porters in Congress would be to name
men like Rufus King of New York and
Robert Morris of Pennsylvania, who
were nationally known for their wealth
and influence. Outstanding in the oppo-
sition was James Madison of Virginia.
His supporters in Congress, men like
William Maclay in the Senate and James
Jackson in the House, were hardly as
well known or of the same social standing
as the Federalist leaders. Madison did,
however, have powerful allies outside of
Congress, men like the patriot Patrick
Henry and the agrarian philosopher John
Taylor of Caroline.

But it is after all not the public men
who participated but the issues in-
volved which give this contest its chief
significance. How far should govern-
mental policy sacrifice justice to expedi-
ency? Should fiscal measures be de-
signed to favor agrarian or commercial
interests? Or if it is desired to assist all,
should this be accomplished through di-
rect aid to commercial interests and
thus by stimulating business, presum-
ably benefit the whole country? And,
finally, should financial measures be so
designed as to strengthen the federal
government or the state governments?
These are some of the fundamental
problems posed by the great debate on
Hamilton's debt program. They are
sharply contested in the excerpts from
Congressional debates and from pam-
phlets and newspapers which are repro-
duced in this volume. Sometimes, as will
be seen, these disputes were not on the
highest plane. The reader will soon dis-
cover that the process of policy deter-
mination in the early democracy in-
volved, in addition to cold logic and high
appeals to justice, not only sophistry and
sentimentality but also some elements of
low humor and name-calling -- even as
they do today. Nor were there lacking
indications that personal economic inter-
ests may have been then, as now, a factor
of some importance in determining con-
gressional attitudes toward legislation.
The major issues raised by the
struggle over the funding program con-
tinue to be reflected in Congressional
debates and newspaper headlines. High
taxes and heavy war debts constantly
pose the old problems of justice versus
expediency. Fiscal proposals designed
to benefit particular economic groups or
to stimulate business activity still divide
parties and create sectional interests.
Even the problem of the effect of finan-
cial measures on the respective roles
of the states and the federal government
is fought over again in nearly every
Congress.

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that
neither the public nor historical scholars
themselves have reached agreement in
evaluating the fiscal program of the
first Secretary of the Treasury. For the
public this is reflected in their attitude
toward the often-quoted statement that
Andrew Mellon was the greatest Secre-
tary of the Treasury since Alexander
Hamilton. Some regard this as the high-
est praise; others feel that, whatever the
merits of Andrew Mellon, this is confer-
ring on him a doubtful distinction. So
also, as illustrated by the last three
items in this volume, do the historians
differ in their judgment. Senator Henry
Cabot Lodge, the conservative Repub-
lican senator from Massachusetts, views
Hamilton's policies as favorably as did
Fisher Ames, his predecessor from Bos-
ton more than a century earlier. On the
basis of a careful examination of the
original records a contemporary scholar,
Irving Brant, emphasizes the role of the
speculators and the liberal historian,
Vernon Parrington, appraises these poli-
cies in a critical light which in 1790

-vi-