Francis Samuel Philbrick and Hugh Chisholm

Summary

Francis Samuel Philbrick and Hugh Chisholm 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica (1911)

Yet probably to no one man, except perhaps to Washington, does American nationalism owe so much as to Hamilton.
In the development of the United States the influence of Hamiltonian nationalism and Jeffersonian democracy has been a reactive union; but changed conditions since Hamilton’s time, and particularly since the Civil War, are likely to create misconceptions as to Hamilton’s position in his own day. Great constructive statesman as he was, he was also, from the American point of view, essentially a reactionary.
Source: Wikisource

Francis Samuel Philbrick and Hugh Chisholm 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica (1911)

His last letter on politics, written two days before his death, illustrates the two sides of his thinking already emphasized: in this letter he warns his New England friends against dismemberment of the union as “a clear sacrifice of great positive advantages, without any counterbalancing good; administering no relief to our real disease, which is democracy, the poison of which, by a subdivision, will only be more concentrated in each part, and consequently the more virulent.”
Source: Wikisource

Francis Samuel Philbrick and Hugh Chisholm 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica (1911)

Hamilton could not see, or would not concede, the predominating forces in American life, and would uncompromisingly have minimized the two great political conquests of the colonial period—local self-government and democracy.
Few Americans have received higher tributes from foreign authorities. Talleyrand, personally impressed when in America with Hamilton’s brilliant qualities, declared that he had the power of divining without reasoning, and compared him to Fox and Napoleon because he had “deviné l’Europe.”
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature