Title: The Warning No. I, [27 January 1797]
From: “Americus”,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[New York, January 27, 1797]

There are appearances too strong not to excite apprehension that the affairs of this Country are drawing fast to an eventful crisis. Various circumstances dayly unfolding themselves authorise a conclusion that France has adopted a system of conduct towards the neutral maritime nations generally which amount to little less than actual hostility. I mean the total interruption of their Trade with the ports of her enemies: A pretension so violent, and at the same time so oppressive humiliating and ruinous to them, that they cannot submit to it, without not only the complete sacrifice of their commerce but their absolute degradation from the rank of sovereign and independent States.
It seems to have become latterly a primary object in the policy of France to make the principal attack upon Great Britain through her Commerce, in order, by extinguishing the sources of her revenue and credit, to disable her from continuing the war and compel her to accept any conditions of peace which her antagonist may think fit to prescribe. It is to this plan, we are to attribute the unjustifiable treatment of Tuscany, in the seizure of Leghorn, and shutting her ports against the English contrary to the will of her own government. The same plan has dictated the attempts, which appear to have been made to oblige Naples to exclude Great Britain from her ports during the present war. And there have been indications of a design to effect a similar restraint on all the Italian states, and expel the British Trade wholly from the Mediterranean. The same object of wounding Great Britain through her commerce has been promoted by the War into which Spain has been drawn, and may be considered as the principal advantage expected from it: While it is likewise understood to be the intention to force Portugal to suspend her commercial relations with Great Britain. The late decree forbidding the importation of British manufactures into France is a further proof of the eagerness with which the policy of destroying the British Commerce is pursued; since it is presumeable from the derangement of French manufactures by the war, that there must have been a convenience in the supply which that importation has afforded.
Tis obviously to the same origin, that we are to trace the decree lately communicated by the French Minister to our Government, with respect to the intended treatment of the Trade of neutrals, and the spoliations which ours has for some time past suffered. While neutral nations were permitted to enjoy securely their rights, besides the direct commerce between them and the British dominions, the commerce of Great Britain would be carried on in neutral bottoms, even with the countries where it was denied access in British bottoms. It follows that the abrigement of neutral rights is essential to the scheme of destroying the British Commerce: And here we find the true solution of those unfriendly proceedings, on the part of France, towards this country, which are hypocritically charged to the account of the Treaty with Great Britain and other acts of pretended infidelity in our Government.
Did we need a confirmation of this truth, we should find it in the intelligence lately received from Cadiz. We are informed through a respectable channel,

   Note Mr. Iznardi our Consul at Cadiz lately arrived who mentioned the fact as here stated adding without reserve that the principle abovementioned is avowed in the correspondence of the French Consul at Cadiz.

 that Danish and Swedish as well as American Vessels, carried into that port by French Cruisers, have with their cargoes been condemned and confiscated by the French Consular Tribunal there, on the declared principle of intercepting the Trade of neutrals with the ports of the enemies of France. This indiscriminate spoliation of the commerce of neutral powers is a clear proof that France is actuated not by particular causes of discontent given by our Government but by a general plan of policy.
The practice upon the decree is a comment much broader than the text. The decree purports that France would observe towards neutrals the same conduct which they permitted her enemies to observe towards them. But the practice goes a great deal further. None of the enemies of France, even at the height of their power and presumption, ever pretended totally to cut off the Trade of neutrals, with her ports. This is a pretension reserved for her to increase the catalogue of extraordinary examples, of which her Revolution has been so fruitful.
The allegations of discontent with this Country are evidently a mere colouring to the intended vilolation of its rights by treaty as well as by the laws of Nations. Some pretext was necessary and this has been seized. It will probably appear hereafter that Denmark, and Sweden have been mocked with a similar tale of grievances. It is indeed already understood, that Sweden, outraged in the person of her Representative, has been obliged to go the length of withdrawing her Minister from Paris.
The complaints of France may be regarded principally as weapons furnished to her adherents to defend her cause notwithstanding the blows she inflicts. Her aim has been in every instance to seduce the people from their Government, and by dividing to conquer and oppress. Hitherto happily the potent spells of this political sorcery have in most countries been counteracted and dissipated by the sacred flame of patriotism. One melancholy exception serves as a warning to the rest of mankind to shun the fatal snare. It is nevertheless humiliating that there are men among us depraved enough to make use of the arms she has furnished in her service—and to vindicate Her aggressions as the effects of a just resentment provoked by the ill conduct of our government. But the artifice will not succeed. The eyes of the people of this Country are every day more and more opened to the true character of the politics of France. And the period is fast approaching what it will be universally seen in all its intrinsic deformity.

The desire of a power at war to destroy the commerce of its enemy is a natural effect of the state of war, and while exercised within bounds consistent with the rights of Nations who are not engaged in the contest is intirely justifiable. But when it manifestly overleaps these bounds, and indulges in palpable violations of neutral rights, without even the color of justification in the usages of War, it becomes an intolerable tyranny—wounds the sovereignty of Nations and calls them to resistance by every motive of self preservation and self respect.
The conduct of France from the commencement of her successes, has by gradual developpements betrayed a spirit of universal domination; an opinion that she has a right to be the legislatrix of Nations; that they are all bound to submit to her mandates, to take from her their moral political and religious creeds; that her plastic and regenerating hand is to mould them into whatever shape she thinks fit & that her interest is to be the sole measure of the rights of the rest of the world. The specious pretence of enlightening mankind and reforming their civil institutions, is the varnish to the real design of subjugating them. The vast projects of a Louis the XIV dwindle into insignificance compared with the more gigantic schemes of his Republican successors.
Men, well informed and unprejudiced, early discovered the symptoms of this spirit. Reasoning from human nature they foresaw its growth with success; that from the love of dominion inherent in the heart of man, the Rulers of the most powerful Nation in the world, whether a monarch, a Committee of safety, or a Directory, will for ever aim at an undue empire over other nations—and that this disposition, inflamed as it was by enthusiasm, if encouraged by a continuation of success, would be apt to exhibit itself during the course of the French Revolution in excesses, of which there has been no example since the days of Roman Greatness.
Every day confirms the justice of that anticipation. It is now indispensable that the disagreeable and menacing truth should be exposed in full day to the people of America—that they should contemplate it seriously and prepare their minds for extremities which nothing short of abject submission may be able to avert. This will serve them as an armour against the machinations of traiterous men, who may wish to make them instruments of the ambition of a foreign power, to persuade them to concur in forging chains for mankind, and to accept as their reward the despicable privilege of wearing them a day later than others.
Already in certain circles is heared the debasing doctrine that France is determined to reduce us to the alternative of War with her enemies or war with herself and that it is our interest and safety to elect the former.
There was a time when it was believed that a similar alternative would be imposed by Great Britain. At this crisis there was but one sentiment. The firmest friends of moderation and peace no less than the noisiest partisans of violence and war resolved to elect war with that power which should drive us to the election. This resolution was the dictate of morality & honor, of a just regard to national dignity and independence. If any consideration, in any situation, should degrade us into a different resolution, we that instant espouse crime and infamy; we descend from the high ground of an independent people and stoop to the ignominious level of Vassals. I trust there are few Americans who would not cheerfully encounter the worst evils of a Contest with any nation on earth rather than subscribe to so shameful an abdication of their rank as men and citizens.

Americus


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Dunn, 28 January 1797
From: Dunn, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dublin [Ireland] January 28, 1797. “I take the liberty of enclosing to you an account current furnished to me by Mr. John Barclay of Philadelphia relative to a fund in his hands by me anxiously desired to be entrusted to your care—A late account of some unfortunate circumstances occurring in Mr. Barclay’s affairs makes me anxious in the extreme that the Property in his hands should be effectually secured—Mr. Barclay has written to Mr. Wilson the American Consul here who recommended Mr. Barclay to me that I shall be secured to the last shilling. When I first took the Liberty of addressing you I addressed you as a Gentleman whose high Honor & distinguished Character had taught me to look up to him with confidence as the Depository of a Trust—You then Sir filled a public Station—That situation being now changed and you having returned to the Profession of the Law (to which I have the honor to belong) I do now with more earnestness and more Confidence request and entreat that you will in your professional Character use your Endeavours to have the Property in Mr. Barclays hands duly secured. Indeed Sir it is a consolation to me of peculiar Importance at this moment that I have professional assistance of such a distinguished kind to rely upon and which I do not entertain a Doubt you will speedily and effectually employ for my Protection and Safety.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Timothy Pickering, 30 January 1797
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia Jany. 30. 1797.
Dear Sir,

I am sorry to have so long delayed an answer to your letter of the 23d. but we have been unusually occupied, and the decrees you referred to were not readily found: that of the 28th of May 1793 I have now discovered in a printed volume of the proceedings of the Convention for that month. So I now inclose you copies—
1st of the decree of May 9th 1793, violating our treaty, by rendering neutral vessels laden with provisions liable to capture, as well as enemy’s property on board neutral vessels.
2d. of the decree of 23d May, repealing the former in respect to American vessels.

3d. of the decree of the 28th of May reversing the last decree.
4th. of the decree of July 1st 1793, repealing that of the 28th of May.
These appear to be all the decrees referred to in your letter: but there must have been a subsequent one alike violating our treaty, which Mr. Monroe forbore to ask the repeal of, lest, as he said, the French Government should demand a performance of the guarantee: yet the very claims in behalf of American merchants whose properties had been captured, were to be made by him on the principle that the decree in question was a violation of our treaty. After this matter was pressed upon him by Randolph (as well as I recollect) he urged the repeal, which was passed Jany. 4th 1795. If this decree and that which it repeals will be useful to you, copies shall be furnished.
It appears probable from the tenor of some of Gouv. Morris’s letters, that the decree of 9th May & 28th of the same month, were passed (at least the latter) to answer the views of the captors of certain vessels taken before the 9th of May—and that of May 28th specially to ennable the captors to hold the ship Lawrance.
I am with great & sincere respect   Dr. Sir, your obt. servt.

