Founders History: Three Capricorns
A Republic, if you can keep it.
Benjamin Franklin
To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.
Richard Henry Lee
There is a certain enthusiasm in liberty, that makes human nature rise above itself, in acts of bravery and heroism.
Alexander Hamilton
January is the month for resolutions when you declare your intent, shaping your destiny with new goals and new habits. For January’s edition of Founders History, we are going to look at three January babies, Capricorns, who shaped our culture, our government, and the relationship between our financial systems and government. In a way, the lives of these three men serve as bookends to the series of events that gave birth to our nation.
We will spend extra time on Founding Father Richard Henry Lee, whose name is not mentioned as often as the members of the Founding Fathers, yet he played a vital role in the push to declare independence. Just as importantly, he also employed a strategy as an Antifederalist when opposing the Constitution that led the way for the Bill of Rights to be formalized.
As a Capricorn myself, I’m happy to share my birth sign with these Founders. No association of greatness on my part is implied.
The Founding Capricorns?
Benjamin Franklin
Benjamin Franklin was born January 17th, 1706 in Boston Massachusetts. Many describe Franklin as a polymath. Polymath is a sterile term from my perspective. It has the ring of AP class vocabulary conferring ability without the recognition of the zeal, adventure and playful nature that Franklin possessed.
Franklin crammed many lives into one. He is referred to as the First American due to his advocacy of colonial independence. His accomplishments embodied why the American colonies could stand alone and break from British restraint and European influence. His achievements spanned many fields of discipline: scientist, inventor, publisher, author, diplomat, member of the British Royal Society, political philosopher and statesman.
But he was loved for his sense of humor and common sense. One of Franklin’s most successful business endeavors was his Poor Richard’s Almanac The first edition appeared in 1733, published under the name Ricard Saunders.
The almanac was a best seller in the American colonies printing up to 10,000 copies a year. Its success brought wealth to Benjamin Franklin. Poor Richard’s Almanack was so popular that Napoleon ordered it translated into Italian and later it was also translated into French.
Franklin, while inventive, drew inspiration from the past. Richard Saunders was a British doctor and astrologer who wrote under the anagram of “Cardanus Rider”. Saunders, too, published an almanac called “Rider’s British Merlin”, a publication that circulated from 1626 to the 1830s.
As a marketing ploy and hook for the Almanac, Franklin predicted the death of his competitor Titan Leeds, and continued the hoax for some time. Eventually Leeds confronted Franklin only to receive the fable that someone else had been printing the Almanac as an inferior impostor.
The Almanac contained many of Franklin’s sayings. In a sense he was America’s first self help, life coach.
Early to bed, early to rise
Makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise.
That could actually be a tweet.
If you have found this article enjoyable and compelling, please give it a like. That is gold. It doesn’t cost a thing, but it will help my efforts here. Other platforms will prevent you from simply seeing these articles, and any time they can be surfaced to someone who will take the plunge would be a huge help. Thank you, you’re awesome.
But that spirit of self improvement, in a sense a form of self determination, embodied what the colonial culture exhibited as they struggled to forge new lives for themselves. Franklin was a staunch supporter of both formal and self education, and while supporting educational institutions, he also advocated for the individual to read and learn on their own. Having been pulled from formal education, this was the path that he took for his success.
Franklin’s work was instrumental during the days leading up to the Declaration of Independence, when he was appointed to the Committee of Five responsible for drafting a formal declaration the colonies intent. There he and John Adams acted as an editor for Jefferson’s work. Franklin would later represent the colonies in France, forging new relationships based in part on his notoriety and flair.
Richard Henry Lee
Richard Henry Lee was born on January 20th, 1732 in Stratford Virginia. His family were descendants of Richard Lee who settled in Virginia in 1639 and made his wealth with tobacco. Lee’s father was Colonel Thomas Lee who served as Royal Governor of Virginia. Lee’s pedigree earned him prominence, and at the age of 16 he attended the Queen Elizabeth Grammar School in Wakefield England. His parents passed away in 1750, and upon his return he divided his estate with his brother. Lee was a slave owner, yet advocated for a high tax on importation of slaves from abroad during his tenure in the House of Burgesses.
Early on in his political career, Lee took on radical views regarding colonial independence, and was one of the first members of the Committees of Correspondence. These organizations were committed to the opposition of the British Parliament. Lee protested the Stamp Act, and through the Committees of Correspondence was introduced to Samuel Adams. The two formed an alliance that later became the driving force in the Continental Congresses to declare independence from Britain, standing in opposition to John Dickinson who hoped for reconciliation.
