Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Gardner, [22 January 1794]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Gardner, William

[Philadelphia, January 22, 1794]
Sir,

I duly received your letter of the 9th inst. on the subject of your salary as Commissioner of Loans. I am fully sensible of the inadequateness of your compensation, and I assure you that it will not be for want of my exertion if something is not added in the course of the present session of Congress.
With great consideration,   I am, Sir   Your obedient servant,

A. Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Rawle, 22 January 1794
From: Rawle, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia, January 22, 1794. On January 25, 1794, Hamilton wrote to Rawle: “Your letter to me officially of the 22 is received.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Otho H. Williams, 22 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Williams, Otho H.

Treasury Department.January 22nd 1794
Sir

I have before me your letter of the 30th of November last containing a requisition from Captn Porter for certain repairs to be done to the Revenue Cutter Active.

The public service requiring that the vessel should be kept in repair, I request that you will have done what shall be found necessary. If the Judgment of the Captain cannot be confided in, you will call in the aid of a trusty and discreet ship carpenter.
Circumstances have suspended an attention to the situation of the master of the Cutter. This affair will now be taken up without further delay.
I am with great consideration   Sir   your obedt servant

A Hamilton
Otho H. Williams EsquireCollector Baltimore


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Ellery, 23 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Ellery, William

[Philadelphia, January 23, 1794. On February 10, 1794, Ellery wrote to Hamilton and referred to “Your letter … of the 23d. of Jany. last.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Henderson, 23 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Henderson, William

Philad Jany 23. 1794
Dear Sir

I thank you for the attention you are so obliging as to pay to the affair. It so happened that Mr Hammond & myself had no opportunity of conversing about it. But I have since written to him & I will thank you to confer with him & endeavour to settle between you what is practicable. Randolph assures me he can give real security in the City of Phila.
Yrs. with esteeem

AH
Wm. Henderson EsqN York


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Mordecai Sheftall, 23 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Sheftall, Mordecai

Treasury DepartmentJanuary 23rd 1794
Sir

I have received your letter of the 25th. of November last enclosing a certain deposition relative to your Petition which was referred to me by Congress.
I trust I shall be able to report on it very shortly when the case will receive full attention.
I am Sir   your obedient servant

A Hamilton
Mordecai Sheftall EsquireSavannah


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Otho H. Williams, Robert Purviance, and George Gale, 23 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Williams, Otho H.,Purviance, Robert,Gale, George

Treasury DepartmentJanuary 23rd 1794
Gentlemen

Certain charges (of which the Collector is in possession) have been brought by William Thompson, first mate of the Revenue Cutter Active against the commander.

To enable me to judge what ought to be done in the case, I have concluded to request that the Collector, Naval Officer, and the Supervisor of the Revenue will form a Board, for the purpose of examining into the facts, and report to me the result.
If the Collector’s state of health should occasion his absence the surveyor is requested to act in his place.
It is to be ascribed to a press of business that the case of Forbes has been put out of view.
With great consideration   I am Gentlemen   Your obedient servant

Alexander Hamilton
The Collector, Naval Officerand the Supervisor of the RevenueBaltimore


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Wilhem and Jan Willink, Nicholaas and Jacob Van Staphorst, and Nicholas Hubbard, 24 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Willink, Wilhem,Willink, Jan,Van Staphorst, Nicholaas,Van Staphorst, Jacob,Hubbard, Nicholas

[Philadelphia, January 24, 1794. On May 1, 1794, Willink, Van Staphorst, and Hubbard wrote to Hamilton: “We have to request your acceptance of our most hearty Thanks for Your very polite letter of 24th January.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tench Coxe, [25 January 1794]
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia, January 25, 1794]

Mr. Coxe has the honor to inclose to Mr. Hamilton a general account of the payments, in Notes & money, of the sum of ten thousand dollars, except a balance of 206 40/100 Drs. for which Mr. Coxe will thank Mr. H. if he can send it to day. Mr. Coxe will at the same time deliver Mr. Hamiltons Note for 300 Drs. of the 11th. Jany. last and sign a minute upon the within paper declaring the whole to have been paid. If Mr. Meyer could make a calculation ascertaining the day between Apl. 9 & Jany. th on which the interest should run upon the whole sum an Obligation in form will be given in exchange for all the other papers.
Jany. 25th. 1794


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Rawle, 25 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Rawle, William

Philadelphia Jany. 25. 1794
Dear Sir
Private

Your letter to me officially of the 22 is received. I submit to you some observations in a private capacity.
Does not the course of proceeding in Chancery provide for the case of absent parties—by allowing service of process on known agents & if the parties do not appear taking the bill pro confesso &c? It runs in my mind there are some rules of convenience in cases so situated, but I am at present too rusty to remember details of practice.
Though the Courts of the UStates could not enjoin the state Courts—Could they not enjoin perpetually the Individuals concerned so as to produce the same effect, in the manner sometimes practiced to prevent proceedings at common law?
These questions are put, not for the sake of answers—but to lead your attention to a further investigation of what may be practicable, towards forcing the affair to a conclusion, as it is very interesting to the public service to ascertain our ground.
With esteem I reman Dr Sr   Your obed serv

A Hamilton
William Rawle Esq


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Andrew Dunscomb, 26 January 1794
From: Dunscomb, Andrew
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Richmond January 26th. 1794
Dr Sir,

Your friendly favor of the 17th Inst. I recd. ⅌ last post. You will please embrace any leisure moment during the present session of Congress, to Act upon the subject matter of my last—requesting in my behalf, if needfull, the aid of Mr Benson, and Mr King, thro’ Congress.
I take this opportunity to inform you, that, as a mark of the continuance of an opinion long entertained, I have, in opposition to the fashion of the times, added the name of Hamilton to that of my Wife’s, this day imprinted on my infant Daughter.
With good wishes & respect   I remain your Obt servt

Aw. Dunscomb
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tench Coxe, 27 January 1794
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Treasury Department, Revenue Office, January 27, 1794. “I have the honor to communicate to you the result of the enquiry into ‘the expediency of erecting a light House on Occacock Island or elsewhere near the entrance of Occacock inlet; and an estimate of the probable expence.’…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joseph Howell, Junior, 27 January 1794
From: Howell, Joseph, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

W. D. Accountants OfficeJanuary 27th 1794
Sir

I have the honor to transmit you some observations on that part of the Act of Congress of 30th April 1790, respecting officers rations and to solicit your attention on the subject.
I am Sir &c

