Alexander Hamilton Arguments

Words: 478
Pages: 2

The National Bank
In 1791, Alexander Hamilton proposed for our new country to establish a national bank. President Washington asked for both the opinion of Thomas Jefferson, as well as Hamilton’s argument. Both men had valid points, but ultimately, Washington agreed with Hamilton and the national bank was created. It was right for Washington to support Alexander Hamilton rather than Thomas Jefferson on the matter of a national bank because the constitution did not forbid it, it stabilized our currency, and was another opportunity for unity throughout the states.
Hamilton was legally in the right for creating a national bank was because nowhere in the constitution did it say that he didn’t have the power to. However, this was one of the key arguments in Jefferson’s case. Jefferson said that the constitution must be taken literally and there was no authorization for this matter (Kennedy,
…show more content…
Unity between the states was crucial to our success as a country. The national bank created a little more unity which indirectly made our nation so prosperous. However,this did not come right away. The majority of southern states were against it, and were angry that they had to pay more towards the national debt (Davies, minneapolisfed.org). Eventually, the central bank forced our nation to come together a little more than it had been. The Constitution not mentioning anything about it, the printing of paper money, and the unity brought to our states are three reasons why Washington made the correct choice in supported the national bank. Jefferson’s arguments were not compelling enough to change Washington’s favor of Hamilton. The new currency also gave us more stability, and a better sense of unity was shared amongst the colonists. No one could say what would have happened if the national bank was not created, but the country’s economy and debt could have been much different than what it turned out to