During his service at the Continental Congresses, Lee distinguished himself as a great orator. Some referred to him as a blend of Cicero and John Dickinson. This earned him the nomination to write a resolution regarding the Colonies' response to attacks from the British and the occupation of Massachusetts. Lee introduced his resolution in June of 1776. Debate over its merits paved the way for the acceptance of formal separation from Britain, as advocated by John and Samuel Adams.
Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved. That it is expedient forthwith to take the most effectual measures for forming foreign Alliances. That a plan of confederation be prepared and transmitted to the respective Colonies for their consideration and approbation.
Lee Resolution
Richard Henry Lee, June 7 1776
Ratified July 2 1776
Lee’s role was not only political during the Revolution, he also fought in the militia in the small skirmish named the Battle of Stratford Landing in 1781.
Alexander Hamilton
Our final Founding Father for this examination is Alexander Hamilton, who was born on January 11th, 1755 Charlestown, Nevis, in the Caribbean. He was born out of wedlock to James Hamilton and Rachel Faucette. Though the youngest of the Founding Fathers, he was arguably one of the most influential in shaping our country after we won the War For Independence.
Hamilton is controversial to many, and in many ways puzzling to me. While I think he was a creature of the banks, his accomplishments and rise to prominence has to be admired. He came from nothing, and as a bastard during the late 1700s there were social implications that were aligned against the rise of someone of ignoble and sinful birth. Perhaps that’s what drove Hamilton so relentlessly. His father abandoned his family when Hamilton was 9, and at the age of 11 Hamilton’s mother passed away. Through a stroke of luck, Hamilton became an apprentice where his talent was noted, and he was sent to a grammar school in New Jersey. Eventually he was accepted at College of New Jersey (Princeton University), but Hamilton left when he outpaced the curriculum. Later Hamilton was accepted into King’s College (Columbia University) in New York City.
For an illegitimate child this is an astounding achievement during the 1700s. From Caribbean to New Jersey to New York.
Hamilton’s intent was to rise in stature in society, and his marriage to Elizabeth Schuyler gained him access to the upper class. During his time at Columbia University, he became absorbed with the cause of the American Revolution, and in 1781 served as General Washington’s aide de camp. Obtaining a field commission, Hamilton fought with distinction in the Battle of Yorktown, and was considered to have excellent leadership ability. At the age of 24. In 1782 he passed the bar exam in New York. By the age 31 he was the first Secretary of Treasury.
This is the mark of an exceptional person, by any measure.
But often men of superior talent have far grander desires and even higher avarice. Hamilton falls into this category at times.
The Articles of Confederation, which formed the first government of the United States, proved to be inadequate to manage the emerging young nation. The states all issued their own currency, and the national government did not have power to raise taxes, so the debt incurred by the colonies during the war was at risk of not being paid. Many recognized that a stronger central system was needed.
The Constitutional Convention was convened in 1787, and while Hamilton was in attendance, he did not have the authority to vote on his home state’s behalf. This did not prevent Hamilton from aiding those who favored a stronger national government, and he, along with James Madison and John Jay, collaborated on a series of essays written under the pen name Publius. Known today as the Federalist Papers, these essays defended the new proposed Constitution. Hamilton demonstrated his genius yet again by authoring 51 of the 85 essays.
For example in Federalist 9, Hamilton argued that a strong form or government, in order to remain cohesive, should be on the lookout for the formation of political interests or factions.
A firm union will be of the utmost moment to the peace and liberty of the states, as a barrier against domestic faction and insurrection. It is impossible to read the history of the petty republics of Greece and Italy, without feeling sensations of horror and disgust at the distractions with which they were continually agitated, and at the rapid succession of revolutions, by which they were kept perpetually vibrating between the extremes of tyranny and anarchy. If they exhibit occasional calms, these only serve as short-lived contrasts to the furious storms that are to succeed.
Government’s role was to take steps to prevent factions from forming in the first place, as a faction could generate violence and as Hamilton demonstrated, could end the stability of a government. This illustrates a dichotomy between liberty and security. The trouble with a majority rule is that it sewed the seeds for discontent that a dictator such as Napoleon could capitalize on.
But Hamilton did have some alarming ideas that caused concern. In a long speech he laid out what was essentially an authoritarian state. While there would be elections, the positions of the executive and senate roles would be for life. Congress would have two houses, with the lower house being an elected position. Governors would have ultimate veto authority at the state level, the national executive would have ultimate veto power at the federal level.
This is a departure from the narrow and defined powers as described in the Federalist Papers. Whether this was a bait and switch on Hamilton’s part or just evolution in his thinking, it would alarm anyone who had just cast off a monarch.
