Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Otho H. Williams, 5 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Williams, Otho H.

Treasury DepartmentDecember 5. 1791
Sir

If the Supervisor of the District of Maryland should apply to you for four hundred Dollars, you will advance him that sum, which he will repay to you out of the duties on Spirits distilled within his district as soon as a sufficient sum shall be received. You will nevertheless take duplicate receipts and transmit one to the Treasury.

The state of the business does not permit that this sum should be brought into your account as Collector. It will appear therefore in your returns as a part of the Cash in hand; but the fact will be properly noted here and finally regulated so as either to end in a credit or reimbursement.
I am, Sir,  Your Most Obed Servant

Alexander Hamilton
Otho H Williams Esqr.Collector, Baltimore.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 5 December 1791
From: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

T. DC. Off Decr. 5th. 1791
Sir,

I have considered the application of Benjamin Bourne Esq. for the renewal of certain Certificates and Warrants for transfering funded Stock alledged to have been lost and am of opinion that the following rules should be adopted.
That in case a transfer Certificate is lost, before the Treasury Warrant has been issued, the claimant or some person having knowledge thereof should in the first instance make an Affidavit before some proper authority, of the circumstances attending the loss, which Affidavit being produced to the Officer who issued said transfer Certificate, should require & justify him in issuing a special Certificate descriptive of the Certificate so alledged to have been lost.
That when, as in the case stated by Mr. Bourne, a transfer Certificate, with the Treasury Warrant annexed, is lost before a Credit is obtained at the Office to which the transfer was directed; an affidavit of the loss as in the preceding case, should be exhibited to the Register of the Treasury, who should thereon issue a special Certificate descriptive of the transfer Certificate & Warrant so alledged to have been lost. On which special Certificate of the Register of the Treasury, the Officer to whom the Warrant of transfer was directed should further certify, that no such Warrant had been presented for entry at his office.
These documents being filed at the Treasury with a suffient bond with sureties, to indemnify the United States against all claims on account of the first transfer Certificate and Warrant or either of them, would in my opinion render it safe & expedient for the Secretary of the Treasy. to issue a new Warrant for such transfers.

The Honble A. H.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Abishai Thomas, 6 December 1791
From: Thomas, Abishai
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philad. 6th Decemr. 1791
Sir

In submitting the following facts and observations to your consideration perhaps I may have exceeded the bounds of propriety in obtruding any thing like an opinion on the subject, but I have been involuntarily drawn into the measure, I hope it is done with due deference and I rely on your candour for an extenuation of the fault.
On the subject of the claim of Wm Courtney esqre refer’d to you to report on I beg leave to observe, that by a resolution of Congress of the 3rd June 1784 it is recommended to the States individually “to grant such relief to their Citizens who have been injured as aforesaid” (which applies to Mr. Courtney’s case) “as they may think requisite and if it shall hereafter appear reasonable that the United States should make any allowance to any particular States who may be burthened much beyond others that the allowance ought to be determined by Congress.”
As Mr. Courtney made repeated applications to the Legislature of North Carolina without obtaining any redress it only remains with Congress to make him such compensation as shall appear just & reasonable.
The tract of Land on which the Troops of the Southern Army encamped after the defeat near Cambden in South Carolina which happened on the 16th August 1780, had been immediately preceding, purchased by Mr. Courtney for the sum of 4000 dollars. The Huts which were then made were continued to be occupied during the Autumn & ensuing Winter until the Month of February 1781 when they were evacuated on the approach of the British Army under command of Lord Cornwallis, the depredations committed during this period were immense, the Timber cut down together with the fencing appropriated for the purposes of Hutting & Fuel, rendered the plantation, (from being in a high state of improvement and cultivation) a perfect waste or common and I verily believe that one half the sum which Mr. Courtney gave for the Land &c. could not then have been obtained for it.
With regard to the damage Mr. Courtney sustained on his Lots in the Town of Hillsborough the enclosed Certificate which he has just sent to me, and which I had given to him when I acted as Quarter Master at that post, is something descriptive of it, but there being no valuation affixed it is difficult at this remote period to ascertain what would be an adequate compensation, however I consider that I am within the bounds of moderation when I say that the sum of 750 dollars would not then have been commensurate to the object of placing him in as eligible a situation in respect to his Town property as he was at the time of the arrival of the Army as aforesaid.
The resolution of Congress before alluded to expresses “That according to the Laws and usages of nations a State is not obliged to make compensation for damages done to its own Citizens by an Enemy, or Wantonly & unauthorized by its own Troops, yet humanity requires that some relief should be granted to persons who by such losses are reduced to indigence and want, and as the circumstances of such sufferers are best known to the States to which they belong” to them it is recommended as before mentioned.
Now sir as Mr. Courtney notwithstanding the “circumstances” of his sufferings were well known to the State, never could obtain any relief from it, I trust there is good ground to hope that the justice and “humanity” of the U.S. will be extended to him. I consider that his case does not altogether come within the meaning of that part of the foregoing resolution which says “wantonly and unauthorized by its own Troops.”
The encamping on his Land, making use of his Timber for Huts and fuel, Occupying his Town Lots for pasturage, Continental yards &c. were certainly “authorized” and necessary. Perhaps the burning of his fencing and the destruction of his buildings were not so. Be that as it may the suffering of an individual (whose fortune may not be considered large), to the amount of three thousand Dollars beyond his proportion for the common defence of the Union will certainly be considered an object worthy of deliberation.

A Thomas


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to the Directors of the Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures, 7 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Directors of the Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures

Philadelphia Decbr. 7. 1791.
Gentlemen

In consequence of powers vested in me by the Agents named in the instrument of Subscription towards the Society for establishing useful Manufactures, I have made Contracts on behalf of the Society with
William Hall, as Superintendent of the printing Business; with Joseph Mort, as an Assistant in the Manufactory, in such way as his Services may be thought most useful. This Gentleman I understand has had opportunities of being acquainted both with the making and printing of Cotton Goods; with Thomas Marshal to superintend the Cotton Mill.
The Contracts with these different Persons are transmitted herewith.
There is a William Pearce who has been employed by me in preparing Machines for the use of the Society; and with whom I have advanced pretty far in an Agreement, but without having reduced it to a definitive form. He pretends to a knowlege of the fabrication of most of the most valuable Machines now in use in the Cotton Manufactory; and his Execution hitherto, as far as he has gone, confirms his pretentions. Among other Machines he has prepared a double Loom, to be worked by one person. Of this he gives himself as the Inventor, and has applyed for a Patent, which he will probably obtain. It is certain that the Machine, if in use at all in Europe is quite new; and as far as without seeing it worked, it can be judged of, promisses to answer the Expectations it gives—with (Geoe) Perkinson, as Foreman or Master of a room in the Cotton-Mill. This appears to be an ingenious Mechanic, who has obtained a Patent for a Flax-Mill, which he alleges his having improved. How far these improvements may be of real Utility, or the Mill itself capable of answering it’s End, ought to be considered as uncertain: since it is a question whether the spinning of Flax by Mills, which has been for sometime a desideratum in Great Britain, is practicable. The object of engaging this Man was to secure to the Society an ingenious Mechanic, and securing to them whatever advantage there may be in the Patent.

