51From Alexander Hamilton to Edward Livingston, 10 February [1802] (Hamilton Papers)
[ New York ] February 10 [ 1802 ]. States that he is “of Counsel” in the case of Steinbach adm United States and asks Livingston for permission to examine the witnesses “ de bene esse .” ALS , Hamilton Papers, Library of Congress. Joaquim L. Steinbach was a New York City merchant and shipowner. An entry in H’s Law Register, 1795–1804, reads: “Steinbach adsm UStates
52Remarks on the Repeal of the Judiciary Act, First Version, [11 February 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
After some pause, Gen. Hamilton rose. He began with stating his own decided opinion, that the contemplated repeal of the late act, taken in connexion with the known and avowed object of that repeal , was an unequivocal violation of the constitution in a most vital part. However, he did expect that on that point, the gentlemen present would be unanimous. Neither had he any hope that any...
53Remarks on the Repeal of the Judiciary Act, Second Version, [11 February 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
He [Hamilton] confessed with seeming sincerity, he felt little zeal on the present occasion. He could prove that to repeal the judiciary law and to with-hold the salaries of the judges, would be an infringement of the constitution. He did not intend, however, to dwell on the constitutionality of the question. He allowed that gentlemen might have different opinions concerning it. His primary...
54Remarks on the Repeal of the Judiciary Act, Third Version, [11 February 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
To these remarks General Hamilton rose again to reply—he remarked in substance that he had fostered the hope, that on this occasion, by cautiously avoiding to say any thing on the point of the constitutionality of the proposed repeal, and stating only the opinion of the New-York bar on that of its inexpediency , there would have been but one sentiment—He regretted, deeply regretted, that on...
55The Examination Number XII, [23 February 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
From the manner in which the subject was treated in the fifth and sixth numbers of The Examination, it has been doubted, whether the writer did or did not entertain a decided opinion as to the power of Congress to abolish the offices and compensations of Judges, once instituted and appointed pursuant to a law of the United States. In a matter of such high constitutional moment, it is a sacred...
56From Alexander Hamilton to the New-York Evening Post, [24 February 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
We might well be excused from taking any notice of such a writer as the author of the leading article in the Citizen of this morning; but as in one instance he has pretended to state facts, in reply to what was said in the Evening Post, respecting the opinions held in the Convention by Mr. Hamilton and by Mr. Maddison, some answer may be expected. Mr. Hamilton had been charged with holding an...
57The Examination Number XIII, [27 February 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
The advocates of the power of Congress to abolish the Judges, endeavor to deduce a presumption of intention favorable to their doctrine, from this argument—The provision concerning the tenure of office (say they) ought to be viewed as a restraint upon the Executive Department, because , to this Department belongs the power of removal; in like manner as the provision concerning the diminution...
58From Alexander Hamilton to Gouverneur Morris, [29 February 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
Your letter of the 22d is the third favour for which I am indebted to you since you left N York. Your frankness in giving me your opinion as to the expediency of an application of our bar to Congress obliges me. But you know we are not readily persuaded to think we have been wrong. Were the matter to be done over I should pursue the same course. I did not believe the measure would be useful as...
59The Examination Number XIV, [2 March 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
In the course of the debate in the Senate, much verbal criticism has been indulged; many important inferences have been attempted to be drawn from distinctions between the words shall and may . This species of discussion will not be imitated, because it is seldom very instructive or satisfactory. These terms, in particular cases, are frequently synonymous, and are imperative or permissive,...
60The Examination Number XV, [3 March 1802] (Hamilton Papers)
It is generally understood that the Essays under the Title of the Federalist, which were published at New York, while the plan of our present Federal Constitution was under the consideration of the people, were principally written by two persons James Madison, now Secretary of State, Alexander Hamilton, formerly Secretary of the Treasury. who had been members of the Convention which devised...