51Cabinet Meeting. Opinion on Call for Volunteers from Kentucky, 13 May 1794 (Hamilton Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of the departments and the attorney General, at the house of the President of the United States, the subject of affording an auxiliary force to Major General Wayne for the purpose of enabling him to make a vigorous and offensive campaign against the hostile Indians being considered, it was advised, that he be authorised, to call for two thousand mounted volunteers...
52William Bradford and Alexander Hamilton to Edmund Randolph, 4 November[–9 December] 1794 (Hamilton Papers)
The case of Mr. Green upon which you request my opinion appears to be, in substance, as follows. Mr Green being a subject of his britannic Majesty, emigrated to America after the treaty of peace in 1783, and by his residence & taking the requisite oaths became a citizen of the United States. He afterwards entered into a contract with certain British Merchants established at Ostend: and on a...
53Cabinet Meeting. Opinion on Expeditions Being Planned in Kentucky for the Invasion of the Spanish Dominions, [10 March … (Hamilton Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of departments, and the attorney general at the President’s on the 10th. day of March 1794. The intelligence from Kentucky, and the territory no. West of the Ohio, was laid before them; whereupon it was advised 1. that a proclamation issue against the expeditions, understood to be prepared in Kentucky, for the invasion of the Spanish dominions. 2. that a...
54Cabinet Decision. Rules for Departure from United States Ports of Belligerent Nations, [16 June 1794] (Hamilton Papers)
When any Vessel, whether of war or merchandize, public or private, belonging to any belligerent nation, shall depart from the United States, beyond the jurisdictional line of the United States, on the Ocean; and a Vessel of War whether public or private, belonging to another of the belligerent nations, being adverse, shall at the time of the departure of the first mentioned vessel, be within...
55Cabinet Meeting. Opinion on a Request for Payment of Installments on the French Debt, [11 March 1794] (Hamilton Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of departments and the attorney general, on the 11th. of March 1794. It is advised unanimously, that Mr. Fauchet be informed, that He shall be supplied with the instalments, due in September and November next, according to the manner, expressed in the report of the Secretary of the treasury to the President on this subject. It is proposed by the Secretary of the...
56Cabinet Meeting. Opinion on Restoring the Brigs Conyngham and Pilgrim to the British, [27 March 1794] (Hamilton Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of departments and Attorney general. March 27. 1794. The Secretary of War, the attorney general and the Secretary of State advise, that the Conyngham be not delivered up to the British owners; the secretary of the treasury dissenting. The Secretary of the treasury, the Secretary of war, and the attorney general advise, that the Pilgrim be delivered up to the British...
57Cabinet Meeting. Opinion on Drafting of Militia by Governor Thomas Mifflin, 24 May 1794 (Hamilton Papers)
Upon consideration of the letter of Governor Mifflin to the President of the US of this date respecting his drafting one thousand men of the Western militia of this state, for the purpose of supporting a detachment directed to take possession of Presque Isle it was advised That an answer of the following purport be given. “That on mature reflection the President is of opinion that it is...
58Cabinet Opinion, 13 May 1794 (Washington Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of the departments and the attorney General, at the house of the President, of the United States, the subject of affording an auxiliary force to Major General Wayne for the purpose of enabling him to make a vigorous and offensive campaign against the hostile Indians being considered, it is advised, that he be authorised, to call for two thousand mounted volunteers...
59Cabinet Meeting Opinion on a Request for a Passport, 2 April 1794 (Hamilton Papers)
We are of opinion, that a passport ought to be granted for a vessel under the above restrictions. Edm: Randolph. Alex Hamilton I am inclined to think the vessel ought [to] sail not only by the permission , but in consequence of the directions of the President. D , in the handwriting of Edmund Randolph, William Bradford, and Henry Knox, and signed by Randolph, Bradford, H, and Knox, RG 59,...
60Cabinet Meeting. Opinion on the Best Mode of Executing the Embargo, [26 March 1794] (Hamilton Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of departments, and the Attorney general of the U. S. at the President’s, on the twenty sixth day of march 1794. The resolution of congress, of this date being submitted to them by the President for their opinion as to the best Mode of executing the same; It is advised unanimously, that the governors of the several States ought to be called upon to enforce the said...
61Articles of Agreement between Alexander Hamilton and Samuel Breck, 1 January 1795 (Hamilton Papers)
Treasury Department , January 1, 1795 . “Articles of agreement between Alexander Hamilton … And Samuel Breck Esquire of the City of Philadelphia in behalf of the Proprietors of the Canvas or Sail cloth Manufactory at Boston…. First That the United States agree to purchase of the said company of Manufacturers … One thousand five hundred and fifty four bolts of Sail canvas or sail cloth…....
62Conveyance from Alexander Hamilton, Elizabeth Hamilton, Isaac Bronson, and Ann Bronson to John B. Church, 24 May 1798 (Hamilton Papers)
New York, May 24, 1798. Convey two and one-half lots of land in New York City to Church. Copy, Conveyances in the Office of the Register, City of New York, Liber 60, 176–79, Hall of Records, New York City. Bronson, a prominent New York City moneylender and land speculator, had been a surgeon’s mate in the American Revolution. For information on this conveyance, see “Receipt from Morgan Lewis,”...
63Report of a Committee of the New York State Society of the Society of the Cincinnati, [6 July 1786] (Hamilton Papers)
The Committee to whom were referred the proceedings of the Society of the Cincinnati, at their last General Meeting, beg leave to report: that they have attentively considered the alterations proposed at that meeting to be made in the original Constitution of the Society; and though they highly approve the motives which dictated those alterations, they are of opinion it would be inexpedient to...
64Enclosure: [Account of the Incident at Elizabethtown], [27 March 1800] (Hamilton Papers)
Some publications having appeared in the news papers in respect to a disturbance at Elizabeth Town implicating Capt Courtlandt & Lt. Livingston of the twelveth Regiment—it is proper that the public should know that early and particular inquiry was made into the affair by order of Major General Hamilton, & that, according to information received from very respectable authority in the Civil...
65Enclosure: Act for Establishing a Military and Naval Service Academy, [9 March 1800] (Hamilton Papers)
An Act for establishing an Academy for Instruction relative to the Military and Naval Service of the United States. 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and house of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled That an Academy be established for the purposes of instruction relative to the military and Naval service of the U. States to consist of four Schools One to be called “The...
66Statement by Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton, [5 July 1799] (Hamilton Papers)
We the Subscribers do certify that Col Ebenezer Stevens was together with ourselves appointed by the Citizens of this City a Committee to devise and cause to be erected fortifications for its immediate Defence—that Col Stevens in the course of the execution of this trust was charged with a particular superintendence of the execution of the works and with a variety of details which occasioned...
67Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr, and Ebenezer Stevens to James McHenry, [14 June 1798] (Hamilton Papers)
We have carefully attended to the subjects presented to our consideration, by your note of yesterday and now offer to you the result of our reflections. The idea of a succession of batteries from the Hook, to the City, very naturally occurs in contemplating the defence of this port, and doubtless has advantages. It would present dangers in the approach which may be expected to have...
68[“C”], [10 November 1792] (Hamilton Papers)
[Philadelphia] Gazette of the United States , November 10, 1792. Philip Marsh has written: “In November, ‘C.’ taunted Freneau, the translator-editor, for publishing a French poem without translating it. Hamilton, who as ‘T. L.’ and ‘An American’ had called attention to Freneau’s lack of translating ability, may well have taken this opportunity to point out the editor’s awkward situation”...
69[“C”], [20 June 1792] (Hamilton Papers)
[Philadelphia] Gazette of the United States , June 20, 1792. Philip Marsh has written: “On June 20th of the same year, when Hamilton, aroused by the attacks in Philip Freneau’s National Gazette , was admittedly on the point of exposing the ‘plot’ to subvert the Constitution led, as he thought, by Jefferson, a strong indictment of that newspaper and its supporters as ‘a faction,’ signed ‘C.,’...
