Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Seton, 11 April 1792
From: Seton, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dear sir
New York 11 April 1792

I find upon enquiry from those who are most conversant in the nature and extent of the Stock Contracts, that Monday the 15th of this month is the day which will probably produce the greatest distress, of course the day on which relief will be the most essential. What is called here the Company, of which Mr Macomb is the ostensible person, have on that day to take Stock or pay differences on half a Million. If they do not comply, then all other Contracts are a float, & the sacrifices must be very great. If they only pay the differences & dont take the Stock, this may be calculated at the rates that the distress will cause the price of Stock to be at, which will go near to ruin them, so that it is of infinite consequence to the Community that the Company should not be too much oppressed if they mean to comply with their Engagements, or that the Public should have immediately relief, if they do not mean to comply. Therefore if it was possible that I could go into the Market for you in force that day, and that it was known I should do so, it would in all probability save the City from utter ruin. Perhaps such a day may never occur again. I take the liberty of mentioning this to you, as your answer can reach me on Saturday which would be time enough.
I am with the most sincere respect & esteem   Dear sir   Your obliged Obe Servt
Wm Seton
A. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Bacler de Leval, [12 April 1792]
From: Leval, Bacler de
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[New York, April 12, 1792.]

Sans doute Monsieur vous ete dans de bien grandes inquietudes Sur L’existence presente de votre malheureux ami et Sa respectable femme. Je Soufre autans que vous que Les circonstances vous obligent a rester a philadelphie dans un moment ou votre presente Leur est Si necessaire. Ils vous attende avec bien de l’impatience mais en attendans votre arrivée rendé leur un bien grand Service: engagè M de Casenove a partir aussi tot pour aider notre pauvre ami a Sortir d’un ernbaras cruel. Je lui ecris de leur part, ils l’attende avec La plus vive impatience. Au nom de L’amitie qu’il ne differe pas d’un jour, Vous m’aves dit qu’il vous ecrirois je devois vous porter Sa Lettre mais tout a coup Les affaires ont pris une tournant Si Sinistre que je ne puis pas quiter cette respectable famille. Les affaires a new york Sont dans une Confusion affreuse èt elles empire tous Les jours par de nouvelle bancroute. Tranquilises vous cependant Sur votre ami, il Se tira encore mieux d’affaire que Les autres mais pour cela il faut quil Sois Secondé par Les Conseils et L’experience d’un veritable ami et il ny a pas un moment a perdre. Engagè donc Monsieur M de Casenove a tous quiter pour venir Sauver notre ami. Il espere tout de Sa presence icy, il L’attens Lundy. Vous voyes qu’il faut que Le tems presse bien pour Lui en Laisser aussi peu, et j’espere tous Si il vient, je crains tout, Seulement Si il differe. Voila Monsieur notre Situation presente. M de La roche a pris le partie de ne pas quiter Duer ny jour ny nuit. Il couche dans Sa chambre a La prison et n’en Sortira que Lors que notre ami Sera plus tranquil et que vous Seres tous icy. Je vous prie de me croire Monsieur avec Les Sentiments que vous inspires Votre tres humble Servante
Bacler deLeval
le 12 avril 1792


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to the President and Directors of the Bank of New York, 12 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: President and Directors of the Bank of New York

Gentlemen
Treasury DepartmentApril 12. 1792

Since my official letter to you authorising an advance to your Cashier of Fifty Thousand Dollars to be applied to the purchase of public debt on account of the United States I have authorised that Gentleman to apply for another fifty thousand Dollars and to make the like use of it. I now confirm this direction and add my desire that he may be furnished with a further sum of fifty thousand Dollars, making in the whole One hundred and fifty thousand, the whole for the purpose above mentioned.
With great consideration   I ha⟨ve the honor to be⟩
The President Directors & Comp⟨any⟩of the Bank of NYor⟨k⟩


Title: Report on the Petition of Daniel Ellis and John How, [12 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 12, 1792Communicated on April 17, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives;

The Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to an Order of the House of Representatives of the 17th. of January 1791, referring to him the petition of Daniel Ellis and John How, Executors of Samuel How, late of the City of Burlington, deceased, respectfully reports.
That it appears by the Petitioners own shewing, that the subject of their claim, which is payment for supplies furnished to a Pennsylvania row-galley, has been originally regarded by Congress, as a charge proper for the consideration of the State. And that the Comptroller General of Pennsylvania, who appears to be the proper Officer to decide on the said claim, has rejected it.
The Secretary does not, therefore, perceive, that the case is of a nature to claim relief from the United States.
All which is humbly submitted,
Alexander HamiltonSecry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department
April 12th 1792.


Title: Report on the Petition of Ezra Stiles, [12 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 12, 1792Communicated on April 17, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to an Order of the House of Representatives of the 5th. of April 1790, referring to him the petition of Ezra Stiles, on behalf of the President and fellows of Yale College in Connecticut, respectfully reports.
That the Act making provision for the debt of the United States, exempts, in future, Philosophical Apparatus from the duties on importation.
That it will, therefore, be agreeable to the spirit of that Act, if the Legislature should think proper to direct restitution, in this case, of the duties which have been paid, as set forth in the petition, to be made to the parties. And that, to the Secretary it appears expedient, from a consideration, that it will be conductive to the interests of learning.
All which is humbly submitted,
Alexander HamiltonSecry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department, April 12th 1792.


Title: Report on a Petition of Philip Verplank, [12 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 12, 1792Communicated on April 17, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to an Order of the House of Representatives, of the 14th of July, 1790, referring to him the petition of Philip Verplank, respectfully reports;
That by reference to the accounts of William Barber, esquire, late Commissioner for the State of New York, it appears, that an account was exhibited to him, for wood, grain, and other supplies, taken by the American Army, as also for the use of the estate of the petitioner, at Verplank’s point, during the late war, the estimated value of which was £4238.18.3, New York Currency.
That, of this Account, the Commissioner admitted the sum of 7970. 81/90 dollars, and rejected the remainder, as being, in his opinion, unauthorized by law.
That, as the claim of the petitioner has already been under the consideration of a Commissioner, who was vested with ample and final authority, a revision of it, in order to a farther allowance, would, in the opinion of the Secretary, be a precedent full of danger. The compensation already made bears so large a proportion to the sum claimed, that there is no appearance of extraordinary loss or signal hardship, to call for a special interposition of the Legislature.
All which is humbly submitted,
Alexander HamiltonSecry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department, April 12th. 1792.


Title: Report on the Petition of Simon Nathan, [12 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 12, 1792Communicated on April 17, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to an Order of the House of Representatives of the 30th July, 1790, referring to him the memorial of Simon Nathan, of the City of New York, respectfully reports;
That the subject of the Memorialist’s application, from his own statement, appears to relate wholly to the State of Virginia, and not to the United States.
The Secretary is, therefore, of opinion, that if, in justice, the case of the said Memorialist should require relief, it cannot, on this ground, be reasonably expected to be afforded by the United States.
All which is humbly submitted,
Alexander Hamilton,Secry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department. April 12th 1792.


Title: Meeting of the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, [12 April 1792]
From: Commissioners of the Sinking Fund
To:

[Philadelphia, April 12, 1792]

At a meeting of the Trustees of the Sinking Fund, on Thursday, the 12th of April, 1792,
Present, The Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Attorney General.
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be authorised to expend, in the purchase of stock, a further sum, not exceeding two hundred thousand dollars, on the principles of the resolution of the 15th day of August, 1791.
From so much of the above resolution as relates to the purchase of three per cent. and deferred stock, the Secretary of State dissented.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Philip Schuyler, 12 April 1792
From: Schuyler, Philip
To: Hamilton, Alexander

New York, April 12, 1792. “Isaac Van Wyck Esqr. of Fish Kill in Dutchess county has requested me for an introductory line to you. He repairs to Philadelphia to Solicit a contract for carrying the mail between this and Albany. I have known Mr Van Wyck from his infancy, and to me has always appeared to deserve the character which he Generally sustains, That of an honest man, punctial in his dealings, and of marked Attention to his business.…”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Seton, 12 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Seton, William

My Dear Sir
Philad. April 12. 1792

I have your letters of the 10th & 11th and more to my distress than surprise I learn by other letters a confirmation of what you apprehended namely Mr. Macombs failure. This misfortune has I fear a long tail to it.
The inclosed you will perceive gives you additional latitude. The terms as heretofore, for six ⅌ Cents 20/ three per Cents 12/ & deferred 12/6.
You must judge of the best mode & manner of applying the sum. The operations here not being extensive, I have found it best to eke out my aid. I doubt whether this will answer with you. My reason was to keep up men’s spirits by appearing often though not much at one time. All is left to you.
You will doubtless be cautious in securing your transfers before you pay.
Some time since in a private letter I suggested a plan of relief something like the following.
All parties concerned to agree to liquidate all contracts not executed by stating Stock at a liberal value say 22/6. for 6 ⅌ Cents 12/ for three’s 13 for deferred—to adjust all differences according to the actual differences between these rates and the sums stipulated & to pay and receive those differences in Stock at the above prices.
Many good consequences would have arisen from such a plan. I think it might have parried the misfortune. I fear it is now too late but something like it may perhaps break the force of the Evil.
Yours affecty
A Hamilton
Wm. Seton Esqr


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, [12 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

[Philadelphia, April 12, 1792]

The Secretary of the Treasury has the honor to communicate to the President a resolution of the Trustees of the Sinking Fund as of this morning. A particular piece of urgent business prevents personally waiting on the President with it. It is very much to be desired that the resolution may receive the immediate decision of the President. It is upon the same principles with the last.
12th. April 1792.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Richard Morris, 13 April 1792
From: Morris, Richard
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
New York 13 April 1792

Your favour of the 24th. Ulto. is duly Recd. I am Sorry at giving you so much trouble in this business but I am Certain Youl Excuse me from the Consideration that I am in Some measure to derange before I can properly Arrange. Had I come to the Office in the first instance, I should have thought the Law, and your Instructions, perfectly Sufficient, and Directory, and taken at once a Decided part, but when I thought it Necessary to make Alterations in the Arrangement of my predecessor I doubted my own Judgement and wished your Sentiments. I am Much Obliged for your Decision in the Business.
Mr Matthew M Clarkson who Mr Smith Appointed I Just now Mett in my way to the Office. I informed him I was about makeing my Quarterly Return and wanted the Necessarys from his Office, amongst Others the Money. It produced Some Little Altercation tho very decent and Good Humour’d it Concluded with my informing him that he was only a Collector and that Amongst them there was no Distinction of Sub and Superior. He mentioned his being then on his way to the Ferry boat in his way to Philadelphia where he Should See You. What his Representations may be I know not. His own Sence may inform him that his Office is Useless and Really is an Embarrasment in the Department. However he may wish to have an Establishment, that may be his Errand, if it is I wish him Disappointed at least untill the deposit is properly Arranged. Then if an Appointment in his present Line is Necessary I shall perhaps be as happy as any one in Seeing a Clarkson fill it. This I write not as a Publick Letter but hearing Mr Clarkson was going for Philadelphia I thought it my duty to say thus much to you for private Information. I therefore Send you on my Own Scral in the Draft without Copying. My Respectfull Compliments to Your Lady and be Assured I am with Real Regard and perfect Esteem.
Your Obliged Hume Servt
Rd Morris

I mean to Answer Your Last letter to Me.
Alexr Hamilton Esqr.


Title: Report on Additional Appropriations, [13–16 April 1792]
From: Nourse, Joseph
To:

[Philadelphia, April 13–16, 1792Communicated on April 17, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury respectfully reports to the House of Representatives, an Estimate of certain Sums, amounting together to thirty four thousand four hundred and ninety seven dollars, ninety Cents, for which an appropriation is requisite, in addition to the provisions heretofore made.
The funds in the power of the legislature, for this purpose, are the surplus of the duties on imports and tonnage to the end of the year 1791; certain unexpended surpluses on former appropriations, and certain sums, which have been paid into the treasury, in consequence of settlements with individuals.
The Secretary takes this opportunity to observe, that the only fund, which has been heretofore appropriated for satisfying the purposes of the Act, for raising and adding another regiment to the military establishment of the United States, and for making farther provision for the protection of the frontiers, is the product to the end of the year 1791, of the duties on spirits distilled within the United States, and of the additional duties laid by the same Act, which imposes those duties on imported spirits; which fund will not prove adequate to the object. A farther provision is therefore necessary, and may be made out of the unappropriated surplus of the duties on imports and tonnage to the end of the year 1791.
All which is humbly submitted
Alexander Hamilton,Secry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department, April 13th. 1792.

Estimate of sums necessary to be appropriated in addition to those provided for by the Act passed the 23d Decr. 1791.

dollars. cents.

For the discharge of a balance due Benjamin Hawkins and other Commissioners appointed under an Act of Congress of 15th March 1785, for treating with the Southern Indians, which balance the Comptroller of the Treasury admitted 5th. January 1792
2787.88.

For the first Clerk to the general Board of Commissioners, his additional salary provided for by a clause in the Act for extending the time for settling the accounts between the United States and the individual States, from the 23d January to 31st December 1792, at 200 dollars per annum
187.91.

For defraying the expense which will attend the stating and printing of the public accounts at the Treasury, in compliance with the order of the House of Representatives, dated the 30th December 1791
800.

Clerks of Courts, Jurors, Witnesses &c.

The fund arising from fines, forfeitures and penalties, having last year proved insufficient for the discharge of the accounts of Clerks of Courts &c to which they were appropriated: a sum for the present year is estimated in order to provide against a similar contingency, of 10.000.

And also for the discharge of certain accounts, actually settled to the 31st December, 1791, in addition to the sums heretofore appropriated 7.000.
17.000.

To rectify a mistake in the Register’s estimate for the enumeration of the inhabitants of Virginia, he having stated the Marshal’s account at 4253.90

Whereas it ought to have been 7553.90,

the difference is
3300.

For the Marshall of the district of South Carolina, his accounts settled; for the enumeration of the inhabitants of that State, amount to 4395.59

The sum estimated was only 3000.

Remains to be appropriated
1395.59.

For so much short estimated for the discharge of sundry accounts against the Treasury Department. The accounts brought in for payment to 31st December 1791, exceeding the said estimate, by,
1355.61.

For defraying the incidental expenses of furnishing the Supervisors of excise with screw-presses, stamp seals, and other articles
600.

For the Commissioner of Army Accounts, his additional estimate for 1792, Vizt.

For Lieut: John Freeman, of the late Maryland line for balance of subsistence, for the years 1782 & 1783 41.75.

Salary of a Clerk on extra hours, from the first of May 1791, to the 1st of April 1792 229.16

Salary of two clerks in addition to those allowed by the last appropriation, as he finds it impossible with the present assistance to conduct the business with that dispatch and propriety required 1.000

Contingencies   100
1370.91.

For an additional estimate of the Clerk of the House of Representatives, to enable him to pay the doorkeepers for their respective services during the recess of the House, in conformity with the Act of Appropriation, passed at the present Session, and of a resolution of the House of the 24th instant.
700.

For the discharge of such demands on the United States, not otherwise provided for, as shall have been ascertained and admitted, in due course of settlement at the treasury, and which are of a nature, according to the usage thereof, to require payment in specie
 5000.

Dollars,
34.497.90.

Treasury Department Register’s Office, 16th April 1792.
Joseph Nourse, Register.


Title: Enclosure A: [List of Petitions for Compensations for Supplies], [16 April 1792]
From:
To:

List of petitions for compensations for supplies furnished during the late War.

Petition of
Lewis Van Woert,
Petition of
John Holbrook,

Jacob Green and others surviving partners of Nathaniel Green & Co.
Ludwig Kuhn,

Levy Bartleson,

Abiel Smith,

William Harris,

Webb and White,

Benjamin Van Fossan, Administrator of Peter Van Fossan.
John Crumpton, and Griffith Jones.

Thomas Hart.


Title: Enclosure B: [List of Petitions for Compensation for Transportation], [16 April 1792]
From:
To:

List of petitions for compensation for transportation during the late War.

Petition of
Christian Knipe. John Smyth
Petition of
Nathaniel Tracy, and Roger McLean


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Seton, 16 April 1792
From: Seton, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

My dear sir
New York 16 April 1792.

I received your Letter by the Express on fryday Morning, previous to which I had been relieving a few by purchases of Stock upon the Strength of the second extention of fifty thousand Dollars At Noon I went into the Market, but the applications were so numerous & so vastly beyond my expectation, I found it necessary to declare I could take but very small sums from each. However notwithstanding this, every one pressed forward & were so eager, that I could only take down names, upon a declaration that I would average the whole. This I did, that no one might be left without some relief—so that the investment of the 100,000 Dollars, goes to upwards of 80 Persons, from which you may form a judgment that your orders for purchase were well timed—at the same time it is an evidence of the great and universal distress which prevails, & which I am sorry to say is such that it would be utterly impossible to make purchases equal to the relief. However it cannot now be worse, and when the public mind calms down a little, it is to be hoped that good will arise out of evil—that the spirit of Industry, instead of Gambling will revive, and that the Stocks will come to their proper and real value.
I am with the highest esteem and respect   Dear sir.   Your Obliged Obed Hu Servt
Wm Seton
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr


Title: Report on Marine Hospitals, [17 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 17, 1792Communicated on April 17, 1792]

[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]
The Secretary of the Treasury, to whom were referred certain papers concerning a marine Hospital at the town of Washington in the State of Virginia, and a memorial of the Marine Society of Boston, on the subject of marine Hospitals, respectfully submits the following Report:
The establishment of one or more marine Hospitals in the United States is a measure desirable on various accounts. The interests of humanity are concerned in it, from its tendency to protect from want and misery, a very useful, and, for the most part, a very needy class of the Community. The interests of navigation and trade are also concerned in it, from the protection and relief, which it is calculated to afford to the same class; conducing to attract and attach seamen to the country.
A fund for the purpose may, it is presumed, be most conveniently derived from the expedient suggested in the abovementioned Memorial, namely, a contribution by the mariners and seamen of the United States, out of their wages to be regulated by law.
The rate of the contribution may be ten cents per month for each mariner or seamen, to be reserved, pursuant to articles, by masters of vessels, and paid to the collectors of districts, to which the vessels respectively belong. Effectual regulations for this purpose may, without difficulty be devised.
The benefit of the fund ought to extend, not only to disabled and decrepid seamen, but to the widows and children of those who may have been killed or drowned, in the course of their service as seamen.
It will probably be found expedient, besides the reception and accomodation of the parties entitled, at any hospital which may be instituted to authorize the granting pensions, in aid of those who may be in condition, partly to procure a subsistence from their own labor. There may be cases, in which this mode of relief may be more accommodating to the individuals, and, at the same time, more œconomical.
The Hospital, or if more than one, each Hospital, and its funds, must be placed under the management of a competent number of directors. It is presumed, that for so charitable a purpose, persons will be found, who will be willing without emolument, to execute the trust, but in order to this, it must be rendered as little troublesome as possible, and for this purpose, the number of directors must be considerable. Twenty five, of whom five to be competent to ordinary business, may be an eligible number. Various options will occur to the legislature, as to the mode of constituting the directors, who must, of course, have the power to appoint and compensate certain necessary officers, attendants and servants.
It is suggested in the memorial from the marine Society of Boston, as expedient, to have three Hospitals. But it is not obvious, that one would not for a considerable time, at least, answer the purpose. More would be productive of a greater expense, in the first establishment, and in the subsequent maintenance of it. A plurality would, however, have some advantages arising from the operation of local considerations and feelings.
Preliminarily to a decision, how far it may be expedient to embrace the offer of the marine Hospital at the town of Washington in Virginia, the general principles of the establishment, including the questions of number and locality, will require to be decided by the Legislature.
Should Congress think fit to adopt an arrangement, which will include the town of Washington, as an eligible situation, it will, in the opinion of the Secretary, be advisable, to vest somewhere a power to contract for the building already there. This will probably be found the best mode of reconciling all the considerations which ought to enter into such an arrangement.
All which is respectfully submitted,
Alexander HamiltonSecretary of the Treasury.
Treasury Department, April 17th 1792.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James Reynolds, 17 April 1792
From: Reynolds, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
Philadelphia 17th. April. 1792.

I am sorry to be the barer of So disagreeable. an unhappy infermation. I must tell you Sir that I have bin the most unhappiest man, for this five days in Existance, which you aught to be the last person I ever Should tell my troubls to. ever Sence the night you Calld and gave her the Blank Paper. She has treated me more Cruel than pen cant paint out. and Ses that She is determed never to be a wife to me any more, and Ses that it Is a plan of ours. what has past god knows I Freely forgive you and dont wish to give you fear or pain a moment on the account of it. now Sir I hope you will give me your advise as freely as if Nothing had eve passed Between us I think it is in your power to make matter all Easy again. and I suppose you to be that Man of fealling that you would wish to make every person happy Where it in your power I shall wate to See you at the Office if its Convenant. I am sir with Asteem yours
James Reynolds
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Wilhem and Jan Willink, Nicholaas and Jacob Van Staphorst, and Nicholas Hubbard, 17 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Willink, Wilhem and Jan

Gentlemen,
Treasury Department.April 17th: 1792.

The Treasurer of the United States has my authority to draw upon you, at thirty days sight, for 500,000 Guilders in favor of John Kean Esquire, Cashier of the Bank of the United States, to which you will please to give due honor.
I am &c.
Alexander Hamilton.
Messrs. Willink, Van Staphorst & Hubbard.
Amsterdam.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Kean, 18 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Kean, John

Sir
Treasury Department April 18th 1792

The bills drawn by the Treasurer on the 11th of February upon the Collectors of New London, New Haven and Fairfield, the sale of which I desired to be suspended, by my letter of the 12th ultimo, may now be disposed of.
I am, with consideration   Sir,   Your obedt Servant
A Hamilton
John Kean EsqrCashier of the Bank of the United States


Title: Enclosure A: [Petitions for the Renewal of Certificates], 20 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

List of sundry Petitions for the renewal of Certificates reported on to the House of Representatives, April 20th: 1792.

No.
1
Petition of
Josias Clapham
No.
13.
Petition of
Daniel Schermerhorn

2
“
John Higby.
14
“
John Craine.

3
“
John Elias Moore
15
“
Peter Huber.

4
“
William Arnold
16
“
John Hays.

5
“
William Albaugh and Margaret Cowell}
17
“
Daniel Robbins.

6
“
Daniel Freer.
18
“
John Pollhemus.

7
“
Laurana Richardson &c.
19
“
Thomas Donnellan,

8
“
Elizabeth Mark.
20
“
Stephen Remington

9
“
Henry Lee,
21
“
Daniel Skillman,

10
“
William Graham junr.
22
“
John Hayden.

11
“
William Baker.
23
“
Job Kittredge &c.

12
“
William Jones.
24
“
William Robinson.


Title: Enclosure B: [List of Sundry Petitions], [18 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

Abstract of the subjects of sundry petitions praying the renewal of Certificates, and Observations thereon.
No. 1.
The petition of Josias Clapham referred 18th November, 1791, sets forth.
That he was possessed of two Certificates issued from the Loan Office of Virginia,

No.
12,
dated
16th.
October
1786,
for
1632 ³⁸⁄₉₀
dollars,
in his own name,

231,
“
1st.
January
1778
1000.
“
in the name of Isaac Zane.

One Certificate issued from the Loan Office of Pennsylvania, May 9th. 1778, for 1000 dollars.
Two others issued from the Loan Office of Maryland,
February 12th. 1779, for 500 dollars,
March 23d. 1779,   for 200   “
And about 200 dollars in Indents. All of which, he alleges to have been destroyed by the burning of a house in Richmond, on the 2nd. day of January 1788. This he attests by his own oath, and corroborates it, by the oath of Leven Powell, and by a Cerficate of John Hopkins, Commissioner of Loans, as to the burning of the House.
The existence of the first mentioned two Certificates, No. 12 and 231, is proved by the said Commissioner; but nothing is said about the others, being not sufficiently described.
It does not appear, that any proceedings have been had, pursuant to the resolution of Congress, of the 10th. of May 1780.

A certificate from the Auditor of the State is produced, intended (as is presumed) to shew, that the State has renewed certain certificates and warrants, which were lost by the same accident.
The fact of the destruction is as well proved, as can generally be expected under such circumstances, and relief seems proper in the particular case, if on the general principle, any ought immediately to be granted; accompanying it with the precautions contemplated by the abovementioned resolution. This, however, is only intended to apply to the certificates, the existence of which is, or can be officially ascertained.

No. 2.
The petition of John Higby New York, referred 21st. November 1791, sets forth:
That he was possessed of a Loan Office Certificate, issued from the Loan Office of the State of New York, No. 10,211, dated April 20th. 1779, for three hundred dollars, in his own name.
That the said Certificate was destroyed by fire, in his dwelling-house, on the night of the 16th. of October 1780, when he was taken prisoner by a party of British, and carried to Canada.
No proof whatever is produced, except of the existence of the Certificate, which is established by the public records.
Without more proof, relief could not be granted with propriety.

No. 3.
The petition of John Elias Moore, Charleston, referred 21st. November 1791, sets forth:
That his father, John Moore held, in his own name, the following Loan-Office Certificates of South Carolina, Viz:

No.
96,6744,6745,
dated
August
12th.
1779,
amount,
Dollars
2200.

1674,1675,1676,
“
January
14th.
1780,
3 at 1000,
each,
 3000.

6758, to 6790,
“

ditto
ditto,
33 at 600,
each
19800.

22.800.

That the said Certificates were taken away, or destroyed by the British in April 1780.
The only proof produced is the oath of the said John Moore.
The existence of the Certificates for the first mentioned 2200 dollars, with a difference of date (being 9th. August 1780,) and of the other sums above stated amounting to 22.800 dollars, appears by the public records.
Relief, in this state of things, cannot safely be given; The oath of an interested party, not corroborated by collateral proof, is an insufficient foundation.
The non appearance, hitherto, of the Certificates is not conclusive proof that they may not appear hereafter; a considerable part of the public Certificates being still unsubscribed.

No. 4.
The petition of William Arnold, Rhode Island, referred November 24th, 1791, sets forth.
That he was possessed of a Loan Office Certificate of Massachusetts, No. 1207, dated October 25th. 1777, for 600 dollars, in the name of Christopher Clarke.
That the said Certificate was burnt with his house and store on the 27th. December 1787, at East Greenwich. The proof of this, is the oath of the party, corroborated as to the burning of the House and Store, by two witnesses.
The existence of the Certificate is proved by official documents.
The Commissioner of Loans of Massachusetts certifies that proceedings under the resolution of Congress have been had, and are deposited in the Loan Office of Massachusetts.
By the Newport Herald it appears, that it has been advertised from the 10th. of October to the 25th. November 1790, and by N. Appleton’s certificate, that it has been advertised in one of the Boston papers, the Columbia Centinel, No. 700.
It was not, however, advertised immediately as the resolution requires.

Relief, however, appears proper in the particular case, if, on the general principle, any ought immediately to be granted.

No. 5
The Petition of William Albaugh, and Margaret Crowell, executors of Henry Crowell, of Maryland, referred November 28th. 1791 sets forth:
That the Testator was possessed of the following Certificates, issued from the Loan Office of Maryland, in his name, Viz:

No.
1296.
dated
April
27th
1779,
for
600
dollars,

1299
“
do

“
600.
“

1297
“
September
3d
“
600.
“

1298
“
do
“
600.
“

1947
“
do
“
500.
“

That after the said Certificates were included in the inventory of the estate of the deceased, they were returned into the possession and care of the said Margaret Crowell, widow of the said deceased, since which those three Certificates, dated in September, have been lost or destroyed, and a piece of one of the others dated in April, is torn away and lost, (the other part is produced.) It is suggested, that they have probably been destroyed by the children of the family.
The proof is the oaths of the parties, and that they have not been sold or conveyed, and certified by George Murdock, Register of Frederick County, that the parties stood charged with the said Certificates.
The existence of the Certificates is proved by official vouchers.
No proceedings under the resolution of Congress appear to have been had.
The circumstances appear to be too inconclusive to authorize relief at present. Better evidence may hereafter result from the calling in of all outstanding certificates. This, however, with the exception of the Certificate, part of which is produced; in regard to which, relief appears proper.

No. 6.
The Petition of Daniel Freer, Ulster County, New York, referred, January 5th. 1792, sets forth.

That he held, in his own name, the following Office Certificates, issued from the Office of New York;

No.
10.298,
dated
May
27th.
1779,
for
300
dollars,

6.072,
“
“
600.
“

That in the month of June, 1781, his house, furniture and papers, among which were the said Certificates, were destroyed by fire.
The only proof is the oath of the party.
The existence of the Certificates is proved by official vouchers. No proceedings appear to have been had under the resolution.
The proof thus far is defective, no collateral evidence being produced, even of the burning of the house.

No. 7.
The petition of Laurana Richardson, Administratrix of George Richardson deceased, referred January 10th. 1792, sets forth:
That her testator was possessed of a Loan Office certificate, dated 26th. February 1779, for five hundred dollars.
That on the invasion of the State by the enemy, he buried the said Certificate with some other things—that he could not find the certificate, and suggests, that it must have been destroyed by the earth.
No proof is produced.
The evidence of the Certificate is ascertained by official vouchers.
There appears not sufficient ground for relief in this case.

