Alexander Hamilton Papers

From Alexander Hamilton to Rufus King, 5 January 1800

To Rufus King

New York January 5
1800

It is indeed a long time, My Dear Sir, since I have written to you, and I feel my obligation to you for the continuance of your correspondence notwithstanding my delinquency.

Had it been true, that I had left every thing else to follow the Drum, my delinquency would not have been so great. But our military establishment offers too little inducement and is too precarious to have permitted a total dereliction of professional pursuits. The double occupation occasionned by these added to Military Duties, and the attentions which circumstances call me to pay to collateral objects, engage my time more than ever and leave me less leisure for communication with distant friends.

If the projected cypher was established I should now have very much to say to you. But for this the arrangement is not yet mature. Soon however, I hope, to make it so, by forwarding to you the counterpart, which is in preparation.1 I must however give you some sketch of our Affairs.

At home, every thing is in the main well; except as to the Perverseness and capriciousness of one2 and the spirit of faction of many.

Our measures, from the first cause, are too much the effect of momentary impulse. Vanity and Jealousy exclude all counsel. Passion wrests the helm from reason.

The irreparable loss of an inestimable man removes a controul which was felt and was very salutary.

The leading friends of the Government are in a sad Dilemma. Shall they risk a serious scism by an attempt to change? Or shall they annihilate themselves and hazard their cause by continuing to uphold those who suspect or hate them, & who are likely to propose a course for no better reason than because it is contrary to that which they approve?

The spirit of Faction is abated no where. In Virginia it is more violent than ever. It seems demonstrated that the leaders there, who possess completely all the powers of the local Government, are resolved to possess those of the National, by the most dangerous combinations,3 & if they cannot effect this, to resort to the employment of physical force.4 The want of disposition in the people to second them will be the only preventive. It is believed that it will be an effectual One.

In the two houses of Congress we have a decided Majority.5 But the dread of unpopularity is likely to paralise it and to prevent the erection of additional buttresses to the Constitution: a Fabric which can hardly be stationary and which will retrograde, if it cannot be made to advance.

In the Mass of the People the dispositions are not bad. An attachment to the system of peace continues. No project contrary to it could easily conciliate favour. Good Will towards the Government in my opinion predominates—though a numerous party is still actuated by an opposite sentiment and some vague discontents have a more diffused influence. Sympathy with the French Revolution acts in a much narrower circle than formerly; but the jealousy of Monarchy, which is as active as ever, still furnishes a hand by which the factious mislead well meaning persons.

In our Councils there is no fixed plan. Some are for preserving and invigorating the Navy and destroying the army.6 Some, among the friends of Government, for diminishing both on pecuniary considerations.

My plan is to complete the Navy to the contemplated extent—say Six Ships of the line,7 Twelve frigates8 and Twenty four Sloops of War9—to make no alteration for the present as to the Military Force10—And finally to preserve the Organs of the existing force; reducing the men to a very moderate number. For this plan there are various Reasons that appear to me solid. I much doubt however that it will finally prevail.

The recent depredations of British Cruisers, sanctionned in various instances by the Courts,11 have rekindled in many breasts, an animosity which was fast extinguishing. Such persons think they see in the circumstance a new proof that Friendship towards this Country on the part of Great Britain will always be measured by the scale of her success. A very perplexing conflict of sensations is the result of this impression.

I must hasten to a Conclusion. It was unnecessary for me to have told you that for the loss of our illustrious friend every heart is in mourning. Adieu God bless you

P S   Who is to be Commander in Chief?12 Not the next in Command. The appointment will probably be deferred.

AL, New-York Historical Society, New York City.

1See Philip Schuyler to H, June 6, 1799; King to H, October 29, 1799.

2John Adams.

3H is presumably referring to the developing alliance between Virginia’s Republicans and the New York Republicans led by Aaron Burr.

4For charges—which proved to be unfounded—that Virginia Republicans were prepared to resort to force, see William Heth to H, January 18, 1799.