Joseph Howell
The Honble.The Secty of the Treasury


Title: Enclosure: [Observations on “An Act for Regulating the Military Establishment of the United States”], [27 January 1794]
From:
To:

By the Act of Congress 30th. April 1790. The commissioned officers are allowed to receive their daily rations in provisions, “or money in lieu thereof at the option of the said officers at the contract price at the posts respective where the rations shall become due.”
By this latitude granted to the officers, the Accountant finds it difficult to ascertain whether the officers have drawn or retained their rations, as the check arises from the contractors accounts which are rendered at the Treasury frequently after an officer has been settled with—representations from the paymaster of the Troops are in corroberation of the above statement. Without being more particular, a striking objection appears to the existing law which authorizes money to be drawn from different sources for demands of one kind. To obviate these difficulties the accountant would submit the propriety of the following resolution and which he believes would be perfectly satisfactory to the officers.
Resolved, that the Commissioned officers in service of the United States from and after the passage of this Act be allowed at the rate of  Dollars ⅌ Month in lieu of each ration to which they are intitled agreeably to their several grades.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to ———, 30 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Treasury Department, January 30, 1794. The catalogue description of this letter reads as follows: “To the Collector of the Customs, objecting to his course in connection with duty on a Cask of Rum: ‘I will only add that in expressing my disapprobation … I did not suppose in you any ill intention.’” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 30 January 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

[Philadelphia, January 30, 1794. An entry in JPP“Journal of the Proceedings of the President,” George Washington Papers, Library of Congress. on January 30, 1794, reads: “The Secretary of the Treasury enclosed me a letter to him from the Collector of Philada. on the subject of the Ship L’Orient.” Letter not found.]


Title: Americanus No. I, [31 January 1794]
From: “Pacificus”,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, January 31, 1794]

An examination into the question how far regard to the cause of liberty ought to induce the UStates to take part with France in the present war has been promised. This promise shall now be performed; premising only that it is foreign to the immediate object of these papers—a vindication of the Declaration of Neutrality. That Executive Act must derive its defence, from a just construction of existing Treaties and Laws. If shewn to be consistent with these the defence is complete.
Whether a mere regard to the cause of Liberty, independent of Treaty, ought to induce us to become volunteers in the war is a question, under our constitution, not of Executive, but of Legislative cognizance. It belongs to Congress to say—whether the Nation shall of choice dismiss the olive branch and unfurl the banners of War.
In judging of the eligibility of the measure with a view to the question just stated, it would present itself under two aspects—

I Whether the cause of France be truly the cause of liberty, pursued with justice and humanity, and in a manner likely to crown it with honorable success.
II Whether the degree of service, we could render, by participating in the conflict, was likely to compensate, by its utility to the cause, the evils which would probably flow from it to ourselves.
If either of these questions can be answered in the negative, it will result that the consideration, which has been stated, ought not to embark us in the War.
A discussion of the first point will not be entered upon. It would involve an examination too complicated for the compass of these papers; and after all, the subject gives so great scope to opinion, to imagination to feeling that little could be expected from argument. The great leading facts are before the Public; and by this time most men have drawn their conclusions so firmly, that the issue alone can adjust their differences of opinion. There was a time when all men in this Country entertained the same favourable view of the French Revolution. At the present time they all still unite in the wish, that the troubles of France may terminate in the establishment of a free and good government; and all dispassionate well-informed men equally unite in the doubt, whether this is likely to take place under the auspices of those who now govern the affairs of that Country. But agreeing in these two points, there is a great and serious diversity of opinion as to the real merits and probable issue of the French Revolution.
None can deny, that the cause of France has been stained by excesses and extravagances, for which it is not easy, if possible, to find a parallel and at which reason and humanity recoil. Yet many find apologies & extenuations with which they satisfy themselves; they still see in the cause of France the cause of Liberty; they are still sanguine in the hope that it will be crowned with success; that the French Nation will establish for themselves not only a free, but a Republican Government, capable of promoting solidly their happiness. Others on the contrary discern no adequate apology for the horrid and disgusting scenes which have been and continue to be acted. They conceive that the excesses which have been committed transcend greatly the measure of those which were reasonably to have been expected with every due allowance for circumstances. They perceive in them proofs of atrocious depravity in the most influential leaders of the Revolution. They observe, that among these, a Marat and a Robespierre, assassins still reeking with the blood of murdered fellow Citizens, monsters who outdo the fabled enormities of a Busiris and a Procrustes, are predominent in influence as in iniquity. They find every where marks of an unexampled dissolution of all the social and moral ties. They see no where any thing but principles and opinions so wild so extreme passions so turbulent so tempestuous, as almost to forbid the hope of agreement in any rational or well organised system of Government: They conclude, that a state of things like this is calculated to extend disgust and disaffection throughout the Nation, to nourish more and more a spirit of insurrection and mutiny, facilitating the progress of the invading armies, and exciting in the bowels of France commotions, of which it is impossible to compute the mischiefs the duration or the end: that if by the energy of the national character and the intrinsic difficulty of the enterprise the enemies of France shall be compelled to leave her to herself, this era may only prove the commencement of greater misfortunes: that after wading through seas of blood, in a furious and sanguinary civil war, France may find herself at length the slave of some victorious Scylla or Marius or Cæsar: And they draw this afflicting inference from the whole view of the subject, that there is more reason to fear, that the cause of true Liberty has received a deep wound in the mismanagements of it, by those who, unfortunately for the French Nation, have for a considerable time past, maintained an ascendant in its affairs—than to regard the Revolution of France, in the form it has latterly worn, as intitled to the honors due to that sacred and all important cause—or as a safe bark on which to freight the Fortunes the Liberties and the Reputation of this now respectable and happy land.

