tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6564473.post1373395979881423910..comments2024-01-15T05:32:24.873-05:00Comments on The Jon Rowe Archives: Jonathan Rowehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6564473.post-4805063705430760842007-08-24T17:09:00.000-04:002007-08-24T17:09:00.000-04:00Here are passages from a letter Hamilton wrote in ...Here are passages from a letter Hamilton wrote in 1803, a year before his death. The letter contradicts Morris's claims and implicitly, Madison's report of Hamilton's view, Madison having become a personal as well as a political enemy after he allied himself with Jefferson. Anyway, here goes: <BR/><BR/>The highest toned propositions, which I made in the Convention, were for a President, Senate, and Judges during good behavior--a house of representatives for three years. Though I would have enlarged the Legislative power of the General Government, yet I never contemplated the abolition of State Governments; but on the contrary, they were, in some particulars, constituent parts of my plan.<BR/><BR/>"This plan was, in my conception conformable with the strict theory of a Government purely republican; the essential criteria of which are that the principal organs of the Executive and Legislative departments be elected by the people and hold their offices by a responsible and temporary, or defeasible, tenure ...If I sinned against Republicanism, Mr. Madison is no less guilty...<BR/><BR/>"I may truly then say, that I never proposed either a President or a Senate for life, and that I neither recommended nor meditated the annihilation of the State Governments....<BR/><BR/>[He protests that it was his understanding during the early days of the convention that members would offer "experimental propositions" might be made in the spirit of "free investigation."]<BR/><BR/>"Accordingly, it is a fact, that my final opinion was against an Executive during good behavior, on account of the increased danger to the public tranquility incident to the election of a Magistrate of this degree of permanancy. In the plan of a Constitution, which I drew up, while the convention was sitting, and which I communicated to Mr. Madison about the close of it, perhaps a day or two after, the Office of President has no greater duration than for three years."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Letter to Timothy Pickering, Sept. 16, 1803 (Library of America edition, pp. 1002-03Enlightened Despothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10166866431234701068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6564473.post-73526955254833736832007-08-20T14:47:00.000-04:002007-08-20T14:47:00.000-04:00Thanks for this post Jon, I found some info on Ham...Thanks for this post Jon, I found some info on Hamilton from hercules mulligan, Awesome!<BR/><BR/>Hamilton's brilliance was beyond any of his contemporaries. He realized a monarchy was wrong, and that Republicanism was good, but that there was something better. He realized the people needed to be virtueous, and if so, a stronger executive would work.<BR/><BR/>In my opinion, he far above any other American that ever lived. <BR/><BR/>He was locked into that duel, he couldn't get out of it. He did the next best thing and fired his shot above Burr, and hoped Burr missed, he didn't miss.Our Founding Truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01072993191810565535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6564473.post-78330754616852017732007-08-20T12:15:00.000-04:002007-08-20T12:15:00.000-04:00On Hamilton's religion, I wrote a brief post on th...On Hamilton's religion, I wrote a brief post on the quote that we have been discussing. <BR/><BR/>Sometime I hope to write a series of posts on my blog covering Hamilton's religion from the beginning to the end of his life (I have studied his writings on the subject for approx. 3-and-a-half-years).Hercules Mulliganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09359315762800176142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6564473.post-82007492263899518172007-08-19T22:06:00.000-04:002007-08-19T22:06:00.000-04:00I think we could safely say that Morris unfairly c...I think we could safely say that Morris unfairly characterized Hamilton. I just thought it was interesting to see how he put it.<BR/><BR/>On a related note, is Morris' sex life too hot for you to handle?<BR/><BR/>I try to stay current with National Review's "The Corner," esp. when Michael Novak or Richard Brookhiser chime in on the Founders & Religion. <A HREF="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTc5ZDVjZmRmZTY1MDM0MzhlODQ0ZmExMjc4ZWU2M2I=" REL="nofollow">This post</A> from last year slipped past me.<BR/><BR/>I'll feature it in a post next week, but give you a preview here. It's the way Brookhiser categorizes Washington's, Adams', and Morris' (all three about whom he wrote books) religion and illustrates the false dichotomy of asking were they "Deists" or "Christians." Instead of "theistic rationalist," he categorizes them as "active Christiform deists." And his reading of Hamilton's religion parallels mine.Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6564473.post-15036828503481654392007-08-19T21:31:00.000-04:002007-08-19T21:31:00.000-04:00Hamilton's own words clarify this issue better:"Ju...Hamilton's own words clarify this issue better:<BR/><BR/>"June 26th, Col. Hamilton said: This question has already been considered in several points of view. We are now forming a republican government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. Those who mean to form a solid republican government ought to proceed to the confines of another government. As long as offices are open to all men, and no constitutional rank is established, it is pure republicanism. But if we incline too much to democracy, we shall soon shoot into a monarchy." <A HREF="http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php&title=1378&search=republican&chapter=64198&layout=html#a_1591471" REL="nofollow">speech in Convention, according to Yates</A> <BR/><BR/>"June 24, 1788.—I am persuaded that I, in my turn, shall be indulged in addressing the committee. We all, with equal sincerity, profess to be anxious for the establishment of a republican government, on a safe and solid basis. It is the object of the wishes of every honest man in the United States; and I presume I shall not be disbelieved when I declare, that it is an object, of all others, the nearest and most dear to my own heart. The means of accomplishing this great purpose become the most important study which can interest mankind. It is our duty to examine all those means with peculiar attention, and to choose the best and most effectual. It is our duty to draw from nature, from reason, from examples, the justest principles of policy, and to pursue and apply them in the formation of our government. We should contemplate and compare the systems which, in the examination, come under our view; distinguish with a careful eye the defects and excellencies of each, and discarding the former, incorporate the latter, as far as circumstances will admit, into our Constitution. If we pursue a different course, and neglect this duty, we shall probably disappoint the expectations of our country and of the world." <A HREF="http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php&title=1379&search=republican&chapter=64207&layout=html#a_1591647" REL="nofollow">speech in the Convention</A><BR/><BR/>"The highest-toned propositions which I made in the convention were for a President, Senate, and Judges during good behavior—a House of Representatives for three years. Though I would have enlarged the legislative power of the general government, yet I never contemplated the abolition of the State governments, but on the contrary, they were, in some particulars, constituent parts of my plan. This plan was, in my conception, conformable with the strict theory of a government purely republican, the essential criteria of which are that the principal organs of the executive and legislative departments be elected by the people, and hold their offices by a responsible and temporary or defeasible tenure. A vote was taken on the proposition respecting the executive. Five States were in favor of it, among these Virginia, and though, from the manner of voting—by delegations,—individuals were not distinguished, it was morally certain, from the known situation of the Virginia members (six in number, two of them, Mason and Randolph, professing popular doctrines), that Madison must have concurred in the work of Virginia; thus, if I sinned against republicanism, Mr. Madison was not less guilty." <A HREF="http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php&title=1387&search=republican&chapter=93534&layout=html#a_2090223" REL="nofollow">letter to Timothy Pickering, Sept. 18, 1803</A><BR/><BR/>"The Senate, I fear, from a similar cause, would be filled by certain undertakers who wish for particular offices under the government. This view of the subject almost leads me to despair that a republican government could be established over so great an extent. I am sensible, at the same time, that it would be unwise to propose one of any other form. In my private opinion, I have no scruple in declaring, supported as I am by the opinion of so many of the wise and good, that the British government is the best in the world; and that I doubt much whether anything short of it will do in America. I hope gentlemen of different opinions will bear with me in this, and beg them to recollect the change of opinion on this subject which has taken place, and is still going on. It was once thought that the power of Congress was amply sufficient to secure the end of their institution. The error was now seen by every one. The members most tenacious of republicanism are as loud as any in declaiming against the vices of democracy. This progress of the public mind leads me to anticipate the time when others as well as myself will join in the praise bestowed by Mr. Neckar on the British constitution, namely, that “it is the only government in the world which unites public strength with individual security.” <A HREF="http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php&title=1378&search=%22republican%22&chapter=64198&layout=html#a_1591450" REL="nofollow">speech in Convention according to Madison</A><BR/><BR/>So no, he wasn't a radical anti-republican. He saw the weaknesses of republican govt (the most dangerous of which was foreign influence, he said in one place), and thought that the British Constitution, in AH's opinion the best that had been written in the world so far, had some very useful and wise features worth imitating, because, in AH's view, they tended towards the protection of individual rights.Hercules Mulliganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09359315762800176142noreply@blogger.com