No. 8.
The petition of Elizabeth Mark, widow of George Mark, referred 15th December 1791, sets forth:
That the said George Mark was, in his lifetime, possessed of a Certificate issued from the Loan Office of Pennsylvania,
No. 189, dated January 1st, 1781, for 345 44/90 dollars.
That William Mark, son of the petitioner, in the month of February 1783, received the said Certificate from his mother, for the purpose of drawing the interest due upon it. That he went from Reading to Philadelphia, in a boat upon the Schuylkill, and that he lost a pocket-book on the way, which contained the said Certificate.

This is attested by the oath of the said William Mark, and is corroborated by the deposition of George Gardner and Peter Steighter.
The existence of the Certificate appears by official record.
The propriety of relief in this case will, therefore depend on the determination of the general question, “whether any shall be granted in the case of lost Certificates.”

No. 9.
The petition of Henry Lee, of Pennsylvania, referred, January 17th. 1792, sets forth:
That he was possessed of the following Loan Office Certificates, issued from the Office of Pennsylvania, in his own name, Viz:

No.
2593
dated
June
11th.
1779
for
1000
dollars.

589
“
“
400.
“

That about the month of July 1782, he took the said certificates to Philadelphia, in order to draw the interest, but received none. That on his return home, the said Certificates having got wet, he laid them by the fire to dry; that they were attracted by the heat, and instantly burnt.
The proof adduced is the oath of the party, corroborated by the testimony of Jacob Lee his son.
The existence of the Certificates is proved by official vouchers.
No proceedings appear to have been had, pursuant to the resolution of Congress.
The proof is as can be expected in any similar case, and relief appears to be proper, if, on the general principle, any ought immediately to be granted, accompanying it with the precautions contemplated by the above mentioned resolutions.

No. 10.
The petition of William Graham junior, Philadelphia, referred January 31st. 1792, sets forth.
That he was possessed of the following Loan Office Certificates—

No.
194
dated
October
13th.
1779,
for
10.000.
dollars,
payable to Francis Lee of Philadelphia

519
“
March
8th.
1779,
600
dollars,
payable to Edmund Custis Virginia.

That on the 20th. November 1779, he placed the said Certificates into the hands of William Graham, of Philadelphia, merchant, as per receipt produced, to be by him delivered to Samuel Montgomery Brown, at Saint Eustatia, for which place, the said William Graham was to sail, in the ship Lady Washington. That the said ship did sail on the 26th. of November, and on the 4th. December, was captured by the Roebuck.
That the said Certificates, being in a leather saddle-bag, got wet and were destroyed.
The proof adduced is the oath of the said William Graham, made the 19th. of January last.
The existence of the Certificates is proved by official vouchers.
The great distance of time between the fact and the proof, is a material objection to it. The objection too is strengthened by the responsibility of the deponent for the Certificates entrusted to him.
It would not appear proper to grant relief in such a case; at least till the calling in of all outstanding Certificates shall have furnished a confirmation.

No 11.
The petition of William Baker, New Jersey, referred, 22d February 1792, sets forth:
That on the 11th. of February 1779, he received two Loan Office Certificates, issued in his name by Joseph Borden;

No.
2120,
for
300
dollars.

4768
“
600
dollars.

That on the same day, he delivered them into the hands of his mother, Judith Baker, to take care of them. That she put them in a Cupboard drawer. That some time in the month of October 1781, the said Judith discovered that the Certificates above mentioned, and other papers, were entirely destroyed by rats or other vermin.
The proof adduced is the oath of the said Judith Baker, of the 7th. of February 1792, which testifies the delivery of the Certificates to her, her having put them in the Cupboard, and the destruction by vermin of the papers, which were in the drawer, but admits that there were no remains of the Certificates left to distinguish them from other papers.
The existence of the Certificates is proved by James Ewing; and that they had not been presented on the 4th. of February 1792: The same is proved by records in the Auditor’s office.
A certificate of Isaac Collins, printer, of an Advertisement having been inserted six weeks, is also produced.
The proof in this case, though not conclusive, is so strong as to justify relief, if on the general principle, it is deemed advisable to grant immediate relief.

No. 12.
The petition of William Jones, Maryland, referred, March 12th. 1792, sets forth:
That he was possessed of the following Loan Office Certificates, issued from the Office of Maryland; Viz:
No. 4564, dated February 15th. 1779, for 600 dollars, issued to Thomas Graham.

      1094
      }

      1095

“
August
24th.
500
dollars each,
1000.

2012
“
November
24th

500.

3339
“
ditto

1000

3100 dollars.

That on the 26th March 1782, his house was consumed by fire, and with it the said Certificates.
The proof adduced is the oath of the party, corroborated by the deposition of Michael Jenifer Stone, as to the good character of the party, and the burning of the house.
The existence of the Certificates is proved by an official Certificate of the Commissioner of Loans.
No proceedings appear to have been had under the resolution of Congress.
The proof in this case is as satisfactory, as can well be expected in a similar case, and relief will be proper, if, on the general principle, immediate relief in any such case, is deemed advisable.

No 13.
The petition of Daniel Schermerhorn, New York, referred November 22d. 1791, sets forth.
That he purchased of one David Root a final settlement Certificate, signed by John Pierce, No. 29. 158, for 80 dollars. That children got hold of some papers, and the said Certificate not being found among them, it is supposed to have been thrown in the fire, of which no other proof, than the oath of the party, is produced.
The existence of the Certificate appears by official records. No proceedings appear to have been had under the resolution of Congress.
The evidence here is too vague and inconclusive to justify relief without further light.

No. 14.
The petition of John Craine, Virginia, referred November 22d. 1791, sets forth.
That he was possessed of a final settlement Certificate, issued the 13th. of August 1784, in the name of James Swart, No. 80.314, for 100 dollars. That the Certificate was destroyed in his waistcoat pocket, when in the wash, about two years ago.
The proof adduced is the oath of the party, corroborated by no collateral evidence.
The existence of the Certificate appears by official records.
The evidence here does not appear sufficient. The final calling in of outstanding Certificates may afford further light.

No. 15.
The petition of Peter Huber, Pennsylvania, referred November 23d. 1791, sets forth.
That he was possessed of a certain Certificate, signed by Benjamin Stelle, which was upwards of twenty pounds, but the number and exact sum he does not remember. That the said Certificate with others, got wet in crossing Perkioming Creek, and was burnt in the attempt of drying it, at the house of Jacob Meisinger at Philadelphia. No proof of this, nor of its existence. No ground for relief.

No. 16.
The petition of John Hays, Virginia, referred December 15th. 1791, sets forth:
That he received from the Commissioner of Accounts in Virginia, two Certificates; the one for 1000 dollars, and the other for 1910. 21/90 dollars, as part of his commutation.
That on the first Tuesday in March 1791, his house was burned, and among other valuable papers, the said Certificates.
The proof is the oath of the party, corroborated by the oaths of three different persons.
The existence of the Certificates is proved by an Official voucher.
The proof is as full as can be expected in similar cases, and relief is proper, if it is deemed advisable, on the general principle, to grant relief immediately in any such case.

No. 17.
The petition of Daniel Robbins junior, Massachusetts, referred November 3d. 1791, sets forth.
That he was possessed of a final settlement Certificate in the name of Jacob Hart, dated January 1st. 1781, for 80 dollars. That on the 4th. of June 1788, his house was consumed by fire, and the said Certificate burnt in it.
The facts alleged are proved by the oath of the party, and corroborated by a Certificate of George Comings and Jonathan Whiting, selectmen of Winthrop; but the Certificate alleged to have been burnt is not sufficiently identified. And its existence is not proved by any official document. There is, therefore, not sufficient ground for relief.

No. 18.
The petition of John Polhemus, New Jersey, referred 31st. January 1792, sets forth.

That on the 24th. of July 1786, he received a final settlement certificate, issued in his name by John Pierce, No. 94.167, for 284 20/90ths dollars, on interest from the 1st. September 1777.
That some time after, he trusted the said Certificate in the hands of Captain Daniel Baldwin, to draw the interest on the same, at the proper office in New York. That interest was paid up to the 31st. December 1784. That some time in February 1787, the said certifiicate was accidentally destroyed by fire, while in possession of said Daniel Baldwin. Proof is made by the oath of Daniel Baldwin, that it was burnt, but how, or where, is not stated.
The existence of the Certificate appears from Pierce’s register, in the Auditor’s office; and on the register it is noted by Guilian Mc.Evers, formerly a Clerk in the Office, that it has been presented since by George Service.
There appears, therefore, to have been a misrepresentation, and no ground for relief.

No. 19.
The petition of Thomas Donnellan, Baltimore, referred February 3d. 1792, sets forth.
That a Certificate was issued to him by the late Quarter Master General, for 308 dollars.
That the said Certificate was accidentally burnt with the dwelling house of the petitioner, and all his effects in the month of December 1788.
There is no proof of the fact, nor any of the existence of the Certificate. Therefore no ground for relief, independent of any objection to the kind of Certificate.

No. 20.
The petition of Stephen Remington, of Providence, referred February 20th. 1792, sets forth.
That in the month of November 1786, he was possessed of a final settlement certificate, issued by John Pierce in the name of Philip Slew, No. 27.340, dated March 1st. 1784 for 80 dollars.
That the said Certificate in the said month of November, was taken out of his desk, by one John Whitby, while in liquor, by whom it was thrown into the fire, with sundry other papers, and consumed.
The proof adduced is the oath of the party, corroborated by that of Rufus Humphrey.
The existence of the certificate appears by record in the Auditor’s Office, where it stands dated 20th. January 1784.
The proof is as fully as could be expected from the nature of the case. Relief, therefore, on the usual conditions, would be proper, if, on the general principle, it is deemed, at present, advisable in any such case.

No. 21.
The memorial of Samuel Skillman, New Jersey, referred 22d February 1792, sets forth.
That he received a Certificate for services signed by Benjamin Thompson, Commissioner New Jersey, No. 1787, dated 23d. December, 1784, for 588 dollars.
That in the month of August 1785, his house was burnt with all his property, and the Certificate.
The proof adduced is the oath of the party, corroborated by a certificate of sundry persons.
The existence of the Certificate is proved by the Commissioner and Treasurer of the State, and by record in the Auditor’s Office.
The proof is as satisfactory, as can be well expected in a similar case; and relief will be proper, on the usual conditions, if, on the general principle, it is deemed advisable at present in any such case.

No. 22
The petition of John Hayden, Pennsylvania, referred 23d. February 1792, sets forth.
That some time in the year 1784, or 1785, he purchased a certificate issued by Jonathan Burrall, to George Emmell, No. 55, for 267 dollars.

That the said Certificate was destroyed by accident, on the 26th. day of August 1785.
The proof consists of a certificate of George Emmell, testifying the sale of the certificate in question to the petitioner, and of a deposition of William Nixon, stating that the deponent and petitioner were working in a field; that the petitioner had laid off his jacket; that some cattle being in the field, one of them got hold of the jacket, and eat the pocket, in which was a pocket book containing the said certificate, as was, at the time of the accident, asserted by the petitioner. That, on examination, they found a small piece of the pocket book, the other part being destroyed.
The existence of the Certificate appears from official records.
Further light in this case, from the final calling in of outstanding Certificates, appears to be necessary towards granting relief with safety.

No. 23.
The petition of Job Kittredge, Ebenezer Whittemore and Martha Whittemore, heirs of William Kittredge deceased, referred February 27th. 1792, sets forth:
That the said William Kittredge was, in his life time, possessed of a final settlement certificate, issued to John Paris, dated March 1st. 1784, No. 33.162 for 80 dollars. That the said Job Kittredge was owner of another final settlement certificate, issued to Palfrey Down, bearing the same date, No. 32.627 for 90 dollars, and another final settlement certificate, issued to Benjamin Baldwin, dated May 1st. 1784, No. 58.892, for 26 dollars, and an indent, issued by Nathaniel Appleton, for 20 dollars.
That all these Certificates were burnt on the 25th. of April 1788, with the dwelling house of the deceased.
No proof is produced of the facts alleged.
The existence of the Certificates, except the indent, appears by official records. But it appears, that the first mentioned Certificate No. 33.162, was taken up by the late Board of Treasury, and a Register’s certificate given for it. Therefore, there appears to be misrepresentation, and no ground for relief.

No. 24.
The petition of William Robinson, Connecticut, referred January 11th. 1792, sets forth.
That he obtained from Captain Simeon Spalding, on certain conditions, as stated in the receipt therewith produced, bearing date, 18th. September 1783, a final settlement certificate, issued by John Pierce, to said Simeon Spalding, for 760 dollars, interest from the 22nd. March 1783.
That the petitioner delivered the said Certificate into the hands of Captain John Cady, who was going to New York, for the purpose of buying goods, with said Certificate for the petitioner.
That he purchased, however, no goods, returned by water, and accidentally fell overboard, and was never afterwards found; and that his pocket book, with all his papers, and the note aforesaid, were lost with him.
The facts alleged are circumstantially proved by the Oaths of the petitioner, of Robert Lightfood, and Joanna Cady.
The existence of the Certificate appears by official records.
There are various possibilities in this case, which would render it particularly unsafe to renew the Certificate, without farther light from the final calling in of outstanding Certificates.

No. 25.
The petition of Henry Bass, Boston, referred July 26th: 1790, sets forth.
That he was owner and possessor of a Continental Loan Office Certificate, issued by Derick Ten Broek, Commissioner for the State of New York, dated March 13th. 1778, for 600 dollars, number not ascertained.
That in the year 1781, he delivered the said Certificate to John Waite, for the purpose of receiving at New York, the interest due thereon.
That the said John Wait lost the said Certificate with a pillow case, in which it was kept, with some other papers at Tarrytown.
The proof adduced is the affidavit of John Wait.
The Certificate not being sufficiently identified, by the description, its existence cannot be ascertained.
It appears from the register of the Commissioner in the Auditor’s office, that no such Certificate was ever issued to Henry Bass, himself.
In this uncertainty, there is no ground for relief. It can never be determined, (taking the loss alledged for granted) that the Certificate may not have been found, and either taken up and cancelled, or exist a claim against the United States.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joseph Whipple, 18 April 1792
From: Whipple, Joseph
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Portsmouth [New Hampshire] April 18, 1792. “I have to inform you of a Seizure that has taken place in this district of a Small quantity of Coffee, unladed contrary to Law from the Sch Adventure Edward Tredick Master from St Martins. The discovery was made by the officers of the Scammel then laying in the harbour about one Mile within the light house—who observed a boat go alongside of the Adventure when a Mile without the harbour. The boat was followd on her return by the Master of the Cutter who took possession of three Small boxes or parcells of Coffee which had been landd from her. The Coffee on inquiry appears to have belonged to one of the Seaman.…”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Thomas Jefferson, [19 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Jefferson, Thomas

[Philadelphia, April 19, 1792]

Mr. Hamilton requests Mr. Jefferson to inform him whether he has received from Mr. Hamilton’s Office copies of the correspondence between Mr. Ternant & him concerning the advance of the 400.000 Dollars. These copies were prepared sometime since & it is not ascertained whether they have been mislaid or forwarded to Mr. Jefferson. A line in answer will oblige.
April 19


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Thomas Jefferson, 19 April 1792
From: Jefferson, Thomas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
Philadelphia Apr. 19. 1792.

In consequence of letters received from mr William Short on the subject of his property invested in the public funds, I am to desire that no transfer may be permitted of any stock standing in his own name, or in the name of any other for his use.
I have the honor to be with perfect esteem & respect   Sir   Your most obedient & most humble sert.
Th: Jefferson
The Secretary of the treasury.


Title: Report on the Petition of Eliphalet Ladd, [19 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 19, 1792Communicated on April 20, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury to whom was referred the Memorial of Eliphalet Ladd, respectfully makes the following Report thereupon.
It has been made a question, whether under the laws of the United States, as they now stand, duties are payable on goods imported in vessels which have suffered shipwreck in the act of transportation. A suit, in which this question is involved, is depending in one of the Courts of the United States.
But the terms of the law have rendered it the duty of the Officers of the customs to advance the claim, which has been done on all the occasions that have hitherto occurred.
The casualty of shipwreck is so affecting a calamity, and is usually attended with such considerable loss to the concerned, that the exacting from the sufferers, the public dues on the articles which escape, is apt to be regarded as partaking of severity and oppression.
The provision for the case of damaged goods is not always a sufficient remedy. It may happen that the goods saved are not damaged, though a large proportion may have been entirely lost.
It would seem, upon the whole, expedient, either entirely to remit the duties in every case of shipwreck, or to vest somewhere a power, either to remit, or abate, according to the circumstances of each case.
The last would best consist with a due apportionment of the degree of relief, to the degree of suffering. From the rareness of the casualty, the loss to the revenue, from either arrangement, could not be very material.

The case stated in the petition appears to be a strong one for relief.
All which is humbly Submitted,
Alexander Hamilton.Secry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department April 19th 1792.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 19 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Treasury Department April 19th. 1792.

The Secretary of the Treasury has the honor to transmit to the President a copy of his letter of the 8th. of March to the Minister plenipotentiary of France, on the subject of an advance of money, and another of the Minister’s answer; in order that the President may be pleased to cause the necessary instructions to be sent through the proper Department to the Minister plenipotentiary of the United States, at the Court of France.


Title: Report on the Petition of Robert Neill, [21 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia April 21, 1792Communicated on April 21, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury to whom was referred the petition of Robert Niel, respectfully makes the following report thereupon.
It is stated by the petitioner, that pursuant to an order which he received from Clement Biddle, Deputy Quarter Master General, in the month of April 1777, a capture was made of a number of horses and cattle, for the use of the armies of the United States. That fifteen of the horses and ten of the cattle were actually carried to Head Quarters, and placed in the yard of the deputy Quarter General.
That the said petitioner, agreeably to the instructions he received from General Stevens, and to the usage of the army, caused the horses and cattle to be appraised, and the amount thereof to be paid to the officers of the party who captured them.
That he exhibited an account to the proper officers of the Treasury, for the sum of six hundred pounds, or thereabouts, paid to the officer aforesaid, accompanied with vouchers, as set forth in the said petition, and that the account was rejected by the Auditor and Comptroller of the Treasury.

