The Nevada journal., 1852-03-25
From the N. 0. Picayune
POLITICAL HISTORY.

uecd, or most or the publlc papers lssueC
by General Washington during his Pre-
sidency, has been revived by his son
Alexander Hamilton, of New York, un
der circumstances of extraordinary con.
fidence, which might, in respect to the
Farewell Address, indeed, be described
as extraordinary presumption. The let
ter in which this pretension is snt ur
was addressed to Kossuth soon after his
arrival in this country and just before
the banquet given to him by the New
York press. In that letter he counsels
Kossuth to read the works of Hamilton,
as "the best evidence of the master in.
fuence, which has, thus far, guided the
destinies of the United States in their
career of distinc ton" He affirms that
"the Proclama ton Of Neutrality was
written by Hamilton, at the seat of Co
vernment, while Washington was at
Mount Vernon, and Jefferson at Monti-
cello," and adds:
"As the time has come, when certain
Developments must be made public, |
do not hesitate to inform you that the
Farewell Address, as well as most of
ashington's important papers, had the
same parentage with the Declaration of
Neutrality"
The authorship of the PROCLAIM tion
of Neutrality is of but little Importance !:
the initiation and administration of the
policy, of which it was but symbol, are
unquestionably Westinghouse The pro.
clamation was sustained by Hamilton in
a series of papers, under the signature
of "Pacifcus," which were answered by
Mr.. Madison, under that of "Helvidiusn y
and the controversy stands unsurpassed
in the political literature of the day, for
the dignity of manner and power of To-
gic, and beauty of style displayed on
both sides. 1t was among the first signs
of that division among the public men
of Washingtons time, which led to the
formation of the two great parties that
contended for mastery in 1900.
The authorship of the Farewell Ad-
dress is another sort of question. Proc
lamations and Messages were official
acts, but the Farewell Address was
a personal matter, and was in itself so
essentially individual that the strongest
direct proof would be required 10 estao-
lish the fact that it was not in any ma
terial part the work of ashington him
self. 1t is not now for the first time
pretended that Gen. Hamilton wrote it,
but no other evidence was ever produced
than the presumption arising from the
reputed fact that copy supposed to be
the original, with interlinoations, &C.,
was found among the papers of Gen.
Hamilton after his death. This would
be very far from conclusive, if there
were not positive testimony extant as 10
the manner by which that copy got into
existence. 1t was very fair material for
setting up an investigation, but the
Hamilton family made it the basis of
positive assertion of the right of their
ancestor more than forty years ago. AS
long ago as 1910 Judge Peters, of Phil
adelphia, anxious to collect centempora-
neous evidence, addressed letter on
the subject to the late John Jay, who
was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
of the United States in Washingtons
Administration, and, in passing be 1t
said, one of the ablest and purest men
which this country ever produced. MIR.
Jay replied at length in opposition to the
whole Hamilton claim; on presumptive
grounds, vindicnting in the most en-
phatic terms the memory of Washing
ton from the implied charge of intellec-
tual inferiority, and pronouncing him by
endowments, qualifications, and cultiva-
ton. independent of any necessity for
aid in that composition, elevated as it is
After treating the subject as one of pro-
liability and inferences, he states his
personal knowledge of the history of the
paper, promising that he had some hes
itation in communicating it, because OBJ
tanned under an implied confidence"
The substance of the facts he commu-
nicated is, that some time before the ad-
dress appeared, General, then Col Ham
ilton, called upon him to state that he
had received from Gen. Washington the
draft of n farewell address, which the
President had prepared, and on which
he desired their opinion. They met and
discussed the address, suggesting amend
ments and alterations but in order to
preserve the Presidents draft untouch-
ed, Gen. Hamilton had rewritten it, in
cluding what changes he had to propose;
and this copy is what they discussed.
Mr.. Jay says, "some amendments were
made, but none of much importance
Both were sent to the President, and he,
it appears, interlined the copy again.
This accounts for the copy in Hamilton's
handwriting although not for the way
in which he got it returned to him.
The statement to Judge Peters was
not made public for many years. In
1925, however, the time anticipated by
Judge Jay arrived. The heirs of Ham
ilton made application 20 Rufus King,
the distinguished New York Senator,
who had been the confidential friend of
Gen Hamilton, and was the depository
of his private papers at the time of the
duel with Burr in which he fell, for the
possession of these papers. MIR. King
declined, on grounds of delicacy, and a