To John Jay from Alexander Hamilton, 9 April 1793 (first letter)
From Alexander Hamilton (First Letter)
Philadelphia April 9 1793
Dear Sir
When we last conversed together on the subject we were both of opinion that the Minister expected from France should be received.
Subsequent circumstances have perhaps induced an additional embarrassment on this point and render it adviseable to reconsider the opinion generally and to raise this further question— Whether he ought to be received absolutely or with qualifications?1
The King has been decapitated. Out of this will arise a Regent, acknowledged and supported by the Powers of Europe almost universally, in capacity to Act—and who may himself send an Ambassador to the United States— Should we in such case receive both? If we receive one from the Republic & refuse the other, Shall we Stand on ground perfectly neutral?
If we receive a Minister from the Republic, shall we be afterwards at liberty to say—“we will not decide whether whether there is a Government in France competent to demand from us the performance of the existing treaties— What the Government of France shall be is the very point in dispute— ’Till that is decided the applicability of the Treaties is suspended— when that Government is established we Shall consider any ^whether^ such changes have been made as to render their continuance incompatible with the interest of the U States”— If we shall not ^have^ concluded ourselves by any Act, I am of opinion, that we have at least a right to hold the thing suspended— till the point in dispute is decided— ^[In margin] I doubt if whether we could bona fide dispute the ultimate obligation of the Treaties—^ Will the unqualified reception of a Minister conclude us?
If it will ought we so to conclude ourselves?
Ought we not rather to refuse receiving or to receive with qualification— declaring that we receive the person as the representative of the Government in fact of the French Nation reserving to ourselves every a right to consider the applicability of the Treaties to the actual situation of the parties?2
These are questions which require our utmost Wisdom. I would give a great deal for a personal discussion with you. Imprudent things have been already done; which renders it proportionably important that every succeeding step Should be well considered—3 With true attachment Dr Sr Your obedt S[ervan]t
A Hamilton
ALS, NNC (EJ: 05623). Endorsed: “Col. Hamilton / recd. & an[swere]d. 11 ap. 1793”. , 14: 297–99.
1. JJ was in Philadelphia in mid-February 1793. Edmond Charles Genet was appointed minister to the United States by the French Republic in November 1792, before the execution of Louis XVI on 21 Jan. 1793. For his arrival and the issues raised regarding diplomatic recognition and neutrality, see the editorial note “John Jay and the Issue of Neutrality,” below. For JJ’s reply, see his letter of 11 Apr., below.
2. For the similarity between the issues AH raises here and the questions GW submitted to his cabinet for consideration on 18 Apr., see , 12: 326–28.
3. AH also consulted Rufus King, who on 24 Apr. expressed opinions similar to those of JJ. See , 14: 335–37.