The petitioner, conceiving himself aggrieved by the said determination, of the Officers of the Treasury, therefore, prays that relief may be afforded him by the Legislature.
The following reasons, which guided the late Comptroller of the Treasury, in the decision of this case, have been stated to the Secretary, to wit: In the settlement of the accounts of the said Robert Niel as Assistant Quarter Master, he has obtained credit for sundry disbursements, including his pay from the 15th day of February to the 15th day of August 1777, in the sum of 7935. ⁶⁸⁄₁₀₀ths dollars, and stands charged for cash received by him at sundry times, to the amount of 7885. ¹⁵/₁₀₀ dollars, leaving a balance due to the said Robert Niel, of 50. ⁵³⁄₁₀₀ dollars, with interest, at 6 ⅌ cent per annum, from the 15th day of June 1777. Among other credits claimed by him, is that which is the subject of his petition. The circumstances connected with this claim are as follow.
The claim itself is for 15 horses, and ten head of cattle, taken from the enemies lines in April 1777, and delivered to the order of Colonel Biddle, Deputy Quarter Master General, for the use of the army, at the appraised price of 1500 dollars, which sum is represented to have been paid to the captors by order of General Stevens. The evidence produced in support of this claim being judged inconclusive and unsatisfactory, it was not admitted. The reasons, which particularly operated against the admission, were, that no receipt has been produced by Mr. Niel, from the Deputy Quarter Master General’s department, for the delivery of the cattle, nor has any appraisement appeared of their value. Receipts have been produced for the payment of 2075. ¹⁷/₁₀₀ dollars, to several officers, for the dividend of the troops who were captors, which receipts specify, that the monies arose from the sales of property taken, as above stated. But there is no regular account of the property taken, nor has Mr. Niel shewn how far the monies paid by him were received from the sales made by himself. The proof adduced to shew the delivery of the cattle and horses, to Colonel Biddle, consists of affidavits recently taken.
By a paper found among the vouchers to Colonel Biddle’s accounts, it appears, that on the 5th of April 1777, nine horses were appraised, by his direction, and that the appraisement amounted to £245: subjoined to the statement thereof, is an order, signed C. Biddle, D. Q. M. G. for payment of the amount to Captain William Briton, one of the captors. A circumstance, which strongly indicates, that those horses were taken on the same expedition, to which this charge is referred by Mr. Niel. It does not appear that any cattle were paid for by Colonel Biddle, but, as he was not in the Commissary’s department, it was not in the line of his duty to pay for them.
It is observable, that the entry, made in Mr. Niel’s books, of this transaction, appears, from the color of the ink, and difference of characters, to have been written lately. It is out of its proper place, immediately preceding an entry of the 19th of March, whereas the transaction itself did not take place, till about the 10th of April.
From a conference between the Comptroller and Colonel Biddle, on the subject of this claim, the following information results.
That it was the general practice, whenever any captured cattle or horses were brought to the Quarter Master or Commissary, for the use of the army, to give a receipt for them to the party delivering the same, and to have a certified appraisement made of them immediately, and also to pay the amount of such appraisement to the captors, if they had money, or to give some certificate, that such amount was due, if they had none. That in the spring 1777, the time of this capture, there was plenty of money in the hands of the proper officers for the purpose; and that if Mr. Niel had presented his account, he would, upon application, most assuredly have obtained payment.
That, upon the whole, it appeared highly improbable, that an individual should have paid 1500 dollars, equal to specie, on account of the United States, without a previous receipt of the amount from the proper officers, or without subsequent application for reimbursement, when the means of obtaining the former, or of successfully urging the latter, were so clearly within his power. And although it had been represented, that Mr. Niel conducted himself, as Assistant Quarter, with much zeal and activity; although the inexperience of the period, in which the transaction happened, might palliate for some deviation from forms, yet, considering that Mr. Niel, in support of his claim, had produced no invoice of the property captured, no receipt for the delivery, either from the Quarter Master, or Commissary department, no instrument of Appraisement —When it was considered, that the advance was greater than an individual would probably make without a voucher, and without immediate application for reimbusement (which, in the opinion of Colonel Biddle, would have been obtained, if it had been applied for) When, along with these circumstances, the suspicious appearance of the entry had been taken into consideration by the late Comptroller, he had been induced to decide against the claim.
Under this representation of the case, the Secretary is of opinion, that the reasons for not admitting the claim of the petitioner, were good and sufficient, and that no special interposition of the Legislature in his favor is advisable.
All which is humbly submitted,
Alexander HamiltonSecry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department April 21st 1792.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Duer, 22 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Duer, William

My Dear Duer
[Philadelphia] April 22, 1792

I hoped ere this to have seen you, to have afforded you whatever of aid could have resulted from my advice after knowing your real situation. But the session protracts itself & I can scarcely say when it will finish. Lest the information contained in my last should induce you to postpone any arrangement with your Creditors, in the hope of speedily having an opportunity of consulting me I have thought it best to apprise you of the degree of delay which may attend my proposed visit to New York. Indeed I can hardly flatter myself that my advice could be of any real importance to you.
How are you? How are your family? At a moment of composure I shall be glad to hear from you.

Eliza joins me in affectionate remembrances to Lady Kitty. Farewell
A Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Short, 22 April 1792
From: Short, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
Paris April 22. 1792.

Since my last of the 24th. ulto. the decree which I then announced to you as being soon to take place, with respect to the supplies for S. Domingo, has been passed. Instead of adopting the proposition of the former minister of Marine, M. de Bertrand, they confined themselves to vote six millions of livres to be applied as relief for S: Domingo, by the Minister of that department. He has determined that a certain sum should be employed in purchases in the U.S. & has therefore applied to me to know if I could take on me to stipulate for our government that they would furnish the money in America on account of our debt to France.
After this decree had been so long delayed I had hoped it would not be passed before the arrival of Mr. Morris, & particularly as I had learned that the Senate had confirmed the nomination of the President, & of course expected him here daily, having written to him how much I was averse to acting in a place after having learned that it was the will of Government that it should be confided to another.
The ministry having made this application to me however, & the business not admitting of delay, I considered it my duty to act in it, on account of the advantage it presents to the U.S. of converting a part of this debt into a fund to be employed in the purchases of their own productions. I could have no doubt of the expediency of the measure as the last loan had been detained in the hands of the bankers of the U.S. in the expectation of its being employed in this way, & as this was conformable to the desire of Mr. Morris, who is now to act in the business & of course if here would take the measures which I have done in compliance with the wishes of the ministry.
It was an inconvenience in fixing the sum to be furnished by the U.S. in livres, as I wished to avoid regulating the rate of exchange. Accordingly in my answer to the minister I engaged that a certain sum, which has been since fixed at 800,000 dollars should be held by you at the disposition of France for the purchase of supplies in America for S. Domingo—the exchange to be regulated hereafter between the two countries. In consequence thereof I have since had a meeting with two of the ministry where it was agreed that I should deliver a credit on you for that sum to the commissaries of the treasury, & that they should pass it to the credit of the U.S. With them there was difficulty on account of the sum being expressed in dollars, as it could not enter in that form into their comptability. These circumstances have occasioned the delay of some days as every thing of the kind has to be sent backward & forward through a variety of hands. In expectation of Mr. Morris’s coming on here daily I had hoped from this delay that he might arrive here before the mode of carrying; the measure into execution was finally adopted. I have just recieved a letter from him however informing me that although he has recieved his credentials, he is delayed by some business but shall leave London soon; & also one from the Minister of the Marine desiring me to meet him tomorrow to give the finishing hand to this business, as not admitting of further delay.
It is for that reason Sir, that I send off this letter by the post of to-morrow morning, to give you notice that the credit abovementioned will be furnished on you, to answer which the value will be kept in the hands of the bankers at Amsterdam out of the late loan at present existing. You may therefore in all safety begin your draughts for that sum, 2100 bonds having been already delivered. I have not mentioned to this government or to any body that you would have to draw on Amsterdam, lest it might affect the exchange in the course of your operation, nor do the bankers know in what manner the sum in their hands is to be applied. Should this business be finally settled, as I don’t doubt, to-morrow, I will inform you of it by the succeeding English post, & also by the way of Havre. In the mean time I have the honor to be Sir, most respectfully your obedt. servant
W: Short
The Honble.Alexander Hamilton Secretary of the Treasury. Philadelphia


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Charles Williamson, [22 April 1792]
From: Williamson, Charles
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
[Baltimore, April 22, 1792]

I beg pardon for the trouble I am giving but I trust when you consider the object you will excuse me. In the Course of many applications I have lately had for Lands in the Genesee I have before me a Letter from a friend of mine who is to embark in the first ship for Britain to bring out a considerable number of Highlanders from Scotland probably 3. or 4 ship load. Mr Steuart informs me that he has met with a Capt Steuart of the Nancy bound for Ireland—who is engaged to bring out 200 people from the North of Ireland to settle in this Country that they are all able to pay their own passage and mostly all of them worth money besides. Capt. Steuart has desired me to send him my terms for settlements in the Genesee which I have done. As these people come from a part of Ireland where 9/10ths of the country live by the manufactoring of fine Linnen, & come voluntarily without expence to the publick—I think it well worth the attention of Legislature of this Country if it should not be so of individuals to adopt some measures that would at once introduce the manufactory of fine Linnen and Cambrick into a Country certainly better calculated for it than any part of America on this side of the Ohio—as in the Genesee the same as in Ireland every farmer may grow and manufacture his own Flax.
It appears to me that only few points are necessary to accomplish this end vizt. to keep the Irish in one body, to give them Lands capable of growing flax in perfection, and to induce them to occupy as small farms as possible. To give them Lands capable of bearing flax in perfection is in my power—and In the terms I Offer, I have given every inducement to make it their interest to take small Lotts. As I have written more fully to Mr. Morris on the subject I shall tresspass no more on your time. To him as to further particulars I beg leave to refer you—but it appears evident to me that if the object is desirable no opportunity ever occured by which it could be so easily attained.
If manufactories are bribed to come into a Country in all probabillity you get the most dissolute—but those who emigrate voluntarily and pay their own expence must have been industrious to be able to do it.
I have the Honor to be with great Esteem   Sir   Your very humble Sert
C. Williamson
Baltimore 22d April 1792


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James Reynolds, 23 April 1792
From: Reynolds, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
Philadelphia 23d. April. 1792.

