standing army of mercenary troops, directed by the arbitrary will of the Ruler by descent, or Divine right, supported by the wishes of the citizens, who were to form and administer the government in their own interests.

It was to differ from all former republics, perhaps, in a more careful regard for the wishes of all classes of its citi-. zen subjects, in granting an opportunity for every citizen to share in the responsibilities of the government by an almost limitless use of the elective franchise. It substituted the term Citizen for Subject. It exalted the individual citizen to the highest possible pinnacle of power and independence. There was, therefore, never offered a grander opportunity for ambitious and patriotic men, who were able and willing to embrace it, than was presented in the formation of our. national government.

CONDITION OF THE PEOPLE.

After the revolution and separation of the colonies from the English government, and the failure of the confederacy of the States (about 1787), it was evident the people could never again submit to the domination of any foreign government, nor the reign of any monarch or king. The people through the long and terrible struggle of the revolution had tasted the sweets of self-government, had learned the greatest source of power, and that the people could build navies that would, in fair fight, win victories from the strongest naval powers, and could mass and support armies of citizensoldiers, commanded by their own neighbors and friends, that could successfully cope in the defense of their homes and nation with the royal troops of the strongest nation then in existence, and that mercenary troops are never superior to citizen-soldiers fighting for their own homes, country and nation. They had also learned in the confederacy that followed the revolution how exceedingly pleasant it is to hold power, and compel those who would rule to consult the voter before a single step could be taken. The danger in such a state of society was of too little restraining power in the government, whether state or nation, and not of too much power. The confederacy died of nervous prostration and "heart failure." There was not sufficient centralized power to compel action. The general government had not

sufficient power to enforce its edicts. The States regarded themselves as the conservators of the powers of government, and at times became so indifferent to the claims of the general government, that they did not even send delegates to the General Assembly. The Constitution of September 17, 1787, was framed and adopted as a necessity, absolutely demanded to meet and remedy this weakness of the Confederacy in this respect.

The people were poor and exhausted by the revolutionary war, and debts of individuals and States then contracted were great, and pressed heavily upon them. There was little trade or commerce. No satisfactory revenue system of states or nation. There was no established financial or monetary system, and little confidence in the States or individuals with one another. Every force in all directions tended towards disintegration and individualism, and nothing towards the concentration of power in the States or Confederacy. The English government was still very powerful. Holding Canada, and of great influence among the Indians, while the whole country was full of Tories, who were firm believers in the right of the English to still reign in this country, and who were in full sympathy with any movement that would restore again their reign.

France, as a national government, was friendly only as a matter of policy and was then too much absorbed in its own political revolution to interest itself much in our national affairs.

Under these circumstances the most important and absolutely essential move to be made was the establishment of a government strong enough to bring together the various States and their conflicting interests into a national government that could defend itself in all commercial and governmental relations with the nations of the world, and protect the interests of all its citizens, and compel in peace and war the respect, and a proper regard for all the rights of its citizens by all foreign nations.

This theory of government was not popular, for it demanded concessions from the States. The larger States in some respects must concede a degree of power and importance to the smaller States in area, and of less wealth and commercial importance. All of the States would be of less individual importance by virtue of ceding any of their sup

posed prerogatives to the general government. Then, again, all the Tory and foreign sympathy was strongly opposed to a national government of any recognized power, to enforce its edicts; because, if successful, it would end any possible return to power on this Continent of the English or any other foreign government. The individual citizen was also very apprehensive that such a strong government would in some way abridge their individual liberties, and that through it in some way the theories of the royalists, the monarchists and the aristocrats would soon prevail in the nation.

