The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1900-10-13
IDOLS OF TWO POLITICAL PARTIES
Both Statesmen Members of
Washington's Cabinet.
FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION OF POLICY
Revived in Present Campaign by
Bryan and M'Kinley.

The break between Thomas Jeffer-
son and Alexander Hamilton in Wash
ington's cabinet had Il far deeper sig
nificance than either of the combatants
realized. 10 them it was largely a per-
sonal affair, embittercd by charges on
both sides of bad faith and political
dishonesty. Washington tried in vain
to keep the two members of his cabinet
on such terms that he would not be
obliged to part with the services of
either Of them. In the end he COM
pletely failed, and was obliged to rec
0gniZe that the breach could not be
bridged. 1t has not been bridged to
this day. The point where jefferson
and Hamilton separated is the separa-
ton point between the two great ma
tional parties in the campaign this
year. 1t was n fundamental question
Of the policy of the government, and
the break had to come. It's bitterness
was not ended even by death, for
Hamilton never believed that jefferson
was other than an underhanded schem.
er, who struck in the back, while JEFF
ferson, a quarter of a century after tho
death of Hamilton had bent his ener
gies to overturn the constitution and
establish monarchy. The quarrel
has extended to most of the biogra-
pliers of the two men. Jeffcrson's side
has ever been sustained by the Demo-
cratic party, while u large element OF
the Republican party of today holds
Hamilton as its patron saint.
When called into the first cabinet Of
the new government by Washington
two men could not have been more
directly opposite in their general the
cries of government than Jefferson
and Hamilton. From his earliest be-
licfs of which there is any record
Jefferson instnctivcly had rebelled
against the exercise Of strong powers
by the British parliament. He went
further than this, and as stOutly re-
bellcd against the exercise of such
powers by the Church of England, then
the established church Of Virginia. lie
did not believe in slavery, it seems,
largely for the same reasons. The en-
tire fabric of aristocracy in Virginia
was offensive to him, and through his
efforts was torn down. The five years
he had spent in France had but
strengthened his democratic opinions.
lie said he had seen the finest country
in Europe brought to ruin by too much
government. He had taken IN impor-
tant part in the way Of advice in do
ing away with the extreme authority
of the French monarchy. In this frame
of mind he returned to America, and
soon afterward took his place as secre-
tary of state in the first cabinet under
the new constitution.
Hamilton had been in service some
months before as secretary of the
treasury. He had received his educa-
ton in the hard school Of the continent
tai army, where he had seen General
Washington's plans constantly brought
to nothing by the lack of power In the
continental congress. In the years
that had followed peace with England
he had seen the financial affairs Of the
States go from bad to worse from the
same cause. Debts were unpaid and
commerce was being destroyed by the
lack Of adequate power in the central
government. Bitter rivalry between
the States threatened to bring on civil
war between them. The government,
while it seemed to have considerable
power, really had none, for 1t had not
the means to compel obedience to a
single act. While Jefferson, in Paris,
had been absorbed deeply in the strug-
gle to cut down the powers Of the gov
crnment, Hamilton was working as
strcnuously at home to enlarge the
powers of the government. The con-
stitution, when finally brought before
the people for adoption, did not suit
Hamilton because it did not give the
central government enough power, but
he hoped and believed that this could
be corrected by an energetic admins
tration. It did not suit Jefferson be-
cause it conferred too much power
upon the central government, but he
was firmly of the opinion that this
could be remedied by subsequent