I am sorry I am in this disagreeable sutivation which Obliges me to trouble you So offen as I do. but I hope it wont be long before it will be In my power to discharge what I am indebted to you Nothing will give me greater pleasure I must Sir ask the loan of thirty dollars more from you, which I shall asteem as a particular favour. and you may Rest ashured that I will pay you with Strickest Justice. for the Reliefe you have aforded me, the Inclosed is the Receipt for the thirty dollars. I shall wate at your Office. Sir for an answer I am sir your very Humble Servant
James Reynolds
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, [23 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

[Philadelphia, April 23, 1792]

The Secretary of the Treasury has the honor to present his respects to the President of the United States, and to submit to him the inclosed communications respecting an instance of misconduct in the Collector of Newbury Port.
23d April 1792.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 24 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Treasury Department, April 24, 1792. “The Secretary of the Treasury has the honor respectfully to submit to the President of the United States, a Contract lately made between the Superintendant of the Delaware Lighthouse, and Joseph Anthony & Son of Philadelphia, for a quantity of Oil.…”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Ellery, 25 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Ellery, William

[Philadelphia, April 25, 1792. On May 7, 1792, Ellery wrote to Hamilton: “I have received your letter of the 25th of the last month.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tobias Lear, 25 April 1792
From: Lear, Tobias
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, April 25, 1792. “By the President’s command T. Lear has the honor to transmit to the Secretary of the Treasury, a Contract lately made between the Superintendent of the Delaware Light-house, and Joseph Anthony & son of Philadelphia for a quantity of Oil, which has received the President’s Approbation.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Jeremiah Olney, 25 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Olney, Jeremiah

Sir
Treasury Department25th April 1792

On application to the Supervisor of the Revenue for Rhode Island he will furnish your Office on a temporary loan with the Sum of two thousand eight hundred & seven Dollars for the purpose of discharging the drawbacks &c as ⅌ the statement transmitted to me. You will receipt for this money as to be returned by you & pay it accordingly out of the Duties of import & tonnage.
It will be necessary hereafter that you regularly note in your weekly return the drawbacks & allowances which will become due on the exportation of Goods from your District for the Month which will follow the rate of each Weekly Return in order that due provision for the payment of the same may be constantly made. This is meant as a temporary measure as I shall communicate to you a particular arrangement, as soon as I have leisure to devise it. It may be well to observe to the Merchants who are entitled to these Drawbacks that the delay has occured only by reason of the extraordinary amount of them.
I am Sir   Your most obedient Servant
Alex Hamilton
Jeremiah Olney Esqr.Collector at Providence


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Seton, 25 April 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Seton, William

[Philadelphia, April 25, 1792. On April 29, 1792, Seton wrote to Hamilton: “I received your official Letter of the 25th.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Short, 25 April 1792
From: Short, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
Paris April 25. 1792

I had the honor of writing to you on the 22d. & then informed you that I was the next day to have a meeting with the Minister of the Marine by his desire in order to terminate the mode of carrying into execution the measure agreed on of furnishing 800,000 dollars in America for the purchase of supplies for S. Domingo. I considered the business as so far fixed that I thought it proper to give you that previous notice that you might commence your draughts on Amsterdam in order to have the sum at your disposition in America. At our meeting the next day, after my letter had been sent off by the post, it was suggested to the minister by one of his assistants that having already recieved advice that bills would arrive from S. Domingo to the amount of twelve millions of livres, it would be proper to submit the matter to the assembly to know whether their intention still was that the six millions voted should be exclusive of the twelve millions which the colony had drawn for. The minister considered this as indispensable for prudence sake, but told me he was absolutely sure that the decree for the six millions would remain untouched. In this situation of the business therefore I send this letter after my last in hopes of its overtaking it in London, merely to make you acquainted with the circumstance, that your draughts for the 800,000 dollars may be suspended until the present delay shall be removed of which you will be immediately informed.
I thought it right that no appearance of delay on the part of the U.S. should be shewn in this business, & have recieved the thanks of the minister for our readiness to comply with the wishes of France for the relief of so important a colony. But as there still remained some difficulty between the department of marine & the commissaries of the treasury, arising probably from a kind of rivality or misunderstanding & as the application to the assembly would necessarily take up some days during which I had every reason to believe that Mr. Morris would arrive here, I observed to the minister that it wd. be more agreeable to me under those circumstances that the matter should be finally settled by him. The affair stands thus suspended for a few days only.
I know that Mr. Morris has a full idea of the advantage resulting to the U.S. from this mode of paying a part of their debt, as he had been active in it before he was thus publicly employed; & of course that he will approve the measure. But as it is possible he may have some other plan for carrying it into execution, I cannot be sorry under present circumstances, that a delay not proceeding from the U.S. should leave the subject open for him. His experience in matters of commerce may perhaps enable him to discover some other mode of remitting this money as more conducive to the public interest.
Your letters of Feb. 14. & March 5. were recieved yesterday forwarded to me from Amsterdam. The last which I have recieved before them was of Nov. 1. 91.
I have the honor to be with the most perfect respect   Sir   your most obedient & most humble servant
W Short

P.S.   It is proper to inform you that neither the Spanish debt nor that to the Farmers general have been yet touched, & that therefore the intended reclamation mentioned in your letter of March. 5. stands on whole ground. You will see by the state of the debt furnished me by the commissaries of the treasury & forwarded to you in a former letter that the government have taken on their acct. the debt to the farmers-general.
The HonbleAlexander Hamilton Secretary of the Treasury Philadelphia


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Nathan Keais, 26 April 1792
From: Keais, Nathan
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Port Washington [North Carolina] April 26, 1792. Acknowledges “the Receipt of your Letter of the 2nd Instant Covering A Commission from the President of the United States to me as Inspector of the Revenue for this port Likewise yours of the 4th which is now before me.” Writes “Respective the Stakage of the Shoals in this State.”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 26 April 1792
From: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir,
T.DC. Off April 26. 1792

The inclosed documents were lodged in this office by the assignees therein named for the purpose of obtaining transfers of all the Stock in the books of the Treasury to the Credit of John M. Taylor & Andrew Summers.
The business has been hitherto suspended for the purpose of ascertaining whether any of the provisions in the Bankrupt Law of Pensylvania, would render it unsafe or inexpedient to permit the transfers desired.
No caveat against the transfers of the Stock has been lodged in this Office, & no act of Bankruptcy has to my knowledge been committed by either Messrs. Taylor or Summers, unless the assignment of their property for the benifit of their Creditors, herewith transmitted should be deemed an act of that nature.
At the special request of the assignees I now transmit the instruments of Assignment, for the purpose of obtaining the opinion of the Attorney General of the United States, on the question, whether a general Assignment of the effects of a trader, for the benefit of his Creditors, ought to be considered as an Act of Bankruptcy—and also whether the Offices of the Treasury are bound to suspend the allowance of transfers, by a reputed bankrupt, unless notice of some clear act of bankruptcy shall have been formally communicated by a Creditor.
I have the honor to be with the greatest respect   &c
Alex Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Allibone, 27 April 1792
From: Allibone, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia] April 27, 1792. Encloses “a Coppy of an Invoice of Oil, which has been delivered this day by Joseph Anthony & Son, agreeably to Contract.”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tobias Lear, 27 April 1792
From: Lear, Tobias
To: Hamilton, Alexander

United States, April 27th 1792.

By the President’s command T. Lear has the honor to transmit to the Secretary of the Treasury a letter from the Supervisor of the District of South Carolina requesting leave of absence from his office for about three months.
The President refers this request to the Secretary of the Treasury whose knowledge of the duties to be performed by the Supervisor will enable him to say whether it can be granted consistent with the good of the public service. If it can, the President observes, that he can have no objection to indulging the Supervisor.
Tobias Lear.S.P.U.S.


Title: Report on the Petition of Joseph Henderson, [27 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 27, 1792Communicated on April 30, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury, to whom was referred the petition of Joseph Henderson, respectfully submits the following Report thereupon.
The Marine Committee of Congress, by a letter to the Navy Board for the eastern department, dated the 19th day of June 1778, authorised that Board to appoint some proper person to the office of Naval Paymaster, observing that Congress had not yet fixed a salary for the Officer contemplated; but that, when it was done, they presumed it would be adequate to the importance of the office.
In consequence of this direction, the Navy Board, on the 5th of August following, appointed the petitioner to act in the above mentioned capacity, in which he appears to have acted, till some time in the year 1782, but when, is not clearly ascertained.
By an account settled between the Board and the petitioner, dated the 1st of August 1782, it appears that he was allowed by the Board, four hundred and three pounds ten shillings, for “his services posting books, from May 1779 to May 1782,” which James Warren, one of the Board, avers to have had reference merely to his services as an assistant, or Clerk to the Board, and not to his services as paymaster.
It does not appear, that Congress ever assigned any salary or allowance to the office or appointment in question, or that the petitioner ever received any other compensation than as abovementioned.
From this state of facts, it results, that the petitioner has a claim to a farther compensation, unless there be some other circumstance of sufficient force to controul it.
As well from the nature of the office, as from express instructions, it was the duty of the petitioner, to keep regular and fair books of accounts with all persons belonging to the vessels of war within the department.
But it is represented to the Secretary, that the accounts of the petitioner were not kept agreeably to his instructions, whereby settlements with individuals have been delayed and embarrassed.
How far this circumstance ought, upon the whole, to bar the claim of the petitioner, is respectfully submitted. To the Secretary, it would rather appear to be the most proper course of public proceeding, to allow a moderate yearly compensation. The quantum may reasonably be regulated with an eye to the collateral compensation, which was enjoyed by the petitioner, and to the appearances of defective execution.
No impediment arises on the score of the Acts of limitation.
All which is humbly submitted
Alexander Hamilton,Secry of the Treasy.
Treasury Department April 27th 1792.