To overcome all this array of hostile sentiment in favor of what was then called a strong government with centralized power in such a government, was an exceedingly difficult matter, and called for the highest possible political sagacity and statesmanship. The age, the sublime nature of the work to be performed, and the peculiar environment of that era produced many able men; and yet but one who combined the wisdom to discern clearly what was needed, the courage, heroism and persistent effort and peculiar power and influence by which men are molded into an irresistible force, to carry forward and perfect great movements in times of great excitement and peculiar conditions. Among the men working together for the same noble purpose were many of the most respected and revered in American history. For their courage, patriotism and statesmanship, Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Adams and Franklin were conspicuous in that historical era of our nation. And yet, amid this brilliant galaxy of statesmen, Alexander Hamilton easily stood foremost in his creative genius, in planning what was most desirable in the Constitution, and most successful in procuring the adoption of proper methods in carrying into effect the details of the different parts of that instru

ment.

His versatility was extraordinary. He was a great orator and lawyer. A soldier of undoubted heroism, bravery and military skill of a high order. He was distinguished as an organizer and very practical in all branches of administration. He was considered by many as the ablest political and constitutional writer of his day. And by that distinguished jurist, Chief Justice John Marshall, was ranked next to Washington, among the bright and unsurpassed list of statesmen and patriots of that period.

THE FATHER OF A CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT.

Hamilton is often called the father of the theory of a centralized, or strong national government. That is, that the national government was superior to the State governments except in all powers, rights and prerogatives, especially reserved by the States.

Washington said: "After gloriously and successfully contending against the usurpation of Great Britain, we may fall a prey to our own folly and disputes." And again he says: "It is clear to me as A. B. C. that an extension of the Federal powers would make us one of the most happy, wealthy, respectable and powerful nations that ever inhabited the terrestrial globe. Without them we shall soon be everything which is the direct reverse. I predict the worst consequences from a half-starved, limping government, always moving upon crutches and tottering at every step."

Hamilton's construction of the implied powers of the Constitution was, that having been granted by the States in the adoption of the National Constitution, the general and express power to raise armies, create and man a navy, levy taxes, regulate commerce and issue money, and make treaties with foreign nations, there was an implied power to do any and all things necessary to carry into successful operation all that had been granted in these express grants of power from the States. Hamilton contended that the people and the States intended at the time of the adoption of the Constitution to form a nation, and grant unto the national government, all the requisite powers necessary to its protection and perpetuity.

His opponents held that inasmuch as the people and the States were the source of all the powers the national government could possibly possess in such a republic, that it could have no powers except such as had been expressly granted to it by the States.

Two powerful parties were formed soon after the Constitution became effective, on these lines, and which continue to the present day. As the different parts of the Constitution were put into practice under the methods then adopted, these parties became clamorous and active as their interests became effected, until the struggle climaxed in an effort of

eleven States to secede from the nation and form a separate government on this Continent. All possible compromises having been exhausted, the construction of the powers of the Constitution was left to the arbitrament of the sword and the solemn judgment of war. After a four years' struggle, untold suffering and inestimable losses of property and the sacrifice of nearly a million of the bravest of men, the theory of Hamilton and his party prevailed upon the bloody field of Appomattox.

It is still a bone of some contention, but the fair verdict of the people, and of the States, undoubtedly now is, that the Constitution has all the express and implied powers necessary for its protection and perpetuity from foreign or domestic enemies, whether of a mob of citizens, or of a combination of States. The adoption of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution embodying its principles was owing largely to the able efforts of, and the confidence the people had in, Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton. That while Jefferson inspired the Declaration of Independence, Hamilton was the incarnation of the Constitution.

POLITICAL PARTIES.

At the time of the adoption of the Constitution (September 17th, 1787), there were no political parties as we now use that term. In Washington's first cabinet Thomas Jefferson was Secretary of State and Hamilton was Secretary of the Treasury. Washington and his whole Cabinet sustained Hamilton's theory as to the implied powers of the Constitution. It devolved upon the Cabinet officials to devise the proper methods for carrying into effect the provisions of the Constitution referring to their various offices, and submit the same to Congress and the President for approval and adoption.

HAMILTON AS SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY.

As Secretary of the Treasury, it devolved upon Hamilton to formulate methods for taxation and raising revenue, and devise means for a satisfactory system of national finance and a circulating medium. Absolutely new systems were to be formulated, and new methods devised to