Historyx

The arguments between Alexander Hamilton and Patrick Henry are a classic argument of what our country went through and is still constantly going through today. It depicts how each person as an individual have their own thought of what our country should be and how each state should act as an individual power. The Federalist 23 is as true today as it was in the past. Each person in power of our government will always have a different view on a proposed legislation or law. The republicans could be considered “modern day Confederates or Union”, just as well as the Democrats.

Before the adoption of our constitution, the thirteen colonies were closely related to small countries, and were held together by the “Confederate Constitution” titled 'Articles of Confederation', which consisted of a small Confederate Congress with equal representation from all states. This congress was not endowed with much power, and could not collect taxes, or negotiate interstate commerce. It was very difficult to present any unified 'American' front to other countries for the purposes of negotiating treaties or trade. The short comings of this form of government were also obvious during the Revolutionary War. Great Britain had seemingly unlimited money resources and a professionally trained military, the Confederate Congress wasn’t able to secure any funding to raise and ensure supplies for their troops due to the fact they couldn’t collect tax from the states, and George Washington was always at risk of losing his army. It was also difficult to fund supplies, pay salaries, or negotiate loans from other countries.

Alexander Hamilton experienced the short comings of this form of government, as he served in the Revolutionary War for Washington, and as the rank of Colonel in war. These experiences changed his view on what was needed in a strong Federal government, as opposed to a weak Confederate Congress. Patrick Henry was a member of a Confederate Congress and the Governor of...