He warned many, that if in fact the idea of a national bank were to be implemented, congress would be given a "boundless field of power". Jefferson wrote, "to take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition". Thus, in denouncing the national bank, Jefferson was protecting the rights of the states and the individual against the new forming national government. He was abiding by his strict constructionist view of the constitution, condemning the bank unnecessary and unconstitutional. His ruling was just; his beliefs flourished in dealing with the issue however later proved to be contradictory.
Jefferson's involvement in the Louisiana Purchase proved his inconsistency in staying true to his ideas. The purchase, doubling the size of the United States at the time, was not done with malice, however contradicted many key Jeffersonian principles. In fact, in his inaugural address, Jefferson stated that expansion was not necessary, for America had lands sufficient for thousands of generations to come. Moreover, his purchase caused a dent in his plans to pay off the national debt quickly and efficiently. The ten million dollars he had originally told Livingston to offer the French soon turned into fifteen million, setting back Americas budget cut. But most importantly, Jefferson's acts were unconstitutional. He was well aware that under his strict constructionist policies the government did not have the power under the constitution to add new territory, or for that matter, grant citizenship. He resorted to reasoning that since his actions were parallel to the majority of the country, his actions were justified and congress would ratify the treaty. He said, "that the less we say about constitutional difficulties the better". Congress did ratify the treaty, and the purchase won him another election three years later, however it will remain evident forever that is actions were both hypocritical and unconstitutional.