T. Pickering
Alexander Hamilton Esq.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, [31 January 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

[New York, January 31, 1797]
Dr. Sir

My late situation exposes me to applications which I cannot resist without appearing unkind. It is understood that Mr. Walker is about to resign the place of naval Officer. Mr. Jonathan Burrall Mr. Rogers (Walker’s Deputy) and Col Giles (the present Marshall) have all three mentioned the subject to me and requested me to express my opinion of their qualifications to you.
As to Mr. Burrall there is no doubt he will be in every sense an excellent appointment. I believe as a man of business on a large scale he may be superior to either and his character is irreproachable. He is now Cashier of the Office of Discount & Deposit is respectably connected by marriage much esteemed & has been an old servant of the public.

Every thing that I have heared of Mr. Rogers’ moral character and capacity for business is intirely in his favour. I have no doubt he is fully worthy of the appointment—is a remarkably accurate accountant & has had long experience in the particular Office. The place is more necessary to him than to either of the others. His station in society generally is inferior to that of the other two.
Mr. Giles you know. I have no doubt he is intirely competent to the Office—he pleads as a merit his perseverance in his present Office though for a long time it was unproductive & he considers the continuance of the present emoluments which are now well enough, as uncertain—they arising from particular circumstances. He is however not quite decided in his wishes on the subject; by tomorrow he will decide.
I have the honor to remain   Most respectfully Sir   Very Obed serv

A HamiltonJany 31. 1797
The President


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Theodore Sedgwick, [January 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Sedgwick, Theodore

[New York, January, 1797]
Dr. Sir

I have been reading the report of the Secretary of the Treasury on the subject of direct taxes. I think it does him credit. The general principles and objects are certainly good. Nor am I sure that any thing better can be done.
I remember, however, that I once promised you to put in writing my ideas on the subject. I intended to have done it and communicated them to the Secretary. My hurry & press of business prevented me. But I concluded lately to devote an Evening to a rude sketch & to send it to you. You may shew it to the Secretary & confer. If in the course of the thing it can be useful to the general end we all have in view it will give me pleasure—if not there will have been but little time mispent. Of course no use will be made of it in contradiction to the views of the Treasury Department.
As to the part which relates to land, I do not feel any strong preference of my plan to that in the Report; for this in my opinion ought to be considered only as an auxiliary, and not as the pith of the tax. But I own I have a strong preference of my plan of a house tax to that in the Report. These are my reasons.

It is more comprehensive, embracing all houses, and will be proportionably more productive. It is more certain, avoiding the evasions and partialities to which valuations will be forever liable—and I think it for that reason, likely to be at least as equal. I entertain no doubt that the rule of rates, adapted as they are to characteristic circumstances, will in fact be more favourable to equality than appraisements. I think the idea of taxing only houses of above a certain annual value will be dissatisfactory. The comparison of the proprietors of houses immediately above with those immediately below the line will beget discontent—and the errors of valuations will increase it.
I think, there will be a great advantage in throwing the weight of the tax on houses, as well because lands are more difficult to manage as because it will fall in a manner less dissatisfactory.
My plan as to houses can easily be combined with that in the Report as to land.
Some years ago I proposed a similar plan in the legislature of this state. It went through three readings and had a great majority in its favour—but as it was essentially different from what had always before obtained in the state it was thought best to postpone to feel the sense of Constituents. I left the legislature. Changes in our political situation rendered the plan of state taxation less important—& the business shrunk out of sight. But there was every appearance that the plan would have been popular in this state.
You observe I confine myself to a Million. I would not bear hard in this way. I would add as aid, the taxes contemplated last session, on stamps, collateral successions, new modification of some articles of imports & let me add saddle horses. The idea of taxing slaves generally will not work well. If confined to all menial servants for luxury as Coachmen footmen cooks &c. it would be eligible.
Yrs. truly

A H
Mr Sedgwik


Title: Enclosure: [Ideas on the Subject of Direct Taxes], [January 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Sedgwick, Theodore

A Million of Dollars per annum to be raised on buildings and lands on the following plan
I   Upon inhabited dwelling houses thus—
Upon every such house of the description and denomination of a log house at the rate of 20 Cents for each room or apartment thereof exclusive of Garret & Cellar
Upon every other inhabited dwelling house of two rooms or apartments, exclusive of Halls or Entries garrets & Cellars, at the rate of 25 Cents for each room or apartment
Upon every such house of three rooms or apartments exclusive as before at the rate of 33⅓ Cents for each room or apartment
Upon every such house of four rooms exclusive as before at the rate of 40 Cents for each room or apartment
Upon every such house of five rooms exclusive as before at the rate of 60 Cents for each room or apartment
Upon every such house of six rooms exclusive as before at the rate of 75 Cents for each room or apartment thereof
Upon every such house of seven rooms & upwards exclusive &c. at the rate of 100 Cents &c
Upon every room in a garret or cellar of a House of the foregoing descriptions having a fire place and upon every kitchen whether in a cellar or adjacent building at the rate of 20 Cents for each room or kitchen
Upon each room or apartment of every such house painted inside the further sum of 25 Cents

Upon each room or apartment of every such house papered inside or painted & bordered with paper the further sum of fifty Cents
Upon every chimney faced with tiles or cut stone other than marble the further sum of 50 Cents
Upon every Chimney faced with marble the further sum of 100 Cents
Upon ever stair case of Cedar or Ebony wood the further sum of 50 Cents
Upon ever stair case of Mahogany wood the further sum of 100 Cents.
Upon every room or apartment with stucco cornishes the further sum of 100 Cents
Upon every room with a stucco cieling the further sum of 200 Cents; but the same room shall not also be rated for cornishes of such work.
Upon every such house with pillars or pilasters outside in front the further sum of 100 Cents—
Upon every such house faced outside and in front in whole or in part with marble the further sum of 200 Cents—
These rates to be paid by the occupiers of the house whether Owners or tenants. When a house is let by parcels the landlord to be deemed the occupier.
Upon all store houses not being parts of dwelling houses in use at the rate of ¼0 part of the yearly value to be determined by the actual rent if rented if not by an estimate or valuation thereof
Upon all grist Mills at the rate of 125 Cents for each run of stones therein
Upon all saw Mills at the rate of fifty Cents for each saw usually worked therein not exceeding three and for each saw above that number 25 Cents—
Upon all wharves in the Cities and Towns of Portsmouth Boston &c (enumerating the principal towns) at the rate of 12½ Cents for each foot in front thereof
Upon all wharves in any other City or Town at the rate of 6 Cents
Upon all Lumber yards in the Cities or Towns of Boston Portsmouth &c (enumerating the principal Towns) at the rate of 2½ Cents for each hundred square feet
Upon all lumber yards in other Cities or Towns, & at the rate of 1¼ Cent for each hundred square feet.
Cottages inhabited by paupers to [be] excepted—to be judged of and ascertained by the Assessors hereafter described.
The amount of the foregoing taxes in each state to be ascertained within a time to be limited by law for that purpose by the Assessors and a report thereof to be made to the Treasury, which shall then proceed to apportion according to the prescribed quota the sum remaining to make up the Million of Dollars to be levied. For example—Suppose there were five states & the product of the House tax of each as follows—

A
100 000

B
150 000

C
200 000

D
50.000

E
100.000

600.000

There would then remain towards the Million to be levied on lands 400 000. Let there be then assigned to each state so much in land tax as together with its house tax will equal the


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Rufus King, [4 February 1797]
From: King, Rufus
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[London, February 4, 1797. Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Robert Morris, 4 February 1797
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Morris, Robert

[New York, February 4, 1797. On February 9, 1797, Morris wrote to Hamilton: “Your favour of the 4th only reached me Yesterday.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Rufus King, 6 February 1797
From: King, Rufus
To: Hamilton, Alexander

London. feb. 6. 1797
Dear sir

I have had the pleasure to receive your Letter of the 16. of Decr. and I need not express the Satisfaction which the information that it contained afforded me, the Probable termination of the Election of Pr. the general Temper of the Country, & the Effect likely to be produced by Mr. Adet’s notes are such as I had not only hoped but expected; if by prudence & Firmness, which have hitherto kept us out of this Extraordinary and dessolating war, we shall be able to maintain the public peace and national Honor, we shall not only increase our Reputation as a wise people but we shall moreover establish a Precedent of inestimable worth for future Times of Trouble and Embarrassment. Nothing can exceed the applause that is here given to our Government, and no American who has not been in England can have a just Idea of the admiration expressed among all Parties of General Washington. It is a common observation that he is not only the most illustrious, but also the most meritorious Character that has hitherto appeared. The King is without doubt a very popular character among the People of this Nation; it would be saying very much, to affirm that next to him, General Washington is the most popular character among them, and yet I verily believe this to be the fact. I mention these Circumstances, not only because it will give you as it has afforded me much pleasure to hear them mentioned but also because they shew a more liberal manner of thinking and speaking respecting us, and a more rational Estimate of our Affairs than formerly existed. Much credit is due to Mr. Jay on this Score; who we thought would do honor, and be of advantage to our Country, but Who has done much more than I could have imagined, had I not seen the clearest proofs of his Success. He had great difficulties to encounter, he overcame many of them, some still exist, and when they will be surmounted I am unable to say. Time and patience are necessary to form a satisfactory opinion how far we shall finally be able to agree. In the main our affairs here are in a good train, the treaty I think will be fairly and fully executed. You remember the Opinion given by certain Gentlemen upon the construction of the 7. article of the treaty. We have experienced embarrassments on this Subject—and for several weeks the business of the Commissioners was entirely at a Stand, the advocate of this Government having denied their Power to examine any question that had been decided by the H. Court of Appeals. The question was delicate; the pride and as it was alledged the importance of men of Rank and influence were almost enlisted against our pretensions, and a little imprudence might have thrown the Business into the worst possible situation. This did not happen; with moderation caution, and a conciliatory mode of proceeding these Difficulties have been intirely removed—and all is now proceeding in a satisfactory manner. The result of several conferences has been after the manifestation of much candor and fairness, on the part of this Government, a direction to the British Commissioners to unite with ours, and to proceed to hear and decide every Question that shall be brought before them according to the Provisions of the Treaty, which it was added it was the Duty of the Comrs. to consider and interpret. They have accordingly decided a case of considerable consequence, which is that of the Patersons of Baltimore—a Ship & Cargo belonging to them had been captured & condemned in the W. Indies. This Sentence had been affirmed in the High Court of appeals, and a memorial in behalf of Patersons was preferred to the Comrs. for Compensations for their Loss & Damages. The Commissioners have pronounced (Doctor Nicholl only dissenting of a full Board) that they have Jurisdiction of the Cause, and that upon its merits the Pattersons are intitled to full & complete compensation for their Loss & Damages to be paid &c. according to the Provisions of the Treaty.
By Letters received today from Paris I learn the unpleasant information that Genl. Pinckney was on the 28 ulto. ordered by the Directory to leave Paris, and that he intended to depart for Holland (where he will wait the orders of our Govt) on the 31. I cannot fully account for this Step after the irresolution that for some time has existed; whether it is to be ascribed to information which has been thought sufficient to satisfy the Directory of the Result of the Election for Pr. or whether it is to be attributed to the late astonishing victories of Buonaparte which have litterally destroyed an Army of 40.000 Austrians, I am uncertain—perhaps both have contributed to this Extraordinary Step.
Yrs very sincerely

