constitu
tion, and into which he injected by his argu
ment and illustrations the customs and powers
of foreign countries and their governments. As
I have said, the doctrine of state rights is once
more beginning to attract the attention of our
public men. Soon it will begin to disturb our
political affairs. Although the stiletto of the
judicial assassin has been thrust into its back
again and again, still it lives after its long rest.
Its next conflict will be with the doctrine of im
plied powers.
Upon the side of that doctrine will be arrayed

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 167
the power of the Supreme Court of the United
States, with the usurpation and assertion of
powers prohibited by the federal convention
which formed our written constitution. Upon
the side of state rights will be arrayed, in all
their greatness, those two grand fundamental
principles that are imbedded in the government
in the affairs of man, of God himself, whether
they relate to law, politics, or to religion, — ^that
all government rests on the consent of the gov
erned and on the personality of man. I repeat,
John Calvin — and John Calvin alone — discov
ered the personality of man; he found man a
slave, and he made Mm a freeman ; he found man
a subject, and he made him a citizen. And from
this noble, fundamental, irresistible principle is,
by an unerring logic, deduced that man has the
right to govern Mmself and to establish Ms own
government, that when established it has no
power, right, nor authority not granted by him.
The doctrine of state rights is part and parcel
of our constitution, wMch is not only a compact,
but a contract between the states composing tMs
federal republic, and without wMch tMs republic
would not be a federal government, but a mon
archy, with an elective sovereign as its executive
head. The doctrine of implied powers is outside

168 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON
the written constitution, and that compact has
no provision that calls for its operative exercise.
It justly belongs to a monarchy, of which the
executive head is a king by inheritance. In the
approaching conflict between these doctrines the
leader of the constitutional government forces
will not be a political quack, nor a political ad
vertiser, nor a political speculator or broker.
Hamilton's fame as a statesman rests on his
resurrection of the prerogative of the English
king under the form and name of the doctrine
of implied powers. In those brilliant essays in
The Federalist in WMch he himself combined
the characters of the diplomatic wire-puller and
the accomplished demagogue, concealing each
from the pubhc eye by the charm and fascination
of English and compact logic, I find that he him
self, unmindful, or rather not knowing, that he
would yet call this doctrine into existence, has in
these very essays given to the thoughtful student
of constitutional law the ablest refutation of
tMs doctrine. I quote from No. LXXVIII.
' ' The complete independence of the courts of
justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Con
stitution. By a limited Constitution, I under
stand one which contains certain specific excep-

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 169
tions to the legislative authority; such, for
instance, as that it shall pass no bills of at
tainder, no ex post facto laws, and the like. Lim
itations of tMs kind can be preserved in practice
no other way than through the medium of courts
of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all
acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Con
stitution void. Without this Sill the reservations
of particular rights or privileges would amount
to notMng * * * It is far more rational to
suppose that the courts were designed to be an
intermediate body between the people and the
legislature, in order, among other things, to
keep the latter within the limits assigned to their
autiiority. The interpretation of the laws is the
proper and peculiar province of the courts. A
Constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded
by the judges, as a fundamental law. It there
fore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning,
as well as the meaning of any particular act
proceeding from the legislative body. If there
should happen to be an irreconcilable variance
between the two, that wMch has the superior ob
ligation and validity ought, of course, to be pre
ferred ; or in other words, the Constitution ought
to be preferred to the statute ; the intention of
the people to the intention of their agents.

170 A STUDY IN ALEXANDEB HAMILTON
' ' Nor does this conclusion by any means sup
pose a superiority of the judicial to legislative
power. It only supposes that the power of the
people is superior to both; and that where the
will of the legislature, declared in its statutes,
stands in opposition to that of the people de
clared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be
governed by the latter, rather than the former."
The right or power to incorporate was one of
those "certain specified exceptions" to the leg
islative authority and "the like" mentioned by
the distinguished Federalist. No matter what
the occasion or its demands, Alexander Hamil
ton always obeyed the injunction of the Apostle
Paul — "to be all things to all men, hoping
thereby to gain some," and always wrencMn.g
it by his conduct in its application from its true
interpretation. I will close my argument with a
short quotation from Bancroft's History of the
Constitution, Vol. 2, page 9 :
"That all ijower not granted to the general
government remained with the states was the
opinion of every member of the Convention —
but they held it a work of supererogation to
place in the Constitution an express recognition
of the reservation."

A STUDY IN ALEXANDEE HAMILTON 171
What a painful proof of the finite mind of
man !
I have now passed in what I beheve to be a
just rcAdew of Alexander Hamilton ; his private
life; his character; his theories of government
as they are to be found in the Madison Papers,
the notes of wMch were examined by Mm and
admitted by him to be correct ; his argument in
behalf of our written constitution in The Fed
eralist, by wMch he contended and proved that
our government was a federal, not a national,
government, and how in a moment—in the
twinkling of an eye — he Mcked his theories out
of Ms pathway as loathsome weeds as soon as he
became Secretary of the Treasury ; his conduct
and measures proposed by him as Secretary of
the Treasury, their purpose, their aim and their
object, their influence and their effect through
our federal courts upon our government and its
political affairs.
And what is the logical conclusion? I answer
my own question, thus : In intellect Alexander
Hamilton was a giant; in character Alexander
Hamilton was a moral weakhng.

3 9002 00545

^