alexander hamilton was the first u.s. secretary, up next a discussion on some of his financial ideas, plans he put in place, this is 50 minutes. now all the museum in the gallery of the museums clothes because of floods the robust programming continues as evidence by today and our author speaking he has written

multiple books on history and including autumn of the black snake, declaration, the whisky rebellion and he's also the author of a recent, not author a contributor of historians of hamilton and he's also roll many essays and articles that you can read like the atlanta, the new york times, boston, huffington post, but none more important than our own magazine financial history, you can find that magazine at www. memo i thought or for museum of american finance, so it should be no surprise of the topic of his next book is alexander hamilton, it is my pleasure to introduce him

(applause) thanks a lot i know the acoustics and here can we were little bit, can anyone hear me? >> okay thank you that's good to now, i think some of you now that maybe, i'm a little bit of a fish out of water here, i would like to point out that the museum has had me speak, this is the third time, in fact my very first ever top ana hamilton and other related issues was sponsored by the museum, and for my very first book and now is back in 2006, so i think some of you already now that it's celebrate hamilton time right now and celebrate is not exactly what i do generally speaking, those of you who know my work now that i think critically and i write critically, i right and thinking critically about everything because that is just how i think, people sometimes think because i'm not a

celebrating that i'm filled with hatred about the people that i read about, you don't spend your life in the company of these people because you hate them, but nonetheless for those of you don't know my stuff, you will know the irony of some of my approaches, here we are in the federal building and here we are on wall street and we could say that we are conveniently located on the corner of money and government and what i want to talk about is how he began to form those connections between money and the government and so i don't talk so much about some of the things that sparked interests lately, for the obvious reasons and the cultural event that is the musical, i don't talk about dueling, they don't talk about his relationships with his family members, i don't talk about his infidelity, i feel

like a lot of people do, i think you know, that some of you looked into this and read about it and joined his book, you can find a lot about the dueling culture and a lot of people had family relationships and upbringings and all the things that people had i'm interested in what made him the dynamic for said he was, that was not like what everyone else did if you know what i mean so i am looking very specifically what i would call and i'm not alone add calling it this the great creative phenomenon that he was that occurred at a certain time, i'm gonna dated at 1782 to 1795 and you can data differently i am just gonna pick that period and say something happened there where, of course with all of the things that went into his a life before he arrived in the

congress, he brought all that baggage and everything that we made him but something happened there that was different from everyone else is doing in things that he saw that others did not necessarily see, dreams that he had, a vision said he had that others did not necessarily have and some are very much opposed to he saw also the nuts and bolts i think that no one else saw how to bring those dreams about then there are the links that he went to an action, sometimes quite unsettling length i think to bring those things about. the decisive effects he had on the founding, how we think about money and government today is what fascinates me about hamilton. to me, it's almost like he gets born in 1782, the phenomenon i am talking about, the creative force i'm talking about starts

about there. i'm looking at the arc of an action, not just thinking and ideas, but an action that has some very compelling drama to it, some of which, as we say today, is highly problematic, but without which we might not be here as the nation that we are. in a sense, hamilton created the nation. in an economic sense. the thing is, the details of that story get left out. you would not think they get left out, it is the reason he is famous, secretary of the treasury. you would not think they would get left out, there have been a lot of biographies of hamilton, and yet they do get left out because people -- not here, the museum of american finance, necessarily, but people do not necessarily

like to hear the words the economic nation, or the word finance. i am writing a book on this subject and my agent said to me when i was pitching it to him, i would say, the financial -- he would say, don't say finance. we are trying to picture book here people might want to read. don't say finance. i am like, i've got you. every once in a while, the buzzer goes off when i see the word. hamilton would use the word, that the connotations without are not his. to hamilton, this is money, power, wealth, greatness, size, scope, expansion. things that are actually highly active and dramatic. greatness. i mean like dominance. making the nation into america, the empire, that is a word he and many of his contemporaries would use. making it into the great thing that he envisioned early it