Rufus King
Col. Hamilton


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Timothy Pickering, [6 February 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Pickering, Timothy

[New York, February 6, 1797]
Dr Sir

I duly received your letter of the 23 of Jany with its inclosure, for which I am much obliged to you. I have read it with great pleasure. It is a substantial satisfactory paper will do good in this Country & as to France I presume events will govern there.
Is it not proper to call upon the Merchants to furnish your Department with statements & proofs of the spoliations which we have suffered from the French as was done when the English were in their mischievous Carreer?
Yrs. with true esteem

A HamiltonFeby 6. 1797

I received your other letter with certain enclosures.

T Pickering Esq


Title: The Warning No. II, [7 February 1797]
From: “Americus”,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[New York, February 7, 1797]

Independent of the commands of honor, the coolest calculations of interest forbid our becoming the instruments of the Ambition of France, by associating with her in the War. The question is no longer the establishment of liberty on the basis of Republican Government. This point, the enemies of France have ceased to dispute. The question now is whether she shall be aggrandized by new acquisitions, and her enemies reduced by dismemberments, to a degree, which may render her the Mistress of Europe, and consequently in a great measure of America. This is truly the remaining subject of contention.
They who understood the real strength and resources of France, before the present war, knew that she was intrinsically the most powerful nation of Europe. The incidents of the War have displayed this fact in a manner which is the astonishment of the world. If France can finally realize her present plan of aggrandisement, she will attain to a degree of greatness and power, which if not counteracted by internal disorder, will tend to make her the terror and the scourge of Nations. The spirit of moderation in a State of overbearing Power is a phœnomenon, which has not yet appeared and which no wise man will expect ever to see. It is certain, that a very different spirit has hitherto marked the career of the new republic; and it is due to truth to add, that the ardent, impetuous and military genius of the French affords perhaps less prospect of such a spirit in them than in any other people.
’Twere therefore contrary to our true interest to assist in building up this Colossus to the enormous size at which she aims. ‘Twere a policy as shortsighted as mean to seek safety in a subserviency to her views, as the price of her clemency. This at best would be but a temporary respite from the rod; if indeed that can be called a respite, which is of itself the sacrifice of a real to a nominal independence.
These reflections are not designed to rouse a spirit of hostility against France, or to inculcate the idea that we ought of choice to participate in the War against her. They are intended merely to fortify the motives of honor, which forbid our stooping to be compelled, either to submit, without resistance, to a virtual war on her part—or to avert her blows by engaging in the war on her side.
When it was the opinion, that France was defending the cause of Liberty, it was a decisive argument against embarking with her in the contest, that it would expose us to hazards and evils, infinitely disproportioned to the assistance we could render. Now that the question plainly is, whether France shall give the law to mankind, the addition of our opposition to her plan could have too little influence upon the event to justify our willingly encountering the certain dangers and mischiefs of the enterprize. ’Tis our true policy to remain at peace, if we can, to negotiate our subjects of complaint as long as they shall be at all negotiable, to bear all that a free and independent people is at liberty to bear, to defer a resort to arms ’till a last effort of negotiation shall have demonstrated that there is no alternative, but the surrender of our sovereignty or the defence of it—that the only option is between infamy or war. But if unhappily this period shall ever arrive, it will impose a sacred and indispensable duty to meet the contest with firmness, and relying on a just providence confidently to commit the issue to the God of battles!
While it is a consolation to know, that our Government, on this as on other trying occasions, will act with perfect prudence, and will do every thing that honor permits to preserve peace: Yet it is not to be forgotten that there is a point at which forbearance must stop—beyond which moderation were baseness—where we must halt and make a stand for our rights or cease to pretend to any.

When the indiscriminate seizure of our vessels by British Cruisers under the order of [the sixth of November, 1793,] had brought our affairs with Great Britain to a crisis which led to the measure of sending a special envoy to that Country, to obtain relief and reparation, it was well understood that the issue of that mission was to determine the question of peace or war between the two nations. In like manner, it is to be expected that our Executive will make a solemn and final appeal to the Justice and Interest of France, will insist in mild but explicit terms on the renunciation of the pretension to intercept the lawful commerce of neutrals with the enemies of France and the institution of some equitable mode of ascertaining and retributing the losses which the exercise of it has inflicted upon our Merchants. If the experiment shall fail, there will be nothing left but to repel aggression and defend our commerce and independence. The resolution to do this will then be imposed on the Government by a painful but irresistible necessity and it were an outrage to the American name and character to doubt that the people of the United States will approve the resolution, and will support it with a constancy worthy of the justice of their cause and of the glory they have heretofore deserved and acquired.
No: let this never be doubted! The servile minions of France—those who have no sensibility to injury but when it comes from Great Britain, who are unconscious of any rights to be protected against France, who at a moment when the public safety more than ever demands a strict union between the people and their government traiterously labour to detach them from it, and to turn against the government for pretended faults, the resentment which the real oppressions of France ought to inspire—these wretched men will discover in the end, that they are as insignificant as they are unprincipled. They will find that they have vainly flattered themselves with the cooperation of the great body of those men with whom the spirit of party has hitherto associated them. In such an extremity the adventitious discriminations of party will be lost in the patriotism and pride of the American character. Good citizens of every political denomination will remember that they are Americans—that when their Country is in danger, the merit or demerit of particular measures is no longer a question—that it is the duty of all to unite their efforts to guard the national rights, to avert national humiliation, and to withstand the imposition of a foreign yoke. The true and genuine spirit of 1776, not the vile counterfeits of it which so often disgust our eyes and our ears, will warn every truly American heart and light up in it a noble emulation to maintain inviolate the rights and unsullied the honor of the Nation. It will be proved to the confusion of all false patriots, that we did not break the fetters of one foreign tyranny to put on those of another. It will be again proved to the world that we understand our rights and have the courage to defend them.
But there is still ground to hope that we shall not be driven to this disagreeable extremity. The more deliberate calculations of France will probably rescue us from the present embarrassment. If she perseveres in her plan she must inevitably add all the neutral powers to the number of her enemies. How will this fulfil the purpose of destroying the commerce of Great Britain? The commerce of those powers with France will then intirely cease and be turned more extensively into the channels of Great Britain, protected by her navy with the cooperation of the maritime force of those powers. The result will be the reverse of what is projected by the measure. The commerce and revenue of Britain will in all likelihood be augmented rather than diminished; and her arms will receive an important reinforcement.
Violent and unjust measures commonly defeat their own purpose. The plan of starving France was of this description and operated against the views of its projectors. The plan now adopted by France of cutting off the trade of neutrals with her enemies, alike violent and unjust, will no doubt end in similar disappointment. Let us hope that it will be abandonned and that ultimate rupture will be avoided—but let us also contemplate the possibility of the contrary and prepare our minds seriously for the unwelcome Event.

Americus


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Robert Morris, 9 February 1797
From: Morris, Robert
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada Feby. 9th. 1797
Alexr Hamilton EsqrNew York
Dear Sir

Your favour of the 4th only reached me Yesterday. I will get Mr Tilghman or Mr Lewis to write to you on the point you desire. In the mean time as I am anxious to have the Land business settled, I think it best to have the papers assigned to Mr Garrett Cottringer in such manner as to Vest him with the right for the present and as that he may release or convey to me my or my order hereafter. The C[h]ancery suit must be dismissed & I will pay your draft at a few days sight for Amot. of the Charges.
I am Dr Sir   Yours &c.

