Sunday night I finished reading Ron Chernow’s Alexander Hamilton, what I must presume is the finest biography of “the founder of American government” yet written. It’s a remarkable piece of historical writing and analysis, and if you are interested in learning more about the early years of our republic (and especially about the political maelstrom surrounding this most underappreciated founder) I recommend it very highly. It’s very thick, but you’ll learn much from reading it.
The general setting is of course an exciting one, a period filled with much more disorganization, violence, dissension and deeply nasty politics than we tend to remember today. In 1793 Vice President Adams felt so at risk that he had arms smuggled to his home. That same year a fever outbreak was so dire (Hamilton himself caught yellow fever) that Washington contemplated moving cabinet meetings to a fever-free location (shades of a future where bio-terror is feared?). Tax collecting wasn’t merely wildly cumbersome and inefficient by today’s standards, collectors’ lives were at risk (the Whiskey Rebellion is a depressing moment in our history that we should be embarrassed of - and I say that as someone who loathes taxes on alcohol). Foreign affairs were just as dangerous and aggressive, and the US was a new, weak state often set upon by European powers. In 1793, after Pitt decreed the Brits could intercept neutral vessels, the British fleet captured more than 250 American merchant ships, impounding more than half of them as war prizes and dragging off many sailors (claiming they were British). By the spring of 1797 the French had seized more than 300 US vessels.
Of course things weren’t only this scary and unstable on this side of the Atlantic during this time period. Many of the French who helped the US during its Revolution suffered terribly during their revolution. Lafayette suffered in solitary confinement, while his sister-in-law, mother-in-law and grandmother-in-law were executed. Admiral d’Estaing was executed. The Comte de Rochambeau was imprisoned. And, of course, Louis XVI was executed.
But even amidst these horrors, these turbulent times fostered connections that might not otherwise have come to pass in this age of lengthy and relatively dangerous trans-Atlantic travel - connections that produced exchanges that might have never happened otherwise. Hamilton and Talleyrand became friendly when Talleyrand was in exile in the United States (Talleyrand was more impressed by Hamilton than by any of the other powerful and influential figures he knew). Hamilton also came to know the duc de La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt during the same time period (and Rochefoucauld was also extremely impressed by Hamilton).
The early years of our country were in many ways more appalling than a lot of us think - and though many constantly laud the age, it's probably important to remember that in its early years our republic was often a mess, and our politics were extremely ugly (in a number of senses). The 1796 election produced a Federalist president and a Republican vice president. The election of 1800 is famously odd and unfortunate in certain senses. As David McCullough has noted Thomas Jefferson, the proponent of agrarian America, owed his election as president to New York. Well, that and the electoral votes representing slaves (or, more accurately the interests of slave owners). Without the slave states getting 3/5 of their slave population counted in their electoral vote, John Adams would have been reelected president (not that that was an especially appealing prospect). As Chernow writes, “The constitution did more than just tolerate slavery: it actively rewarded it.” (p.628) And in 1800 we saw that grotesque system lead to the beginning of the ascendancy of the slave-holding South in our national politics (and 24 straight years of rule by aristocratic, slave-owning Virginians).
And of course that’s only the start of the horrors and follies associated with that year’s election. The decidedly undemocratic system of electing a president that we are still saddled with – if no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes, the presidential election goes to the US House where every state (no matter its size) gets 1 vote opened the door to all sorts of shenanigans in 1800. In that year the presidential election wasn’t decided until the House’s 36th ballot, and one congressman from Delaware was crucial in deciding the outcome (which is arguably worse than one Supreme Court justice from California doing it).
Amidst this instability, at a time when the country’s survival was not something to be taken for granted, Hamilton worked as diligently as anyone for its survival, and his energy, mind and powers of persuasion were key to many of its earliest successes. While his central role in establishing a strong base for the national economy is his best known work, he played an enormous role in other policies too, and of course was key in building and leading the first US military force. President Washington deferred to and supported him on many policy debates, and even had Hamilton write much of his famous farewell address (which of course wasn’t really an “address” in the modern sense as it was designed to be printed, not spoken). Through greatly shaping the views of Washington and other influential figures like Chief Justice John Marshall, Hamilton has probably had more of an effect on the course of our nation’s development than several presidents, even though he was never elected president himself.
His early death (it’s remarkable to remember that most of his greatest work was done in his thirties) at the hands of Vice President Burr (who had earlier been involved in a duel with Hamilton’s brother-in-law) meant that he did not have the chance to burnish his image and legacy. And his reputation has likely suffered because his great rivals lived decades more and had many opportunities to shape the historical record. But this excellent biography will hopefully go a long way toward redeeming his reputation. He wasn’t a perfect man or politician (though he seemed to have a much keener grasp of where the country was headed both economically and morally – he was a fervent abolitionist – than many of his contemporaries), and this isn’t a hagiography. But he was an extraordinarily impressive and influential individual, and this text does much to help us appreciate how he affected US history.
Posted by armand at April 5, 2006 08:55 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Books