All the Contracts leave to the Society the power of dismissing at pleasure, if on experiment, they find it their interest.
I thought it adviseable in the first instance, to secure Persons of whose Usefulness there was reason to entertain a favorable Opinion, tho’ upon terms which may appear high, that the Business might be early put in Motion.
It is a point understood between Mr. Mort and myself, that if desired by the Society, he is to go to Europe, to bring over Workmen, at his own Expence in the first instance; but with the assurance of reimbursement and indemnification. To engage such a Person as Mr. Mort for this purpose appeared to me a Point of some consequence.
I have the honor to be  with great consideration  Gentlemen Your Obedient servt

A Hamilton.
The Directors of the Society forestablishg. useful Manufactures.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Stephen Van Rensselaer, 7 December 1791
From: Van Rensselaer, Stephen
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Albany December 7 1791
Dear Sir

At the request of several officers of our late Army, I transmit you the enclosed Memorandum. If any provision is made for such cases you will oblige me by informing me. Mrs. Rensselaer joins in love to you & Mrs. Hamilton.
I am D Sir Your Hum Sert

Stephen Van Rensselaer


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Otho H. Williams, 7 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Williams, Otho H.

Treasury Department Decembr 7th 1791
sir

I request that You will pay to Messrs Elliot and Williams ten thousand Dollars on the first of January next, on account of their contract with the united States of the 27th September instant, taking duplicate receipts, one of which to be transmitted to the Treasury. You will of course retain money in Your hands for the purpose and in case there should not be a probability of a Sufficient sum being received in time, You will inform me of it.
I am, sir,  Your obedt Servt

Alexander Hamilton
Otho H. Williams EsquireCollector Baltimore


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from George Cabot, 8 December 1791
From: Cabot, George
To: Hamilton, Alexander

10ber. 8th. 91.
Dear Sir

I have understood that after the peace of 63 & ’till the late war France gave direct assistance to her Cod fishery beside the monopoly of her home & colonial markets—but notwithstanding these encouragements the supply from her own fishery was so scanty that her prohibotory laws were evaded & very large supplies of foreign fish were continually smuggled into her Colonies & consumed there at prices 40 per cent higher to the Planters than English & American fish was worth at the free ports in the neighbouring Islands.
Since the peace of 83 fish of the U S has not been wholly prohibited but its admission has been generally confined to a single port in an Island (sometimes very distant from the Consumers); the duty demandable on each quintal has been from 3 to 8 livres & the amount actually paid from 2½ to 3, while the french fish has enjoyed a free access to every place & upon landing has been entituled to a very liberal bounty. Yet under all these disadvantages the fishery of the U S has successfully rivalled that of France.
There facts at first view seem to indicate such a preponderance of natural advantages in the U S for carrying on the fishery as can hardly be balenced by France but it shou’d be noticed that about 5 years ago the french West India markets were surcharged to such a degree that the Exporters of fish from the U S suffered great losses upon all they shipped thither, & the fishery exhibited such symptoms of decline in consequence of it that it may be doubted whether it coud possibly have been supported if that of France had not been interrupted by the Commotions at home. It shou’d be observed too that the equipments of armed fleets & appearances of war occur so frequently to the European nations & especially to France that no fair experiment can be tried to determine the extent to which their fishery wou’d be carried in a long period of uninterrupted pursuit. These & similar events however have great influence upon the fishery of the U S but their frequency & effect in future can neither be foreseen nor accurately estimated, & hence it is the more difficult to say what is the greatest disparity of duties the fish of the U S cou’d bear & meet the fish of France in the french market—but on the whole shou’d the Govt of the U S restore to their Cod fisheries in some direct form the full amount which they pay to it’s treasury by the comsumption of dutied articles, & shou’d the fisheries of France be left without aid from their Govt, except like those of the U S a bare indemnity from contribution to the public revenue, & shou’d the markets of the french west Indies be open to the fish of both Countries, I think it may be safely relied on that the fish of the U S cou’d be afforded full 10 per Cent cheaper than that of France & consequently cou’d bear a duty of 10 per Cent on it’s value at the place & time of sale & yet sustain the competition with french fish selling in the same market duty free.
I have thus my dear Sir given you the best opinion I can form at present on the subject of your enquiry. This I have done not with the expectation of adding to your information but solely to shew my readiness to obey your command & to convince you of the esteem & respect with which
I am very sincerely your assured Friend  & mo. ob. Servt

George Cabot


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Charles Lee, 8 December 1791
From: Lee, Charles
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Alexandria [Virginia] 8th. December 1791
Sir!

The Ship Washington and the Brandy that were seized here, have been delivered up to the Owners, they having given bond with security to abide the legal decision of the seizure.
I am Sir! respectfully  Your most Obedient Servant

Charles LeeCollector at Alexandria.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Jeremiah Olney, 8 December 1791
From: Olney, Jeremiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Providence, December 8, 1791. “… Having recd. a Letter from the Master of the Cutter Argus, informing me, that the Schooner Alice was at Anchor about Four Miles from Rhode-Island LightHouse when his Mate boarded her, I have this day requested the District Attorney to commence a Prosecution against Captain Andrus.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Benjamin Hawkins, 9 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Hawkins, Benjamin

Philadelphia dec. 9. 1791
Dear Sir,

The ground upon which was founded the refusal to receive upon the subscription to the loan in State debt, the Certificates of North Carolina, on account of the Government of that State was simply this. The preamble to the clauses which relate to the assumption and various expressions in those clauses evidently contemplate “a provision for the debts of the respective states.” Now a bond or other security for a debt being once cancelled or discharged by, or surrendered to the Debtor without fraud or accident, there ceases to be a debt. The certificates therefore of the State of North Carolina, in this case the debtor, which were in the hands of its government, constituted no existing debt of the state; of course nothing upon which the assumption could operate.
If any thing was requisite to elucidate so clear a position, or make plainer the intent of the law, it might be found in that provision which directs, That interest on the difference between the sum in each case assumed and the sum actually subscribed shall be paid to each state, in trust for the non subscribing creditors of such state; this clearly indicating that a state is in no event to receive any of the monies appropriated to the purpose of its own debt except as a trustee for actual creditors which necessarily supposes existing debts.
Here too is found an answer to the claim that a state should be permitted to subscribe, on its own account, such part of its debt as may have been extinguished subsequent to the act of assumption. As the state is to receive interest on all the unsubscribed part of its debt, within the limits of the sum assumed, untill a settlement of accounts shall determine the equity of a further continuance of the payment, there is no necessity in point of equity, that a State should be permitted to subscribe the part of its debt, so subsequently extinguished. If the idea of a settlement of accounts were excluded, an equity of that kind would doubtless arise
Not chusing in a matter of this kind to rely wholly on my own opinion, I suspended a definitive judgment, untill an opinion of the Attorney General had confirmed my own ideas.
I have already incidentally answered the second object of your enquiry. It appears to me that both the letter and the spirit of the act require that the interest on the abovementioned difference between the sum assumed and the sum subscribed should be paid to each state untill there shall be a settlement of accounts and “a provision for the balance, if any, which may then appear in favour of the State,” without enquiry in the mean time into the existance or number of non subscribing creditors. The Law appears to me to take there existance for granted, and to rely on the settlement of accounts to furnish a rule for the continuance or discontinuance of the payment of interest to a State. This construction is strengthened by the circumstance of the payment being directed to continue untill provision shall be made for any balance which may appear in favour of a State. That payment has therefore the further operation of a pledge for this provision.
I have the honor to be, with great  consideration, Dear Sir  your obedient servant

Alexander Hamilton
The honorable Benj Hawkins Esq.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Henry, [9 December 1791]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Henry, John

[Philadelphia, December 9, 1791]

The Secretary of the Treasury not relying entirely on the accuracy of the data upon which the calculations in his Report on the subject of the Mint were founded, as they respect the quantity of fine silver contained in the silver dollar, thought it advisable to embrace the opportunity of the interval between the last and the present sessions of Congress to endeavour to obtain from Europe more certain information on the point.
The result has been—He first received from Amsterdam an account of the Standard of the new M. dollar which is almost the only one in circulation according to the regulations of the Spanish Mint.
This account States
1st as to weight, That there are 913 to 914 dollars in 100 marcs, or 791 ounces aveirdupois.

Consequently on the computation of 913 to 100 marcs each dollar would weigh
dwt.   grs 17 – 7 ⁷⁸⁵⁄₉₁₃

On computation of 914 to 100 Marcs
17 – 7 ³⁷⁰⁄₉₁₄

2nd As to the standard—That it is 258 parts fine to 30 alloy

dwt.   gr.

Consequently a dollar of
17 – 7 ⁷⁸⁵⁄₉₁₃
would contain of fine silver
372 ⁴⁹⁴⁄₉₁₃

   “     a dollar of
17 – 7 ³⁷⁰⁄₉₁₄
would contain of ditto
372 ³⁷⁰⁄₉₁₄

It is ascertained that it was formerly usual at the Spanish Mint to allow a remedy of weight and alloy of ²⁄₂₂₈ parts.

If the remedy continues, the quantity of fine silver in a dollar of the first description above would be
369 ⁵⁹⁷⁄₉₁₃

In a dollar of the second description    “   “
369 ²²⁸⁄₉₁₄

But he afterwards received a return of an actual assay at the Mint of Amsterdam which states the dollar at 258 parts fine to 30 parts alloy in exact conformity to the Standard of the Spanish Mint as before given and exclusive of all allowance for Remedy.

According to which a dollar would actually contain of  fine silver
372 ⁴⁹⁴⁄₉₁₃

or,
372 ³⁷⁰⁄₉₁₄

Three conjectures arise—either that the Account given as conformable to the legal standard of the Spanish Mint was not just, but was predicted upon the result of assays at the Mint of Amsterdam, or that being so conformable the remedy formerly allowed at the Spanish Mint has ceased, Or that the Assay at the Mint of Amsterdam was not perfectly accurate.
There has been also received the result from assay at the Mint of London which makes the Standard of the Spanish Dollar 5172 parts fine to 588 parts alloy.

According to which a silver dollar weighing
17 7 ⁷⁸⁵⁄₉₁₃

  would contain of fine Silver
373 ³⁷⁶⁄₉₁₃

a dollar weighing
17 7 ³⁷⁰⁄₉₁₄
372 ⁹¹³⁄₉₁₄

Here is a small difference which indicates a difference of accuracy in the assays, or a difference in the pieces assayed arising from errors in the Spanish Mint.
The two statements from Amsterdam seem entitled to most confidence not only because there is a correspondency between them, but because there are some marks of inaccuracy in the proceedings at the Mint of London. It is stated in the body of the certificate that the gross weight of the Dollar is presumed to be 17 dwt., 10 Grains and in the Margin it is mentioned as certain that the average is 17 dwt. 8 Grains.
The latter however is the truth or very near it, according to the trials in large masses made at the Banks of N. America & New York, but the cashier of the former bank seems to be of opinion that for a time the dollar rather gains in weight from the dirt which adheres to it, though in the course of a long circulation it loses.
Philadelphia, December 9, 1791
Alexander HamiltonSecy. of the Treasy.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Jeremiah Wadsworth, [10 December 1791]
From: Wadsworth, Jeremiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[December 10, 1791]
Dear Sir

Inclosed you have the paper I promised You; if you wish for anything more or any explanation of that inclosed I will wait on you when You Please.
Your Hume Svt

J Wadsworth
Decr 10 1791


Title: Enclosure: From Jeremiah Wadsworth, [10 December 1791]
From: Wadsworth, Jeremiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[December 10, 1791]
Dear Sir

A duty of ten per Cent on our Salted provisions imported into the French Islands would be too much unless we were relieved from other impositions which you will see by the paper herewith are more than ten ⅌ Cent on our Cargoes. When our Vessels arrive in Hispaniola the Captain must find a Bondsman tho his whole Vessel and Cargo is in the Power of the Government; this Bondsman is the Merchant who charges five ⅌ Ct on the Sales and the same on the return Cargo. We are happy if he will let our Captains do the business & not meddle in the Sales or purchase for in bothe we are in most instances sure to suffer, in the first from want of knowledge of the Value of our Horeses in the latter a carelessness of the quality of the goods, and often short weght & Short measure, sometimes delay of payment we are under the necssity of imploying a Captain or Merchant of our own who is paid five per Cent to save us from greater impositions
Our t[r]ade to the French Islands consists of a great Variety of Articles [on] many of which a small duty is charged, for Horses Oxen Sheep & Hogs alive Beans, Peas Hoops Staves, Boards, Scantling &c. What the legal duties are I do not know but We pay about one per Cent and the duty on Melasses outward is about the same.
It would be of consequence to have the Charges of every kind Mentioned in the treaty as their general regulations are not easily known; if it is agreed that we shall pay the same as the French Ships pay they will make us pay all the Charges which are made on their Ships & men for the purpose of establishing funds for their Various Cases, Beureaus &c.
a Brigantine of 130 Tons entered

Port au Prince in 1788

Paid duties on Cargo

duties 1 ⅌ Ct
344

on 50 Quintal Salted Beef

@ 3 livres
150

on Melasses exported 1 ⅌
712

1 206

Collectors fees. 8 dollars
66

Expedition
66

Admiralty & Anchorage
210

Harbour Master
60

Gratification Extra
66

Commandant
49.10

Soldiers
49.10

interpreter
99

666

Sales—40 Hor[s]es @ 390 livr
14 600

Beef Lumber Beans Peas &c
   5 400

  20.000

Commission 5 ⅌ C
   1 000
   1.000

18 000
2 866

   2 866

15 134

Commission 5 ⅌ c
    700

14 434

Thus a Cargo of 20-000 livres is reduced to 14434 livres without any Commission to our own Merchant or Captn. In many instances the French Merchant takes 10 ⅌ Cent at once out of the Grocce Sales. The Melasses rising in price they latterly put water into it. On an average the Melasses falls short on Gauge 5 ⅌ Ct. Our trade has so increased to the French Islands that American produce gradually falls & that of the Islands has rapidly increased. We do not now get more Gallons of Melasses or pounds sugar &c for £1000 than we used to get in 1786. 7. & 8 for £750. I do not mean since the insurrection, but before.
The Practise of Extorting a Commission under Pretence of Being Bondsman is confined to Hispaniola. The Windward Islands do not practice so but all the Other impositions are nearly the Same. Many Vessels of the Burthen of 130 Tons Carry lumber only which does not amount to the Sum Stated above. The Charges are the Same except the duties thus of a Cargo of Lumber in such a Vessel sells for 10.000 livr.

Port Charges would be
  666

leaving
9 334
livres

from which a Commisn of 5 ⅌ C on the
  500

groce Sales
8 834

from which 5 ⅌ C more as Commn.
  434

8 400

which is 16 ⅌ Ct in port Charges & Commissn. without any duties which is at least one ⅌ Ct.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joseph Whipple, 10 December 1791
From: Whipple, Joseph
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Portsmo New Hamp Decr. 10th. 1791
Sir

I have recd. your letter of the 22 Ulto. & have communicated it to Capt. Yeaton.
Conceiving that I can in no better way possess you of Cap. Yeatons reasons for deviating from your limits and my directions respecting the fitting of the Cutter, than by transmitting you his letter to me on that Subject I now inclose it.
I must observe that the last additional and reprehensive clause of your letter So far as it may be intended for me as such, could not be read unfelt, not from a conciousness of having in the Smallest degree deviated from the Strictest attention to œconomy in my transacting the business of the Scammell or from having ever in the most minute instance departed from that principle in transacting the public business committed to my charge, but from reflecting on the disagreeable circumstance of being charged with unreasonable parsimony on one Side, and on the other to receive an unmeritted reproof.
I have the honor to be &c.

Hon. Alex Hamilton Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Otho H. Williams, 10 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Williams, Otho H.

Treasury DepartmentDec. 10. 1791.
Sir

I have received a statement of the case of the Brig Trimmer from the Judge of the District Court of Maryland, and have determined to remit the forfeitures and penalties incurred by the vessel, goods and captain, on the repayment of the disbursements of money actually made. As the season of the year is critical, and the vessel may, if detained, be caught by the ice, I request that you will dismiss her on the repayment of the abovementioned disbursements. A formal act of remission will be sent to the Clerk of the District court in the next week.
I am, Sir,  Your obedt. servant

Alexander Hamilton
Otho H. Williams Esq.Collector, Baltimore.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Otho H. Williams, 10 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Williams, Otho H.

Treasury DepartmentDec. 10. 1791.
Sir

It has been represented to me by Mr. Kearney Wharton of Philadelphia, that some hardship has fallen on him in consequence of the want of proper instruments to ascertain the strength of a parcel of Rum belonging to him and lately imported by Messrs. Oliver and Thompson from Antigua. Though I have not yet decided how far it may be proper to make these revisions, I wish that measures may be taken by you in conjunction with the Surveyor to have the whole invoice reexaminied, and such enquiries made as to the difference of price between it and Rum of Antigua as has been taken, or as it appears likely to be necessary for the owners to accept. You will be aware that particular care is necessary in examining goods, which have been so long unladen, and which may have passed through several hands.
I am, Sir,  Your obedt. servant

Alexander Hamilton
Otho H. Williams EsqCollector Baltimore.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Caleb Gibbs, 12 December 1791
From: Gibbs, Caleb
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Barre, Massachusetts, December 12, 1791. On September 10, 1792, Gibbs wrote to Hamilton: “I wrote you On the 12th. of Decr. last.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Otho H. Williams, 12 December 1791
From: Williams, Otho H.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Baltimore 12 December 1791
Sir

I have very lately received a letter which has a reference to your circular of the 5th. of August; and upon reperusing the latter I discover that I have been very remiss, but I hope not censurable, for not replying to some parts of it sooner. My attention to the previous parts, and a supposition that I was not immediately concerned in the latter, produced in my mind, a temperory suspension of the subjects, and other business, afterwards, detached them entirely from my memory. This is a bad appology; but it is true, and therefore the best I can offer.
The delay, which has unavoidably happened, in rendering the returns to the treasury from this Office has been occasioned partly by my own indisposition, which disqualifies me for the detail of the business and partly by the Nuptials of the Deputy Collector; But more especially by the laborious task of calculating the duties on each particular specis of Merchandize, according to their several rates, which makes it some times necessary to make several calculations for the contents of a single package. They are however now in considerable forwardness and shall be transmitted as soon as possible.
In answer to the 4th paragraph of your letter it is proper for me to observe that if the oppinions upon which your instructions were founded are to be respected as law it ought not to be expected of me “to acertain in what instances there have been deviations in this district,” because in this district I am myself the responsable person in the cases alluded to. I have, however, no hesitation to confess that I think the oppinions of Messrs J & H were hastily assumed; and that the respectability of their judgments, uniting with the press of Important public business, might have a tendency to obtain the approbation of your own to their deccision.
Infallibility is the attribute of no man; and it cannot be imagined that I mean the least disrespect to any one when I say I think it entirely possible and even probable that a more deliberate consideration might have produced in the same persons different opinions, on the same subject. The first opinion delivered by Messrs. J & H is
“That Vessels of less than 20 tons, licenced as the act directs are exempt from tonnage; Because the act having declared that they shall be at liberty to trade without entering or clearing, the duty of tonnage, which is payable only on the entry of Vessels, can never arise.” The latter part of the 23d section reads thus, “But no licence shall be granted for any vessel untill the owner or owners applying therefore shall have paid the tonnage duty thereon and shall enter into bond &c.” To reconcile this part of the law with the opinion of Messrs. J & H. is impossible without altering the language. In my apprehension it was the intention of Congress to subject Vessels of a certain discription to a duty on tonnage at every entry, and Vessels of another discription to a like duty only once a year; as was the custom formerly with several of the States. But my opinion is governed by instructions.
The 2nd. opinion of Messrs. J & H is
“That no fee is demandable for the licence directed to be given to such Vessels” because “the Legislature seems to have made a distinction &c.” A provisional clause in the latter part of the 22d. section, which appears to have no relation to the previous part, requires “that the master or owner of every Vessel of less than 20 tons, and not less than 5 tons, which shall be employed between any of the districts of the United States, shall annualy procure a licence from the Collector of the district to which such Vessel belongs, who is thereby authorized to give the same, purporting that such Vessel is exempt from clearing and entering for the term of one year from the date thereof: And the master or owner shall give bond with sufficient security” &c. What motive can be supposed to have induced the Legislature to have required of the Collector a certain service without compensation I cannot conceive; neither can I think that it was their intention, since they have been so very moderate in the compensations granted for other services; nor does any reason occur to me why the owner (of a Vessel of less than 20 tons) should be exempt from paying a fee for the licence any more than for the bond; Both are expresly provided for in the 31 section. “For every licence to trade between the different districts of the United States” (almost letter for letter with the clause requiring the licence to be procured) “and for taking every bond required by this act” &c. But it is not pretended that the bond is not to be paid for.
The 3rd. opinion of Messrs. J. & H. is
That, by the 25 and 26 section, only the fee of 25 “Cents for a permitt to proceed to the place of destination is demandable.” By these sections it is required, in certain cases, that the Collector shall receive duplicate manifests of Cargoes intended to be transmitted from one district to another; He must necessarily compare them, and he is required to administer a long oath, a certificate whereof he must write on one of those manifests, to be delivered to the master: and the other manifest he must file in his Office; all which is much more labor and trouble than granting a permit. I think it unreasonable to conclude that Congress intended, in more instances than one, that the lesser service should be compensated and the greater performed for nothing. Yet the 5th. clause in the 31 section of the act, by connecting the compensation “for every entry of inward Cargo” with the compensation for “Receiving of and qualifying to every manifest of Vessels licenced to trade” (which last can be done according to section 25 & 26 at the place of export only) has so confounded the duties of two officers, in different situations, that according to Messrs. J & H neither of them can legally receive his just reward. The Gentlemen were “aware that their construction of the act would involve a consequence probably not intended by the Legislature”. I perswade myself that a revision of their opinions would discover to themselves more than one consequence evidently inconsistant therewith. If I may be permited to abridge their conclusive remarks, (without altering a letter or transposing a syllable) they will read thus. “As it is expressly declared that no other or greater fees shall be taken by the several officers of the customes; we suppose that no other

   What a conclusion is here? They found the infallibility of their opinion of an act upon the act itself, and declare no other construction inadmissibly except the ones mentioned which is no other, and therefore can be no exception.

