Adams despised Hamilton because he found him doing his job when he would go to Braintree for months at a time at which point his cabinet turned to Hamilton for answers to complex issues. So he was pissed that H was essentially president for the first three years of the Adams’ administration. He also despised him because he was Washington’s favorite and principle advisor ON EVERY ISSUE. Adams was also extremely jealous of Washington and every bit the “hot-head” H was.
Madison worked closely with H until Jefferson’s return and was more Hamiltonian than Hamilton when the CC began. Virtually every point he disagreed with him involving principle Madison was in the wrong. Madison had to admit that the National Bank was necessary and had it rechartered after the financial disaster ensuing from the War of 1812. This was the biggest policy disagreement between the men and Madison was shown to be completely wrong.
Jefferson was envious of anyone with a superior mind to his and despised anyone standing in the way of his manipulation of the democracy. Jefferson was superior to Hamilton only in his political scheming and manipulation and his opposition to the policies necessary to strengthen our new nation would have been fatal but for Hamilton. Washington grew to despise Jefferson due to his dishonesty and lack of integrity.
Monroe was just a Jeffersonian puppet willing to hate what his master hated and love what his master loved. About the only good thing he did was serve as an officer with Hamilton.
The four you mention were as flawed as H if not more so and the last three. Most of their opposition to H came because he was the greatest threat to their own power.
None of his enemies came close to producing state papers of such immense importance to the development the modern capitalist economy as were those of Hamilton.
Adams despised Hamilton because he found him doing his job when he would go to Braintree for months at a time at which point his cabinet turned to Hamilton for answers to complex issues.
Gee...an unelected ex cabinet official with no title or office who was recently disgraced in a major sex scandal starts pretending one day that he is President of the United States, and you see nothing wrong with that? Or why the real President might be slightly upset about it? Or why the real President and his next three successors might view such a person as a "threat" to their power and justifiably so?
Hamilton's insubordination pushed him closer to the verge of treason than any of the people he accused of the very same under the Alien and Sedition Acts. He wanted Adams to be his puppet as he led the country into an empire-building war with France. Adams justifiably said no. And he would have been equally justified for that matter to order Hamilton arrested, given the schemings that were going on in his private letters to Wolcott.
Nor do I care that Hamilton positioned himself as Wormtongue to Washington's Theoden. It says little to redeem Hamilton from being despised by practically every single other major founding father, and only proves that even Washington had his faults.
As to Hamilton's supposedly "superior mind," you delude yourself. Even a cursory review of his writings reveal Hamilton was a muddled second-rate thinker who misunderstood basic principles of economics and frequently contradicted himself without even realizing it. For a notorious hot-head who had been a principle in no less than 10 previous abortive duels to write on the eve of his 11th that he detested dueling is simply laughable. And yet that is what Hamilton did, apparently unaware of just how silly such a claim was coming from him. That is not a sign of brilliance, arrogantsob. It's a sign of questionable sanity.
None of his enemies came close to producing state papers of such immense importance to the development the modern capitalist economy as were those of Hamilton.
What utter bull. Hamilton was a rambling, economically illiterate neo-mercantilist. His policies obtained political popularity for the same reason that mercantilists normally do - they're great for dispensing the favors of government to politically connected interests. But capitalist economics they are not, and no credible economist today on the free market side of things considers Hamilton a sound thinker.
The people who think fondly of Hamilton's economics, on the other hand, are illustrative of his folly in their own right: the Keynesians, who tolerate him as a forbearer, and the LaRouchies who practically worship him.