could be. when you say economic nation, to him, that is the nation. that is the nation in a lot of ways. and in a lot of ways, i think he was right about that. what hits left out when people say, he did all of these things, but it kind of gets buried in all of the other things about his life, i call it for the purposes of this talk, something we could describe as the hamilton scheme. i think i have water here somewhere, yes i do. the hamilton scheme. scheme is obviously a loaded term. it can mean a plan, any sort of thought of something, a schema, it can be value neutral. we also use it to mean a scheme, he is scheming in the backroom, my nefarious plans. only talk about hamilton, we have to talk

about that he had a major plan, it goes beyond the plan, it does intubation and a nuts and bolts means of building the country so that it could do the things he wanted it to do. but other people saw it as a scheme of corruption, a scheme designed to destroy democracy. so the various uses of the word scheme are throwing here just because i think in this room, no doubt, and if you talk to people outside of this room about hamilton, you will get a wide variety of of use. whether it was a scheme in a good sense or bad sense. so that is what i want to try to tell you about today, how the scheme worked. and you can all think about, you probably have before, what kind of scheme you sink it is -- you think it is. when i set up an invitation to this talk and description of what i would be doing, i promised an

efficient five-minute trip through -- efficient 45 minute trip through everything you would need to know about the hamilton scheme. i realized as i approached the talk, that was a slight exaggeration or a boldfaced lie, he give there is no way in the time we have today that we can do a deep dive on anyone of these topics. what i am going to do now that i have learned you -- have lured you in here, i'm going to give you a superficial sense of what the various topics are. anyone of them at various times, maybe we can do a deeper dive and i can backup some of the things i am saying rather than

just saying them, which is what i'm going to do today. realize the sales pitch was a sales pitch and we are going to get a more general view of what i think the hamilton scheme involves. one thing that is funny, he became treasury secretary under washington and put his scheme into effect in the first half of the 1790's, but i'm going to focus today much more on the 1780's because that is when he developed the scheme and when the issues that drove him and the opposition to it began to form, and the tension we still have today in society between money and government started to form. while there is a lot to say about what he did in the 1790's, to get at what he was trying to do in the 1790's, you have to go back to his first efforts and politics in the 1780's, i think. and see him develop it and figure out what is going on, if he could ever get himself into a position to bring it about. somewhat surprisingly, i will be focusing largely on what he did in the 1780's to

develop the scheme. he comes to the continental congress right after his service in the war, the revolutionary war, the war of independence, and this is some thing and don't really talk to much about, yorktown. everyone knows about it now, and the defense of the redoubt. to me, that is like juvenilia, now he comes to do what he is really going to do what other people could not do. he comes to the continental congress, which at that time was meeting in philadelphia. interesting because the war is going to be over quite soon. with the war almost ever, the revolution almost ever, victory in a sense on the horizon, we might think,

and out of this, this great victory, comes the fantastic building of nationhood, a country will emerge full unified and ready to take on the world. what is actually happening as he arrives in the continental congress, because the war is about to end, the country is about to fall apart. that is because what is holding the country together, these various states, various entities, they are confederated, they are not a nation. what is holding them together has been this war. the unity of the country is around this war. what hamilton sees when he comes to congress is that is a -- it is about to crash and burn. and there is such a potential to do something different, to pull it all together and create an amazing, new phenomenon. and expanding, even in pure phenomenon. that is an outlandish thing to envision for a 20 something-year-old man arriving with his elders and superiors

come up many of them committed to different visions at that time. but he began to see it. he was not alone in that, he had a mentor in that vision, robert morris. a name that while it is known at the museum of american finance, is not widely known by the people who watch the show or read biographies. morris is a problematic character for a lot of reasons. i think he is hamilton's most important mentor in the area i am interested in. of course, there are other areas of hamilton's life. this creative period. but morris is sometimes a difficult character to deal with because he spent his vast wealth on financing the revolution out of this pocket, some people would say the revolution also financed him. he did not have a problem with mingling private and public funds. he was probably the richest men in america, casually corrupt, obese, witty, charming, and quite a character. really the first major banker the country had. this was someone who saw