 construction of the act is admissable, except

   What a conclusion is here? They found the infallibility of their opinion of an act upon the act itself, and declare no other construction inadmissibly except the ones mentioned which is no other, and therefore can be no exception.

 the one which we have mentioned.” To conceive the force of such reasoning I must be endowed with other than common sense. It is noticed merely to justify my conclusion that their opinions were hastily assumed, and I shall only add that I assure myself you will think my moity of the mite allowed, in either of the cases in question, too inconsiderable a motive to influence my Judgment. I am &c.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Otho H. Williams, 12 December 1791
From: Williams, Otho H.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Baltimore, December 12, 1791. According to its catalogue description, this letter relates to the “Registry of the Brig Dove, Josiah Parsons, master.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Jeremiah Olney, 14 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Olney, Jeremiah

Treasury Department Decemb 14 1791
Sir

I do not think you will be justifiable in making a deduction from the legal rate of duty on Coffee, on account of its being broken, nor on cocoa, because of an inferiority of quality, they being in each instance as I presume the unmixed article, on which the Legislature has imposed an uniform impost, without providing a variation of duty in case of differences of quality.
The shells of Coffee cannot properly be considered as included in the duty on coffee, which was meant to apply, it is presumed, to the grain. It is however difficult to determine on the requisite deduction. If the Owners will permit a bag or cask of about one hundred weight to be impartially taken out, by one of the Officers of the Customs, and to be shelled, at their expence, by some person to be employed by you for the purpose, I would recommend your deducting from the whole in that proportion. The result I would wish to be communicated to me.
I am sir,  Your obedt Servt

Alexander Hamilton
Jeremiah Olney EsquireCollector Providence


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Otho H. Williams, 14 December 1791
From: Williams, Otho H.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Baltimore 14 December 1791
Sir

I have received your instructions respecting the Brige. Trimmer and she shall be dispatched accordingly. What you say of disbursements of money actually made may make it necessary to inform you that in the case of the Brig Trimmer, and in others similar thereto (where the matter of illegality was duly reported without reserve, and manifestly without any intention of evading the law) the custom has been to detain the goods on board the Vessel without seizure, and to give the parties concerned, an opportunity of making representation; and prefering a petition to the Judge; which has always been done within the time limited by law for goods to be permitted to remain on board. The Judge has usually taken up the matter upon this ground and satisfied himself (by enquiry of the Custom House Officers) of the propriety of recommending the case. This mode of conducting the business has been adopted by the officers upon the following considerations. If any deception, or fraud, were intended it could not fail to be discovered, or strongly suspected, within fifteen days: the time allowed for vessels to unlade; and if no deception or fraud were intended it would be ungenerous, and, sometimes, cruel, to subject persons who are innocent, and, perhaps, unfortunate in the very circumstance which exposes them to a penalty, to expose them to unnecessary expences also.
I am, Sir,  Your Most Obedient Humble Servant

A. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: Conversation with George Hammond, [15–16 December 1791]
From: Hammond, George,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, December 15–16, 1791]

Towards the end of last week, I had a very long and confidential conversation with Mr Hamilton, the Secretary of the Treasury, in the course of which the opinion, I had entertained, of that Gentleman’s just and liberal way of thinking was fully confirmed. The late unfortunate expedition under General St Clair naturally engrossed a great portion of our conversation, whence I was induced to express his Majesty’s sincere desire to see tranquillity between the Indians and the United States permanently re-established. I took occasion distantly to intimate that if this government should think proper to solicit the King’s interference for this purpose through his government in Canada, I had reason to believe that the application would not be ineffectual. To this Mr Hamilton replied that the British Government might be assured that the United States, in the present war, were actuated by no motives of extending their territory, but simply by the desire of binding down the Indians to the stipulations of their last treaty, and that if this object could not be attained by negociation, it was determined to prosecute the war with vigour—that this government was however sincerely solicitous to effect a pacification, and if the voluntary interposition of the King’s government in Canada could tend to accomplish it, such a measure would be received with the greatest gratitude.
In another part of our conversation, Mr Hamilton hinted to me, with as much caution, as the danger of committing himself too far rendered necessary, that in the affairs of this country the present is an important crisis, upon which may depend the future complexion as well of its political connexions as of its commercial arrangements with the nations of Europe. I farther collected from other incidental observations that the government of France seems inclined to hold out to this country, in their projected treaty, some additional circumstances of advantage, which will have a tendency still farther to favor and promote the navigation of the United States.
Upon this last head, I must not omit mentioning to your Lordship that Mr Hamilton informed me he was preparing a report upon the actual state of the navigation and commerce of this country, whence it would appear that the present system of France was more favorable to the former, and that of Great Britain to the latter. He however admitted, that upon balancing the general aggregate advantages resulting to the country from these respective systems, the scale had hitherto decidedly preponderated in favor of the commercial encouragements afforded by Great Britain.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James Reynolds, 15 December 1791
From: Reynolds, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, 15th December, 1791.
Sir

I am very sorry to find out that I have been so Cruelly treated by a person that I took to be my best friend instead of that my greatest Enimy. You have deprived me of every thing thats near and dear to me, I discovred whenever I Came into the house. after being out I found Mrs Reynolds weeping I ask’d her the Cause of being so unhappy. She always told me that she had bin Reding. and she could not help Crying when she Red any thing that was Afecting. but seing her Repeatedly in that Setevation gave me some suspicion to think that was not the Cause, as fortain would have it. before matters was Carred to two great a length. I discovered a letter directed to you which I copied of and put it in the place where I found it. without being discovered by Her. and then the evining after. I was Curious anough to watch her. and see give a letter to a Black man in Markett Street. which I followed Him to your door. after that I Returned home some time in the evening, and I broutched the Matter to her and Red the Coppy to her which she fell upon her knees and asked forgiveness and discovered every thing to me Respecting the matter And ses that she was unhappy. and not knowing what to do without some assistance. She Called on you for the lone of some money. which you toald her you would Call on her the Next Evening. which accordingly you did. and there Sir you took the advantage a poor Broken harted woman. instead of being a Friend. you have acted the part of the most Cruelist man in existance. you have made a whole family miserable. She ses there is no other man that she Care for in this world. now Sir you have bin the Cause of Cooling her affections for me. She was a woman. I should as soon sespect an angiel from heven. and one where all my happiness was depending. and I would Sacrefise almost my life to make her Happy. but now I am determed to have satisfation. it shant be onely one [f]amily thats miserable. for I am Robbed of all happiness in this world I am determed to leve her. and take my daughter with me that She shant see her poor mother Lot. now Sir if I Cant see you at your house call and see me. for there is no person that Knowes any thing as yet. And I am tiremd to see you, by some Means or other. for you have made me an unhappy man for eve. put it to your own case and Reflect one Moment. that you should know shush a thing of your wife. would not you have satisfaction yes. and so will I before one day passes me more.
I am yours

James Reynolds.
Mr. Alexander Hamilton.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to James Reynolds, 15 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Reynolds, James

[Philadelphia, December 15, 1791. In the “Reynolds Pamphlet”Alexander Hamilton, Observations on Certain Documents Contained in No. V and VI of “The History of the United States for the Year 1796,” in which the Charge of Speculation against Alexander Hamilton, Late Secretary of the Treasury, is Fully Refuted. Written by Himself (Philadelphia: Printed for John Fenno, by John Bioren, 1797). Hamilton wrote: “The same day, being the 15th of December 1791, I received from Mr. Reynolds the letter … by which he informs me of the detection of his wife.… In answer to this I sent him a note, or message desiring him to call upon me at my office, which I think he did the same day.…” Hamilton’s letter of December 15, 1791, not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Maria Reynolds, [15 December 1791]
From: Reynolds, Maria
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia, December 15, 1791]
Col. Hamilton
Dear Sir

I have not tim to tell you the cause of my present troubles only that Mr. has rote to you this morning and I know not wether you have got the letter or not and he has swore that If you do not answer It or If he dose not se or hear from you to day he will write Mrs. Hamilton he has just Gone oute and I am a Lone I think you had better come here one moment that you May know the Cause then you will the better know how to act Oh my God I feel more for you than myself and wish I had never been born to give you so mutch unhappisness do not rite to him no not a Line but come here soon do not send or leave any thing in his power

Maria


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Short, 15 December 1791
From: Short, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Amsterdam Dec. 15. 1791.
Sir

I have now the honor of inclosing you a copy of the contract for the loan opened at Antwerp, which could not be had in time to go with my last of the 1st. inst. The customary ratification has been promised on it, which it is hoped will be obtained & forwarded to Antwerp. A duplicate will be sent by another conveyance. The translation is in French, the English language not having been understood by the Notary. The act is copied as nearly as possible from those passed here & you will find the terms at least as barbarous, but as it seems they compose the technical language of Antwerp I imagine no objection will be made to them, they being clear and intelligible. I recieved yesterday a letter from M. de Wolf in which he informed me that the loan continued going on with prosperity as well as the remittances he was making therefrom to France. I have already mentioned to you that it would be remitted in proportion as it was recieved as I understand that to be your wish, the reservation for your purposes having extended only to f 2,500,000. to be taken out of the last six millions loaned here.
I come now to speak of the business at this place which I have postponed writing to you about until now because nothing new has occurred since my last & because I hoped after arriving here I should be able to give you information of greater certainty respecting it.
I have already informed you that the bankers here in reply to my letter authorizing them to make a loan at 4½. p. cent interest had told me that they postponed it in the hopes of being able to make one in a short time at 4 p cent interest on the charges being augmented. I informed you also how unexpected a circumstance this was to me & at the same time that my earnest desire to see it realized could not prevent my entertaining certain doubts respecting it. I wrote to them however immediately approving their having postponed the loan at 4½ p. cent, & authorized their opening one at 4. p. cent at the charges they mention. Lest this offer of the loan at 4. p. cent should be intended merely to defeat that at Antwerp, or at least to be made use of as a pretext for shewing the disadvantage of opening a loan out of Holland, whilst they should make use of the authorization for one at 4½. p. cent interest here, I thought it advisable at the same time that I mentioned to them that their having not used it in the hopes of reducing the interest still lower, was an additional proof of their zeal for the service of the U.S. to desire them to consider that authorization as no longer in force, but to act under that for the loan at 4. p. cent interest; if they found such an one practicable.
This was the best means I had of satisfying myself fully whether a loan at 4. p. cent here was really practicable, as now having no longer the power to make one at 4½ p. cent & the tax on loans approaching it was certain every effort would be used to effect one at 4. p. cent, even if their original offer should have been made with the intentions abovementioned.

I mentioned to you in my last their letter respecting the loan at Antwerp & their adding that it had rendered impracticable the expected loan at 4. p. cent. I afterwards recieved another from them saying that if that loan could be arrested in its present state & no more of the bonds given out they could still effect the loan here, but otherwise that it would be impossible. As they had been informed however that it was contracted for they must have known that they were placing their offer on a contingency that could not take place. Since my arrival here they persist in saying that the loan at 4. p. cent cannot take place at present, though it may be hoped for soon, & that it has been prevented only by that at Antwerp. Thus the affair stands at present.
My conversations with these gentlemen however have given me full proofs of what I informed you I was myself already fully satisfied about—namely that it is not the loan at Antwerp which has prevented the one held out here at 4. p. cent. The various reasonings they have made use of carry a strong conviction with them of what I assert. They laid down for example that the bonds of the Antwerp loan being for sale here & the money lenders finding thus an opportunity of placing their money at 4½. would not give it at 4., & this would seem reasonable. Yet they told me among other things that the tax on loans would not diminish their number, as those in whom the money lenders had confidence, such as brokers undertakers &c. would always prevent their placing their monies in loans made elsewhere, of course that those powers who have need of Dutch money must come & take it at Amsterdam. This is probably the truth. I asked them how they reconciled it however with what they had told me of the loan at Antwerp being brought here & spoiling the market for the loan they had considered as certain without it. M. de Wolf had also given me every reason that can be given in such cases to believe, that no part of these obligations had been or would be placed on the Amsterdam market. He observed that it was his interest as well as that of the undertakers of Antwerp to prevent it & accordingly to his knowlege one of the brokers from Amsterdam interested in the American loans having written to an undertaker of Antwerp to know on what terms he could take an interest with him, had been answered that he had no part to dispose of in that manner. He suspected the intention was to get possession of a certain number of the obligations either to sell them under par on the Amsterdam market, or to shew me, as a proof of the money’s coming from Amsterdam although the loan was opened at Antwerp, & of course to prove that it was no new source of credit. This you will easily concieve Sir is an underground kind of business where it would be useless & improper to employ myself in digging for the truth between assertions on one hand & denials on the other. Of course I do nothing more than hear indifferently all parties & draw the inferences which seem to me the most probable that they may serve as a future guide.
The bankers here finding that I did not consent to renew the authorisation for the 4½. p. cent loan on being told that the one at 4. p. cent was impracticable for the present, have taken some pains to shew me that the step from 5 to 4. p. cent was too rapid for the money lenders, that nothing but the extraordinarily favorable moment at which they concieved the idea of it could have justified it &c. They press me to renew that authorisation & among other reasons say that it will hasten the moment of making a loan at 4. p. cent. I asked them how they reconciled that with what they had told me of the 4½. p. cent obligations from Antwerp on this market having procrastinated the 4. p. cent loan. I was left unsatisfied on this & other points of the same nature.
On the whole I cannot at present entertain a doubt that the loan at Antwerp was the cause of the expectations held out from hence as to one at 4. p. cent. On that ground many things are easily accounted for which are inexplicable on any other. I have taken much pains to convince myself on this subject, as well because I considered it a point of importance to the U.S. as on my own account personally. For although I am fully persuaded that you will consider the loan at Antwerp as a measure that admitted of no hesitation at the time it was adopted, yet I should not have been able to have divested myself of pain if by any posterior & unforeseen contingency, it had been really the means of preventing the U.S. from reducing the rate of their interest to 4. p. cent. The bankers themselves agree that at the time of the loan being authorized at Antwerp the possibility of one here at a lower rate of interest was not discoverable by any human foresight.
I gave the bankers no hopes that I shall consent to a loan at 4½. p. cent. I shall wait until the delay necessary for making one at 4. p. cent shall be ascertained as nearly as possible—if not too considerable I shall suppose it not advisable to wait for it. Since the U.S. was not to derive the expected benefit from the present rate of exchange with France, former reasons for despatch in the making of loans do not exist.
Nothing has been yet settled as to the manner in which the payments are to be rated. The several data are known viz. the rate of exchange & depreciation & there can be no inconvenience in delaying the settlement of the mode.
The contract for the late loan of six millions was signed immediately on my arrival here. It will be soon forwarded for ratification as usual. The bonds are printing & I shall have finished signing them in a few days. Immediately after which & taking arrangements for a new loan here I shall return to Paris by the way of Antwerp. The present state of affairs in France will have rendered my absence of little consequence—no business but that of the most urgent & pressing nature being attended to there by the ministry.
I have been favored by the bankers here with the President’s speech at the opening of Congress & other articles of American intelligence. The last letters which I have had the honor of recieving from the U.S. are yours of Sep. 2 & Oct 3. & one from the Sec. of State of July 28. Your last acknowleges the reciept of mine of July 26. & 27. There were three of an older date unacknowleged which I hope will have been since recieved, they were July 8, 19 & 24.
I beg you to be fully persuaded of the sentiments of respect & attachment with which I have the honor to remain, Sir, your most obedient humble servant

W Short
The HonbleAlexander Hamilton. secretary of the Treasury—Philadelphia


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joseph Whipple, 15 December 1791
From: Whipple, Joseph
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Portsmouth, New Hampshire, December 15, 1791. “Mr. Parrott the 2nd Mate of the Scammel having an advantageous offer in the Command of a Ship has risigned his place in the Scammel.… I was obliged to acquiesce in this resignation which is rendered the more inconvenient by the Scarcity of young men Suitable for the Station of 1st. Mate to which I recommended Mr Parrott.… I would propose for your consideration & direction the temporary appointment of such persons as may appear the most suitable.…”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Sharp Delany, 16 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Delany, Sharp

Treasury DepartmentDecember 16 1791
Sir

I wish you to ascertain who is the present owner of the Brig Lydia commanded by Captain Vancise, of what place he is a resident, whether he is a Citizen of the United States, when he became owner of that vessel, and where he purchased her.
Should application be made for a new register for that Vessel, I wish to receive immediate information, and that you suspend the issuing of it until you shall afterwards hear from this office.
I am, Sir,  Your Most Obed Servant.

Alexander Hamilton
Sharp Delany Esqr.Collr. Philadelphia.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joseph Whipple, 16 December 1791
From: Whipple, Joseph
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Portsmouth, New Hampshire, December 16, 1791. “I have received your Circular letter to the Agents of the Cutters of the 17th. Ultimo. As the directions given In that letter supersedes the Necessity of a particular Statement … I will only observe that the cost of 232 days of the mens victualling amounted to 33 20/100 Dollars being about 14⅓ cents pr. ration. Cap Yeaton has however agreed to Supply the people at 12 cents pr. diem for the whole term of Victualling the Vessel when at allowance & when not, and untill the 30th. of June next Accounting for the Cost of all the Provisions hitherto purchased for her which to the 1st. instant averaged about that Sum.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Otho H. Williams, 16 December 1791
From: Williams, Otho H.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Baltimore 16 December 1791.
Sir

I cannot discover by the acts of the Legislature that Collectors have any legal jurisdiction, or controul, over the Officers of the revenue cutters; or that they have, necessarily, any agency in that establishment further than to receive the reports of the Officers and to respect them as authentic documents whereby to ascertain the Cargoes of inwardbound vessels. I therefore conclude that the several letters and instructions, addressed to me from the Treasury department are intended to supply some defect of the law in that respect; and have consequently given the business all the attention I could. It has not, however, been practicable for me to make any effectual arrangement respecting the rations of the Officers and men. Captain Gross has always declined entering into any contract; and the object is too inconsiderable to gain the attention of any one else in whom I could confide.
Unwilling as I am to intimate any disapprobation of an establishment which the wisdom of the Legislature has adopted I think it my duty to suggest my opinion that the Revenue cutter for Maryland has hitherto been of no more advantage to the United States, and perhaps much less, than if She had been built and manned on the lake Erie. The very few papers that have been sent to the Customs House by the officers of the cutter have been informal, incorrect, or out of time, some of them 2 or three weeks after the entry of the Vessel to which they related and it does not appear to me that any essential service has been, or could have been, performed by the Cutter in the Chesepeak, than merely the inspection of such papers as the masters of Vessels had to produce.
It will perhaps be remembered that my sentiments were not favorable to the plan of employing cutters in this district, and thence it may possibly be concluded that I have not been disposed to render all the assistance in my power; But I certainly have had no power in the business beyond what has been delegated by the secretary of the Treasury in the form of particular permissions, or ‘special directions with very exact limitations, and cautions which it was improper for me to exceed and which have not been neglected. That it may not seem that I have been, at any time, unmindful of the public interest in this respect I think it expedient to mention to you at this time the foregoing particulars very lately communicated by Lieutenant Thomas of the Cutter, and of whom I made very minute enquiry respecting the affairs. The first Lieutenant Mr. Porter about the 11 November went as Master of the schooner Polly, cleared from this port for New Orleans: But supposed to be destined on a secret voyage to the Island of Cuba. He expected, I am informed, to return and take his command on board the Cutter in about two months after his departure. The 3d. Lieut. Mr. Forbes, I understand, had waited a considerable time for his Commission without receiving it, and being an expert and necessitous seaman was induced to make a Voyage to Sea. When he returned his Commission was in the possession of the Captain; But as the Cutter was not then prepared for a cruise he went again to Sea. He sailed last in the schooner Polly, which cleared from this port about 3 weeks ago 26 Novmr. for St. Eustasia. Lt. Thomas further informs me that Captn Gross left the Cutter in his charge the 15 November, with instructions to hire five good hands; to fit out the cutter and sail as far as Annapolis; and there wait his orders. That he has not been able to procure the hands for the pay and subsistence allowed by Congress, ten to twelve Dollars ⅌ mo. being given here for good Seamen to sail in merchant Ships. Captn Gross expected to return from the Eastern shore of Maryland in ten or twelve days after his departure. Mr. Thomas supposes that he has been detained by bad weather, head winds, and an apprehension that the late severe cold has closed this harbour, and that it is uncertain whether he will return this winter, as he left orders how the affairs of the cutter were to be managed in case he should not return. Yet Mr. Thomas thinks it may be that Captn. Gross is at this time returning. Two men only are all that have been on board the cutter for near two months, and these are supplied with provision and fuel by Mr. Thomas in port. This is a different account from that which would give me pleasure to communicate; But as I do not know how, or when, matters can be better arranged without your interposition I have thought it right to trouble you with this detail.
Simon Deagle master of a coasting Vessel from this port, last from Norfolk, brought 10 Musketts & 10 Bayonets 20 pistols 2 Lanthorns and 1 Chissell which he said he recd from the Collector at Norfolk for the use of the Cutter belonging to this District and which he has delivered to Lieutenant Thomas.
I am, Sir, Your most obedient Humble Servant


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joseph Whipple, 17 December 1791
From: Whipple, Joseph
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Portsmouth, New Hampshire, December 17, 1791. “I received by the last post your letter of the 2nd Instant directing me to Mention to Cap Yeaton his omitting to notice in the abstract of his journal for October the receiving of manifests from Vessels which I shall mention to him on his return into port.…”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to ———, [18 December 1791]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

Philadelphia, December 18, 1791]
My Dear Sir

I am this moment going to a rendezvous which I suspect may involve a most serious plot against me, but various reasons, and among others a desire to ascertain the truth induce me to hazard the consequence. As any disastrous event might interest my fame; I drop you this line, that from my impressions may be inferred the truth of the matter.
Yrs. sincerely

A Hamilton
Sunday December 17th 1791


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Jeremiah Olney, 19 December 1791
From: Olney, Jeremiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Providence, December 19, 1791. “I have received your Letter of the 8th. Instant. I shall charge in my present quarter’s and future Accounts, all Monies paid by me into the Providence Bank, as accounted for by the duplicate Receipts forwarded agreeable to your directions.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James Reynolds, 19 December 1791
From: Reynolds, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia 19th December 1791.
Sir.

