Alexander Hamilton The Man, The Duel, The Government
By Al Cronkrite The Covenant News ~ January 25, 2005
"Fourth Generation war is triumphing over the products of rationalism because people who believe in something will always defeat people who believe in nothing at all."
William Lind
On July 11th, 1804 Alexander Hamilton, icon of the establishment of the Nation, shot in the hip, died as a result of the wound inflicted in a duel by Vice-President Aaron Burr. Three years earlier Hamilton‘s eldest son, Phillip, had been similarly wounded and killed in a duel.
Born in 1755 or 1757, the date is disputable, on the Island of Nevis in the West Indies, Alexander Hamilton was the bastard son of an illicit relationship between a married French women named Rachel Fawcet Lavien and James Hamilton, an unsuccessful Scottish businessman. Rachel was mother to two "whore children" Alexander being the youngest. At one point her husband had her arrested and imprisoned for adultery.
The stories differ, but precocious 11 year old Alexander worked as a clerk in either or both his mother’s store or in a business owned by one Nicholas Cruger. His inordinate abilities caught everyone’s attention and at the age of 16 with the help of a Presbyterian Minister named Hugh Knox and some wealthy Islanders he was shipped off to New York where he studied at King’s College (latter renamed Columbia).
His lucid command of language both spoken and written was astonished. At the age of 17, in 1774, he was writing revolutionary essays and in 1776 he had become a Captain in the Artillery. A year later he was an Aide-De-Camp for General George Washington. By the end of the War he was promoted to Lt. Colonel. Through the war and through the nation’s first Presidency, until Washington’s death, the two had a close relationship.
In 1780 Hamilton married Elizabeth Schuyler whose father, Philip Schuyler, came from a wealthy New York Dutch family. Schuyler had been a General in the Continental Army and was active in New York politics. The marriage produced eight children.
Following the War and his marriage, well into his third decade, in 1783, he spent three months of intensive study of the law in Albany, New York and was admitted to the bar that same year. He had a fertile legal mind and developed a very successful private practice in addition to his strategic role in the development of the government of the Nation. His legal opinions were noted for "clarity, vigor and rigid reasoning".
His adversary, Aaron Burr, was born into an aristocratic family; his father had been President of Princeton University where he received his education. The famous Connecticut Christian Evangelist Jonathan Edwards was his grandfather. His elitism caused him to look askance on the success of Washington and Hamilton whose roots were less lofty.
He was Hamilton’s foe on several fronts. Burr was jealous of General Washington. He considered his abilities as a General less than adequate and had written him an openly contemptuous letter, which Hamilton probably read. Also, Burr won a race to represent New York in the U. S. Senate in which Hamilton supported the losing bid by his father-in-law, Philip Schuyler.
Alexander Hamilton was an ardent Federalist and a believer in rule by an elite cadre. At one time he proposed that state governors be appointed by the president and that the president and senators be elected to lifetime terms. He believed that government deserved the wisdom of talented aristocrats and did not trust the general population to govern themselves.
"The second major distinguishing feature of Hamilton's political philosophy was its emphasis on energetic government. He believed that the government should be proactive in economic and military affairs, have the power to supersede lower governments (as at the state level), and be able to exercise authority directly on the people. Only an energetic government would be able to provide the stability and order necessary to secure the blessings of liberty for the people, especially over such a large geographical area as the United States."
In Federalist No. 69 Hamilton wrote "A feeble executive implies a feeble execution of the government. A feeble execution is but another phrase for a bad execution; and a government ill executed, whatever may be its theory, must be, in practice, a bad government".
Though the American Constitution provided for centralization under a federal government it failed to secure the concentration of power Hamilton sought. Nevertheless, he fully supported the Constitution and authored the majority of the buttressing Federalist Papers.
In spite of his boundless energy and considerable literary and oratorical skills his political philosophy was not well received by his contemporaries.
Under the Administration of the Nation’s first President, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton was appointed Secretary of the Treasury. His close association with the President made him the most powerful man in Washington but his backing for a National Bank and the almost monarchical government structure he had proposed made him subject to virulent criticism.
Thomas Jefferson’s Republicans were in a fret that Hamilton’s policies would benefit the wealthy patricians at the expense of agrarians. They also worried that his imperious personality would bring to the fledgling nation the evils they so hated in England.
Hamilton would often bring esoteric legislation to congress and was able to cajole its passage even though the legislators may not have entirely understood it. During his tenure the Treasury Department grew to a massive 1,000 employees. Jefferson said that Hamilton’s policies, "flowed from principles adverse to liberty and was calculated to undermine and demolish the republic by creating an influence of his department over the members of the legislature ... to have that corps under the command of the Secretary of the Treasury for the purpose of subverting step by step the principles of the Constitution...."