70Cabinet Opinion on Relations with Spain and Great Britain, 20 June 1793 (Washington Papers)
At a meeting this day of the heads of departments at the President’s on summons from him, a letter from Messrs Viar & Jaudenes dated June 18. & addressed to the Secretary of state, was read: whereupon it is the opinion that a full detail of the proceedings of the U.S. with respect to the Southern Indians, & the Spaniards be prepared, and a notification as to the particular matters charged in...
71Cabinet Opinion on the Rules of Neutrality, 3 August 1793 (Washington Papers)
August 3. 1793 The foregoing rules having been considered by us at several meetings, and being now unanimously approved, they are submitted to the President of the United States. DS , in George Taylor, Jr.’s writing, DLC:GW ; copy (letterpress copy), DLC : Jefferson Papers; LB , DLC:GW ; Df , in Alexander Hamilton’s writing, DLC : Jefferson Papers; copy, DNA : RG 46, Third Congress, 1793–1795,...
72Cabinet Opinion on French Privateers and Prizes, 5 August 1793 (Washington Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of departments & the Attorney general at the Secretary of state’s office Aug. 5. 1793. The case of the Swallow letter of marque at New York, desired to be sent out of our ports, as being a privateer. it is the opinion that there is no ground to make any new order on the subject. The Polly or Republican, in the hands of the Marshal at New York, on a charge of having...
73Cabinet Opinion on the Little Sarah [Petite Démocrate], 8 July 1793 (Washington Papers)
At a meeting at the State house of the city of Philadelphia July 8. 1793. Present the Secretary of state, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary at War. It appears that a brigantine called the Little Sarah has been fitted out at the port of Philadelphia, with fourteen cannon, & all other equipments indicating that she is intended as a Privateer to cruise under the authority of France, &...
74Cabinet Opinion on the Recall of Edmond Genet, 23 August 1793 (Washington Papers)
At meetings of the heads of departments & the Attorney General at the President’s on the 1st & 2d of Aug. 1793. On a review of the whole of mister Genet’s correspondence & conduct, it was unanimously agreed that a letter should be written to the Minister of the U.S. at Paris, stating the same to him, resuming the points of difference which had arisen between the government of the U.S. & mister...
75Cabinet Opinion on French Privateers, 17 June 1793 (Washington Papers)
At a meeting of the heads of departments at the President’s this day, on summons from him, a letter from mister Genet of the 15th inst. addressed to the Secretary of state on the subject of the seizure of a vessel by the Govr. of New York as having been armed, equipped & manned in that port with a design to cruize on the enemies of France, was recd as also the draught of an answer prepared by...
76Cabinet Opinion on Sending an Agent to the Choctaws, 1–5 June 1793 (Washington Papers)
That an Agent be sent to the Choctaw nation to endeavor secretly to engage them to support the Chickasaws in their present war with the Creeks, giving them for that purpose arms and ammunition sufficient: and that it be kept in view that if we settle our differences amicably with the Creeks, we at the same time mediate effectually the peace of the Chickasaws & Choctaws, so as to rescue the...
77Cabinet Opinion on the Polly (Republican) and the Catherine, 12 June 1793 (Washington Papers)
The President having required the opinions of the heads of the three departments on a letter from Governor Clinton of the 9th inst. stating that he had taken possession of the sloop Polly, now called the Republican, which was arming, equipping & manning by French & other citizens to cruize against some of the belligerent powers, and desiring to know what further was to be done, and they having...
78Cabinet Opinion on French Privateers, 3 August 1793 (Washington Papers)
That The Minister of the French Republic be informed that the President considers the U. States as bound pursuant to positive assurances, given in conformity to the laws of neutrality, to effectuate the restoration of, or to make compensation for, prizes which shall have been made of any of the parties at war with France subsequent to the fifth day of June last by privateers fitted out of...
