New York Assembly. Remarks on an Act for the Relief of Persons Holding or Possessing State Agent’s Certificates, [22 February 1787]
New York Assembly. Remarks on an
Act for the Relief of Persons
Holding or Possessing State Agent’s Certificates1
[New York, February 22, 1787]
Mr. Hamilton was against having the words struck out. The state had received the same advantage from the certificates issued by the deputies of the state agent or his assistant, as of those issued by the state agent only. There was no propriety in making the relief partial. Justice should be alike administered to all.2
Mr. Hamilton was of opinion, the state should give all the relief possible, to every class of public claimants; and that there should be no discrimination with respect to possessors of certificates.3
The [New York] Daily Advertiser, February 27, 1787.
1. H is referring to “An act for the relief of persons holding or possessing State agent’s certificates.” The bill provided “That it shall and may be lawful for the treasurer of this State, to receive on loan until the first day of May next, certificates issued by Udny Hay Esquire, late agent of this State, or any of his assistant agents” (I, 465). On this date John Tayler, an assemblyman from Albany County, made a motion to strike out the words “assistant state agents.” It was against this motion that H’s remarks were addressed.
2. At this point Tayler spoke in behalf of his motion (described in note 1). Tayler argued “that the state had declared that these certificates were not to be received after the first of September last. That the holders of the certificates who had neglected getting them loaned, finding they were worth little; sold them for a trifle to speculators. He thought that to redeem those certificates would be encouraging them” (The Daily Advertiser, February 27, 1787).
3. The Assembly rejected Tayler’s motion.