Inordinate ability and the adulation it engenders often results in an arrogant disregard for rules. Hamilton not only ran roughshod over the Treasury Department but his attraction to women reflected on his character and reputation. General Washington’s wife, Martha, had a lustful tomcat which she nicknamed "Hamilton" in reference to her husband’s Aide; there were rumors of an affair with his wife Elizabeth’s sister, Angelica; and one New England congressman complained that the secretary of the treasury ogled his wife at a dinner in Philadelphia.
Most famous was his affair with Maria Reynolds a dark beauty whose husband was a convicted securities swindler willing to allow Hamilton sexual access to his wife for regular payments of cash. These cash payments were discovered and thought to have come from public coffers when Hamilton was investigated by congress in 1792-3 for supposed financial misdealing. It is thought that Thomas Jefferson, another Hamilton antagonist, made the affair public in 1797. In an attempt to salvage his public integrity Hamilton made a full confession of the affair and admitted to the cash payments maintaining they had come from his own private funds.
In his confession Hamilton maintained the whole affair was a "conspiracy of vice against virtue" and that the vice was on the side of his political opponents. It was his contention that he was being persecuted for a trifle and had a "proud consciousness of innocence" for not having impugned his financial integrity.
Descriptions of Alexander Hamilton were not always flattering. He was quoted as saying that his heart was the master of his judgment and was described as "indiscreet in utterance, impolitic in management, opinionated, self-confident, and uncompromising in nature and methods."
The antagonism between Burr and Hamilton came to a head when a New York newspaper published Hamilton’s public statement that he "looked upon Mr. Burr to be a dangerous man, and one who ought not to be trusted with the reins of government." And also, that on previous occasions Hamilton has expressed an even "more despicable opinion of Burr." Burr wrote Hamilton demanding an apology and retraction, a heated correspondence followed. Hamilton declined to apologize and Burr challenged him to a duel.
Scores of prominent persons were killed in duels during the Eighteenth and Nineteen Centuries; estimates are that up to 70 percent were politicians. During those years honor was highly regarded and political positions were vigorously supported.
Hamilton lived most of his life as a Deist. Shortly before his death he experienced a Christian rebirth and determined "to meet Burr in battle but to withhold his fire, thus giving a double opportunity to Col. Burr to pause and reflect." His beloved son, Phillip had done the same. He wrote his wife, Elizabeth, "the scruples of a Christian have determined me to expose my own life to any extent rather than subject myself to the guilt of taking the life of another."
After the duel, Aaron Burr was involved in a scheme to take control of the Louisiana territory and form a separate nation. In a sensational trial in 1807 he was acquitted by the lenient ruling of Chief Justice of the United Sates Supreme Court, John Marshall. President Thomas Jefferson commented with a statement quite familiar to contemporary American Conservatives, "It now appears we have no law but the will of the judge." Burr never regained his reputation and following the trial he lived almost thirty years in obscurity.
In researching Alexander Hamilton one cannot help but be struck by the resemblance between this influential Founder and our former Chief Executive, William Jefferson Clinton. Both came from humble backgrounds, both were intellectually gifted, both were exceedingly articulate, both had an eye for women, both were exposed, both strongly contended for their innocence, both blamed their problems on an enemy "conspiracy" and both were involved with esoteric legislation.
It appears that Hamilton would have been delighted with the events of the early Twenty-First Century. He would have approved the swagger of the Bush II Presidency and the acquisition of power he has accumulated. A nation ID card would have made his heart glad and he would have reveled in the thought of the pervasive government surveillance expressed in the ABC television program entitled "No Place to Hide". The ecumenical prayer service that followed the inauguration of President Bush II held at the Washington National Cathedral, "A National house of prayer for all people", would have been quite acceptable to him and since George Washington was a Mason he would probably have embraced it as well.
With the volumes of Evangelical writings supporting the Christian roots of our Nation there are quizzical twinges in noting that nothing concerning The Savior appeared in the Constitution. The tenets of George Washington’s Masonic Order are at odds with proper Christian theology and it seems his reverence was not enough to reign in Hamilton’s excesses. When Hamilton resigned from the Treasury Department Washington wrote "In every relation, which you have borne to me, I have found that my confidence in your talents, exertions and integrity, has been well placed. I the more freely render this testimony of my approbation because I speak from opportunities of information which cannot deceive me, and which furnish satisfactory proof of your title to public regard."