Without undertaking to determine, which of these opposite opinions rests most firmly on the evidence of facts, I shall content myself with observing that if the latter is conceived to have but a tolerable foundation, it is conclusive against the propriety of our engaging in the war, merely through regard for the cause of Liberty: For when we resolve to put so vast a stake upon the chance of the die, we ought at least to be certain that the object for which we hazard is genuine is substantial is real.
Let us proceed to the discussion of the second question.
To judge of the degree of aid which we could afford to France in her present struggle, it may be of use to take a true view of the means, with which we carried on the War that accomplished our own Revolution.
Our supplies were derived from five sources—1 paper money—  2  domestic loans  3  foreign loans  4  pecuniary taxes  5  taxes in specific articles  6  military impress.
The first of these resources with a view to a future war may be put out of the question. Past experience would forbid its being again successfully employed, and no friend to the morals property or industry of the people, to public or private credit, would desire to see it revived.
The second would exist, but probably in a more limited extent. The circumstances of a depreciating paper, which the holders were glad, as they supposed, to realize, was a considerable motive to the loans obtained during the late war. The magnitude of them, however, even then, bore a small proportion to the aggregate expence.
The third resource would be equally out of the question with the first. The principal lending powers would be our enemies as they are now those of France.
The three remaining items—Pecuniary taxes, taxes on specific articles; military impress, could be employed again in a future war and are the resources upon which we should have chiefly to rely: for the resources of domestic loans is by no means a very extensive one, in a community where capitals are so moderate as in ours.
Though it is not to be doubted, that the People of the UStates would hereafter as heretofore throw their whole property into common stock for their common defence against internal invasion or an unprovoked attack—who is there sanguine enough to believe that large contributions either in money or produce could be extracted from them to carry on an external war voluntarily undertaken for a foreign and speculative purpose?
The expectation were an illusion. Those who may entertain it ought to pause and reflect. Whatever enthusiasm might have been infused into a part of the community would quickly yield to more just and sober ideas inculcated by experience of the burthens & calamities of war. The circuitous logic, by which it is attempted to be maintained, that a participation in the war is necessary to the security of our own liberty would then appear, as it truly is, a mere delusion, propagated by bribed incendiaries or hair-brained enthusiasts. And the authors of the delusion would not fail to be execrated as the enemies of the public weal.
Viewing the matter dispassionately, we cannot but conclude, that in a war of choice, not of necessity, like that in which we are invited to engage—it would be a bad calculation to look for great exertions of the community.
The business would move as heavily, as it was in its origin impolitic. The faculty of the government to obtain pecuniary supplies would in such a situation be circumscribed within a narrow compass. Levies of men would not be likely to be more successful than those of money. No one would think of detaching the Militia for distant expeditions abroad: And the experience we have had in our Indian enterprizes do not authorise strong expectations of going far, by voluntary enlistments, where the question is not as it was during the last war the defence of the essential rights & interests of the Country. The severe expedient of drafting from the Militia, a principal reliance in that war, would put the authority of Government in the case supposed to a very critical test.
This summary view of what would be our situation & prospects is alone sufficient to demonstrate the general position that our ability to promote the cause of France by external exertions could not be such as to be very material to the event.
Let us however for more more complete elucidation inquire to what particular objects they could be directed.
Fleets we have not and could not have in time or to an extent to be of use in the contest.
Shall we raise an army and send it to France? She does not want soldiers. Her own population can amply furnish her armies. The number we could send, if we could get them there at all, would be of no weight in the scale.
The true wants of France are of system, order, money, provisions, arms, military stores.
System and Order we could not give her by engaging in the war. The supply of money in that event would be out of our power. At present we can pay our debt to her in proportion as it becomes due. Then we could not even do this. Provisions and other supplies, as far as we are in condition to furnish them, could not then be furnished at all. The conveyance of them would become more difficult—& the forces we should be obliged ourselves to raise would consume our surplus.

Abondonning then, as of necessity we must, the idea of aiding France in Europe, shall we turn our attention to the succour of her Islands? Alas we should probably have here only to combat their own internal disorders to aid Frenchmen against French men—whites against blacks, or blacks against whites. If we may judge from the past conduct of the powers at war with France their effort is immediately against herself—her Islands are not in the first instance, a serious object. But grant that they become so, is it evident, that we can cooperate efficaciously to their preservation? Or if we can what will this have to do with the preservation of French Liberty. The dangers to this arise, from the invasion of foreign armies carried into the bosom of France—from the still more formidable assaults of civil dissention and the spirit of anarchy.
Shall we attack the Islands of the Powers opposed to France?
How shall we without a competent fleet carry on the necessary expeditions for the purpose? Where is such a fleet? How shall we maintain our conquests after they are made? What influence could the capture of an Island or two have upon the general issue of the Contest? These questions answer themselves.
Or Shall we endeavour to make a diversion in favour of France by attacking canada on the one side & Florida on the other?
This certainly would be the most, indeed the only, eligible mode of aiding France in war. These enterprises may be considered as within the compass of our means.
But while this is admitted, it ought not to be regarded as a very easy task. The reduction of Canada ought not to be undertaken with less than  men; that of the Floridas with much fewer than  for reinforcement could be brought to both those countries from the West India possessions of their respective sovereigns. Relying on their naval superiority, they could spare from the Islands all the troops which were not necessary to the preservation of their internal tranquillity.
These armies are then to be raised and equipped and to be provided with all the requisite apparatus for operation. Proportionate magazines are to be formed for their accommodation and supply.

