Hamilton is using loose constructionism to defend the idea of a national bank. He argues that the federal government has the implied powers to establish corporations and institutions, such as a national bank, that are necessary to carry out its functions, even if such powers are not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution.
Use the quote from Alexander Hamilton to answer the question.
“This general and indisputable principle puts at once an end to the abstract question, whether the United States have power to erect a corporation; that is to say, to give a legal or artificial capacity to one or more persons, distinct from the natural. For it is unquestionably incident to sovereign power to erect corporations, and consequently to that of the United States, in relation to the objects intrusted to the management of the government. The difference is this: where the authority of the government is general, it can create corporations in all cases, where it is confined to certain branches of legislation, it can create corporations only in those cases. …It is not denied that there are implied well as express powers, and that the former are as effectually delegated as the latter. And for the sake of accuracy it shall be mentioned, that there is another class of powers, which may be properly denominated resulting powers. It will not be doubted, that if the United States should make a conquest of any of the territories of its neighbors, they would possess sovereign jurisdiction over the conquered territory. This would be rather a result, from the whole mass of the powers of the government, and from the nature of political society, than a consequence of either of the powers specially enumerated…”
What logic is Hamilton using to defend the idea of a national bank?
(1 point)
Responses
strict constructionism
strict constructionism
loose constructionism
loose constructionism
a stronger economy without banks
a stronger economy without banks
the power to supervise banks with the people
1 answer
1 answer