79Cabinet Opinions on the Roland and Relations with Great Britain, France, and the Creek Indians, 31 August 1793 (Washington Papers)
At a meeting of the Heads of departments & Attorney General at the President’s on the 31st day of Aug. 1793. A letter from mister Gore to mister Lear, dated Boston Aug. 24. was read, stating that the Roland, a privateer fitted out at Boston & furnished with a commission under the government of France, had sent a prize into that port, which being arrested by the Marshal of the district by...
80The Defence No. X, [26 August 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The object of the third article is connected with that of the second. The surrender of the posts naturally drew with it an arrangement with regard to inland Trade and navigation. Such an arrangement convenient in several respects appears to be in some respects necessary. To restrain the Indians on either side of the line from trading with the one party or the other at discretion, besides the...
81From Alexander Hamilton to Defence No. XX, [23 and 24 October 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The point next to be examined is the right of confiscation or sequestration, as depending on the opinions of Jurists and on usage. To understand how far these ought to weigh, it is requisite to consider what are the elements, or ingredients, which compose what is called the laws of Nations. The constituent parts of this system are, 1 The necessary or internal law, which is the law of Nature...
82The Defence No. XI, [28 August 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The foregoing analysis of the third article, by fixing its true meaning, enables us to detect some gross errors which have been principal sources of prejudice against it. One of these is that the article gives to the other party a right of access to all our ports, while it excludes us from the ports of Nova Scotia and Canada. It has been clearly shewn that it gives no right of access to any...
83The Defence No. XXXVI, [2 January 1796] (Hamilton Papers)
It is now time to fulfil my promise of an examination of the constitutionality of the Treaty. Of all the objections which have been contrived against this instrument, those relating to this point are the most futile. If there be a political problem capable of complete demonstration, the constitutionality of the Treaty in all its parts is of this sort. It is even difficult to believe that any...
84The Defence No. XXII, [5–11 November 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The analogy of the stipulation in the 10th article with stipulations in our other treaties and in the treaties between other Nations is the remaining topic of discussion. After this, attention will be paid to such observations by way of objection to the article as may not have been before expressly or virtually answered. The 20th. article of our treaty of Amity and Commerce with France is in...
85The Defence No. XV, [12 and 14 September 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
[ It is the business of the seventh article of the treaty, to provide for two objects: one, compensation to our citizens for injuries to their property, by irregular or illegal captures or condemnations; the other, compensation to British citizens for captures of their property within the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, or elsewhere, by vessels originally armed in our ports, in...
86The Defence No. I, [22 July 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
IT was to have been foreseen, that the treaty which Mr. Jay was charged to negociate with Great Britain, whenever it should appear, would have to contend with many perverse dispositions and some honest prejudices. That there was no measure in which the government could engage so little likely to be viewed according to its intrinsic merits—so very likely to encountre misconception, jealousy,...
87The Defence No. IV, [1 August 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
An accurate enumeration of the breaches of the Treaty of peace on our part would require a tedious research. It will suffice to select and quote a few of the most prominent and early instances. One of the earliest is to be found in an Act of this state for granting a more effectual relief in cases of certain Trespasses passed the 17 of March 1783. This act takes away from any person (subjects...
88The Defence No. XXXVII, [6 January 1796] (Hamilton Papers)
It shall now be shewn, that the objections to the Treaty founded on its pretended interference with the powers of Congress tend to render the Power of making Treaties in a very great degree if not altogether nominal. This will be best seen by an enumeration of the cases of pretended interference. I The power of Congress to lay taxes is said to be impaired by those stipulations which prevent...
89The Defence No. XVII, [22 September 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The VIII article provides merely that the Commissioners to be appointed in the three preceding articles shall be paid in such manner as shall be agreed between the parties at the time of the exchange of the “Ratification of the Treaty, and that all other expenses attending the Commissions shall be defrayed jointly by the two parties the same being previously ascertained and allowed by a...