When we where last togeather you then would wis to know my Determination what I would do and. you exspess a wish to do any thing that was in your power to Serve me, its true its in your power to do a great deal for me, but its out of your power to do any thing that will Restore me to my Happiness again for if you should give me all you possess would not do it. god knowes I love the woman and wish every blessing may attend her, you have bin the Cause of Winning her love. and I Dont think I Can be Reconsiled to live with Her. when I know I hant her love. now Sir I have Considered on the matter Serously. I have This preposial to make to you. give me the Sum Of thousand dollars and I will leve the town and take my daughter with me and go where my Friends Shant here from me and leve her to Yourself to do for as you thin[k] proper. I hope you wont think my Request is in a vew of making Me Satisfaction for the injury done me. for there is nothing that you Can do will Compensate for it. your answer I shall expect This evening or in the morning early, as I am Determened to wate no longer till. I know my lot
Yours

James Reynolds
Mr. Alexr. Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Ellery, 20 December 1791
From: Ellery, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Newport [Rhode Island] December 20, 1791. “… I transmitted to the bank of Providence by water last friday seven thousand Dollars under the care of an Inspector. The money arrived safe but he has not had an opportunity to return with the Cashiers Receipts. I expect him this day, and will send on a receipt by the first post.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Joseph Whipple, 20 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Whipple, Joseph

[Philadelphia, December 20, 1791. On January 12, 1792, Whipple wrote to Hamilton: “I had the honor to receive your letter of the 20th. of last Month.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 20 December 1791
From: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Treasury DepartmentComptrollers Office.20th: December 1791.
Sir,
On examining the Accounts of Vincent Redman, Collector of the Customs, for the District of Yeocomico River, in the State of Virginia, for the Quarter ending 31st: March 1791, it appears, that he has charged duties on the Sloop Maria, an American Coasting Vessel, under Twenty Tons burthen at the rate of six cents per Ton, per Annum, to the amount of Ninety Cents.
As the Collection of those duties seems to have been made contrary to the intent of your Circular Letter to the Collectors, dated 30th: November 1789; I have taken the liberty to submit the circumstance to your consideration.
I am &ca:

O: W: Jr:


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Royal Flint, 21 December 1791
From: Flint, Royal
To: Hamilton, Alexander

New York, December 21, 1791. “This letter will be presented you by Dr. Hopkins of Connecticut. He is on his way to Philadelphia, and while he is in that City, I feel a desire that you become acquainted with him. The literary talents of this gentleman, and the liberal way of thinking, he adopts on all public questions of importance, will render him not only a valuable, but a pleasing acquantance.…”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Thomas Mifflin, 21 December 1791
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Mifflin, Thomas

Treasury Department, December 21, 1791. Writes to Mifflin concerning Pennsylvania creditors.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Jeremiah Olney, 22 December 1791
From: Olney, Jeremiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Providence, December 22, 1791. “I yesterday received your favor of the 23rd. of Novemr. Your approbation of my Conduct in the Case of the Brigt. Betsey, affords me the sincerest Satisfaction; and in future, should similar breaches of the Law occur within this District, I shall proceed in the way you have now suggested, as a less expensive and more speedy Mode of Determination; and, in discharging the duties of my Office in general, I shall continue my endeavors to merit your support.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Allibone, 23 December 1791
From: Allibone, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia] December 23, 1791. “I have the Honor to call your attention to a Short report on the state of the establishments under my care as follows: The Light House in good order and well Supplied with every thing Necessary for the ensuing Season—the Publick Piers in good repair. The usual exhanges of Beacons & Buoys and those which were relieved brot. up and deposited in their usual places in safety. Enclosed is also a Certificate by John Turner & Joshua Humphrys Ship wrights who was required by me in aid of my own Judgment, to examine the old Beacon Boat of the Brandywine, from which it will appear, that she may without much risque be employed another season.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Thomas Jefferson, [23 December 1791]
From: Jefferson, Thomas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia, December 23, 1791]

Th. Jefferson presents his respectful compliments to the Secretary of the treasury and incloses him the copy of a letter and table which he has addressed to the President of the United States, and which being on a subject whereon the Secretary of the Treasury and Th: J. have differed in opinion, he thinks it his duty to communicate to him.

Dec. 23. 1791.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Short, 23 December 1791
From: Short, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Duplicate to go by the way of the Texel. 1st & 3d. sent by way of England
Amsterdam Dec 23d 91
Sir

I had the honor of writing to you from hence on the 15th. inst. & of informing you of the posture of the American business here at that time. I am now happy in being able to announce to you the conclusion of a loan here for the U.S. at 4. p. cent interest. The reimbursements are to begin at the end of ten years & to be made in equal parts during the five succeeding. It has been found absolutely necessary to abandon the clause for re-imbursement at the will of the U.S. the lenders having lately become much dissatisfied with it, since the fall of interest in the other loans. In future however it will be found practicable for the U.S. to reserve this right after a given number of years. The sum of the loan is three millions of florins. The Undertakers have insisted on eight months, instead of five as allowed in the last loan. Although it will probably be furnished before the term, yet it will certainly not be done as expeditiously as the last, the market being at present excessively charged with loans. The charges will be between 5–6 p. cent, that point however is not finally settled, the bankers insisting now with some earnestness on 6. p. cent, notwithstanding in their first letter they stated them at less. I shall settle with them the terms at which this loan may be considered as at your disposal, so that you may regulate your draughts for such parts as you may chuse to call for. No reservation having been made by you I shall continue to have it applied towards the French payments until I hear from you, in proportion as it is recieved.
The departure of the English post by which this letter will be sent precludes me from saying anything further to you at present. In my next I will inform you of the steps which have preceded this loan, & which have convinced me that that at Antwerp has not had an unfavorable influence as the bankers here pretended.
I inclose you the second copy of the Antwerp contract mentioned in my last. Immediately after signing the bonds for the new loan which will be in five or six days unless delayed in the press, I shall return to Paris. I beg you to be persuaded of the sentiments with which I have the honor to be Sir, your most obedient servant

W Short
The Honble. Alexander Hamilton Secretary of the Treasury Philadelphia


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Melancton Smith, 23 December 1791
From: Smith, Melancton
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Newyork 23rd Dec. 1791

Sir I am favored with yours of the 18th Instant. In a letter I wrote to Genl. Knox of the 5th instant I mentioned that that I had seen no Advertisement for a contract for West point and wished to know whether that post was to be supplied under his Orders, as the recruits were or whether a new Contract was to be formed if the latter I offered to furnish the Garrison at ten cents pr Ration. As I had not received any answer to this proposal, and there was every reason to expect the River would every day be Obstructed with Ice, I forwarded some provisions to be ready to supply them after my Contract had expired. I hope this has arrived. The lowest I would undertake to supply West Point is nine and an half Cents pr ration.
I am Sir  Your Ob ser

Meln Smith


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Jeremiah Olney, 26 December 1791
From: Olney, Jeremiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Providence, December 26, 1791. “I have received your Letter of the 14th. Instant: The contents shall be attended to; and the result of the first Instance that occurs, respecting unshelled Coffee, shall be communicated to you.…”