To Thomas Jefferson
[Philadelphia] Friday Morning [30 March 1792]
The enclosed Instrumt does not accord with my recollection of Mr Blodgets proposed Loan1—and I confess I had much rather see a clear expression of the intention than to meet an explanation of it afterwards by one of the parties, to the contract.
The number of Lots to be Mortgaged I do not positively recollect—but sure I am one half were to be North of an East & West line from the Presidents House. I do not remember that the words “valuable Lots” were inserted in the proposition of Mr Blodget—& think the Mortgaged Lots were releasable by the substitn of other—If therefore the subsequent instrument should not place these matters in a very precise point of view, a foundation will be laid for much discontent, & probably disputes.
Did you see Mr White yesterday? and in that case what was his opinion respecting M——n’s acceptance in the manner suggested?2
AL, DLC: Jefferson Papers.
1. The enclosure, apparently a draft of the loan warrants for the District of Columbia, has not been identified. For the proposed loan of Samuel Blodget, Jr., to finance projects in the Federal City, see GW to the Commissioners for the District of Columbia, 6 Mar., n.7, and GW to Jefferson, 21 Mar., 3 April.
2. Despite having misgivings, GW was considering naming Daniel Morgan a general officer of the new expedition against the hostile northwestern Indian nations (see Jefferson’s Memorandum of a Meeting of the Heads of the Executive Departments, 9 Mar., and GW’s Memorandum on General Officers, 9 Mar., n.5). GW had apparently asked Jefferson to obtain the opinion of Virginia congressman Alexander White on whether or not Morgan would accept a commission (see GW to Jefferson, 4 April).