Some men, whose fate it is to think loosely may imagine that a more summary substitute could be found in the Mi[li]tia. But the Militia, an excellent auxiliary for internal defence, could not be advantageously employed in distant expeditions requiring time and perseverance. For these, men regularly engaged for a competent period are indispensable. The conquest of Canada at least may with decision be regarded as out of the reach of a Militia operation.
If war was resolved upon, the very preparation of the means for the enterprizes which have been mentioned would demand not less than a year. Before this period was elapsed, the fate of France, as far as foreign invasion is concerned, would probably be decided. It would be manifest either that she could or could not be subjugated by force of external coertion. Our interposition would therefore be too late to benefit her. It appears morally certain, that the War against France cannot be of much duration. The Exertions are too mighty to be long protracted.
The only way in which the enterprizes in question could serve the cause of France would be by making a diversion of a part of those forces which would otherwise be directed against her. But this consequence could not be counted upon. It would be known that we could not be very early ready to attack with effect; and it would be an obvious policy to risk secondary objects rather than be diverted from the efficacious pursuit of the main one. It would be natural in such case to rely for indemnification on the successful result of the War in Europe. The Governments concerned imagine that they have too much at stake upon that result not to hazard considerably elsewhere in order to secure the fairest chance of its being favourable to their wishes.
It would not probably render the matter better, to precipitate our measures for the sake of a more speedy impulse. The parties ought in such case to count upon the abortion of our attempts from their immaturity, and to rely the more confidently upon the means of resistance already on the spot.
We could not therefore flatter ourselves that the expedient last proposed—that of attacking the possessions of Great Britain and Spain in our neighbourhood—would be materially serviceable to the cause of France.
But to give the argument its fairest course, I shall take notice of two particulars, in respect to which our interference would be more sensibly felt. These are the depredations, which our privateers might make upon the commerce of the maritime enemies of France, and the direct injury which would accrue to that of G Britain from the interruption of intercourse between the two Countries. Considering the shock lately sustained by mercantile credit in that Country—the real importance to it of our imports from thence and of our exports thither, the large sums which are due and in a continual course of remittance from our merchants to her Merchants—a war between the UStates and Great Britain could not fail to be seriously distressing to her.
Yet it would be weak to count upon very decisive influence of these circumstances. The Public credit of G Britain has still energy sufficient to enable her to struggle with much partial derangement. Her private credit manifestly disordered by temporary causes, and propped as it has been by the public purse seems to have recovered its impaired tone. Her commerce too suddenly interrupted by the breaking out of war must have resumed its wonted channels in proportion as the progress of her naval preparations has tended to give it protection. And though the being at war with us would be very far from a matter of indifference either to her commerce or to her credit; yet it is not likely that it would arrest her carreer or overrule those paramount considerations which brought her into her present situation.
When we recollect how she maintained herself under a privation of our commerce, through a seven years war with us, united for certain periods of it with France Spain & Holland, though we perceive a material difference between her present and her then situation arising from that very effort, yet we cannot reasonably doubt that she would be able notwithstanding a similar privation to continue a war which in fact does not call for an equal exertion on her part, as long as the other powers with which she is associated shall be in condition to prosecute it with a hope of success. Nor is it probable, whatever may be the form or manner of the engagement, that Great Britain could, if disposed to peace, honorably make a separate retreat. It is the interest of all parties in such cases to assure to each other a cooperation: and it is presumeable that this has taken place in some shape or other between the Powers at present combined against France.
The conclusion from the several considerations which have been presented carefully & dispassionately weighed is this, that there is no probable prospect of this country rendering material service to the cause of France, by engaging with her in the War.
It has been very truly observed in the course of the publications, upon the subject—that if France is not in some way or other wanting to herself she will not stand in need of our assistance and if she is our assistance cannot save her.

Pacificus.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Caleb Gibbs, 31 January 1794
From: Gibbs, Caleb
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Boston, January 31, 1794. “I have done myself the honor to address you several times since my return to this Metropolis from the Country.… I will not intrude upon you too long but will only say, that we are told that the United States are going to build a number of vessells of war, and fortify their Ports and harbours. If so and any thing you think me Competent too in either case, will thank you to think of me. I keep a store in the Central part of the Town Contiguous to the Long wharf and if any vessell of war is built in this place or its vicinity I should be glad to offer my services in storing &c.… I do profess to be a Judge of what is called good timber.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Benjamin Lincoln, James Lovell, and Thomas Melville, 31 January 1794
From: Lincoln, Benjamin,Lovell, James,Melville, Thomas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Boston, January 31, 1794. On February 20, 1794, Hamilton wrote to Lincoln, Lovell, and Melville: “I am to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 31st ultimo.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edmund Randolph, [31 January 1794]
From: Randolph, Edmund
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia, January 31, 1794]

The Secretary of State has the honor to inclose to the Secretary of the Treasury a letter from T. W. Jarvis. As the subject relates to the Treasury Department, it is consigned to the disposal of its head.
January 31st. 1794.


Title: Conversation with George Hammond, [January 1794]
From: Hammond, George,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, January, 1794]

I have the honor of informing your Lordship, that Mr. Shoolbred communicated to me in a letter dated the 9th of January last, which I received towards the end of that or early in the beginning of the succeeding month, the circumstance of certain British seamen, who had been captured on board of the ship Friendship, by the French sloop of war the Lascasas, (and who with the vessel were brought into Charleston) having been removed from the sloop of war into another vessel, which had been fitted up as a prison ship. Mr. Shoolbred farther stated to me the measures he had pursued for obtaining in the first instance the enlargement of the prisoners, and the very spirited and judicious remonstrances, which he had addressed to the Government of South Carolina on this flagrant breach of neutrality. Immediately on the receipt of Mr. Shoolbred’s letter, it was my intention to have submitted the substance of it to the Secretary of State; but I was induced to suspend that intention, in consequence of a previous incidental conversation which I had with Mr. Hamilton, and in which that Gentleman informed me, that the general government having received intimation of a design on the part of the officers and crews of the French privateers in Charleston to establish a prison ship in that port; positive orders had been about ten days before issued to the Governors of South Carolina instantly to oppose the execution of it.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Benjamin Lincoln, 1 February 1794
From: Lincoln, Benjamin
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Boston Feby 1st. 1794
Sir

By this mornings post your letter of the 21st. Ulto. was received As also a letter covering one directed to our Minister at the Court of Great Britain. We have a vessel now loading & will sail in a few days for Amsterdam so that your letter directed to Messrs. Willink & Van Staphorst will go directly to its address in Holland agreeably to your wishes.

Secy of the Treasury


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Ellery, 3 February 1794
From: Ellery, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Newport, Rhode Island] February 3, 1794. “A question has arisen respectg. the disposition of that part of the net proceeds of the sales of the Schooner Hannah which appertains to a Surveyor which I wish you would answer. I am in doubt whether it should be paid to the Surveyor of this Port, or of Bristol … the forfeiture of the Hannah was not incurred in either of those ports … for at the time the goods were run out of the Hannah, for which she was forfeited, she was lying at Anchor off a point of land at the North East part of the island of Rhode Island, which Point is within the limits of the Town of Portsmouth.… The Surveyor’s part of this forfeiture is trifling; but the same disposition should I conceive take place in similar cases be the sum to be paid what it may. I could therefore wish that you would be pleased to make such a determination in this case as may serve for a Rule in all like cases which may occur.…”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Ellery, 3 February 1794
From: Ellery, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Colles Offe. Port of Newport [Rhode Island]Feby. 3d. 1794
Sir,