RM


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Timothy Pickering, [10 February 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Pickering, Timothy

[New York, February 10, 1797]
Dr Sir

If I recollect right, Chancellor Livingston while Secy for foreign Affairs reported a censure upon Our Commissioners who made the peace with G Britain for not obeying their instructions with regard to France. Will you favour me in confidence with the real state of this business? I was at the time a member of Congress. It was immediately on the arrival of the provisional articles.
I trust my Dear Sir effectual measures are taking to bring us to some issue with France to ascertain whether her present plan is to be persisted in or abandonned. For surely our Commerce ought not to be thus an undefended prey.
Yrs truly

A HFeby 10. 1797
T Pickering Esq


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Hall and Stimpson, 11 February 1797
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Hall and Stimpson

New York, February 11, 1797. “The suits against Riley as a Partner of Wetmore are expected to be matured for Trial at the ensuing Circuit Court which begins the 20th of March. I should of course want the original documents to establish the Copartnership and the original notes & acknowleged accounts to establish the respective demands of the parties. As the measures preparatory to Trial are attended with considerable advances to Officers of Courts say about five pounds in each suit the Gentlemen concerned will not expect that I should make these advances. I request therefore that an adequate sum be remitted.…”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Rufus King, [15 February 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: King, Rufus

[New York, February 15, 1797]
My D Sir

Geave me leave to recall to your recollection and acquaintance Mr. De Talon the bearer of this, who, as he informs me, goes to Europe on private business. I need not observe that he is an interesting man, as you know all his titles to the attention, which your situation will permit you to afford. You must not think, I forget you, because I do no write (for this is only my third letter). I am over-whelmed in professional business and have scarcely a moment for any thing else.
You will have learnt the terrible depredations which the French have committed upon our Trade in the West-Indies on the declared principle of intercepting our whole Trade with the ports of her enemies. This conduct is making the impression which might be expected though not with that electric rapidity which would have attended similar Treatment from another power. The present session of Congress is likely to be very unproductive. That body is in the situation which we foresaw certain anti executive maxims would bring them to.
Mr. Adams is President, Mr. Jefferson Vice President. Our Jacobins say they are well pleased and that the Lion & the Lamb are to lie down together. Mr. Adam’s Personal friends talk a little in the same way. Mr. Jefferson is not half so ill a man as we have been accustommed to think him. There is to be a united and a vigorous administration. Sceptics like me quietly look forward to the event—willing to hope but not prepared to believe. If Mr. Adams has Vanity to plan a plot has been laid to take hold of it. We trust his real good sense and integrity will be a sufficient shield.
Yrs. Affectly

A HamiltonFeby. 15. 1797
R King Esq


Title: The Warning No. III, [21 February 1797]
From: “Americus”,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[New York, February 21, 1797]

The Paris Accounts inform us that France has lately exercised towards Genoa an act of atrocious oppression, which is an additional and a striking indication of the domineering and predatory Spirit by which she is governed. This little Republic, whose territory scarcely extends beyond the walls of her metropolis, has been compelled, it seems, to ransom herself from the talons of France by a contribution of nearly a million of Dollars; a large sum for her contracted resources. For this boon, “the French Government engages on its part to renounce all claims upon Genoa, to forget what has passed during the present war, to forbear any future demands.” It would appear from this, that France to colour the odious exaction, besides the pretence of misconduct towards her in the present war has not disdained to resort to the stale and pitiful device of reviving some antiquated and derelict claim upon the Country itself. In vain did the signal hazards encountered by Genoa to preserve her neutrality in defiance of the host of enemies originally leagued against France, in vain did the character and title of Republic plead for a more generous treatment: the attractions of plunder predominated. The Spirit of Rapine callous to the touch of justice, blind to the testimony of truth, deaf to the voice of entreaty, had marked out and devoted the victim. There was no alternative but to compound or perish.
If it be even supposed, though this has never appeared, that at some period of the war, Genoa may be chargeable with acts of questionable propriety in relation to France, it is manifest that it ought to be attributed to the necessity of a situation which must have obliged her to temporise. A very small and feeble state in the midst of so many great conflicting powers, parts of her territories occupied by armies which she was unable to oppose—it were a miracle indeed if her conduct in every particular will bear the test of a rigorous scrutiny. But if at any time the pressure of circumstances may have occasioned some slight deviation, there is nevertheless full evidence of a constant solicitude on the part of Genoa to maintain to the utmost of her ability a sincere neutrality. It is impossible to forget the glorious stand which she at one time made against the imperious efforts of Great Britain to force her from her neutral position. The magnanimous and exemplary fortitude which she displayed on that occasion excited in this country universal admiration and must have made a deep impression. ’Tis only to recollect that instance to be satisfied that the treatment which she has just experienced from France merits the indignant execration of mankind. Unfortunate Genoa! how little didst thou imagine that thou wert destined so soon to be compelled to purchase thy safety from the crushing weight of that hand which ought to have been the first to rise in thy defence.
How fruitful, at the same time, of instruction to us is this painful example! The most infatuated partisans of France cannot but see in it an unequivocal proof of the rapacious and vindictive policy which dictates her measures. All men must see in it that the flagrant injuries, which we are now suffering from her, proceed from a general plan of domination and plunder; from a disposition to prostrate nations at her feet, to trample upon their necks, to ravish from them whatever her avidity or convenience may think fit to dedicate to her own use.
The last intelligence from France seems to dispel the doubt whether the depredations in the West Indies may not have resulted from misapprehension or abuse of the orders of the French Government. It is now understood to be a fact that the Cruisers of France every where are authorised to capture and bring in all vessels bound to the ports of her enemies.
This plan is pregnant with the worst evils which are to be dreaded from the declared and unqualified hostility of any foreign power. If France after being properly called upon to renounce it, shall persevere in the measure, there cannot be a question but that open war will be preferable to such a state. By whatever name treachery or pusyllanimity may attempt to disguise it, ’tis in fact war, war of the worst kind, War on One Side. If we can be induced to submit to it longer than is necessary to ascertain that it cannot be averted by negotiation, we are undone as a people. Whether our determination shall be to lock up our Trade by embargoes, or to permit our commerce to continue to float an unprotected prey to French Cruisers, our degradation and ruin will be equally complete. The destruction of our Navigation & Trade, the annihilation of our mercantile capital, the dispersion & loss of our seamen obliged to emigrate for subsistence, the extinction of our Revenue, the fall of public credit, the stagnation of every species of industry, the general impoverishment of our citizens, these will be minor evils in the dreadful catalogue. Some years of security and exertion would repair them. But the humiliation of the American mind would be a lasting and a mortal disease in our social habit. Mental debasement is the greatest misfortune that can befal a people. The most pernicious of conquests, which a state can experience, is a conquest over that elevated sense of its own rights which inspires a due sensibility to insult and injury, over that virtuous pride of character which prefers any peril or sacrifice to a final submission to oppression, and which regards national ignominy as the greatest of national calamities.
The records of history contain numerous proofs of this truth. But an appeal to them is unnecessary. Holland and Italy present to our immediate observation examples as decisive as deplorable. The former within the last years has undergone two revolutions by the intervention of foreign powers without even a serious struggle. Mutilated of precious portions of its territory at home, by pretended benefactors but real despoilers; its dominions abroad slide into the possession of its enemies rather as derelicts than as the acquisitions of victory. Its fleets surrender without a blow. Important only by the spoils, which it offers, no less to its friends than to its enemies—every symptom about is portentous of national annihilation.
With regard to Italy, ’tis sufficient to say, that she is debased enough not even to dare to take part in a contest on which at this moment her destiny is suspended.
Moderation in every nation is a virtue. In weak or young nations, it is often wise to take every chance by patience and address to divert hostility and in this view to hold parley with insult and injury—but to capitulate with oppression, rather to surrender at discretion to it is in any nation that has any power of resistance as foolish as it contemptible. The honor of a nation is its life. Deliberately to abandon it is to commit an act of political suicide. There is treason in the sentiment avowed in the language of some, and betrayal by the conduct of others, that we ought to bear any thing from France rather than go to war with her. The Nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a Master and deserves one.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Robert Morris, 23 February 1797
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Morris, Robert

[New York, February 23, 1797. On March 3, 1797, Morris wrote to Hamilton and referred to “Yours of the 23d.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Theodore Sedgwick, [26 February 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Sedgwick, Theodore

[New York, February 26, 1797]
My dear Sir

The present inimitable course of our public affairs proves me to be a very bad politician so that I am afraid to suggest any idea that occurs to me. Yet I will give over my timidity & communicate for your consideration a reverie which has struck me.
It is a fact, that the resentment of the French Government is very much levelled at the actual President. A change of the person (however undespicable in other respects) may give a change to the passion, and may also furnish a bridge to retreat over. This is a great advantage for a new President & the most ought to be made of it. For it is much our interest to preserve peace, if we can with honor and if we cannot it will be very important to prove that no endeavour to do it has been omitted.
Were I Mr. Adams, then I believe I should begin my Presidency by naming an extraordinary Commission to the French Republic. And I think it would consist of three persons, Mr. Madison Mr. Pinkney & Mr. Cabot. I would pursue this course for several reasons, because I would have a man as influential with the French as Mr. Madison yet I would not trust him alone lest his Gallicism should work amiss—because I would not wound Mr. Pinkney so recently sent in the same spirit. Thirdly I think Cabot would mix very useful ingredients in the Cup.
This Com~ should be charged to make explanations, to remonstrate, to ask indemnification and they should be empowered to make a new Treaty of commerce not inconsistent with our other Treaties—& perhaps to abrogate or remodify the Treaty of Alliance.
That Treaty can only be inconvenient to us in future. The Guarantee of our sovereignty & Independence henceforth is nominal. The Guarantee of the West-India Island of France as we advance in strength will be more & more real. In future & in a truly defensive war I think we shall be bound to comply efficaciously with our Guarantee. Nor have I been able to see that it means less than obligation to take part in such a war with our whole force. I have no idea of Treaties which are not executed.
Hence I want to get rid of that Treaty by mutual consent or to liquidate its meaning to a Treaty of definite succour in a clearly defensive war, so many men, so many ships, so much money &c to be furnished by one ally to the other. This of course must be so managed as to exclude unequivocally the present War in all its possible mutations.
Such objects are important enough for three. In executive matters, I am as little fond as most people of plurality—but I think it pedantry to admit no exceptions to any general rule. And I believe under the circumstances of the case a Commission would be adviseable. I give my dream as it has occurred. You will do with it what you please.
Yrs.