5Party affiliations cannot always be determined with exactitude in the seventeen-nineties. The best estimate by an historian is probably that of Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., who has written: “In the last session of the Fifth Congress the party division was fifty-six Federalists and fifty Republicans. But at the beginning of the next Congress, the Federalist majority of six was estimated to have grown to about twenty, although the majority was diminished somewhat during the course of the session” (Cunningham, The Jeffersonian Republicans. The Formation of Party Organization, 1789–1801 [Chapel Hill, 1957], 134). On May 12, 1800, Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison: “… when they met, it was believed they had a majority of 20. but many of these were new & moderate men, & soon saw the true character of the party to which they had been well disposed while at a distance. The tide too of public opinion sets so strongly against the federal proceedings that this melted off their majority, & dismayed the heroes of the party” (ALS, James Madison Papers, Library of Congress).

7These ships were authorized by “An Act for the augmentation of the Navy” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 621–22 [February 25, 1799]).

8These ships were authorized by “An Act to provide a Naval Armament” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 350–51 [March 27, 1794]); “An Act supplementary to an act entitled ‘An act to provide a Naval Armament’” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 453 [April 20, 1796]); “An Act providing a Naval Armament” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 523–25 [July 1, 1797]); Section 2 of “An Act supplementary to the act intituled ‘An act to provide an additional Armament for the further protection of the trade of the United States, and for other purposes’” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 575–76 [June 30, 1798]); “An Act to make a further appropriation for the additional Naval Armament” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 608–09 [July 16, 1798]).

9These ships were authorized by “An Act to provide an additional Armament for the further protection of the trade of the United States; and for other purposes” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 552 [April 27, 1798]); “An Act supplementary to the act intituled ‘An act to provide an additional Armament for the further protection of trade of the United States, and for other purposes” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 575–76; Section 1 of “An Act for the augmentation of the Navy” (1 Stat. description begins The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (Boston, 1845); II (Boston, 1850). description ends 621–22).

10For the composition of the Army, see the introductory note to H to James Gunn, December 22, 1798.

11On September 5, 1799, Timothy Pickering wrote to Edward Stevens, United States consul general at Santo Domingo: “I am very happy to find that the supposed mistake as to the opening the ports for trading to St Domingo will produce no ill consequences, & to learn that the British cruisers have of late manifested a conciliatory conduct towards American vessels: but this is doubtless confined to those trading to St. Domingo: for elsewhere I do not know when, since 1793 & 1794, they have been more eager to capture, or certain of their judges more prompt to condemn, American vessels, than at the present time: it is producing, as well it may, much uneasiness and heartburning” (ADf, Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston). Pickering may have been referring to information contained in two letters dated August 1, 1799, from Kingston, Jamaica, which were published on September 5, 1799, in the [Philadelphia] Aurora. General Advertiser. In the second of these letters the writer stated: “… Within the ninety days past, there have been 53 American vessels, or to use the modest language of these lords of the sea, ‘Detained.’ I take the number from the marine register in the Custom House, but I know they are not all entered there, and the actual number is greater.… the American vessels … in almost every case … are condemned in the court of admiralty.” On September 6, 1799, an item entitled “Caution” appeared in the [Philadelphia] Aurora. General Advertiser, which stated: “All vessels bound to or from the Spanish Maine or Spanish Colonies, are to be (if met with) sent into the British ports for adjudication.” On October 24, 1799, Benjamin Stoddert, in commenting on possible subjects for the President’s annual message to Congress, wrote to John Adams: “… I have forborne any observations about the Spiolations by British Cruisers, & the extraordinary lengths to which the Judges of the inferior tribunals suffer themselves to be carried, in the condemnation of our Vessels—supposing Col Pickering has official documents on these points, & if he has not; doubting the propriety of mentioning them” (ALS, Adams Family Papers, deposited in the Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston).

12H is using a term commonly used to describe the commanding officer of the Army, although the Constitution provides that the President is the commander-in-chief of both the Army and Navy. Following George Washington’s death on December 14, 1799, no officer was assigned to the permanent command of the Army until the appointment of Major General Jacob Brown on June 15, 1805 (Heitman, United States Army description begins Francis B. Heitman, Historical Register and Dictionary of the United States Army, From Its Organization, September 29, 1789, to March 2, 1903 (Washington, 1903). description ends , I, 17).

Index Entries