the brilliance of young hamilton, and to whom hamilton gravitated. they were looking at the issue of how to keep the country together, and what we're really talking about here is how to keep the country together as a political force, but the way they cite, and this was the genius -- the way they saw it, and this was genius, keeping the country together as a financial phenomenon. what they were talking about here is what is known as the revolutionary war debt. which is to say, it is an incredibly complicated topic, and when i study it, smoke comes out of my

ears as i try to get a handle on all of the aspects of the debt, but the country needed money to fight the war. the part that morrison hamilton were interested in took the form of bonds issued to a small number of very wealthy people of the robert morris type, who were expecting, hoping to get paid 6% interest on their bonds. there was no tax on that at the time, a nice rate of return. that was supposed to finance the war. this was an interstate kind of investing class, lending class. the merchants, the people with actual money in gold and silver, or the equivalent in possession. so the war debt, and this is what is fascinating with people talk about debt now and hamilton, the war debt is pulling country together as far as the people who envision a future for the country. you

have all of the richest people in the country, or many of them, invested in these bonds. so it is funny to think about national unity being equated with more -- war and public debt, but that is the way they looked at it for obvious and cogent regions -- cogent reasons. what people say about hamilton frequently is he was confronted with all this debt after the revolutionary war as treasury secretary and he had to wrestle with this and get it paid off because they had to spend all this money. that is the opposite of what happened in the 1780's. as you probably know, hamilton is responsible for funding the debt, and assuming all of the state debts. hamilton funding assumption. funding a debt and paying off a debt are not the same thing. they are in some ways opposites. we know this when we make payments on credit cards, we are not paying them off when we make the minimum payment. this is a funny thing that has happened to hamilton's legacy. it is not just that most people don't get it. i

will be do something quickly from the internet. if you put in a few search terms around hamilton, debt, etc., you can get this. paying for the revolutionary war was the start of the country's debt, true. some of the founding fathers formed a group and borrowed money from france and the netherlands to pay for the war. that is also true, that is where that entry stops on the war debt. john adams went over there, he negotiated, blah

blah. the foreign debt is not the important part of the debt. the domestic debt is what drives all of the issues we still do with today. it was substantially larger in numbers and overwhelmingly more important. but the fact that some website gets this wrong should not surprise anybody, except that this website is called treasury direct kids. it is supposed to educate kids about physical matters. it is the bureau it is the department hamilton founded. it is describing his approach to debt in wrong terms. what fascinated him, what got him up in the morning to us, might sound boring, public debt. it was a thrilling opportunity and a domestic debt, the debt to rich americans that was the driver of everything i have been trying to talk about. here are some liberal scholars writing a piece about something unrelated. they're trying to fill you in on the background of hamilton and debt. they say the most pressing issue is what to do about the new nations debt. continental congress and individual states accumulated massive debts during the war. hamilton, now secretary of the treasury, wanted the new

federal government to assume the states that and pay them back in full -- states that -- debt and pay them back in full. this sort of general sense of he came into office, we have run up so much debt and i have to pay it off. i don't know exactly where that comes from. if you heard that we were saying things like that he would be like wow, all of these years later and they still don't get the brilliance of what i was trying to bring about. i don't know how he would feel about that but i find it fascinating that we don't want to know about his real relationship to the debt. he didn't try to hide it -- he didn't try to hide it, it was not steaming. he put forward in a brilliant manner and entire program based on this very idea. now, the risk to all this visionary stuff that they were working on, a central bank, central bonds, getting the state debts into federal hands as well. coalescing this massive economic force through government. the threat to all of this in the 1780's is guess what? peace. the absence of war. what is the congress going to do, they think they are sovereign entities. they are

