What Was The Difference Between Hamilton And The Federalist Party

The Federalist Party believed there was a constitutional necessity for national infrastructure, whereas the Republican Party believed increased infrastructure posed a threat to the people’s liberty; however, the war of 1812 caused the Republican Party to realize the practicality of Hamiltonian principles. The Federalist party cast a vision of free government based off unity, whereas The Republican party cast a vision of popular self-government. Regarding practical policy, the Federalist Party saw the necessity of establishing infrastructure. Led by Hamilton, the party promoted the establishment of a national bank alongside of increased resource allocation to allow flourishing manufacturing in the United States. Understanding that erecting a national back did not directly fall into the authority of the Federal Government, Hamilton carefully examines the “necessary and proper” clause and
He asserts that “no government has a right to do merely what it pleases” (178). Hamilton argues that the establishment of a national bank will not violate the rights of the people and does fall under the necessary and proper clause. Alternatively, Jefferson believed that the necessary and proper clause did not provide sufficient support for the establishment of a national bank. Jefferson claims that, “The Constitution allows only the means which are ‘necessary,’ not those which are merely ‘convenient’ for effecting the enumerated powers” (194). Since the Constitution did not allocate the power to the national government to erect a national bank, Jefferson believed that the problems without a national bank could be solved by banks from individual states. The principle manifested in this differing opinion is the constitutionality