Despite their different views of the government and the economy, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were two great leaders in United States history. Throughout their political lives, they never stopped debating and representing what they believed in. People disagreeing with the government and the government’s different views on issues led to the rise of political parties in the 1790’s. Thomas Jefferson spoke out in the early 90’s with a strict interpretation of the Constitution and his views on the bank. “To take a simple step beyond the boundaries… s to take possession of a boundless fiels of power” (Document A). It is evident that powers are delegated based on the Constitution and accepting those limits is the foundation of the United States. He believes the bank is not favored by the Constitution. Jefferson obviously had different opinions than Alexander Hamilton. In 1790, Jefferson wrote, “… Hamilton was not only a monarchist, but in support of a monarchy based upon corruption” (Document 1). That quote foreshadows their differences that would be clearly known in the future.
Alexander Hamilton, on the other hand, has a more loose interpretation of the Constitution. He basically believes that proof is needed that the government is sovereign because, he said, “the power which can create a supreme law of the land, in any case, it doubtless sovereign as such case” (Document B). He believes that all laws made in the United States under the Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land. Hamilton also accepts the growing tension. “Mr. Jefferson is at the head of a faction, decidedly hostile to me and my administration…
Mr. Jefferson displays his dislike of funding the debt… Jefferson and his supporters are unsound and dangerous… ” (Document 2). The growing gap between these two men and their opinions creates tension. The people of the country have to choose to take sides as factions begin to establish. The government tries to stop the people’s uprising by establishing rules and boundaries. For example, the Sedition Act. “If any person shall unlawfully combine or conspire together with intent to oppose any measure of the government of the United States.. e or they shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor” (Document F). That means that people against the government would then be convicted, punished, fined, and imprisoned. The Kentucky Resolutions focus was on how all the basic freedoms remain but, “may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom” (Document H). It is apparent that the government is trying to be as strict as possible without violating the Constitution. Rhode Island responds to those kinds of violations, calling them “an infraction of the United States Constitution” (Document I).
George Hay, a member of the Virginia State Legislature, in 1799 wrote “… the Sedition bill is an abridgement of its liberty, and expressly forbidden by the Constitution” (Document 7). Thomas Jefferson, in 1794, said, “… the public’s detestation of the excise tax is universal, and has now associated to it a detestation of the government” (Document 3). There he flat out admitted to the people’s dislike of how things were. It was almost unanimous that everything was in disarray. John Allen of Connecticut, however, thought differently, in support of the Sedition Act. If there ever was a nation which required a law of this king, it is this… which print the most shameless falsehoods against the representatives of the people” (Document 6). The differences, the trying to squeeze around the Constitution, the violation of freedoms, the government’s turmoil, all this chaos led to political parties. Thomas Jefferson noted, “The two political sects have arisen within the United States” (Document 5). People from all different backgrounds have different views. That is what caused the establishment of political parties and a more diverse United States.