Title: Report on the Petitions of Richard Blackledge, [28 April 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 28, 1792Communicated on April 30, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury, to whom were referred by the House of Representatives, two petitions of Richard Blackledge, one bearing date the 20th of December 1790, the other bearing date the 19th: of January 1791, respectfully submits the following report thereupon.
The first of the said petitions seeks compensation for some Coffee and Sugar, which appear to have been supplied by the petitioner, to officers and soldiers of the North Carolina line and militia, in captivity, during the late war. By the petitioner’s own shewing, the supply was originally intended to be on the credit of the State of North Carolina, induced by a particular measure of that State, without any agency whatever of the United States, to authorize or invite it. However meritorious, therefore, the claim of the petitioner, it can only be properly addressed to the before mentioned State. An admission of it, as a charge against the United States, in favor of the individual, would be contrary to the course of the transaction, and could not be done, without an interference with the Acts of limitation.
The second of the said petitions seeks compensation for a quantity of leather, sold to the late Governor Caswell of North Carolina, in February, April and May 1778, and for fifty sides of leather sold and delivered to Edward Hall, a Quarter Master, in July 1781.
It appears by a resolution of Congress of the 25th. of November 1777, that Governor Caswell, by the description of “Governor Caswell,” was requested and empowered to purchase leather for the use of the United States, for the payment of which, he was authorised to draw on the Treasury, and was desired to transmit accounts of his proceedings, to the Board of War, and Clothier General.
A question is made, whether Governor Caswell was, by that resolution, constituted an agent to Congress, in his private or public capacity. If there be any ambiguity on this point, in the wording of the resolution, the contemporary transactions explain, at least, the intention.
It appears by the Treasury books, that warrants have been drawn, to a considerable amount, for satisfying the drafts of the late Governor Caswell (some of them having express relation to his agency,) all which have been charged to the State of North Carolina.
It further appears, from the books of the then Clothier General, (extracts from which, marked A, are herewith sent) that considerable quantities of leather, and some shoes, amounting in nominal value to £7.720.15. were delivered at Lancaster in Pennsylvania, in April, June, August and November 1778, and were credited in these books, to the State of North Carolina.
These circumstances explain the light, in which the agency in question was considered at that time.
The particular transaction, on which the claim of the petitioner is grounded, is an evidence, that he himself considered Governor Caswell, as contracting in his official character, and even that the credit given was to the State of North Carolina. The document, that establishes the purchase, is an account acknowledged by Governor Caswell, which is headed thus “Richard Caswell for the public of North Carolina to the Executors of Richard Blackledge Dr.” It may be inferred from this, that the course of the business was understood to be that Governor Caswell purchased, as on account of the State of North Carolina, and that an adjustment was to be made between the United States and that State.
There is a presumption (though it does not appear from the entries) that the leather supplied by the petitioner was a part of that, for which credit is given on the books of the Clothier General.
After a careful examination, it has not been found that Governor Caswell ever rendered an account of his transactions, according to the requisition of the resolution, under which he acted.
With respect to the charge for leather delivered to Edward Hall, there is no other trace of it, than in the documents which accompany the memorial.
The whole claim, as on behalf of the petitioner against the United States, if there were no other objection to it, would be barred by the Acts of limitation.
In this state of things, the only practicable mode of doing justice to the petitioner, without contravening the course of the transaction, and the Acts of limitation, is for the State of North Carolina to adjust and satisfy the demand, as far as regards the leather sold to Governor Caswell, on the consideration of a reciprocal credit in the accounts of that State with the United States.
There are appearances to induce a supposition, that an uncertainty as to such a credit has been heretofore an obstacle to the settlement by the State.
On this point the Secretary can only observe, that there is, in his opinion, no cause to doubt that the State of North Carolina can obtain a credit, in conformity to the entries in the books of the late Clothier General, in the settlement of the accounts of that State with the United States.
With regard to the part of the claim, which relates to the leather delivered to Edward Hall, an admission of it could not, in the opinion of the Secretary, be allowed, but upon a principle, which would entirely unsettle the Acts of limitation.
All which is humbly submitted,
Alexander HamiltonSecry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department April 28th: 1792.


Title: Report on the Petition of Alexander Contee Hanson, [28 April 1792]
From:
To:

[Philadelphia, April 28, 1792Communicated on April 30, 1792]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury, on the petition of Alexander Contee Hanson, referred to him by the House of Representatives on the 25th of January 1791, respectfully makes the following Report.
It appears that Congress, by their Act of the 14th of September 1786, appointed nine Judges (of whom the petitioner was one) to constitute a Court for hearing and determining a controversy of boundaries between the States of South Carolina and Georgia.
That this Court was directed to be holden at the City of New York, on the third Monday of June 1787.
That the Commissioner, in consequence of his appointment, attended at New York, at the time prescribed, without previous knowledge of a compromise, which had taken place between the parties, which prevented the necessity of a judicial decision.
That the petitioner was sixteen days absent from home upon his journey, having remained some days in Philadelphia (as he alleges) partly for the purpose of endeavoring to procure compensation, and partly on account of indisposition.
That no compensation has been made to him for trouble or loss of time.
It further appears, that no compensation was established by Congress, for the service, and that in no similar case, has any been made by the United States.

It is understood, that compensations have in other cases of similar controversy, been made by the States concerned.
Upon this state of facts, the following observations occur.
Here was a service performed by the petitioner, on the requisition and appointment of the government of the United States.
It seems, therefore, just and regular, that a compensation should be made by the same authority, unless some different mode was originally provided, as resulted from the course of the business.
No different mode was originally provided, and the compromise of the dispute prevented any award or adjustment of costs, by the Court.
It was and still is reasonable that the States concerned should have made the requisite compensation between them; but it appears a well founded expectation, that the United States should either see this done, or should themselves make the compensation.
It is therefore submitted as in the opinion of the Secretary proper, that the Legislature should make provision for the one or the other; defining, at the same time, the quantum of the compensation.
All which is respectfully submitted
Alexander HamiltonSecry. of the Treasy.
Treasury Department April 28th 1792.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joshua Mersereau, 29 April 1792
From: Mersereau, Joshua
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Elizabeth, New Jersey, April 29, 1792]
The Honble. Alexr. Hambleton
Sir

I take the liberty of asking, What Success Colo. Harper has Met with in respect to his appointment. You will please to Excuse the Liberty I have taken as I am antious to hear of his appointment—as I am Confident it will tend greatly to the happyness of our part of the Country—as the Indians put full Confidence, in the Col. and Wish much for his appointment saying he never Deceivd. them as others have, in their Translations. Please to Make my respectfull Comps. acceptable To your Lady and accept the same   from Your Obedt.   Hum: Servt.
Joshua Mersereau
Elizabeth TownApril 29 1792
NB:   I expect our Election is Very Tight. Mr. Jays being one of the Emancipation Committee opperates much against him. With our Old Copper heads.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Allibone, 30 April 1792
From: Allibone, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia] April 30, 1792. “Since delivering the estimates and observations for Building a Pier at mud Island. I have made careful Enquiry into the vallue of the articles estimated. The result whereof is that the Smiths ask from 6d to 6d½ for that kind of Iron work, And the Price of Building Stone of Inferiour quality is 5/4 at the whaves & that of Superiour is 6/10. the Delaware paving Stone is 10/6 the load. but would not answer so well for packing in a Pier in that exposed situation. Ships Ballast may be had considerably Lower but could not be depended on, as it might not be to be had when wanted, and could not be waited for. And there would be the addition of freight from hence.…”


Title: Conversation with George Hammond, [April 30–July 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, April 30–July 3, 1792]

It is somewhat remarkable that in my last conversation with Mr Hamilton on these points, he said that this government would, he doubted not, consent to grant to the subjects of the crown a free intercourse of commerce with the Indians dwelling within the American territory, provided that a similar intercourse with the Indians residing in the territory of Canada should be allowed to the citizens of the United States. Within three days after this conversation I received from Governor Simcoe a memorial of the merchants of Montreal, a copy of which I have the honor of inclosing and from which your Lordship will perceive that those Gentlemen imagine that the evils, resulting from the surrender of the posts, would be considerably alleviated by the permission, to the subjects of the two countries, of this reciprocity of commerce with the Indians residing within their respective dominions.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Archibald Mercer, 30 April 1792
From: Mercer, Archibald
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
Millstone [New Jersey] April 30 1792

I am requested to acknowledge rect. of your favour of 14th Inst. to the Governor and Directors of the Society for establishing useful Manufactories.
It is with pleasure I inform you that your observations in general conincide with the opinion of the board of Directors, and that they will esteem as a favour any communication you may be disposed to favour them with from time to time.
It is with regret I inform you the affairs of the Society are as much deranged as they well can be. At present we can only count upon 70,000 Dols in Deferred Stock transferred on the Books of Cochrans Office in the Name of the Society at 14/ in the pound, and this was not done until some time after the Loan, the propriety of which I leave you to Judge as the money was all wanted; the residue of the first payment except some necessary advances we consider in Jeopardy, tho measures have been taken to secure about Eleven Thousand pounds Stg committed to Mr Duhurst for the purpose of procureing plain cotton linens to begin the printing business. Should that Money, or the proceeds be safe, I have no doubt the business may soon be put in Train with more promising prospects, and at all events, if we have men of clear integrity to conduct the business in future the institution may yet flourish. A special meeting of the Board of Directors is called to meet at New Ark the 15th of May, as the Permanent seat of the Manufactory is then to be fixed on, and the principal officers of the institution appointed and their duties regulated. It is the wish of all the directors that you attend the meeting, as every thing depends upon a good beginning. For my part I confess myself perfectly ignorant of every duty relating to the Manufactoring business. As it is a favourite design of yours, you have no doubt considered the subject and as we all have a full confidence in you your presence will be absolutely necessary.
I have the Honour to be sir   Your obt Hume Servt
Archibald Mercer D. Govr.S U M
Alexander Hamilton Esq


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Mathews, 1 May 1792
From: Mathews, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[May 1, 1792. On July 10, 1792, Tench Coxe wrote to Mathews: “I have before me your Letter of the 1st: of May to the Secretary of the Treasury, and I feel great pleasure in observing that the little duty, which has accrued under the Act of March 1791 is likely to be collected without legal compulsion.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 1 May 1792
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

[Philadelphia, May 1, 1792. On May 2, 1792, Hamilton wrote to Washington: “The case was here before the Secretary’s letter of yesterday was sent to the President.” Letter not found.]


Title: Receipt from George Parkinson, [2 May 1792]
From: Hamilton, Alexander,Parkinson, George
To:

[Philadelphia, May 2, 1792]
Received May 2d. 1792 of Alexander Hamilton One hundred Dollars on account of The Society for establishing useful manufactures.
Geo: Parkinson