Hamilton was the greatest expert on the Constitution that we ever had. He was the genius of the Revolution and the greatest political thinker since Aristotle.
Obviously sovereignty has the means to protect itself and accomplish its tasks or it is not sovereign. Our government was empowered to become sovereign which it could not do under the Articles. Hence, the powers of the national government (the “General” government) were greatly expanded while those of the state governments severely restricted in affairs affecting the entire nation.
Not even Jefferson and Madison denied there were implicit powers within a sovereign government. The constitution was not a detailed plan but only the outline, the basis of a government.
The Convention rejected the addition of anything which would prevent the discernment of implied powers or rule out their existence.
Congress was given the power “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” - Article I, Section 8, paragraph 18.
Thus, a central bank as a means of exercising those powers efficiently is clearly Constitutional. It aids the government in funding operations (civilian and military), collection of taxes, borrowing of money and serves the public welfare by restraining wild fluctuations in the money and credit markets.
The Constitution does NOT contain the word “absolutely” in reference to “necessary”. Hamilton destroys Jefferson’s misuse of the word “necessary” so convincingly that Washington signed the Bank Bill almost instantly after receiving Hamilton’s opinion. After all, H. was the greatest lawyer in the country as well as the primere financial expert and most prolific communicator of the Revolutionary period.
Marshall’s opinion about “necessary” comes straight out of Hamilton’s elegantly reasoned and expressed essay. Marshall himself compared his mind to that of Hamilton as comparing “a taper to the sun” and admitted that in every constitutional question his first consultation was the “Federalist” two-thirds of which Hamilton wrote. The greatest political philosophical work written in the Western hemisphere btw.
Funding of the National Debt is clearly constitutional under Article I, Section 8, paragraph 2. Assumption not only instantly made U.S. credit the equal of ANY in the world (it had been the worst) but created a money supply where there was none and allowed the U.S. economy to take off for the stratosphere. This brilliant achievement alone puts Hamilton in the first rank of statesmen in all of history.
As to the danger of an endless chain of implied powers, this is where judgment and honesty come into play. A constitutional act must not contravene the spirit of the document and at some point in the endless chain this would be violated.
“the greatest political thinker since Aristotle”
LOL
“The convention rejected the addition of anything which would prevent the discernment of implied powers or rule out their existence”
No they didn’t. You yourself go on to talk about the necessary an pepper clause. That does it, right there. And if that weren’t enough the 10th amendment spelled it out for us.
“The Constitution does NOT contain the word ‘absolutely’ in reference to ‘necessary’”
If you were paying attention you’d know that the “absolutely” point wad supposed to br in your tabor. The Constitution does indeed contain the phrase “absolutely necessary,” in Article 1, section 10 regarding a prohibition on states laying imposts and duties. Marshall used this to argue that “necessary” in “necessary and proper” meant “convenient” rather than “indispensable.”
“Hamilton destroys Jefferson’s misuse...”
Well, hoe about Madison’s? Or Edmund Randolph’s? Or anyone else who didn’t already have their mind made up that they wanted a bank.
“created a money supply where there was none”
What? Of course there was a money supply. Not a national currency, but good thing since the saying “not worth a continental” admirably summed up the efficacy of the recent misadventure in central direction of monetary policy.
“allowed the US economy to take off for the stratosphere”
Wow. I can’t really argue with that, except to say there was quite a lag between then and our historically unrivaled economic miracle. Also that by the time we competed to be the world’s foremost economic power we had no central bank. And after we got one again recessions and depressions grew worse and closer together.
Whence this notion that copious debt is a good way to build credit, or that finance must be centrally controlled to spur growth. I will admit the assumption of state debt, legal or not, was a brilliant move on Hamilton’s part. But more in a Machiavellian way than you’re thinking. Whoever held debt would be behind the new government, which helped us avoid being a banana republic. Economically and constitutionally it’s another matter.
“this is where judgement and honesty come into play”
Is it honest to say “necessary” means “convenient,” “incidental,” “useful,” or conducive to”? Is it good judgement to think the Convention either left it to common sense that there should be a central bank, or left it up to the discretion of whoever was in charge? This in a scheme of the pellet and the states sacrifing only discreet and expressed portions of their sovereignty? Is it honest to pretend a bank was necessary to handle public debt or any other power of the federal government.
By the way, if you haven’t I suggest you read Madison contra Hamilton. His Federalist essays are better, too.