This Letter will be accompd. by a represent. of the case of Samuel Pearsall, junr. master of the Sloop Nancy. His Representn. is true as far as it concerns her being licensed—her tonnage, her arrival here, her being visited by an Inspector, her not having a manifest, her being wholly laden with the produce of the United States, and his payment of Twenty dollars. That part of it which relates to the Conversa. between us is not particularly narrated. I told him that I had no reason to suspect, that his not being provided with a manifest was owing to any thing but his ignorance or inattention to the Law, that I had no discretionary power, that it was my duty to enforce the Law, that more than eight months had elapsed since the new Coasting Act had taken place, and that if I should not take notice of his transgression others might expect to avoid the law by making a like plea; That he must either pay the Penalty, or petition the Judge who would cause the facts to be stated which should appear on inquiry, and annex to the Petition and transmit them to you who was empowered to mitigate or remit the penalty, or, which was not so regular, to pay it and apply directly to you directly. To avoid expence he chose the last. As to his never having been asked for a manifest in his frequent trips to Newyork since the repeal of the old Coasting law I cannot say any thing, nor about his ability to suffer the loss of twenty dollars; for they are not within my knowledge. I have I conceive done my duty, and shall be perfectly satisfied with your determination in this case.
I am, Sir, yr. most obedt. servant

Wm Ellery Colle
Alex. Hamilton Esqe.Secry Treasury


Title: Enclosure A: Probable State of Cash up to the First of April Ensuing, 4 February 1794
From: Treasury Department,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

A.Probable State of Cash Up to the First of April Ensuing.

Proba[b]le Demands on the Treasury to the first of April vizt.

Amount of Cash in the several Banks ⅌ Treasurer’s return of the 3d. instant
332,177.50

For the Department of War
113,827.38
Amount of Cash in the hands of the several Collectors of the Customs and Supervisors ⅌ Abstract of returns dated the 3d. instant.
134,605.96

For the payment of Foreign Officers
133,961.64
By Amount of Sums receivable for duties on Imports and Tonnage in the Months of February and March ⅌ Abstract of returns of Bonds made up the 7th. of January last
272,734.43

For Sums informally advanced by the Bank for the public Service for want of Appropriations
69,843. 5
Deficiency of Cash towards answering the probable Demands on the Treasury
 621,294.18

For Bills purchased to remit to Amsterdam for payment of Interest falling due on the Foreign Debt to the first of March inclusively
168,000.
Dollars
1,360,812. 7

For the last Instalment of a Loan of 800,000 Dollars of the Bank of the United States obtained pursuant to an Act of the last Session
200,000.

For a Quarter’s Interest on the public Debt payable within the United States
547,000.

Amount of Civil List for a quarter including Compensations to Members of Congress
128.180.

Dollars
1,360,812. 7

Treasury DepartmentFebruary 4th. 1794.
Alexander Hamilton.Secy. of the Treasury.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Wilhem and Jan Willink, Nicholaas, and Jacob Van Staphorst, and Nicholas Hubbard, 4 February 1794
From: Willink, Wilhem,Willink, Jan,Van Staphorst, Nicholaas,Van Staphorst, Jacob,Hubbard, Nicholas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Amsterdam] 4 February 1794.
Sir!

Confirming our last respects of 14 Ultimo, We have now but to transmit You the Account Current of the United States with us, up to 31st January last, the Balance whereon, due by us Holld. Curry. f 923,284.13.8. We transfer to the Credit of the United States in a New Account.
The Delivery of the Bonds the preceeding Month has been very brisk: Among them were 144. Bonds of the Half of the Loan the Undertakers reserved at their option. Thus of the last Three Millions Loan, 1644. Bonds have been absolutely sold: A number that We flatter ourselves to have the pleasure, to advise you the Monthly Increase of.
We are respectfully &c.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from George Bush, 5 February 1794
From: Bush, George
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Wilmington, Delaware, February 5, 1794. On February 17, 1794, Hamilton wrote to Bush: “In your letter of the 5th. instant.” Letter not found.]


Title: Edmund Randolph to Edmond Charles Genet, 5 February 1794
From: Randolph, Edmund
To: Genet, Edmond Charles

Philadelphia Feby. 5. 1794
Sir

I do myself the honor of informing you that the French Ship L’Orient of Bengal now lying in the port of Philadelphia attracts the attention omit these words (and excites the suspicion) of the Executive. It is represented that on her arrival she was a private ship the property of the French East India company and though armed was without a public Commission (had a complete military equipment and belonged to the East India Company) (of L’Orient) omit—that possession has been since taken of her under your authority for the use of the French Nation—that as an Evidence of her being destined to be used on public service the uniform of France appears to be worn by those who are attached to her and that she is to be commissioned here to cruise upon the other belligerent Powers. This last circumstance when connected with those preceding will if it be true be immediately seen to infringe the rules prescribed by the President of The UStates, and therefore (deserves an inquiry on =demands an explicit declaration  =our part that it is deemed inadmissible, and the expression of an our part. You will permit me to hope for an answer whether a =expectation that if any such intention has been entertained it will be renounced Commission has been and is intented to be given to the L’Orient to cruise on the enemies of France—and I ask this the rather because a =and that no appearances will continue to exist of a nature to excite candid Exposition on one side of what produces suspicion, and a =inquietude here or suspicions elsewhere of the Candour of the UStates. A similar reply on the other promises a continuance of that harmony =reliance is entertained that no embarrassment will in this instance be occasioned which it will always be my wish to maintain.) =to the Government.
Note at foot
Corrections are proposed according to the Interlineations. The word harmony which has a personal reference to Mr Genet appears particularly exceptionable under the circumstances.

A Hamilton

☞ The corrections proposed are the interlineations marked thus =.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Adams, 6 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Adams, John

Treasury DepartmentFebruary 6th. 1794
Sir

Having made the necessary examination into the means possessed by the Treasury for complying with a late order of the Senate and of the time which would be requisite for preparing them, I have the honor now to communicate the result.
Several Custom-house returns of Exports amounting to a large sum having been rendered for a term longer than a quarter; it is found impossible to make up that return for the twelve months directed by the Senate in the first paragraph. A Statement, however for one year differing therefrom only in one quarter is nearly matured. It can be completed in a few days, after the receipt of a quarterly return for the port of Philadelphia, the Custom-house business of which was exceedingly deranged by the late malady.
The detailed statement of Imports for the year ending on the 30th day of June 1792 required by the second paragraph, can be made up in about two months, by suspending the formation of that for the Year ending with September 1792, which in the course of the Treasury business was in preparation, and would have been completed in a few days. This will require eight extra Clerks for two months, and will produce an additional expence of about 600 or 700 dollars.
The detailed statement of Imports for the year ending on the 30th of June last, also required by the second paragraph, cannot be made up at present, for want of the Returns from the Customhouses.
The returns of Tonnage in the old form will exhibit what is required by the third paragraph and can be made out in the proper office in a short time. The two sets of returns of Tonnage required by the fourth paragraph, can be made out in about six weeks after the preceding documents shall be compleated; or they can be matured at the same time by employing four more extra Clerks at an expence of about 250 dollars.

