64 
INTRODUCTION. 
before the revolution, though very deficient in methodical arrangement, and on 
many points extremely discursive, was, nevertheless, justly considered as consti¬ 
tuting the foundation of a system of political economy, and establishing land¬ 
marks for the guidance of subsequent investigation. 
Hamilton discussed, with surpassing ability, the fiscal policy of the government 
in four reports. The first of which was on the public credit; the second, on a 
national bank; the third, upon manufactures; and the fourth,,on the establishment 
of a mint. To point out the proper means for paying the public debts of the union 
and of the states was the object of the first report. He recommended that no discri¬ 
mination should be made between the creditors of the United States and those of 
the several members of the confederacy, and that the new system of finance 
should include the payment of all by the general government. 
The report on a national bank commenced with the proposition that such an 
institution would be of primary importance, for a prosperous administration of 
the finances, and of eminent utility, connected with the operations for the support 
of public credit, and maintained the expediency of establishing such an institu¬ 
tion, in a train of powerful arguments, derived from a view of the benefits which, 
it was alleged, resulted to trade and industry from public banks, as well as those 
affecting credit, which, as was supposed, such an institution would afford in the 
peculiar circumstances of the country. The whole subject of banking, the uses 
and relation of specie and circulating notes, their respective advantages and in¬ 
conveniences as a currency, the arguments in favor of banks, and the objections 
to which they were obnoxious, were all thoroughly discussed. The president 
had required written opinions from the members of the cabinet, concerning the 
constitutionality of a bank. Mr. Jefferson, secretary of state, and Mr. Randolph, 
attorney-general, in their opinions denied the power of congress to establish such 
an institution. Hamilton’s report may be considered a reply to these opinions, 
and whatever may be the merits of that still vexed question, this paper is univer¬ 
sally conceded to be an able vindication of the side of the argument which the 
author adopted. 