One can speculate on future generations using the Clinton under arm Bible as proof that he was a Christian or the Bush II profession of Christian faith as proof that in spite of his associates and his policies he, too, was a Christian. With all his foul language and stonyhearted combativeness, Richard Nixon maintained the image of a devout Quaker. Abraham Lincoln often quoted the Bible. American politicians have always been aware that the majority of American voters are Christians who seek a God fearing, righteous president.
Alexander Hamilton was a baby Christian when he died. Mature heathens and Baby Christians do not make competent leaders. A Christian nation cannot be achieved without a Godly legal structure. Unfortunately, with all its merits, our Constitution is only a collection of human mandates. In Virginia, Patrick Henry rose in opposition to the new Constitution. Some of his comments made nearly 117 years ago on June 5, 1788 are worth reviewing. Henry was concerned that power would be vested in people rather than in the states and that a minority would be able to captivate the majority, he thought the power to tax would become confiscatory and raised his voice in favor of maintaining the Confederation. Some of his points are poignant.
"In this scheme of energetic government, the people will find two sets of tax-gatherers—the state and the federal sheriffs. This, it seems to me, will produce such dreadful oppression as the people cannot possibly bear. The federal sheriff may commit what oppression, make what distresses, he pleases, and ruin you with impunity; for how are you to tie his hands? Have you any sufficiently decided means of preventing him from sucking your blood by speculations, commissions, and fees?
The Senate, by making treaties, may destroy your liberty and laws for want of responsibility. Two thirds of those that shall happen to be present, can, with the President, make treaties that shall be the supreme law of the land; they may make the most ruinous treaties; and yet there is no punishment for them. Whoever shows me a punishment provided for them will oblige me.
Will the oppressor let go the oppressed? Was there even an instance? Can the annals of mankind exhibit one single example where rulers overcharged with power willingly let go the oppressed, though solicited and requested most earnestly? The application for amendments will therefore be fruitless. Sometimes, the oppressed have got loose by one of those bloody struggles that desolate a country; but a willing relinquishment of power is one of those things which human nature never was, nor ever will be, capable of."
The problem really started with the Constitution itself. It was crafted from the musings of men, many of them brilliant, but all with prejudices and opinions. It created man-made rules for a God fearing Nation. Such a document is only able to provide guidance for a humanistic society.
Christianity offers the only foundation for lasting freedom. Man gains his importance from being created in the image of God and both citizens and their leaders are to be restrained by His mandates.
Hamilton was right in distrusting Democracy and the will of the people. He was wrong in trusting in aristocracy. Sin distorts man’s reason, creating anarchy and making just and rational thought impossible. This distortion coupled with a lust for power always impels humanistic nations toward tyranny. In our fallen creation it is only through the ultimate wisdom of God’s immutable Law that lasting peace and prosperity are possible. Man-made government, no matter how exquisite in structure, will always be challenged by other men who contend for the validity of their differing opinions and vie for the opportunity to make changes.
A real Christian nation might consider beginning a constitution with words to this affect:
We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created in the image of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and that He has provided for those He has chosen the freeing Grace of Our Lord and King, Jesus, the Christ. We the people have determined to live our lives and conduct our affairs in accordance with the Laws handed down by God to his servant Moses and to elect leaders who willingly place themselves under the same dominion.
Alexander Hamilton was a brilliant man. Aaron Burr was himself well educated. His father graduated from Yale at the top of his class . His grandfather, Jonathan Edwards, graduated from Yale with honors. The intellectual brilliance of the enlightenment had captured the hearts of America’s elites even before the Constitution was written. This idol has continued to supercede Godly wisdom and is the driving force behind social deterioration and dreams of a contemporary Tower of Babel in the form of a utopian new world order.
Brilliant minds corrupted by the distortions of adulation may be more susceptible to error than the less acute thoughts of their inferiors. They also do it quicker and with more embellishment.
Man was not created to govern himself. His need for the stout restraint of God’s unchanging mandates has never been more urgent.
Postscript:
A lament on the demise of the duel. Author unknown.
"The duel, the encounter with pistols for two followed by coffee for one, no longer exists as a method of settling disputes. They are now fought in the courtroom. The challenger and the challenged are still present but the contest is conducted by the seconds, namely the lawyers. Instead of the matter being settled in a few minutes by a couple of lead balls and two crachms of powder costing a few pence, the process may be dragged out for days or months at great expense. The result now depends on who is the better legal confidence person in their ability to influence a jury or judge rather than who is the better shot."
The following Internet pages were used as resources for this writing: