Transcripts For CSPAN3 Alexander Hamilton Myths 20170226

Good afternoon. Welcome to the methodist church. Im the pastor of this congregation. We welcome you to this exciting event sponsored by the Alexander Hamilton Awareness Society. An important event in their organization and an important vent for our congregation. We are the oldest meth death congregation in the United States. We are celebrating our 250th year. In many ways it is fair to say that this congregation grew up with this country. It seems that our presence in American History have defined this congregations history as well. When we consider the legacy, influence, and importance of what we can learn from the Founding Fathers of this country, i think that lends to my experience here today. I look for those themes. I look for the ways in which the threads and influences of this church and the way in which those things are impacted by the likes of Alexander Hamilton. Whatever it is that brings you here, whenever you hope to learn, whatever questions you bring, whatever insights you hope to gain, i hope that you find them fulfilled. I trust that you will. I look forward to spending time with you this afternoon. Good afternoon. I am president of the Alexander Hamilton Awareness Society. It is more familiarly known as the aha society. We just celebrated our fifth anniversary. Thank you to the cognition of john Street Methodist Church for hosting this event. It is part of happy birthday hamilton 2017. We invite you to join us tomorrow for the wreath laying ceremony at hamiltons grave. It will include the coast guards and officials. He spent the first eight years of his life in davis and the second eight years in st. Croix. Theyre going to be there speaking and presenting. It will be a nice event. I would like to let you know that the premiere will be there tomorrow. The ambassador will be there as ell. We look forward to have you there. We have bob white, the president of the Alexander Hamilton society of st. Croix. He has some special things hes brought from rachels grave, Alexander Hamiltons mother, to share with us and place at tomorrows ceremony. It will be a nice addition as well. Congratulations to the church and your milestone, the 250th, and this building is the third building which is celebrating its 175th anniversary, built in 1841. Right through this wall, do you know whats right behind this wall . 57 maiden lane. That is where Thomas Jefferson lived. That is where jefferson, madison, and hamilton got together to work out the nations debts and where the permanent capital of the United States should be. Its also inspired in the musical, where it says i want to be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened, the room where it happened. It happened right through this wall. Just 10 days from now, two years ago, on january 2015, the show debuted off broadway, hoping to make it to broadway. The show made it to broadway. The name, hamilton an american musical. This musical has introduced millions of people around the nation and around the world to Alexander Hamilton. People are looking into his background with a positive spirit. Why has hamilton been considered a less significant founder in the minds of the public . His characterization, the convenient villain, but it was based on miths. So new readers of the hamilton musical and fans start going in and reading this characterization, this very confusing, so our website, the ahasociety. Org, we share the recommended books that do relay Accurate Information about Alexander Hamilton. Subsequent authors on hamilton would previously rely on other accomplished writers that ended up promulgating a lot of mischaracterizations. Thats why hamilton just wasnt so well known and revered before the look hes getting now. Our speaker today has done the actual hard work of getting past the books and getting to the primary source, of getting to the actual report, getting to the actual letters. Monumental book Alexander Hamilton and the persistence of myth, which one de of biographies is of the most important books on lexander hamilton. Stephen knott served as cochair of the university of virginias president ial Oral History Program and directed the Ronald Reagan oral history project. Professor knott received his ph. D. From Boston College and has taught at the United States air force academy and the university of virginia. Hes the author of the book that we just mentioned, the persistence of myth, also the secret and sanctioned covert operations of the american presidency, which Alexander Hamilton was also involved with that, with general George Washington. Dr. Knott recently coauthored a book about hamilton and washington. The talk will be followed by q a, so you could prepare concise questions, that will be terrific for after the talk. Help me welcome Stephen Knott. [applause] dr. Knott thank you. Thank you all. Thank you very much. I appreciate you coming out on this cold winters day. I particularly want to thank everyone involved with the Alexander Hamilton Awareness Society. These guys do terrific work in terms of keeping hamiltons legacy alive for your fellow citizens. I also want to thank the john Street Methodist Church for providing such a beautiful venue for my talk today. Let me begin by noting that i never believed in my life when i wrote Alexander Hamilton and the persistence of myth well over 15 years ago that hamilton would be restored, not only to his rightful place as a founding father, but would also become a broadway celebrity. I never dreamed in my wildest imagination that that would happen when i was writing this book back in 19981999. Let me start by noting that i believe that alexander New Hampshire i will ton was the first victim of the politics of personal destruction. Thomas jefferson, james madison, james monroe, and other jeffersonian lieutenants made it their sort of lifes work in the 179 on 0s and even after hamiltons death to besmirch his reputation. And part of the reason for this was their objection on policy grounds to the federalist presidency of George Washington. But it was simply easier, it was more politically palatable to attack Alexander Hamilton than it was to attack George Washington, the father of his country. So washington, for the most part, not all, but for the most part of washingtons presidency was off limits to the kind of personal and political attacks that were directed against Alexander Hamilton during his life. Even after the duel, even after the death of hamilton at the hands of aaron burr, jefferson and his lieutenants understood the damage that a dead hamilton could do in terms of presenting a threat to the jeffersonian agenda. And, in fact, their Immediate Reaction as a chain of correspondents that goes back and forth between madison and monroe and noah webster and other jeffersonians expressing deep concern over the potential emotional reaction to hamiltons death and the damage that might do to the jeffersonian agenda. Hamiltons death in 1804 gave jefferson and john adams, another opponent of hamiltons, some 22 years in which to spin the historical record. Hamilton dies in 1804, jefferson and adams, of course, die on the fourth of july on 1826. They use that time to, as i said, sort of spin historical record in a direction favorable to the jeffersonians. Of course, madison, james madison, helped Alexander Hamilton hamm by 3 years, and as we now know, he actually goes back and doctors some of the notes that he took from the Constitution Convention to make hamilton look bad. This same desire to sort of belittle and besmirch hamiltons reputation continues the pace throughout the Democratic Party in the 19th century. Andrew jackson, for instance, believed that hamilton was the tribune of the moneyed aristocracy. Of course, jackson begins to see, or comes to see the bank of the United States and nicholas as the sort of personification of all that was wrong with Alexander Hamilton. And jackson plays that, i would call sort of the class card to the hit, and hamilton is a key figure in terms of appealing to populist sensibilities in terms of generating animus towards the bank of the United States. During the american civil war, you briefly see a kind of surrection of hamiltons reputation, his antislavery stance, his strong nationalism appeals certainly to many in the north and the new republican party, especially future president s such as james garfield, rutherford b. Hayes, benjamin harrison, and others, all revere Alexander Hamilton as the father of the American Union and perhaps the greatest of the founders next to George Washington. The 20th century very briefly at the beginning of the 20th century, hamilton retains his status as an impressive founder, at least for those who considered themselves progressive. Im thinking particularly of Teddy Roosevelt, henry cabot lodge, you can call him a progressive, mostly in the republican party. These are people who revere Alexander Hamilton. Hes not particularly well liked in the populist wing of the Democratic Party. William jennings bryant, for instance, sees him as the founding plutocrat. Hamiltons reputation in the 20th century, it begins to decline fairly rapidly. While he was revered by president s such as Warren Harding and calvin coolidge, those two president s are not exactly guaranteed to make him a revered figure in the academic circles, shall we say. Its hardings secretary of the treasury, andrew mellon, who he rects this statue that exists to this day on the grounds of the treasury in may 1923, but when the great crash comes, as they say in my book, Alexander Hamilton might well have been the chairman of the Republican National committee in terms of his reputation in the media, because he was so warmly embraced by harding and oolidge and mellon, and that perception of his as the founding father of wall street, you begin to see a radical decline in hamiltons reputation in the late 1920s and throughout the new deal year. It really is Franklin Roosevelt more than any other president who elevates Thomas Jefferson into the pantheon of american greats. Its roosevelt who he rects the Jefferson Memorial, the beautiful title, basin memorial in washington, d. C. And in so doing, there is kind of an iron law in American History, as one falls, the other rises, and jefferson really comes into his own in a sense in terms of the american mind. In the 1930s and 1940s. The only book rethrough roosevelt ever wrote was a book by Claude Bowers called jefferson and hamilton and the struggle for democracy in america. And if i can be blunt, this is a godawful book that actually took the nation somewhat by storm. F. D. R. Found this book to be brilliant in his review, and i think the new york world, an obscure newspaper that no longer exists, but it was a glowing review. Now, if you look by book at this bowers, hamilton is portrayed as a dictator, or budding dictator, we should say. Bower repeatedly used the terms dictatorial, characterizing hamilton, and he argues that hamilton considered himself to of part of the race military masters. So hamilton was a budding fascist during the founding era, and this caricatured hamilton, believe it or not, resonates with millions of americans, including, interestingly enough, jeffersons most famous biography, who says that bowers work is a brilliant piece and actually inspired him to get into the business of writing biography, the famous sixvolume or so biography of Thomas Jefferson. Again, its f. D. R. Who erects the Jefferson Memorial in washington, d. C. , supposedly even has a hand in selecting the quotes that adorn the wall of the Jefferson Memorial. And its Franklin Roosevelt who invites a Staff Sergeant in the United States army by the name of sydney kingsley who writes the greatest, or the most successful broadway play of 1943, the patriot. And in this play, it was the hamilton of its day, the hail mary ton musical of its day, and if you go back and read the script, you see why f. D. R. Loved t. You have a cigarchomping Alexander Hamilton stomping around the stage referring to the american eople as the drunken swines. All the while eliza hamilton its besides him in a Marie Antionette outfit expressing approval of her husbands contempt for the American People, it really is beyond belief. But f. D. R. Actually invites Sidney Kingsley to stage a command performance in washington, d. C. , general George Marshall is in attendance. Felix fank further, all of Washington Society attends this play in washington, d. C. , in the president s private booth and also kingsley is invited to the dedication of the Jefferson Memorial. I say in my book, and i really dont think this is an overstatement, by the period of the second world war, Alexander Hamilton in many quarters is seen as joseph in a waist coat and breaches. That may be a little bit of an overstatement, but not by much. Fortune magazine actually has to write a piece in which they say if hamilton were alive today, we think he would fight the nazis. Things do begin to change in the late 20th century in terms of hamiltons reputation, visavis jefferson. And thats partly due i think in good measure due to the fact that civil rights and the whole africanamerican experience becomes very much part of the, at least the political agenda of the 1960s. I think also due to the fact that hamilton was the lone immigrant amongst the key, key Founding Fathers. That also begins to play, in a sense, to hamiltons favor, and you see this in the works of Richard Brookhiser and eventually working its way into Linmanuel Mirandas musical. Yet i have to point out that many miths still persist to this day regarding Alexander Hamilton. And i believe that these miths persist at least partly due to the ideological agenda of arious scholars and writers. For instance, by to Great Lengths in the persist tense of myth to sort of chip away at this idea that Alexander Hamilton referred to the American People as a great beast. The source of this goes back to henry adams book in written in 1889, the history of the jefferson administration, and adams is the first one to sort f pull this great beast quote. Hamilton allegedly said ad a dinner party around 1800 that your people, sir, are a great beast. Adams pulls this out of the object scrure jurist in massachusetts. The point im getting at here is the quote was allegedly uttered in 1800. The source, source a told source b who told source c, who then published a book 60 years later with that quote. No scholar worth his salt should cite that quote. Its a fourthhand account published 60 years after the fact, by a person who despised amilton. Ok . But this quote has taken on a life of its own. And scholars who should know better continue to cite it. Some of them will Say Something to the effect of, well, he may not have actually said it, but it sounds like hamilton. And thats, in my view, very professionally irresponsible. Let me talk about a few more miths associated with hamilton that persists to this day despite the great work of miranda and michael newton, whos in the audience today. The idea that Alexander Hamilton was an opponent or a foe of liberty. This was another myth first pop grated by the jefferson and by jefferson himself. Jefferson is the source of the quote that Alexander Hamilton believes that Julius Caesar was the greatest man who ever lived. Now, jefferson reports this 20 years after the fact in 1811, long after Alexander Hamilton is dead and not in a position to refute it. I would urge you to look at the work of an historian by the name of thomas gomez, whos done a great job in terms of dismissing that quote as fiction. But again, these things have taken on a life of their own. I have to give jefferson credit. I mean, jefferson and his lieutenant. They were masterful in terms of spinning the historical record. Their spinning persists to this day, i think youre sort of picking that up from me, and these miths are proving very resilient. Another myth, of course, is that hamilton was only concerned or solely concerned with the wellbeing of the rich and the wellborn and banks or bankers in particular. Now, it is true that hamilton was not a friend of or supporter of participatory democracy. He believed in and wanted a government that consisted of as many elements, as he put of, of stability and permanence as he could possibly infuse into the system. So, yes, did he propose a president elected for life and a senate elected for life. But i believe, along with some others, that i believe hamilton himself even made this case, what he was trying to do at the Constitutional Convention was pull his fellow delegates as far in the direction of permanence and stability as he could, so he stakes out what was arguably a somewhat extreme position and makes the more moderate national, nationalist position seem far more i think palatable and acceptable. The other, of course, charge charges that he faced in his lifetime and persisted is that he was a monarchist, and, of course, the people who push this line will cite that speech in june of 1787, in which hamilton makes the case for president elected for life. Ill leave it up to you whether you think an elected president for life subject to impeachment is an attempt to create a monarchy. But again, i would just i ask you to think or consider the possibility, again, that hamilton is trying to pull the convention as far as possible in the direction of a permanent stability. But what i will say to you is accusing somebody in the 1790s of being a monarchist was the equivalent of accusing somebody of being a communist in the 1950s. It was not an attempt to engage in any sort of debate, it was an attempt to end debate, to stifle debate, to destroy your opponent, and that is exactly what jefferson and his lieutenants were attempting to do in the 1790s. As jefferson would put it in 1802, he wants to sink the federalists into an abyss from which they would never emerge. Another issue that one frequently encounters in terms of critics of hamilton, of those who portray him as a dictatorial, plutocratic or peoplehating founder, they will focus in or key on the whiskey rebellion. This was an ongoing series of protests in western, primarily in western pennsylvania, of whiskey distillers, and hamilton and washington for a time lead the 12,000 to 14,000 men to suppress this rebellion. You will frequently find, and there are a number of books out there, including one within the last couple of years, where the whiskey rebels are portrayed very sympathetically. These are grassroots folks merely trying to stand up for their rights and to sort of embrace the spirit of 1776. But if you look at it from president washingtons position and from secretary of the treasury hamiltons position, this was one of the first tests for the new government in terms of what look, this government is four, five years old. Theres a real question as to whether its going to survive. Will obedience to law override the arms resist abc of a minority . It was, in a sense, a question of should the majority govern . Hamilton had made repeated concessions, concessions to the when i key rebels, and in return all he got in a sense was escalating violence. Threats to burn pittsburgh to the ground, harassment, violent harassment of hamiltons revenue. One guy was kept locked up for three days, and they promised him his freedom, only in return for grinding his nose off on a grindstone, ok . This was violent, and this had the potential to spiral out of control, and it was president washington who made the decision to put down the whiskey rebellion. Washington referred to that 12,000 to 14,000 men that he led as the army of the constitution. So for hamilton and washington, this was a test of the first test of the american constitution. And was law going to prevail in the United States or the use of force . Another myth in a sense i think that still percolates out there, you saw it in David Mcculloughs book on john adams, this notion that hamilton was attempting to use the quasi war with france as an opportunity to suppress domestic sense through the use of armed force, that somehow this quasi army that washington had been appointed sort of the figurehead leader and that hamilton actually led, much to that this pain, force was going to be used to march into the south to destroy jefferson and his party. This, of course, leads jefferson to write, what at least the initial draft of the kentucky resolution, makes a lear statement in favor of secession. Again, i think this is dramatically overstated by mccouple sandow a lot of hamiltons critics. As jacob cook has pointed out, when the war fades, ok, when adams strikes the deal, hamilton is in command of that army. What does he do . He disbands it, ok . A real budding closet napoleon would have taken advantage of that situation to enact his dastardly scheme. He disbands the army in his usual typical professional fashion. I think there is a tendency even in the quasiwar with france to look at hamilton in the worst possible light. What you will frequently see biographers and historians do is refer to hamiltons letter that he wrote when he was 14 years old or so in which he says i wish there were a war. I mean, what kind of teenage boy i am revealing too much, teenage boys think that way. Right . They had dreams of military glory to get them out of their groveling situation. Frequently what you see is that quote, i wish there was war, that has been pulled up as a point as an evidence of hamiltons napoleonic, warmongering, dictatorial streak, without any reference that it was written by a young teenager. Finally, the final myth, and unfortunately even though i ove what was done with hamilton the musical, this idea that Martha Washington med her randy tomcat Alexander Hamilton, it is amazing to me how frequently that is cited. Michael newton has done tremendous work in terms of pulling that apart, but there is no evidence whatsoever. It is fiction. It is fiction that Martha Washington named her horny tom cat after hamilton, and that myth lives on. Unfortunately it is propagated in the musical, which i love, by the way. Finally let me conclude. Then id like to get to your questions. I think one of the final myths and i think this is the most important of all. The fact is, Alexander Hamilton was George Washingtons closest advisor. Staff person, more than a staff person when he becomes treasury secretary, but he is his most important advisor in the matters of war, the revolution, and peace. During the first two during the administration of George Washington. He was washingtons righthand man. That should get far more attention than it does. The fact is that the George Washington should have had more in common with his fellow slave owner, fellow virginian Thomas Jefferson, but he did not. Instead, he bonded with this immigrant from an obscure speck of an island in the caribbean. And the two of them, hamilton and washington, i would argue, put aside their parochialism to im not sure hamilton ever had any parochialism to create a great nation, the United States of america, and to the end of his life, George Washington had nothing but positive things to say about Alexander Hamilton, including hamiltons character and hamiltons integrity. In fact, washington rallies to hamiltons side when hamilton confesses to the affair with maria. By the end of washingtons life, the last few years of washingtons life, he has nothing to do with Thomas Jefferson. He has completely cut him off, rightly so because jefferson had deceived his own president on multiple occasions and lied right to washingtons face. Washington finally agreed to confront jefferson about this deception. The fact is that while serving as secretary of state for president washington, jefferson was organizing the opposition and jefferson was leading the press campaign to go after first hamilton, and ultimately George Washington. So i would urge those of you in the audience today and those watching us through cspan, to look at washingtons take, his assessment of Alexander Hamilton. Washingtons reliance on Alexander Hamilton. Nd if you do so, you will be able to move beyond many of the miths i discussed this morning and goinsthee Alexander Hamilton, despite the arguments of jefferson and his lieutenants, was as american as you can get, because George Washington certainly understood that. Thank you and i would like to take your questions. [applause] i hope i left enough time. Please wait for the microphone to come to you. Nicole will be bringing around he microphone. Dr. Knott i can repeat the questions if that will elp. Revenge is sweet and i think miranda [indiscernible] dr. Knott ok. No comment. [laughter] [question indiscernible] dr. Knott that is a great question. The idea that jefferson is the champion of small government, the idea that you see directive from hamiltons libertarian critics, if you will, that hamilton is the father of big government. That hamilton will be happy with the new deal or the great society, the sort of activist federal government we see to this day. I think that is a myth as well. I am glad you mentioned that, michael. I would urge those of you in the audience to look at some of the work by a political scientist named Carson Holloway who has written extensively on this subject. Hamilton was not a believer in big government. He was a believer in energetic government, particularly in the realm of National Security. Ok . And he says accident pliftly in the federalist papers explicitly in the federalist papers that the federal government will be responsible for matters of war, peace, Foreign Policy, international commerce. That is basically it. It is not, it is not responsible, whether you like this or not, it is not responsible for the welfare of individual american citizens. In fact, i find it hard to believe that a man who wrote in the federalist papers that a power over mans subsistence is a power over a mans will would be a believer in the kind of modern welfare state that has been around for a hundred or so years. So i do think that is one of the myths about hamilton. What he wanted was a United States of america. He wanted people to think of themselves as americans, not as new yorkers or virginian and he wanted to invest enough elements, as i said, of permanence and stability in this new national government, particularly in the realm of Foreign Policy and National Security. So i think a number of progressive historians in the 20th century began to distort that record as a kind of justification for the kind of modern behemoth that we have today. And i think, again, i would urge you to take a look at mr. Holloways work, which has been far more effective on this issue. I think it was interesting when you mentioned people not wanting to quote the rest of the letter. When he said, i would willingly risk my life, not my character for my station. Even at a young age, he was cognizant of his character. Dr. Knott thank you for pointing that out. I appreciate that. You mentioned a few times the success and thoroughness of how jeffersonians spun hamilton. As a researcher and scholar, how did you start to untangle that to try to find where the truth was . Dr. Knott the inspiration for my book, i have to admit, was merrill petersons work the jeffersonian image in the american mind. Peterson is a historian at the university of virginia who is a great admirer of jefferson. I thought it would be interesting to look at this man, Alexander Hamilton, who when im beginning to write this in the late 1990s, is still seen as a malevolent force. Sort of the darth vader of the american founding. And unwinding it proved to be fairly simple. I mean, i had to make sure that i understood hamiltons record as best i could. I had to make sure i went through hamiltons writings extensively, and the writings of his contemporaries and so forth, and then the distortions begin to appear very, very quickly. Including this, i wish there was a war quote. Again, you are taking a 14 year old and applying that thinking to a man in his 40s . And people not pointing that out. So very quickly i began to see this campaign of distortion that jefferson and his lieutenants launched in the 1790s and how it carried on for decades. I mean, jefferson believed hamilton was a colossus. As he put it. And they took him seriously, i will give them that. They took him so seriously that they decided he needed to be destroyed both in life and in death. So it was not as difficult as you might imagine to start dissecting things. As long as i felt i was on solid ground, in terms of knowing hamiltons actual record. Good question. I have a question of my own. Part and a part b. Which myth do you think was most damaging to hamilton while he was alive, and which myth is currently the most damaging that is continuing to persist . Dr. Knott i would say, while he was live, probably without question, it was the monarchist angle, the british agent angle. So, jefferson and his lieutenants argue that hamilton is a monarchist but they also begin to explicitly state that hamilton was a british agent. Which by the way, must have really burned a veteran who has put his life on the line as opposed to some other folks. So i think the monarchist angle, which is closely tied with hes part of the british faction, that was incredibly damaging in the 1790s and the rest of life. He would have to try to overcome that. In our time, maybe due to the renewed and increased sensitivity surrounding issues of gender, perhaps this notion that he was a serial adulterer, which is fiction. Yes, he had an extramarital affair, i am not excusing that. But was he a serial adulterer, who had a super abundance of secretions, as john adams said . For whatever reason, john and Abigail Adams were obsessed with Alexander Hamiltons sex life. [laughter] and i think today thats why i have to say i was bothered while i loved the musical, going again to see it, i actually tried to contact linmanuel and say, can you just stop . Because he actually stopped at one point after saying that Martha Washington named her randy tomcat hamilton, he turns to the audience and he says thats true. Its not true. For somebody who seems sensitive to the idea who have gets to tell your story, i kind of wish he wouldnt cost him anything to pull that line out. So i think thats probably more damaging today. Thank you. Dr. Knott i think there is a entleman up front. You mentioned the names of several of our president s and their attitudes towards hamilton. But what was Woodrow Wilsons attitude towards the hamilton legacy . R. Knott good question. Woodrow wilson, i would say a little bit torn. Wilson admired hamiltons embrace and advocacy of an energetic executive but he found or certainly bought into the idea that hamilton dislikes the great masses of people. And he found that to be, whether it is accurate or not, objectionable. So a younger wilson seems to have some positive things to say about hamilton, but the older wilson does not. He has embraced what is going to become a 20th century Democratic Party orthodoxy that jefferson was the champion of the common man and hamilton was the champion of the wall street plutocrats and that has been the defining issue in american ife. You are going to find far more admiring statements from Teddy Roosevelt about hamilton, then you will from woodrow ilson. First of all i would like to say, i loved this book. Thank you for writing it. Second of all, more recently since the publication there have been a spat of articles about hamiltons xenophobia. Have you read any of them . Do you have any comments . Dr. Knott i have seen them. Ive seen a few pieces in relation to the quasiwar with france and tougher immigration standards. Right. Dr. Knott during the quasiwar. I think it is true. I think Many Americans were scared during 179798 with what they saw as the back channel or fifth column influence inside the United States and hamilton did advocate for tightening mmigration restrictions. Xenophobia no. I mean, this is one of the few founders who grow up in a completely different world than most of his peers. So i a legitimate concern for National Security at a time of a potential conflict with a great power strikes me as legitimate and not xenophobia. If that helps. Im troubled with the president for life and a senate for life. Dr. Knott sure. How would you choose a good president and good senator . Dr. Knott senators of course would have been chosen by the state legislators. Not by direct popular election, that does not come until the 17th amendment. And i would be troubled by it as well. We would be in the year whatever of the jimmy carter presidency. No offense to anybody. O me that is too long. Again, i hamilton wanted i am beating this to death, but he wanted to infuse as many elements of stability and permanence into the system as he could. Particularly for Foreign Policy and security reasons. I think he felt the longer you keep somebody in place, he makes an argument in the federalist papers that he would be opposed to the 22nd amendment which limits the president to two terms. He wanted as long a term as possible and as he did with many of the things he disagreed with in the final constitution, he swallowed hard and accepted it and fought like thoke get it ratified, arguably fought harder than anybody else, certainly in this state, which was key. Im hedging a little bit on your question because i am not entirely sure if hamilton himself believed that. In other words was it a tactic designed to make the more moderate nationalist proposals more palatable to the delegates . But im not going to endorse a president or senate for life. He did of course say you could be removed, or you could be impeached as a president even if you were elected for life. There were checks. Anyone else . Anybody here want to defend Thomas Jefferson . I have to confess i do suffer from jefferson derangement syndrome. [laughter] in todays new york times, there is a quote ads saying that if hamilton had lived, he was preparing to leave the country through an anticipated crisis in american democracy. Specifically, it does not explain what she meant, but had he lived another 1020 years, what impact would that have had on the present development of the American Government and policies . Dr. Knott i have always believed that Alexander Hamilton was pretty well finished by 1804. Its unfortunate. He was planning on writing a memoir, a philosophical treat is. I wish that would have happened. It would have been tremendous. But as a political force, i am not sure what i have a lot of respect for joanns work, but i am not sure what she is alluding to there. I do think hamilton and his party were pretty well done by 1804. They hold on until 1816. I believe thats the last time, maybe its 1820. I think its 1816, the last federalist candidate, rufus king. They are getting their clocks cleaned by jefferson and madison and monroe. So they have been politically outmaneuvered. Again, i will say this for jefferson, he was a much better street politician in a sense. And a much better political tactician by far than hamilton and they constantly outmaneuvered federalists. Hamilton was hoping to create this christian Constitutionalist Society as a Grassroots Network to check the jeffersonians, but i think it was too late in the game. O in my view, hamilton was spent politically by 1804. I think he kind of knew that too. I think part of the reason he challenged, or he accepted the dual with burr is this is his last patriotic act. Hes going to finish burr. I think he had a pretty good sense that he might die out there across the river here. And that that would finish aaron burr. Hamilton was going to throw away his shot, this would be burrs last shot. And it was. It did finish him politically. So i just see hamilton as a spent force by 1804. Again, without reading the entire piece or speaking with joanne freeman, that is as far as i can take it. I do know, had hamilton lived to witness the war of 1812, he would have said i told you so. You got to be prepared. You got to have a strong military, and you got to have a National Bank to fund a war. You cant just talk about war and declare war and not be prepared for it. That is committing national suicide. I think he would have felt very vindicated by the events related to the tragic mismanagement of the war of 1812 under madison. Thank you and we have our last question back here. Dr. Knott sure. Thank you for that talk. Dr. Knott thank you. How do you see the future of Alexander Hamiltons legacy in the sense that the shape of all of these appreciation and renaissance going on in the last few years . Dr. Knott i think hamiltons legacy is in good shape not just because of the great work of the Alexander Hamilton Awareness Society, but this is a more we live in a very diverse country. There is a great appreciation for issues related to immigration. I would think and i havent touched on the fact, that and i was reprimanded for this if i dont that hamilton was one of the founders of the new york society for the manumission of slaves. I am not going to say he was a radical abolitionist, he wasnt. But in contrast to jefferson, madison, monroe and some of the stalwarts in their party, hamiltons position on matters of race, the fact that it is pretty clear that he did not own slaves himself, and the fact that he is one of the founders of the manumission society, i think its going hold him in good stead as the 21st century progressive. So it may come to pass that jefferson was right, opposed in death as in life, and as one falls the other rises. I think the 21st century has a good chance to be hamiltons century. [applause] dr. Knott thank you. Thank you very much. Dr. Knott sure. The Alexander Hamilton Awareness Society would like to provide a special designation for the work that Stephen Knott has done and to provide that, we have the designer of the prevent of this program, assisted by sergio, if you could come and present the award. Good afternoon, everyone. As we have heard from this talk, for the past two centuries authors have taken up the task of writing about Alexander Hamiltons life but along the way stories of the olitical opponents who outlived him have been told as fact and as a result hamiltons contributions were repressed and his character was recast. Outlived him have been told as it was not until Stephen Knott that anyone took the time to examine the narrative behind the narrative that have been told. It is a tribute to his Indepth Research that we now have an understanding of how hamiltons story has been reshaped over the centuries and his eticulous study has helped hamilton authors to tell a more accurate story. And by thoroughly debunking many miths about Alexander Hamilton, dr. Knott has helped those interested in learning about hamilton be introduced to a truer version of him. Since his monumental book Alexander Hamilton and the persistence of myths was published, he has remained active in researching new material on hamilton, including writing articles and publishing an additional book, coauthoring a book on hamilton and washingtons partnership. Hes also an active scholar of the hamilton network, being active and remaining a present force for public question. For these reasons and many more, the Alexander Hamilton Awareness Society is proud to bestow the designation of National Hamilton scholar. [applause] dr. Knott thank you. Thank you. [applause] thank you. And dr. Knott will be available to meet with you afterwards and we thank you so much. Dr. Knott thank you. Thank you for coming. This is beautiful. Thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] youre watching American History tv, 48 hours of programming on American History every weekend on cspan3. Ollow us on twitter, cspanhistory to keep up with the latest history news. Democratic congressman represents californias silicon valley, and monday night on the communicators hell describe the issues that matter most to the regions tech companies, their frustration with washington, and his goal to create more jobs through the companies in his district, which include apple, google, and tesla, among others. Hes interviewed by a technology reporter. We have to figure out what the credentialing will look like for the jobs that are available. Not everything is going to roir a fouryear degree. Im not as concerned about the folks who are getting fouryear degrees or ph. D. s. But what are you doing after high school thats going to get you a credential thats actually going to get you a job . And i think the federal government should be looking to a credential that actually relate to employment and having conversations with the private sector, and then funding those type of apprenticeship programs. Watch the communicators monday night at 8 00 eastern on cspan2. Sunday, an interview with dorothy, who served as president of the National Council of negro women, worked alongside Martin Luther king jr. On the 1963 march on washington, and received the president ial medal of freedom and the congressional gold medal. The interview is from the explorations in black leadership oral history collection. Heres a preview. Dr. Height, let me take you to the 1963 march on washington. You helped convince the others to let Martin Luther king speak last, but you werent able to convince them to have a woman speaker. What was the tone . You know, it was very interesting