The Senate will perceive from this the state of the business and will judge whether it is expedient to pursue it in the form contemplated by the order. Such of the matters required as can go on without additional expence or the derangement of what is already on hand are in train. And if no revocation of the order is speedily received the other objects as far as they are practicable will be also prosecuted.
But I feel it a duty to use the liberty of taking the present occasion to remark, that it is extremely to be desired that the two houses of the Legislature could fix upon a plan for regulating the returns which they would choose to have made to them periodically from the Treasury, that the business might be prosecuted in conformity to that plan. Congress would then have the information, which they may deem useful, and the Treasury could be prepared systematically to furnish it; without any derangement of the current course of its operation, and without an unnecessary increase of expence. Occasional & desultory calls frequently made for returns and statements, which involve complicated and elaborate investigations, and much clerkship, interfere more materially with the regular conducting of the public business, than can easily be imagined, except by those who have the progress of it immediately under their eye. They oblige the principal officers and the most expert Clerks to transfer so much of their attention from the ordinary & indispensable operations of the Department, as must render it impossible, (if the practice should continue in the same degree in which it has for some time existed) for the Officers of the Department to be responsible for the orderly punctual and efficacious execution of its primary & most essential objects. This conclusion has so pressed itself upon me from experience that I have thought it incumbent upon me to submit these reflections to the consideration of the Senate.
[With perfect respect I have the honor to be   Sir   Your most Obedient & humble servant]

Alexander HamiltonSecy of the Treasy
[The Vice President of The UStates& President of the Senate.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Isaac Holmes, 6 February 1794
From: Holmes, Isaac
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Charleston, South Carolina, February 6, 1794. On February 28, 1794, Hamilton sent to George Washington “a letter from the Collector of Charlestown of the 6th instant.” Letter not found.]


Title: Americanus No. II, [7 February 1794]
From: “Americanus”,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, February 7, 1794)

Let us now turn to the other side of the medal. To be struck with it, it is not necessary to exaggerate.
All who are not wilfully blind must see and acknowlege that this Country at present enjoys an unexampled state of prosperity. That war would interrupt it need not be affirmed. We should then by war lose the advantage of that astonishing progress in strength wealth and improvement, which we are now making, and which if continued for a few years will place our national rights and interests upon immoveable foundations. This loss alone would be of infinite moment: it is such a one as no prudent or good man would encounter but for some clear necessity or some positive duty.
If while Europe is exhausting herself in a destructive war, this country can maintain its peace, the issue will open to us a wide field of advantages, which even imagination can with difficulty compass.
But a check to the progress of our prosperity is not the greatest evil to be anticipated. Considering the naval superiority of the enemies of France we cannot doubt that our commerce would be in a great degree annihilated by a war. Our Agriculture would of course with our commerce receive a deep wound. The exportations which now contribute to animate it could not fail to be essentially diminished. Our mechanics would experience their full share of the common calamity. That lively and profitable industry which now sp[r]eads a smile over all our cities and Towns would feel an instantaneous and rapid decay.
Nine tenths of our present revenues are derived from commercial duties. Their declension must of course keep pace with that of Trade. A substitute cannot be found in other sources of taxation, without imposing heavy burthens on the People. To support public credit and carry on the war would suppose exactions really grievous. To abandon public Credit would be to renounce an essential mean of carrying on the war, besides the sacrifice of the public Creditors and the disgrace of a National bankruptcy.
We will not call in the aid of Savage butcheries and depredations to heighten the picture. Tis enough to say, that a general Indian War, incited by the united influence of Britain and Spain, would not fail to spread desolation throughout our frontier.
To a people who have so recently and so severely felt the evils of War little more is necessary, than to appeal to their own recollection for their magnitude and extent.
The war which now rages is & for obvious reasons is likely to continue to be carried on with unusual animosity and rancour. It is highly probable that the resentment of the combined powers against us if we should take part in the war would be if possible still more violent than it is against France. Our interference would be regarded as altogether officious and wanton. How far this idea might lead to an aggravation of the ordinary calamities of war would deserve serious reflection.
The certain evils of our joining France in the war are sufficient dissuasives from so intemperate a measure. The possible ones are of a nature to call for all our caution, all our prudence.
To defend its own rights, to vindicate its own honor, there are occasions when a Nation ought to hazard even its existence. Should such an occasion occur, I trust those who are now most averse to commit the peace of the country will not be the last to face the danger, nor the first to turn their backs upon it.
But let us at least have the consolation of not having rashly courted misfortune. Let us have to act under the animating reflection of being engaged in repelling wrongs which we neither sought nor merited, in vindicating our rights, invaded without provocation, in defending our honor violated without cause. Let us not have to reproach ourselves with having voluntarily bartered blessings for calamities.
But we are told that our own Liberty is at stake upon the event of the war against France—that if she falls we shall be the next victim. The combined powers, it is said, will never forgive in us the origination of those principles which were the germs of the French Revolution. They will endeavour to eradicate them from the world.
If this suggestion were ever so well founded, it would perhaps be a sufficient answer to it to say, that our interference is not likely to alter the case—that it could only serve prematurely to exhaust our strength.
But other answers more conclusive present themselves.
The war against France requires on the part of her enemies efforts unusually violent. They are obliged to strain every nerve, to exert every resource. However it may terminate, they must find themselves spent in an extreme degree; a situation not very favourable to the undertaking a new, and even to Europe combined, an immense enterprize.
To subvert by force republican Liberty in this Country, nothing short of entire conquest would suffice. This conquest, with our present increased population; greatly distant as we are from Europe, would either be impracticable or would demand such exertions, as following immediately upon those which will have been requisite to the subversion of the French Revolution, would be absolutely ruinous to the undertakers.
It is against all probability, that an undertaking, pernicious as this would be, even in the event of success, would be attempted against an unoffending Nation by its Geographical position, so little connected with the political concerns of Europe.
But impediments would arise from more special causes. Suppose France subdued, and a restoration of the Monarchy in its ancient form or a partition effected. To uphold either state of things, after the general impulse in favour of liberty, which has been given to the minds of 24 Millions of people, would in one way or another find occupation for a considerable part of the forces which had brought it about. In the event of an unqualified restoration of the monarchy if the future monarch did not stand in need of foreign legions for the support of his authority; still the Powers who had been concerned in the restoration could not sufficiently rely upon the solidity of the order of things reestablished by them not to keep themselves in a posture to be prepared against the disturbance of it—’till there had been time to compose the discordant interests and passions produced by the Revolution and bring back the Nation to ancient habits of subordination. In the event of a partition of France, it would of course give occupation to the forces of the conquerors to secure the submission of the dismembered parts.
The new dismemberment of Poland will be another obstacle to the detaching of troops from Europe for a crusade against this Country. The fruits of that transaction can only be secured to Russia and Prussia by the agency of large bodies of forces kept on foot for the purpose within the dismembered territories.
Of the powers combined against France there are only three whose interests have any material reference to this Country—England, Spain, Holland.
As to Holland it will be readily conceded that she can have no interest or feeling to induce her to embark in so mad & wicked a project. Let us see how the matter will stand with regard to Spain & England.

The object of the enterprise against us must either be the establishment in this Country of a royal in place of our present Republican Government, the subjugation of the Country to the dominion of one of the parties, or its division among them.
The establish[men]t of an independent monarchy in this country would be so manifestly against the interests of both those Nations, in the ordinary acceptation of this term in politics—that neither of them can be so absurd as to desire it.
It may be adopted as an axiom in our political calculation, that no foreign power which has valuable colonies in America will be propitious to our remaining one people united under a vigorous Government.
No man I believe but will think it probable, however disadvantageous the change in other respects, that a Monarchical Government, from its superior force, would ensure more effectually than our present form our permanent unity as a Nation. This at least would be the indubitable conclusion of European calculators. From which may be confidently inferred a disinclination both in England and Spain to our undergoing a change of that kind.
The only thing that can be imagined capable of reconciling either of those Powers to it would be the giving us for monarch a member of its own royal family and forming something like a family compact.
But here would arise a direct collision of interest between them. Which of them would agree that a prince of the family of the other should be reigning over this country give to that other a decided preponderancy in the scale of American affairs?
The subjugation of the UStates to the dominion of either of those Powers would fall more strongly under a like consideration. Tis impossible that either of them should consent that the other should become Master of this Country—And neither of them without madness could desire a mastery which would cost more than ’twas worth to maintain it, and which from an irresistible course of things could be but of very short duration.
The third, namely the division of it between them, is the most colorable of the three suppositions—But even this would be the excess of folly in both.
Nothing could be more unwise, in the first instance, in Great Britain, than to consent by that measure to divide with Spain the emoluments of our Commerce which now in so great a degree center with her with a probability of continuing to do it as long as the natural relations of commerce are permitted to govern.
Spain too could not fail to be sensible that from obvious causes her dominion over the part which was allotted to her would be altogether transient.
The first collision between Britain and Spain would certainly have one of two effects—either a reunion of the whole Country under Great Britain or a dismission of the yoke of both.
The latter by far the most probable would discover to both the extreme absurdity of the project.
The UStates, rooted as are now the ideas of Independence, are happily too remote from Europe to be governed by her. Dominion over any part of them would be a real misfortune to any Nation of that Quarter of the Globe.
To Great Britain the enterprise supposed would threaten serious consequences in more ways than one. It may safely be affirmed that she would run by it greater risk of bankruptcy and Revolution than we of subjugation. A chief proportion of the burthen would unavoidably fall upon her as the most monied & principal maritime power & it may emphatically be said that she would make war upon her own commerce & credit. There is the strongest ground to believe that the Nation would disrelish and oppose the project. The certainty of great evils attending it—the dread of much greater—experience of the disasters of the last war would operate upon all. Many, not improbably a majority, would see in the enterprise a malicious and wanton hostility against Liberty, of which they might themselves expect to be the next victim. Their judgments and their feelings would easily distinguish this case from that either of their former contest with us or their present contest with France. In the former, they had pretensions to support which were plausible enough to mislead their pride and their interest. In the latter, there were strong circumstances to rouse their passions alarm their fears and induce an acquiescence in the course which was pursued.

But a future attack upon us, as apprehended, would be so absolutely pretextless, as not to be misunderstood. Our conduct will have been such as to intitle us to the reverse of unfriendly or hostile dispositions: While powerful motives of self-interest would advocate with them our cause.
But Britain Spain Austria Prussia and perhaps even Russia will have more need and a stronger desire of peace & repose to restore and recruit their wasted strength and exhausted Treasuries—to reinvigorate the interior order and industry of their respective kingdoms relaxed and depressed by war—than either means or inclination to undertake so extravagant an enterprise against the Liberty of this Country.
If there can be any danger to us of that sort it must arise from our voluntarily thrusting ourselves into the War. Once embarked, Nations sometimes prosecute enterprises which they would not otherwise have dreamt of. The most violent resentment would no doubt in such case be kindled against us for what would be called a wanton and presumptuous intermeddling on our part. What this might produce it is not easy to calculate.
There are too great errors in our reasoning upon this subject. One is that the combined Powers will certainly attribute to us the same principles which they deem so exceptionable in France; the other, that our principles are in fact the same.
If left to themselves, they will all except one naturally see in us a people who originally resorted to a Revolution in Governt as a refuge from encroachment on rights and privileges antecedently enjoyed—not as a people who from choice have sought a radical and intire change in the established Government, in pursuit of new privileges and rights carried to an extreme, not reconciliable perhaps with any form of regular Government. They will see in us a people who have a due respect for property and personal security—who in the midst of our revolution abstained with exemplary moderation from every thing violent or sanguinary instituting governments adequate to the protection of persons and property; who since the completion of our revolution have in a very short period, from mere reasoning and reflection, without tumult or bloodshed adopted a form of general Government calculated as well as the nature of things would permit—to remedy antecedent defects—to give strength and security to the Nation—to rest the foundations of Liberty on the basis of Justice Order and Law—who at all times have been content to govern ourselves; unmeddling in the Governments or Affairs of other Nations: in fine, they will see in us sincere Republicans but decided enemies to licentiousness and anarchy—sincere republicans but decided friends to the freedom of opinion, to the order and tranquilty of all Mankind. They will not see in us a people whose best passions have been misled and whose best qualities have been perverted from their true aim by headlong fanatical or designing leaders to the perpepration of acts from which humanity shrinks—to the commission of outrages, over which the eye of reason weeps—to the profession and practice of principles which tend to shake the foundations of morality—to dissolve the social bands—to disturb the peace of mankind—to substitute confusion to order anarchy to Government.
Such at least is the light in which the Reason or the passions of the Powers confederated against France lead them to view her principles and conduct. And it is to be lamented that so much cause has been given for their opinions. If on our part, we give no incitement to their passions, facts too prominent and too decisive to be combated will forbid their reason to bestow the same character upon us.
It is therefore matter of real regret that there should be an effort on our part to level the distinctions, which discriminate our case from that of France—to confound the two cases in the view of foreign powers—and to hazard our own principles, by persuading ourselves of a similitude which does not exist.
Let us content ourselves with lamenting the errors into which a great, a gallant, an amiable a respectable Nation has been betrayed—with uniting our wishes and our prayers that the Supreme Ruler of the World will bring them back from those errors to a more sober and more just way of think⟨ing⟩ and acting and will overrule the complicated calamities which surround them to the establishment of a Government under which they may be free secure and happy. But let us not corrupt ourselves by false comparisons or glosses—nor shut our eyes to the true nature of transactions which ought to grieve and warn us—not rashly mingle our destiny in the consequences of the errors and extravagances of another nation.