not going to make good on these bonds. they might ignore them or cancel the debt. peace is definitely a problem, to the extent that robert war. what is the congress going to do, they think they are sovereign entities. they are not going to make good on these bonds. they might ignore them or cancel the debt. peace is definitely a problem, to the extent that robert morris'assistant wrote a letter to general washington requesting that he keep the war going a little bit longer. the idea frequently with robert morris was when he was able to get requisitions and get money, pay the bondholders. it was not about paying the soldiers any

troops. pay the bondholders. if you do not pay the bondholders, if you force the bondholders to take too big of a haircut, anarchy will prevail, stability will falter. first you pay the bondholders. that is i you keep things together. this is an idea that robert morris had. the idea was to get a tax going. a national tax. there was no nation, but a national style tax. if the states to agree to go beyond the powers they were granted in the articles of confederation. and impose and impost they called it on imported goods. he told them it was just the beginning. if we can get them to do that

we will have other kinds of domestic taxes as well as. this is the vision for forming nationhood. you can tie it together by collecting in an interstate matter, taxes earmarked for federal bonds. that doesn't sound exactly what we think of when we think of a unified nation. that is what they thought would gather up all of this economic force, all of this wealth, all of this power, and make it grow and become dynamic. that is a really skeletal idea of the things they began to develop in the 1780's. hamilton fought in eight more new wants ways than morris could have probably. put into effect in the 1790's, i will check with my watch and see how we are doing. i will sip some water. in 1783 they --

this is hamilton to my mind. i see him being born in 1782, which is why conceit about this whole thing. his first formative political action on a countrywide stage was to involve himself in a conspiracy. it was to threaten the continental congress, to threaten the states with a military coup in order to bring about the very scheme i described. this is fortuitous in some ways. the officer class had not been paid, they were very fed up about that. they sent officers to philadelphia to demand payment. hamilton and morris and their crew were finding it very difficult to get this tax passed to have the effect of creating the unification of the country around the bonds. they seize on this opportunity that is

presented by the angry officer class to suggest that they should also become a bondholders. they should join in the fight to get the bonds funded via the tax. if the arm -- if the officer class of the army were to refuse to lay down their arms with peace, you have the strongest lobby, literally the strongest that there is. you have an armed force behind this. this was a very dangerous thing to try and do, as washington told hamilton a little later. this was a threat potentially to the republican nature of the country that was supposedly being formed to the states. they did it though, they tried. think of the incredible audacity, the incredible fearlessness, the incredible ability to take risks with his future reputation and maybe his life. his relationships with his

father-in-law, if this had come to light in the way that it could have, think of the incredible high wire act this was. hamilton goes as far as to try and get washington involved in to lead this effort. washington demurrers. what happened is by the way, people city nuremberg crisis was a failure, in many ways it was, washington was not deposed by angry officers. the system continued, the army happily continued under civilian command. all that was good. really, what happened partly was the officer class did get added to the bond holding class. it was the compromise, washington supported that. now you have the other components of the scheme, you have the officer class of the armed forces involved in the same economic dynamic relationship. you can see the nuernberg conspiracy is a failure. you can also see it as a success. coming out of the conspiracy he kind of sets the table for what he is going to do in the 1790's. he has a new

relationship with george washington, and you might think because washington counseled hamilton, an army is a dangerous thing to play with. you would think that washington had thought, well hamilton is crazy, i had to stay away from him. actually, their correspondents after the conspiracy is a fascinating study in the dynamics of their always fascinating tents and important relationship -- tense and important relationship. washington makes it clear he is 100% in favor of being sure the country is being in a position, this is again towards leading

towards nationalism, in a pose edition -- in a position to pay the public creditors. this is a vision that washington shared. we have the sort of picture of the hamilton scheme. the consultation and -- concentration of american wealth in a bonded government debt to the rich and obligation to the rich, all in federal rather than state hands. it is hard, they felt they were not getting anywhere sometimes. an interstate obligation to align with the interest of the rich. also, the financial interest in general and the social interest. it is a puzzle you are trying to put together, this system, to make it perfect or complete. you have the final click peace which is the concentration of military power in this same bonded debt. this combines a wealth with government, with force. actual, literal force. this leads to

the idea of tax collection. pulling the country together and tax enforcement putting the country together. there you have the basis i would say of the hamilton scheme. i think here, we might begin to see how some people at the time could consider this whole thing a bit of a scheme, a bit of a scam even. when i said he whole thing, i mean the american revolution, the war of independence. what is about to happen was the forming of the nation itself as a mechanism for in reaching rich at the expense of the poor and ordinary. you could see how some people might take that position given everything i have just described. hamilton had enemies. i think you know he had enemies, because we know

about the division in american culture. this is jefferson versus hamilton basically, or jefferson and madison versus hamilton. i want to tell you -- i want to complicate that story a little bit. there are other enemies that come first. if we still talking about the 1780's, jefferson and hamilton were not enemies in the 1780's, they did not have anything to do with each other. they come into the cabinet and they will work together in the 1790's. you meet people on a new job and you are like hi, nice to meet you. then you realize this person is like my enemy. and think this person will ruin everything. madison, who became hamilton's more effective enemy in the legislature. madison and hamilton were close allies in everything i told you about except maybe the newburgh thing. madison was very committed to all of the things we just talked about. they were the two hotshot lawyers in the continental congress pouring over the continental congress

to find ways to expand the federal power. you know madison was committed to the federal power and to nationhood. only later did the differences between hamilton and madison become so overwhelming. the enemies that hamilton had in the 1780's are a group of people whose names are not super well known, but they represent a movement, a populist movement. it had its own ideas about finance, if i may use that word. about money, american wealth, accountability to the people, they meant themselves, the ordinary people. these are people frequently without the vote. of course, you had to a property to have the vote. to run for office you had to have even more property. they wanted the

vote, they wanted to vote for white men. they wanted the vote for white men without property. what they wanted to do was do things like breakup government monopolies, fix prices, stop the foreclosures, enables small-scale credit for ordinary people. in that sense they would build their own financial system in what they would consider a more democratic way. without the vote, they ride. they were -- without the vote today rioted. they did all kinds of illegal things. we get this torches and pitchforks idea of the mob at the time. they tore down people's houses. there was violence involved in this. along with the torches and pitchforks image, they wrote resolutions, they said that they wanted. what they wanted was democracy. of course,

this is anathema to the founding generation. if you think about what this really meant at the time, with the populists wanted to do was break the connection between property and dissipation. citizenship in that sense. they wanted to break the property connection between property and rights, property and liberty. that is an ancient connection as far as the famous founding fathers are concerned. breaking is a horror show, you have mopped rule, you have anarchy. these names are not names that have gone down in history the way to names at the famous founders are. i will tell you anyway to get them on the record. thomas young, a doctor and activist. james cannon, a math teacher. christopher marshall, a pharmacist, they were both labor organizers.

liam finley a weaver who became a lawyer. and herrmann who had a vision about an american society. he wanted to end slavery, stop stealing indian land. he started writing about this in the 1760's. he believed in progressive taxation. he believe there should be some form of taking care of people when they get too old to work, which we might call social security. he wanted government credit programs. the end to dynastic wealth, regulation, they actually called it regulation of the power of wealth. the thing about husband, i would like to get this on the record, he was not alone. he saw these things. literally he had the kind of mind, where he actually saw these things. he had literal visions. everything

i said that sounds like the new deal, he saw them. he spent his life on a next her g of the book of daniel. the populists were not in our terms necessarily, they were not modern, rational, scientific liberal types. there is a certain in a liberalism to use a term around right now about some of their visions. like you might see in the abolitionist movement. it is not like a we did a study and it is more effective if you don't have slavery. it is a moral calling from a vision that might seem outside of the enlightenment vision that i would say hamilton represents among others. there is an opposition for you, we won't have time to get to the jefferson-madison opposition. i want to get this other piece in. with the hamilton scheme coming on strong, about to get put in place, it is about to come in

the constitution. he is about to become the secretary of treasury. the opposition is this white working class of the day. in a interesting scope between socialistic ideas and a small capitalistic ideas. a dire opposition to that, that is what sets off a lot of the explosions that i believe, -- amended on this note so we can get some question-and-answer in here. there are still with us in many ways today. i will leave it at that. thank you for your very kind attention today. thanks a lot. as we (applause) are about to do the question and answer let me say one more thing. i want to thank the museum of american finance for its tolerance of my

eccentric and -- eccentric approach. also the alexander hamilton awareness society. i don't know if you will still be speaking to me after this, even if you are not i thank you very much for your liberal approach to these kind of dissenting views. how are we doing this q&a? is there a microphone going around? hi proposal for -- iran and an american system now a on hamilton, the proposal for the substitute for the word finance credit,, since hamilton's work was all devoted to the work of public credit and i suggest that gives a higher concept to the kind of machinations use carrying out because the purpose of the credit of wanting the financial class to the government to develop the country, he had tremendous support from some working class

people as you know from the constitutional activities here in new york, the great ship hamilton that was sent down broadway and support of the constitution, because he was going to build the country, that is what i would suggest. >> i think it is a better word, i'm not sure it's gonna sell copies of my book necessarily, i agree that it is the most accurate term possibly. >> was hamilton a colder himself? >> i'm glad this came up actually, people spent a lot of time jefferson, madison, was he a bond holder, i think that raises a question about personal corruption, and i would like to make this clear and i think it's really interesting that while he hung out with a lot of the people who would very directly benefit, he thought he wanted to hang out with them and make things better for them, that's how he

thought he was building the country, people spend a lot of time jefferson and medicine and others trying to prove that hamilton was personally corrupt, and would personally benefit from his anna projects, i think it's so fascinating that they feel to prove that i think they feel to prove it because his vision was, like robert morris was skimming and he didn't think anything wrong of it and i don't know if he hadn't, i don't feel peter and, how so i don't know but he was not doing that and in think of it as campaign, he had a different vision, he wanted to author and, empire he was and looking to get a few bucks on the side so i'm glad that came up because when people accused him of corruption they should have, if they want to accuse sanitation of -- his sister not his personal interests, yes, sorry

this gentleman carrying the microphone, then you sir, thank you for your lovely top i want to get some insight into the formative years, i had the greatest esteem for our so i wondered if you could give us more information on the development of this character being borne out of wedlock again denied access to christian. >> i can't, partially because as i was saying that aspect of, there is, michael, that man in the back he has his hand up briefly he can tell you everything i would say there is to know about that and he's working on that now, i guess as i was saying my interest just as an ally in the back story, you know i talked about his relationship with washington for a, second i could do along and i have on that and i find the most fascinating relationship there is but i

find i'm not interested in how that might relate to his, you know father issues or whatever, not because i don't think that's an interesting subject, is just i'm interested in my father issues, if i knew some of you are better i would be interested in your as but everyone has them and i'm always looking for the things about him that make him different but there are obviously whole other ways to look at it this and michael has a lot of that information, i'm sorry the microphone has been handed away but we can come back to that. >> how did the revolutionary war soldiers unless people fear under the, i understand that the officers became holders, how did the revolutionary roll out today unless the soldiers, how did they fare.? >> there's a long complicated story, to make a short answer they did not voice their opinion and fair very well,