AHFeby. 26. 179⟨7⟩

The idea here given to be useful ought to be executed at once. The Senate should not be permitted to disperse.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Beekman, [1 March 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Beekman, William

[New York, March 1, 1797.] “Having reconsidered the case of your Uncle (Wm. Beekman’s) Will with the authorities—I advise the Devisees to claim all that by the Partition became his several property & which in my former opinion with Mr. Evertson was considered as passing by his Will, not merely a proportion equal to his interest before Partition in the part which remained to him after partition. The principle seems to be not only that a partition simply is not a revocation of the devise but that the part acquired in severalty in lieu of the part before held in common passes wholly to the devisee.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Robert Morris, 3 March 1797
From: Morris, Robert
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Colo Hamilton Esqr New York
Philada March 3d 1797
Dear sir

On the day I wrote you last, Mr Westerloe left at my House Yours of the 23d. I expect the pleasure of his company soon. I hope Mr Bridgon’s Clients will as was proposed in my last letter to you come or send to Mr Nicholson who is disposed to put their demand upon the most satisfactory footing in his power, & I expect the business may be so settled as that the Money will be forth coming sooner than by Legal process it can be obtained, for as I am not properly the payer, altho’ responsible, I shall resist as long as I can if they pursue me instead of seeking paymt from the real debtor or principal who is willing to arrange the matter to their Content. I want sadly to have the affair of the Genesee Land finished by Colo Walker it is become indispensible to have it done in one or other of the modes mentioned in my last letter if the Assignment of Colo Smiths Deeds or Mortgage is made to Mr Cottringer he can release such parts as I convey. And the remainder will not be subject to Attachment. The President has nominated a Commr to preside at the Treaty which I intend to hold with the Indians, and I expect the senate will this day give their assent so that I hope it may not be long before I make a purchase but my wish is to have this as little known as possible. I mention it to you that you may advise Mr Church to give Mr Marshall two Dollars an Acre for the 10,000 Acres mortgaged to him I could now sell it for 2/ N York currency on a credit shorter than the time I am to pay Mr Church and I am confident that it will be worth four, to six or eight dolls pr Acre by that time. My wants cause me to desire a Sale and if I must sell had not Mr Church better to take the benefit than let others do it. The moment the Indian title is obtained there will be a rush of People into that Country that will raise the price of land beyond that or any other part of America, & the settlements will be made by Men of property, & respectable character who are now laying by Money, and preparing themselves for the purpose. Nothing is more certain than these things & Mr Church has the opportunity of doubling trebling or Quadrupling his money, tell him therefore to embrace it.
I am Dr Sir   Yours &c.

RM


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Patterson, 5 March 1797
From: Patterson, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Kingston] Ulster County [New York], March 5, 1797. “As you are the only persen I think I Can with Safty apply too to assist me in giting my Militerie Lot as it is well known I have faithfull Served my Country it gives me the more Confidence to Crave your assistance. I must inform you that I have found my Discharge and have it Now in my Possession. I have found Blanchar the Person who took out the Patent Deed for my Lot No. 32 in Cato he Lives in Cats kill town in the County of Albany.… I must beg the favor of you to write me a Letter of advice as Soon as you Receive this or as Soon as you think it Necessarie (which will perhaps be after you have made Some inquiry in the business) I shall again inform you whre I Live which is in Franklin township Huntingdon County on the Little Juniata River State of Pennylvania.…”


Title: Bill from James Robinson, [7 March 1797]
From: Robinson, James
To:

[New York, March 7, 1797]

1796

Augt: 13th
Alexander Hamilton Esqr:

To James Robinson for fence

42 boards @ 1/

£2–2.

32 half Do: @ /6d

16.

18 posts @ 2/ and 12 lb Nails @ ½

2–10.

 7 days Labour carpenters @ 11/

3–17.

 4 Loads cartage @ 2/

8.

£9–13

Received New York March 7. 179[7] of Alexander Hamilton the amount of the above account being for the use of the lot of John Barker Church in broad way.

Jams. Robinson


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Robert Morris, 8 March 1797
From: Morris, Robert
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada. March 8th. 1797
Dear Sir

You have herewith the Copy of a letter from Mr Bridgen to me & my reply which you will cause to be delivered, if they will apply to Mr Nicholson the business will be accomplished with him but if they possitively will not, I must request you to adjust the matter on my behalf on the best terms & longest time you can obtain. I am impatiently waiting an Answer to my last letter on the business with Colo Walker, it is of the greatest & most immediate importance to have it finished. I hope this days Mail will bring the information from you to
Dr Sir   Your Obedt hble servt

Robt Morris
Alexr Hamilton EsqrNew York.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Robert Morris, 8 March 1797
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Morris, Robert

[New York, March 8, 1797. On March 9, 1797, Morris wrote to Hamilton: “I have this moment received yours of yesterday.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Robert Morris, 9 March 1797
From: Morris, Robert
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Alexr Hamilton Esqr New York
Philadelphia March 9th 1797
Dear sir

I have this moment received yours of yesterday with the deed to Mr Cottringer for which accept my thanks. Mr Ralph Mather the last endorser of the bill on which Mr Bridgon threatens to bring suit, has opened a negotiation here with Mr Nicholson respecting it, and as I hope an arrangement will be made so as to satisfy the owners of sd Bill you will be good enough to prevail on them to wait the issue of this negotiation before you enter into any engagement on my part and I will inform you the result as soon as it is ascertained. I am Dr Sir
Yours &c

RM


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Hamilton, 10 March 1797
From: Hamilton, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Greenock, Scotland, March 10, 1797. On May 2, 1797, Hamilton wrote to William Hamilton: “Some days since I received with great pleasure your letter of the 10th of March.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Tilghman, 13 March 1797
From: Tilghman, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, March 13, 1797. Replies to Hamilton’s letter of March 10, 1797, and answers questions concerning provisions on naturalization in Maryland’s constitution and statutes.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Laight, 14 March 1797
From: Laight, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[New York] March 14, 1797. “Had there not been frequent Instances in many respectable Offices in this City where Events of a similar kind have been effected, which I am now solicitous of obtaining, I should deem it presumptuous to address you on the Subject: Let this, in addition to the solicitude of a Parent for the Establishment of a Son in the line of his Profession be my Apology. Edward W. Laight, after his matriculation at Columbia College, was instructed in the Rudiments & Principles of Law by Coll: Burr.… He has been admitted to the Bar as an Attorney. Of his qualifications Professional Men are better Judges than myself. The Object I aim at is, to have him patronized by a Person of Merit & Celebrity, more for the purpose of improvement than for present Emolument.… The wish of my heart is that Coll: Hamilton should be such a Patron. If therefore it is not incompatible with Coll. Hamiltons Views to receive as an Attorney in his Office a Young Man, of, at least decent Manners & educated as above mentioned, I should be made happy by his giving me an opportunity of acceeding to such Terms as he himself would prescribe.”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Philip Schuyler, 19 March 1797
From: Schuyler, Philip
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Albany March 19th 1797
My Dear Sir

I shall not fail to call the attention of the senate to the insecure state of the port of New York and to detail the distressing consequences which must result should the Metropolis be laid under contribution, be conflagreated, or possessed by a hostile foreign power: but I apprehend nothing more will be done than Authorizing the Governor to take measures for Its security, If a war with some European power should appear to him inevitable.
It is to be lamented that the most influential characters in the representation from New York could not be prevailed on to remain here: by thus neglecting their duty they have commited the affairs of their constituents to less able hands, and painful results must be expected.
If Gentlemen of consideration in the public mind continue to refuse seats in either branch of the Legislature, It is certain that a variety of evils will result to the community, and the metropolis will be most deeply Affected. I wish therefore, that the necessity in Gentlemen to step forward and offer a consent to be candidates at the ensuing election may be strongly urged. Mr. Burr, we are informed, will be a candidate for a seat in the assembly; his views It is not difficult to appreciate. They alarm me, and If he prevails I apprehend a total change of politics in the next assembly—attended with other disagreable consequences.
Mr. Adams’s speeches to the senate at taking leave, and expressions, in that, at his Inaugeration, have left very unfavorable impressions in my mind, and created alarm, but It may not be prudent to state the reasons. We are all in health, and All Join in love to you & all with you,
I am Dear Sir Most sincerely Yours

Ph: Schuyler


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Uriah Tracy, 23[–24] March 1797
From: Tracy, Uriah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada. 23d. [–24] March 1797
Sir

You will probably remember, I applied to you for James Johnson of Salisbury in Connecticut, for the purchase of a tract of Land lying in that Town, of which you had the care & disposal. Johnson has lately written me, that the sale is not yet completed & wishes me to pursue the business, as he is still very desirous of purchasing the Land.
You will recollect how far the negociation has proceeded & whether you mean to sell to Johnson—please to let me know as I wish to inform him what he must do to finish the Contract, on his part.
I am, Sir, with respect   Your very humble sert.

Uriah Tracy
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.

NB. I am detained here by indisposition. You can, if you please direct a line to me here. I hope to be in health sufficient to go on to Connecticut soon, when I shall, on my way, see you at New York.
Since writing the within I have se⟨en⟩ the Speech of Barras to Citizen Munroe on his taking leave. Pardon me, when I say—the most diabolical & at the same time vapid puffing speech that ever disgraced a Burletta like that of Tommy Thumb. I foresee a struggle now in our Councils to send Maddison or Gallatin, or possibly John Swanwick or Ned Livingston, Envoy Extraordinary to the Cut-throat Directory. The United States, for fear of being subject to G. Britain will struggle hard, to be so to France. God in his infinite mercy grant, that we may be sunk in an Asphaltic Lake rise, where once stood the States—rather than subject ourselves to that nest of Assassins.
Yrs.
U. Tracy.