Lee, the Antifederalists and the Poison Pill
Those who held states rights as sacred saw the new proposed Constitution as dangerous. It did not have written guarantees of the right to free speech, freedom of religious practice and the right to bear arms. This group maintained that this was the road back to central authority. When you read the documents of that period you’ll see the use of the term “monarchy” to describe what many thought results from a strong national government. In modern terms, that is dictatorship in its worst form, or oligarchy should society be divided up into managed silos of activity.
The Antifederalists arose in opposition to the proposal of centralized power on a national level. That roster included Patrick Henry, George Mason, Samuel Adams, Elbridge Gerry, and Richard Henry Lee. To their thinking, a federal republic was properly defined under the Articles of Confederation, and the Articles supported the concept “think locally, act locally” via the political processes of the states. Many Antifederalists acknowledged the issues that the national government had, but consolidation was not the answer. Any consolidation would result in a loss of rights.
Lee, along with others like Patrick Henry, did not attend the Constitutional Convention, claiming “I smelt a rat in Philadelphia, tending toward the monarchy”. He did have a plan to halt the acceptance of the new Constitution. Today we call this a “poison pill” and it generally refers to actions that a company takes when threatened with a hostile takeover or buyout. Essentially a poison pill is when a company has provisions in place that make a hostile purchase less economically inviting, such as expensive buyout packages or contracts with liabilities that would put the buyer in a less favorable position.
In terms of legislation, a poison pill for a bill would be an amendment.
Lee’s thinking was as follows: add amendments which essentially called the original proposed Constitution into doubt, in hopes that the required majority votes of 9 states would not be achieved. While a political tactic, Lee did propose concepts that represented what would become the Bill of Rights. Many were concerned that the new Constitution lacked provisions such as clear definition of freedom of speech, religion, and the right to a fair trial. This resonated with many citizens who feared that a strong federal government could infringe upon their rights. At worst the Constitution would gain these proposed amendments and be passed, at best a majority of 9 states would not be achieved and resulting in a second Constitutional Convention. Going back to drawing board would be the chance to draft a better proposal.
While the poison pill did not prevent ratification as Lee intended, it raised awareness of what the Constitution lacked, and Madison took up the charge to add the Amendments that would become the Bill of Rights in 1791. To Lee’s thinking, the compromise that Madison championed was not enough to prevent a slow usurpation of power by the national government.
The Aftermath
Indeed, as Secretary of the Treasury, Hamilton would create a national bank, using the concept implied powers of the Constitution to be the basis as an argument against Jefferson regarding the power of Congress to create such an entity. To the Antifederalists, this was the very thing that they warned of: the national government inventing powers for itself. While convenient and perhaps necessary, different crises would always arise and the government that could grant itself power would always find an excuse to do so. This is the very definition of overreach.
As we discussed in previous Founders History, even the best minds of the Founding Fathers tore up the Constitution. John Adams’ ratification of the Alien and Sedition Acts is a prime example of that.
Founders History: The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 To Save Our Country
While I am not a fan of Hamilton, who seemed very eager to expand national power and use debt as a method of authority, I do want to point out his actions that surprised me and paint different dimensions of his personality and character. These actions contributed to a rivalry which led to the duel with Aaron Burr, and to Hamilton’s death.
The election of 1800 resulted in a tie between the two Democrat Republican candidates Jefferson and Aaron Burr. This meant that the House of Representatives would choose the victor. Despite their enmity, Hamilton urged the House to vote for Jefferson. Though they had been at odds ideologically, Hamilton believed Jefferson would be more temperate in his approach to government power. Hamilton wrote:
Mr. Jefferson, though too revolutionary in his notions, is yet a lover of liberty and will be desirous of something like orderly Government – Mr. Burr loves nothing but himself – thinks of nothing but his own aggrandizement – and will be content with nothing short of permanent power and in his own hands – No compact, that he should make with any passion in his breast except Ambition, could be relied upon by himself – How then should we be able to rely upon any agreement with him? Mr. Jefferson, I suspect will not dare much Mr. Burr will dare every thing in the sanguine hope of effecting every thing
Jefferson was selected as president, Burr as vice president. Later Jefferson would write of Burr:
His conduct very soon inspired me with distrust. I habitually cautioned Mr Madison against trusting him too much.
In the end, Hamilton chose principal and campaigned for his political enemy, Jefferson. This does say something about Hamilton’s judgment of character. Despite his very authoritarian leanings, Hamilton demonstrated his ability to set aside personal differences when choosing the next leader of our growing nation.