they were not made gentleman and many of them went unpaid in the end and so they began to get a sense, whether you will agree with them or not that this whole thing, this 70 years of war had been nothing for them and only for enriching the class of people who are already rich and they knew as their vocal creditors who they were already intended to emirates we consider user us and closing their properties and so for us you can see how this conflict would develop. anyone else? i, we all passed on the way in the statue of george washington out there and i can see that and behind him there's this bundle of sticks wrapped up which is a symbol for strength and unity

and they are called -- the word of fascism so it's not useful of course to call him a fascist but he is what you're talking about, the combination of financial power and military power, is not on the spectrum so to speak? >> yet it is not useful to me to use that term, partially because i don't know enough technically speaking about fascism to apply it, it's an 18 century term, i have seen arguments where people are saying exactly what you are saying, it's on the spectrum and if you are trying to enrich the families and manage the economy in that way maybe, i guess i would go with your statement that it's not useful because, categorizing is not really what i try to do when

i'm writing books about this stuff we are talking about it, kind of throws a damper, what i try to do is make it my own interpretation and my own engagement with the material and i try to make it feel to me like it's coming alive and so because that term wouldn't have existed and has so many connotations that are so many damning, flows alike for them? how excited was hamilton when he saw the opportunities and so other people can do that, other people can decide and have these debates and analogies and this may be ironic because i'm taking you to places that are quite critical but it's not because i'm scared to use the term because people like me are being agree, i've been accused of that, i'm not scared to use it i just don't think it helps bring anything to life but i do think it's a good ally and have thought and worth pursuing, you

know, thanks to bring it up, i have to watch the microphones i can just call on people. i'm watching, this gentleman, yes it, is this working? >> yes. >> i think i don't understand something because what you just explained, i don't know why the hamilton awareness group to you for that, what is bad about this or manages to hopeless capitalist. >> you may be but i was just kidding when i said i don't after speaking to me after this, my take on hamilton is obviously critical and so there is nothing necessarily bad about it but some people, i mean this is what's so interesting, there was actually it was my first book and it had

a major role at a concert else of everything i was talking about and do you know people who read, that some of them said to me you know i finished up again i hate that guy, i hate him, i thought well that was not my intention, i get why you could find a frightening in some ways any might not subscribe to his vision for the country and a lot of people today, and i don't hate it but i do think sometimes that major enthusiasts do not, i'm not saying this about the -- people, but i'm happy to say but i would also say, i do think some of the big enthusiastic at the moment are touchy when you bring up some of the nuts and bolts reality of how this stuff works or any way seem to work to those who did everything

they could to stop it, i don't think it's necessarily bad, i just think some people think it is. >> one more. >> not all of us here too by the way. >> i'm not saying everybody hates me by the way. >> that was a joke when you talk about, hamilton, his effect on, on the economy and the dichotomy between the soldiers in the upper classes, hamilton actually believed that corporations should be and citizens have the same rights. my understanding which totally gets that. however the supreme court is just like that into play and other -- i do with the federal society and going back to the region of tenth of constitution. you've written about that quite a bit. you

mentioned. >> how long do we have here? >> about 30 seconds for that one? here's what i want to say about that. i want to bring to the whole corporation's people think. i will say that in federal 78 -- beloved by many as a great defensive the independence of the judiciary, he makes quite -- a condition he can do to step down more democratic physical type of legislation since you bring up the supreme court social talking about that right now. they brought us some modern liberalism has played a lot of faith in the independence of the supreme court of a number of important issues. that is not necessarily the way hamilton thought that was supposed to work. the independence judiciary can often make undemocratic decision and this in some way i was a lawyer for getting people

to ratify the constitution. would you say you are wrapped up? things to everyone who sponsored this. thank you all for coming out. >> seaspan as journal live with every day with news in all of the issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning andrew -- -- you heard about

visions for westward expansion. particularly those from alexander hamilton and thomas jefferson. also discussed, multiple federal law aimed at controlling land distribution and the role of the line taking native american lands. this is an hour and 15 minutes.