Mr. Hamilton.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Robert Morris, 27 March 1797
From: Morris, Robert
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Alexander Hamilton Esqr New York
Philada. March 27th. 1797
Dear Sir

I wrote a few lines from Mr Nicholsons house on Saturday whilst waiting to see Mr Mather; he did not come there untill I was obliged to come away, but Mr Nicholson informs me he came afterwards and that they are likely to effect an Arrangement for the Bill of Exchange and that Mr Mather has written to stay any proceedings in New York untill they hear again from him. This being a debt of Mr Nicholsons I am desirous that he should settle it, but should he fail I must ultimately do it, and if in the end it falls to my lot, I now request that you will use your discretion, and make the best Arrangement you can for me. I pledge my honor that there is no other encumbrance on the 100000 Acres of Genesee land Mortgaged to Mr Church than that Mortgage and I am extreemly averse to suffering any other to go on it. I want Mr Church to buy it. He may do that now, so as to double his Money on me, respecting this I wrote you some time ago to which you did not reply.
I am Dr Sir   Yours &c.

RM


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Timothy Pickering, 30 March 1797
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia March 30. 1797.
Dear Sir,

I believe I mentioned in my last, that I was going to sketch a state of facts relative to Mr. Pinckney’s mission for publication. I now inclose it. That the facts should be known to our citizens was deemed important. I thought it highly important that the Representatives should come together impressed with the sentiments of their constituents on the reprehensible conduct of the French Government, which made loud complaints of wrongs, but refused to hear our answer, or to enter on any discussion of the subjects of complaint, by refusing to acknowledge a special minister, sent from the U.S. for the direct purpose of making explanations; and that demanded of conscious innocence a confession of offences and redress of injuries never committed, as the preliminary of receiving our minister. The abominable depredations on our commerce—their unfounded complaints—their preposterous refusal to hear our answer—and the indignities offered to our ambassador, combined, and fully known to the people of the U.S. it might be fairly hoped would so powerfully operate in removing their ill founded and ill requited attachments to France, and even excite such a spirit of just resentment & pride, as would effectually controul certain men who have seemed willing to chain us to that republic & make us lick the feet of her violent and unprincipled rulers.
The statement of facts being prepared, I expected to hand it yesterday to Mr. Fenno for publication: but some scruples arose about its expediency. The facts are carefully extracted from General Pinckney’s letters of December 20, & January 6. The objections were, that, it might be deemed irritating—that it would be deemed an official publication, tho’ anonymous—that such manifestly official publications have not heretofore been made, except to Congress, and that at their approaching session the letters themselves will be laid before both Houses. That America will expect the Executive to use every means of cultivating peace, and to hazard nothing which can be construed into a tendency to provoke a war. But the same objections, substantially, were made by our French-American patriots to my letter to General Pinckney, tho’ written with extreme moderation, & containing answers and explanations to complaints which the French minister himself had the impudence to address to the Citizens of the U.S. whom those patriots would gladly continue to keep in the dark; and in short, prostrate by an unconditional submission at the feet of the most ambitious and horrible tyrants that ever cursed the earth.
The publication being thus suspended, I inclose the statement for your information. You need not return it, as I have a fair copy. I need not have been so minute in the detail: but the substance of the facts I still think ought to be published, and without delay; and in such form as to bear evident marks of authenticity, without which they will not gain universal belief, & therefore fail of the impression which I wished to have had produced by the publication. If you can drop me a line expressing your opinion on the matter, I shall be much obliged.
I am with sincere respect   Dr Sir Your obt. servt

T. Pickering
Alexr. Hamilton Esq


Title: Enclosure: A Statement of Facts Relative to General Pinckney’s Mission to France, [30 March 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

General Pinckney, appointed minister plenipotentiary from the United States to the French Republic, left Philadelphia near the end of September, and arrived at Paris the 5th of December last, in the evening. On the 6th, he sent, by his secretary, to Mr. Monroe his letters of recall; and immediately afterwards waited on Mr. Monroe, who shewed him a letter from M. Delacroix, the French Minister for foreign affairs, dated December 2. 1796, in which M. Delacroix, remarked, that Mr. Pinckney’s arrival appearing to be at hand, if it had not already taken place, he thought it his duty to inform Mr. Monroe of the formalities to be observed on that occasion; & then tells him, the usage is, that the minister recalled and his successor send to the Minister for foreign affairs, the copy of their letters of recall and of credence.
Genl. Pinckney deeming it more respectful to the Minister to acquaint him with his arrival, & to inform him that they would wait upon him at any hour he would appoint, with their letters of credence and recall, Mr. Monroe on the same day (Decr. 6th) wrote to M. Delacroix accordingly, and requested he would appoint a time when Mr. Pinckney & himself should have the honor of attending him, for the purpose of presenting to him copies of those documents.
On the 9th of December Genl. Pinckney received from Mr. Monroe a letter imforming him that M. Delacroix had appointed that day, between one and four o’clock, to receive them. M. Delacroix letter is dated that day, in answer to Mr. Monroe’s of the 6th; and after reciting the object of the interview, M. Delacroix said, he should be eager to receive him that day, at any hour from one to four o’clock, afternoon, if that would be convenient to him; & prayed him to propose it to General Pinckney. Accordingly Mr. Monroe, & General Pinckney with his Secretary Major Henry Rutledge, about two o’clock, waited on M. Delacroix; and Genl. Pi[n]ckney was introduced to him by Mr. Monroe as his successor. On receiving their letters of credence and recall, M. Delacroix said he would deliver them without delay to the Directory. He desired Major Rutledge to let him have the names of baptism, & ages of himself & Genl Pinckney, that cards of hospitality might be made out, which he said was necessary to reside there unmolested. Their names & ages were immediately given; and M. Delacroix promised to send the cards the next morning.
When this interview was known, the reports which had been spread abroad, before Genl. Pinckney’s arrival, that he would not be received by the Directory, vanished. However, on Monday Decr. 12th, Mr. Monroe’s secertary (Mr. Prevost) called on Genl. Pinckney, and told him that Mr. Monroe had just received a letter from M. Delacroix; & desired to know if Genl. Pinckney had received one: The latter answered that he had not. Mr. Prevost then shewed Genl. Pinckney M. Delacroix’ letter to Mr. Monroe. It is dated the 11th of December; and after mentioning that he had laid before the Executive Directory the copy of Mr. Monroe’s letter of recall, & Genl. Pinckney’s letters of credence, M. Delacroix says the Directory had charged him to inform Mr. Monroe, that they would not acknowledge nor receive another minister plenipotentiary from the United States, until the injuries stated to the American Government had been redressed.
Genl. Pinckney waited till the next day, Decr. 13th, expecting to receive a like notification from M. Delacroix; when, not hearing from him, Genl. Pinckney wrote him a letter, in which after reciting the substance of that which M. Delacroix had written on the 11th to Mr. Monroe, he expressed his regret at the determination of the Directory, and that he was not permitted even to attempt to explain the sentiments of America and its government, or in the terms of his letters of credence, to endeavour to efface unfavourable impressions, to banish suspicions, and to restore that cordiality which was at once the evidence and pledge of a friendly union. Genl. Pinckney then suggested, that as official copies of his letters of credence and of Mr. Monroe’s letters of recall had been delivered to M. Delacroix, the determination of the Directory should have been communicated immediately to him (Genl. Pinckney) that he might, without delay, transmit the same as from the Executive of the French Republic to the Government of the U. States. He also desired to be informed whether it was the intention of the Directory that he should immediately quit the territories of the French Republic; or whether he & his family might stay until he heard from his government.
This letter Genl. Pinckney sent by his Secretary to M. Delacroix, who opened and read it in Major Rutledge’s presence. When he had finished, he desired Major Rutledge to return to Genl. Pinckney as his answer, That the Executive Directory knew of no minister plenipotentiary from the United States, since the presentation of Mr. Monroe’s letters of recall; and that the Executive Directory had charged him to notify to Mr. Monroe, that they would not acknowledge nor receive another minister plenipotentiary from the United States, until the injuries stated to the American Government had been redressed: which notification the Directory relied on Mr. Monroe’s imparting to his own government, as well as communicating to Genl. Pinckney. As to the second subject of Genl. Pinckney’s letter, (whether the Directory intended that he should quit the territories of the Republic, or stay till he heard from his government) M. Delacroix said he could return no answer until he had laid it before the Executive Directory. Major Rutledge asked if Genl. Pinckney should expect an answer. M. Delacroix replied, that the intentions of the Directory should be signified either to him or to Mr. Monroe.
On the 15th of December, M. Giraudet called upon Genl. Pinckney, & said he was chief secretary in the department of foreign affairs: that he came on the part of the Minister of foreign affairs, to signify to him, that with respect to his letter to M. Delacroix, he could not directly communicate with Genl. Pinckney, but only with Mr. Monroe, as such direct communication would be acknowledging Genl. P. as Minister, when the Directory had determined not to receive him: that as to the other part of his letter, relative to his remaining there, he supposed Genl. P. was acquainted with the local laws of France relating to strangers. Genl. Pinckney answered that he was not. M. Giraudet then said there was a decree forbidding all strangers to remain in Paris without particular permission, which as the Directory did not grant to General Pinckney, the general law would of course operate. To this Genl. P. answered, that he could not conceive that the having of a direct communication with him would involve the consequence that had been mentioned. Had Mr. Monroe died before his arrival, the information that they would not acknowledge him must have been communicated to Genl. P. himself; and that Mr. Monroe having received his letters of recall, could not now act officially, any more than if he had ceased to exist. That with regard to the law of France relating to strangers, it did not apply to the requisition in his letter, which was to be informed whether it was the intention of the Directory that he should quit France, or be allowed to stay till he heard from his government.
Mr. Giraudet said he rather imagined it was the intention of the Directory that Genl. Pinckney should quit the territories of the Republic; but as it admitted of a doubt, he would mention it to the minister, and communicate the result in the evening. Genl. Pinckney then further desired to be informed, if obliged to quit the Republic, in what time he must depart, as his baggage had not yet arrived from Bourdeaux: adding, that he meant not to ask any personal favour, but to have the intention of the Directory clearly expressed, in relation to him in the public character in which he came to France. M. Giraudet said he would do what he desired; and departed. In the evening he returned, and said, That in answer to the doubt entertained at the former meeting, the Minister (Delacroix) could only answer, that he had understood the Directory to mean, that Genl. Pi[n]ckney was to quit, not Paris only, but the territories of the French Republic. That as to the time in which it was necessary to depart, the Minister would not designate it; but he would have another communication with the Directory; and that their intentions should be made known in a more explicit manner on both points. M. Giraudet then said he must inform Mr. Pinckney, that in all probability M. Delacroix would not be the organ thro’ which he would receive the answer, as the Minister of police was the officer under whose department his case would come. To this Genl. Pinckney replied, That M. Delacroix & the Directory had received the official copy of his letter of credence: That it was in the power of the Directory to receive him or not; but they could not divest themselves of their knowledge of the public character in which he came to France: That in that character he was entitled to the protection of the law of nations, whether the Directory received him or not. That if they permitted him to stay till he heard from his government, he was under the protection of that law: and if they ordered him to quit the territories of the Republic, still he was entitled to letters of safe-conduct and passports for his journey. Genl. Pinckney closed this conversation with M. Giraudet, with desiring him to inform M. Delacroix, that he requested that whatever further passed might be in writing, that no mistakes might happen by verbal communications, and that he might know explicitly the intentions of the Directory.
After this, ten days having elapsed without any communication from M. Delacroix, and complaints having been received by Genl. Pinckney of inconveniences to which american citizens in France were subjected, for want of passports signed by their minister: he thought it his duty, tho’ not acknowledged by the French Government, to endeavour to remedy this grievance. For americans coming from the territories of a power at war with the Republic, on arriving in its ports, were thrown into confinement, unless they could give security for their good behaviour, until they could obtain passports from our minister at Paris—after being countersigned by the minister of foreign affairs. Genl. Pinckney therefore directed his secretary, Major Rutledge, to wait upon M. Delacroix, to represent this subject, and to obtain from him, unofficially, the determination of the Directory concerning his residence or departure from the territory of the Republic. Accordingly, on the 26th of December, Major Rutledge waited on M. Delacroix, and mentioned the situation of the American citizens lately arrived in France, who had been thrown into prison; where they remained, for want of passports, which could not now be obtained, there being no acknowledged minister from the U. States. General Pinckney therefore wished to be informed to what authority he should refer them for relief. M. Delacroix answered, that an order had been made on this subject; and that in future all petitions on behalf of American Citizens, for passports, should be addressed to the Minister of the General Police: That however, he would charge himself with any which Genl. Pinckney might then have by him, if he preferred the channel of his department. Major Rutledge then asked M. Delacroix if he had heard any thing further from the Directory as to their intentions respecting General Pinckney’s remaining where he was. M. Delacroix answered with marks of great surprize—That he thought he had already explained himself with sufficient clearness on the subject: that he had long since signified to General Pinckney, the impossibility of his staying: that he thought he had exercised much condescension in having been so long silent, which he had been induced to do, by Genl. Pinckney’s having complained of the delay of his baggage, which he supposed must by this time have arrived from Bourdeaux: that, in short, he should be sorry if his further stay should compel him to give information to the minister of the Police.!!! Major Rutledge answered, that if permitted, he would call to M. Delacroix recollection the communication he had made to General Pinckney, thro’ his secretary M. Giraudet. That gentleman had indeed told Genl. Pinckney, that he must consider himself in the light of any common stranger, to whom a card of hospitality was denied, and who was compelled, by the laws respecting foreigners, to withdraw from the territories of the Republic: but General Pinckney had refused to regard himself in any other situation than that in which he had entered France; which was not in a private capacity, but in a public character, which had been officially announced to the Directory: that he was not subject to the law respecting strangers, but was under protection of the law of nations: M. Giraudet then took leave, with a promise to communicate to the Minister of foreign affairs the ground which Mr. Pinckney had taken. In the evening he returned, and said that the Minister would again lay Genl. Pinckney’s letter before the Directory, & that their intentions should be made known to him as soon as possible. Major Rutledge then remarked, that he supposed all this had been faithfully related to him by his Secretary. M. Delacroix answered, That Genl. Pinckney must have mistaken M. Giraudet, as to his intention of again laying Genl. Pinckney’s letter before the Directory. Major Rutledge replied, That this was impossible; for he had been present at both conversations, in which the material parts had passed in English, and been repeated in French. M. Delacroix then said that M. Giraudet had acted without his authority. Major Rutledge answered, That Genl. Pinckney had nevertheless waited until that moment in expectation of hearing from him, agreeably to M. Giraudet’s promise: that the General was very far from intending to dispute the will of the Directory; what he wanted was a communication of that will in writing. M. Delacroix said it had already been given. Major Rutledge desired to know when. M. Delacroix answered, in the notification which he had made, by order of the Directory, to Mr. Monroe: that this contained their sentiments on the point of Mr. Pinckney’s staying; in as much as that his not being received, implied that he should depart. Major Rutledge denied that this was a fair deduction. M. Delacroix insisted that it was. Major Rutledge said it had not so struck Genl. Pinckney, nor any person with whom he had conversed: but however, if such was the construction to be put upon it, he flattered himself that M. Delacroix could have no objection to expressing it upon paper, in order that Genl. Pinckney might have something more substantial than the authority of the word of his secretary, to justify himself to his own government, for quitting a spot to which he had come in obedience to their orders. Here M. Delacroix turned away, with some warmth, and said he should do no such thing: that Genl. Pinckney might make his own deductions—he desired to have no more communications with him. Major Rutledge withdrew.
This behaviour of M. Delacroix did not discompose Genl. Pinckney. He considered that he was at the post where his duty required him to remain, until he received orders from his own government how to conduct himself, or until the French government should give him a written order to depart; or send him passports as a minister of his country whom they would not suffer to remain within their territory; or do some other unequivocal act that would justify his going.
Such appears to have been the conduct of the French Government; and such the situation of Genl. Pinckney, until some time in January last. If they finally order him to quit France, it will surprize no one. The Directory, it is said, have already sent away thirteen foreign ministers; and a late Emigrant, now in Paris, has assured them, that the United States are not of greater consequence, nor ought to be treated with more respect than Genoa or Geneva. (Genoa is a little bigger than the state of Delaware; and Geneva, almost of as great extent as the little county of Delaware in the state of Pennsylvania; that is, about thirteen miles long and eleven broad.)


