Answer:
Alexander Hamilton favored a looser interpretation of the Constitution than Jefferson.
Step-by-step explanation:
Hamilton was one of the most influential figures in American political history. He served as a delegate in the Constitutional Convention of 1787; He was one of the authors of The Federalist Papers, which helped to convince the States to ratify the Constitution; And he was the first Secretary of the Treasury of the nation. Throughout these critical first years of the republic, Hamilton made his political philosophy clear. First of all, he wanted a highly centralized government. He protested against the first constitution of the nation, the Articles of Confederation, precisely because he considered that it did not give enough power to the national government, and in the Constitutional Convention he proposed the existence of a permanent executive head that could veto any state legislation. Hamilton intended to use this centralized power to subsidize the rich and their businesses, in order to encourage them to support a government in constant expansion. As Secretary of the Treasury, he was a frantic tax promoter who advocated government planning for the economy. He promoted the accumulation of public debt, protectionist rates and politically controlled banks; He disparaged politicians like Jefferson, who talked too much about freedom; And he argued that the new American government should pursue national and imperial glory, in the manner of the British, French and Spanish empires.
All these actions carried out by Hamilton show us that his constitutional interpretation was quite flexible, since many of his ideas were not explicitly stated in the Constitution, but, rather, were not forbidden.
Jefferson, on the other hand, opposed this interpretation, preferring a more strict reading, by which the government could only carry out the actions that the Constitution explicitly named in its text.