90The Defence No. VI, [8 August 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
There is one more objection to the Treaty for what it does not do, which requires to be noticed. This is an omission to provide against the empressment of our seamen. It is certain that our Trade has suffered embarrassments in this respect, and that there have been abuses which have operated very oppressively upon our seamen; and all will join in the wish that they could have been guarded...
91The Defence No. XVIII, [6 October 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
It is provided by The tenth article of the Treaty that “Neither Debts due from individuals of the one Nation to Individuals of the other, nor shares nor monies, which they may have in the public funds, or in the public or private banks, shall ever in any event of War or national differences be sequestered or confiscated, it being unjust and impolitic that debts and engagements contracted and...
92The Defence No. III, [29 July 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The opposers of the Treaty seem to have put invention on the rack, to accumulate charges against it, in a great number of cases, without regard even to plausibility. If we suppose them sincere, we must often pity their ignorance; if insincere, we must abhor the spirit of deception which it betrays. Of the preposterous nature of some of their charges, specimens will be given in the course of...
93The Defence No. XIX, [14 October 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The objects protected by the 10th. article are classed under four heads, 1 debts of individuals to individuals 2 property of individuals in the public funds 3 property of individuals in public banks 4 property of individuals in private banks. These, if analised, resolve themselves, in principle, into two discriminations—(viz) private debts & private property in public funds....
94The Defence No. IX, [21 August 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
It was my intention to have comprised in two numbers the examination of the second article; but on experiment it was found expedient to add a third. I resume for a moment the subject of indemnification for the detention of the Posts. As an inducement to persist in this claim, we are assured that the magnimity of France would have procured for us its establishment. In the first place this...
95The Defence No. XXI, [30 October 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
Since the closing of my last number, I have accidentally turned to a passage of Vatel , which is so pertinent to the immediate subject of that paper, that I cannot refrain from interrupting the progress of the discussion to quote it. It is in these words (B 3 C 4 § 63) “The Sovereign declaring War can neither detain those subjects of the enemy, who are within his dominions at the time of the...
96The Defence No. XII, [2–3 September 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The remaining allegations in disparagement of the 3 article are to this effect 1 That the exception of the country of the Hudsons Bay Company owing to its undefined limits renders the stipulations in our favour in a great measure nugatory. [2. That the privileges granted to Great Britain in our Missisippi ports, are impolitic, because without reciprocity.] [3] that the agreement to forbid to...
97The Defence No. XXXI, [12 December 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
I resume the subject of the two last papers for the sake of a few supplementary observations. The objections to the Treaty for not adhering to the rule “that free ships make free goods and enemy ships enemy goods” as being the relinquishment of an advantage which the modern law of Nations gives to Neutrals have been fully examined and I flatter myself completely refuted. I shall however add...
98The Defence No. XXXII, [16 December 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The 18th Article of the Treaty, which regulates the subject of contraband, has been grievously misrepresented. The objections urged against it with most acrimony are disingenuous and unfounded; yet while I make this assertion which I flatter myself I shall be able to prove, I shall not pretend to maintain that it is an article completely satisfactory. I even admit that it has one unpleasant...
99The Defence No. XIII, [5 September 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The 4th and 5th articles of the Treaty from similarity of object will naturally be considered together. The fourth, reciting a doubt “whether the River Mississippi extends so far Northward as to be intersected by a line to be drawn due West from the Lake of the Woods in the manner mentioned in the Treaty of Peace” agrees, that measures shall be taken in concert between the two Governments to...
100The Defence No. XVI, [18 September 1795] (Hamilton Papers)
The second object of the seventh article, as stated in my last number, is “compensation to British Citizens, for captures of their property within the limits and jurisdiction of the U States, or elsewhere by vessels originally armed in our ports, in the cases in which the captured property having come within our power, there was a neglect to make restitution .” This precise view of the thing...