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 31 March 1797
From: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia Mar. 31. 1797
Dear Sir,

I have recd. your Letter of March 30th. and I consider it as a great acquisition. It developes the origin of a circumstance which came to my knowledge at the close of the last session which filled my mind with inexpressible surprize. To you I will say but in the most perfect confidence that the President had determined on instituting a Commission, but it would not have been composed as you now propose. I believe no one of the heads of Departments knows of the decision except myself, I had attributed it to Mr. Ames from a casual expression, & I own that by means of my most sincere & urgent expostulations nay supplications, it was postponed.
I am far from believing, that considering General Pinckneys diplomatic rank, his personal character, & the special objects of his mission, which were specified in his Letters of Credences and communicated to the Directory that there is any just or even specious pretext for his rejection. On the contrary it appears to me that France has insolently rejected a fair & suitable proposition for a discussion and adjustment of the existing disputes—That the national indignity is such, that it must be noticed. There is a point, but where I allow to be uncertain, below which the Government cannot stop without loosing the confidence of the people and producing that despondency, loss of Credit & want of public concert, which would ruin our affairs. I wish we may find that our apathy has not been already carried to a fatal extreme.
The plan of measures I would propose is as follows.
1st. That the President should in his speech to Congress take a view of the complaints of France & of the measures adopted by his predecessor, particularly in the mission of Mr. Pinckney & should give them his decided approbation. That he should intimate but in delicate terms that France has rejected a suitable opportunity for discussion, but that this would not prevent him from persevering in the line of Negociation. That measures would be accordingly pursued for renewing proposals to & entering upon negociations with the Government of France whenever its consent can be obtained.
2nd. That the President should recommend, and in more than usual terms of confidence, the adoption of the following measures. 1st. an increase of Revenue 2nd. The arming our Vessells for defence with the right of capturing the attacking force. 3d. The equipment of a number of stout merchant Ships & Gallies to defend our Coasts. 4th. The fortification of our Ports. 5th. The enrollment of a Land force, (principally with a view of preventing insurrections of Slaves in the Southern States,) 6th. A power in the Executive to arrest Vessells & persons suspected of intending to cruize against our Trade, or Nations with whom we are at peace.
3d. A serious and firm call upon Congress for their united and vigorous support of the Executive, with an appeal to the honour generosity & patriotism of the people, in the present critical State of Affairs. My own ideas of the system & intentions of France lead me further in defensive & cautionary measures, that I have proposed but I am sensible of the impolicy of anticipating public opinion.
On the subject of negociation, I would ever be ready to meet France & would keep an Agent, or if you please Agents, in Europe ready for that purpose; but I am not willing to admit that the Government has already done less than the occasion required, or that France is justifiable in refusing to recognize Mr. Pinckney. I am also free to declare that I conceive the claims of France to be in any other than the last & most extreme necessity, utterly inadmissible. They in fact require a surrender of National Independence. I would propose to retract nothing.

   Note I would not refuse a remodification of Treaties if desired.

The idea of a Commission consisting of Mr. M. or any man like him, I must own to you is one which I can never adopt without the utmost reluctance. I have no confidence in Mr. M—he has been a frequenter of Mr. Adets political meetings. I have been just informed that Mr. Adet has suggested the idea of sending this Gentleman. We know that the French count upon the support of a party in this Country, and so shameless is the faction grown, that positive proof of a devotion to French views, is with many no injury to a mans popularity. If the government suffers France to dictate what description of men shall be appointed to public trusts, our Country is undone—from that moment, the confidence of all the old fashioned, honourable & virtuous men of the interior Country is irrecoverably lost.
Another consequence of not rejecting the interference of France is, that it will encourage other Nations to interfere especially G. Britain, & will moreover countenance the calumny, that a British faction exists. The french say, that Mr. Jay & his friends were in the British interest, & that therefore he was appointed. Will it be safe or proper to appoint a Man known to be of the French party, & thus give to a falshood, the force of argument? If I know any thing of human nature, this will be the effect on the minds of Thousands.
I have no objection to sendg a man of neutral politicks, at least on party questions, if he be a man of sense, firmness & integrity. General Pinckney is of this description. If a Commission of three is generally prefered, it is a point perhaps not to be contested, though I own it does not strike me agreably. Yet how is the Commission to be composed, must all concur, or will the concurrence of two suffice? In either case mutual confidence will be essential to success. From what was on the point of being done, I presume Mr. C——to be out of the question. If a man of his principles were to be associated with Mr. M. either nothing would be done or something worse than nothing. Mr. M——would insist on a submission to France, or would obstruct a settlement & throw the disgrace on the friends of Government. Either result would deliver the Country bound hand & foot to French influence. If nothing was done the obstinacy of the federalists would be complained of, if something was done however humiliating, the responsibility would be divided & all the mischiefs would be attributed to the despera⟨te⟩ state of affairs induced by the fatal Treaty with G.B.

You known that I am accustomed to respect your opinions, & I am not so ignorant of the extent of your influence upon the friends of Government as not to be sensible, that if you are known to favour the sending of a Commission, so the thing must & will be. When the body of both parties concur in a measure individual opinions stand for nothing. In this case what would be the objection against sending Mr. Ingersoll of this City or som⟨e⟩ such character, to be united with J. Q. Adams or Mr. Murray, & Genl. Pinckney to rendezvous at Amsterdam, until the consent of France to negociate can be obtained. Is it necessary that the mission should procede directly to France, & must Mr. M——be a member?
I should be sorry if the friends of the Governt. were to consider me or any of the public officers as desirous of producing a War with France because I should consider this as evidence that our Affairs are desperate. If the public pulse does not beat higher than that of the Government all is over. There ought ⟨to⟩ be a Zeal for strenuous measures, & this Ze⟨al⟩ ought to be an Engine in the hands of Gov⟨ern⟩ment for preserving peace. I think I can assure you, that the motion of our Ship cannot be adjusted to a minute Scale, if the present course is attempted to be varied, it will in future be nearly opposite to the present.
The present is a moment of apparent tranquillit⟨y⟩ but I conjecture that it is a Calm which forebodes a hurricane; the Executive will either fin⟨d a⟩ violent & steady Gale from one point, or be assailed with a Tornado, which will throw every thing into confusion. I predict that no treaty, no compromise, no concession will afford security.
Revenue is essential, & there will I fear be insuperable objections started by the friends & enemies of Government. Credit has been abused has been exhausted, in senseless speculations.
Having no ambition to gratify, no theory or project to support, I shall be ready to aid my Country with my best exertions & shall be happy to receive your opinions, and to know the state of public opinion. No person can exceed me in sincere wishes that what is proper may be done.
Yrs assuredly

Oliv Wolcott Jr.
A Hamilton Esq.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to James McHenry, [March 1797]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: McHenry, James

[New York, March, 1797]
My Dear Friend

Take my ideas and weigh them of a proper course of conduct for our administration in the present juncture.
You have called Congress—tis well.
When the Senate meets (which I should be glad to see anticipated) send a Commission extraordinary to France. Let it consist of Jefferson or Madison Pinckney & a third very safe man, say Cabot.
Proclaim a Religious solemnity to take place at the Meeting of Congress.
When Congress meet, get them to lay an Embargo with liberty to the executive to grant licenses to depart to Vessels armed or sailing with Convoys.
Increase the Revenue vigorously—& provide naval force for Convoys. Purchase a number of Vessels now built the most fit for Sloops of War & Cutters and arm & commission them to serve as Convoys. Grant Qualified letters of marck to your Merchantmen to arm defend themselves & capture those who attack but not to cruise—or attack.
Form a provisional army of 25000 men. To be engaged eventually & have certain Emoluments. Increase your Cavalry & Artillery in immediate service.
Or do as much of all this as you can. Make a last effort for peace but be prepared for the worst.
The Emperor Paul is at best Equivocal. A successor is apt to differ from a predecessor. He seems to be a Reformer too. Who can say into what scale his weight may be finally thrown?

If things shall so turn that Austria is driven to make peace & England left to contend alone—who can guarantee us that France may not sport in this country a proseliting army? Even to get rid of the troops, if it fails, may be no bad thing to the Government of that Country. There is a possible course of things which may subject us even to an internal invasion by France. Our calculations to be solid should contemplate this possibility.
I know in your administration there is a doubt about a Commission or Envoy extraordinary. I am very sorry for it, because I am sure it is an expedient measure. But perhaps France has said she will receive no Minister till her grievances shall be redressed. Tis hardly possible this can refer to any but a Minister who is to reside. A special extraordinary mission cannot be intended to be excluded—because it is at least necessary to know what measure of redress will satisfy if any is due. But grant she will refuse to hear. Still the great advantage results of shewing in the most glaring light to our people her unreasonableness—of disarming a party of the plea that all has not been done which might be done—of refuting completely the charge that the actual administration desires War with France.
But the enemies of the Government desire the measure. Tis the strongest reason for adopting it. This will meet them on their own ground & shut their mouths.
But to answer the end a man who will have their confidence must be sent—Jefferson or Madison. To do this & to be safe others must be united, say Pinkney & Cabot. Hence the idea of a Commission.
I am really my friend anxious that this should be your plan. Depend on it it will unite the double advantage of silencing enemies & satisfying friends.
I write you this letter on your fidelity. No mortal must see it or know its Contents. Yrs.

A Hamilton
J Mc.Henry Esq


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Francisco de Miranda, 1 April 1797
From: Miranda, Francisco de
To: Hamilton, Alexander

a Paris ce 1. avril 1797.
Mon cher et respectable ami,
C’est depuis quatre ans que je reprends la plume pour vous dire que je suis encore au Nombre des vivans qui restent en france depuis la tyrannie. Voici un Livre qui vient de paraitre sur la Révolution française pas Desodoards. Il contient tous les faits principaux, et indique les Causes, avec Connaissances, Impartialité, et modération à mon avis. Et tous Ceux qui Connaissent à fonds la révolution, m’ont confirmé dans cette opinion que j’avais formée d’abord en le lisant. Ne manquer pas de le lire immédiatement, et de le faire passer après au nouveau président, s’il ne l’a pas lu encore. Mrs Paine et M——e, qui sont déja partis d’ici pour se rendre ches Vous, ne seront pas peutetre du mème-avis; mais je crois qu’ils ont mieux Connu le système des Jacobins, que celui de la révolution française. Enfin il est certain, mon ami, que l’ex-President Washington fit une faute bien grave en envoyant ici pour ambassadeurs Mr Morris, et Mr. Monroe, tous deux exagerés dans un sens Contraire. Il est vrai que le premier est un homme infiniment plus instruit, et bien moins extravagant que l’autre. P——e est devenu un Marat tout à fait—Dieu veuille qu’il ne fasse pas plus de mal au nouveau monde, que l’autre n’en a fait à la france.
Adieu, mon cher ami, continuer à soutenir avec Courage la Cause de la Liberté, que tant de brigands et d’ignorants deshonorent depuis cinq ans, tout en prétendant de l’aimer et de la défendre. Je suis réuni ici (et pour cela persécuté encore) avec le petit nombre de ceux qui la connaissent et qui la défendent Sincérement; Veuille la Providence nous accorder du Succès pour le bonheur de ces pays ci ainsi que pour la tranquillité des autres, au moins. Donnez moi des nouvelles de nos amis communs Knox, et W. Duer. Faites leur bien des Complimens de ma part, en leur Communiquant la partie de cette lettre—si que Vous jugerez à propos, aussi bien que le livre. Je Vous prie de présenter mes respectueux Complimens au gl. Washington—ainsi qu’à tous mes amis à New York &c. &c.
Yours most sincerely
F. Miranda.

P.S. Je viens de Recevoir dans le moment une Lettre de Mr. Monroe, par son Secretaire Mr. Prevost. Le contenue de cette Lettre me fait soupçoner quelque cabale ou intrigue des Mess. Paine, et M——e (avec qui je n’ai jamais eû aucume liaison) ainsi je m’empresse de vous envoier Copie de cette petite Correspondence, pour vous mettre à même de pouvoire Repondre aux Calomnies qui sont les armes de la Secte Jacobitte.

Alex: Hamilton, Esqe. at Newyork.


Title: Enclosure: John B. Prevost to Francisco de Miranda, [27 March 1797]
From: Prevost, John B.
To: Miranda, Francisco de

[Paris, March 27, 1797]
Sir,
I have called several times at your lodgings in the rue florentin, but have hitherto been so unfortunate as to find you abroad, may I therefore request you to name Some moment when your leisure will permit you to See me in Paris.
I am, Sir,   your humble servant
J. B. Prevostof New York.
Septedi.


Title: Enclosure: James Monroe to Francisco de Miranda, 17 March 1797
From: Monroe, James
To: Miranda, Francisco de

Paris March 17. 1797.
Sir,
I was informed by M. Paine that you had some papers of Importance to our governement which you Sometime Since expressed a wish to deposit in my hands. Being on the point of departing for the U. States, I have thought proper to notify you of it, and to assure you that I Shall be happy to take charge of Such papers. M. Prevost who will have the pleasure to deliver you this, will explain to you the nature of M. Paines communication and take charge of such papers as you are pleased to deliver him. With great Respect I have the honor to be your very humble servant
Ja Monroe.