Pacificus


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Ellery, 7 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Ellery, William

[Philadelphia, February 7, 1794. On March 3, 1794, Ellery wrote to Hamilton: “I have received your letter of the 7th of Feby. last.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edmund Randolph, 7 February 1794
From: Randolph, Edmund
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, February 7, 1794. Encloses “the Bond of Henry Cooper, as Consul at St. Croix.” Approves Cooper’s securities and “transmits the Bond, bearing date the 8th day of November, 1793, to be deposited in the Treasury Office.”


Title: Treasury Department Circular to the Collectors of the Customs, 10 February 1794
From: Treasury Department,Hamilton, Alexander
To: Collectors of the Customs

Treasury Department, February 10th. 1794.
Sir,

A Provisory arrangement has been agreed upon with the Ambassador of Great Britain contained in a letter from the Secretary of State to him dated the 26th December last, to ascertain the losses by detention, waste, or spoliation, sustained by such vessels the property of subjects of Great Britain, as have been or shall be captured by French Privateers armed and equipped in the Ports of the United States, and brought within any Port of the United States.
In order that these measures may be taken with as little delay as circumstances will permit, I have to request that you will whenever applied to by any of the Consuls of Great Britain, in concert with the Consul, appoint persons to establish the value of such vessels and cargoes, at the times of their Capture and of their arrival in the Port into which they are brought, according to their value in such Ports; transmitting to me the documents of the proceedings in each case.
I am, Sir,   With consideration,   Your Obedient Servant,

A Hamilton


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 10 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Treasury Departt. 10 Feby. 1794
Sir,

The enclosed letter of the 27 of last month from the Collector of Tappahannock, relates to a subject equally delicate & disagreeable. It is my duty to add, that bills have returned protested to the amount of 3000 Dollars.

This conduct, though I trust proceeding from no ill motive in the Collector, is of a nature so fatal to the punctual collection of the revenue, and at the same time so vitally injurious to the public credit, that I cannot forbear to submit it as my opinion, that the public good requires the superceding of the officer.
With perfect respect &c. &c.

Alexander Hamilton.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Nicholson, 11 February 1794
From: Nicholson, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Comp. Genl. Office [Philadelphia]Feby. 11th 1794
sir

I feel myself indebted for your attention to my former requests, permit me further to request that you will direct a copy of the opinion of the late Atty. Genl. to you on the subject of the subscribability of the Pennsa. New Loan debt in the Loan opened by Congress per Act of Augt. 4th. 1790—“for such Certificates bearing date before Jany 1790, as had been issued by the respective States as acknowledgments or evidences of debts by them owing.”
With much respect   & esteem   I am Yr Most ob ser

JN
The Honble Alexr. Hamilton EsqrSecty Treasy Ustates


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Seton, 11 February 1794
From: Seton, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

New York 11 Feby 1794
My Dear sir

Not wishing to infringe upon one moment of your time during the arduous & busy scene you have been engaged in, I have till now delayed my communications respecting my operations for Mr. Church.
On the 17th of December I purchased for him 9 Shares of U S. Bank Stock @ 13 ⅌ Cent and 12 Shares at 13½ ⅌ Cent—on the 20th of that month I further purchased 5 Shares @ 13 ⅌ Cent & 5 Shares at 13¼ ⅌ Cent in all Thirty one Shares which cost with the Brokers Commission Dollr. 14076. ¹⁰⁄₁₀₀. I drew Bills upon him at the same time for £3050. Stg which I sold at 5 ⅌ Cent above par making Dollr. 14233. ³²⁄₁₀₀. I have since received the Dividend upon these Shares which make Doll. 480. ⁵⁰⁄₁₀₀ more to the credit of Mr. Church. The 31 Shares have since been transferd in his Name, but I have not taken out the Certificates, as in your instructions you do not mention that I should. After I had made these purchases, it was the opinion of all the Brokers that when the Bank was open for transfers the price would fall more than in proportion to the Dividend, I therefore suspended my operations & wrote Mr. Church so—but the event has proved I did wrong, for they have since been as high as 15. & never less than 13, at which to 13½ they now remain—and the Exchange from 5 to 6 ⅌ Cent above par. As there is no appearance of a fall in either, I wish to know your opinion whether I had not better proceed to purchase immediately till I shall compleat the quantity wanted; there is a Vessel will sail for Falmouth the 16 or 17th. by which opportunity I could wish to advise Mr. Church of my intentions.

I am with the sincerest esteem & respect   Dear sir   Your Obliged Obed Hubl Ser

Wm Seton
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tench Coxe, 12 February 1794
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia] February 12, 1794. States “that the existing Light House act will expire in the ensuing recess of Congress by its own limitation.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Henry Knox, 12 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Knox, Henry

Treasury department Febry 12th. 1794.
Sir.

Inclosed you will find the copy of a letter from Mr. Habersham of the 16th ultimo.
The bearer of it (who is mentioned in it) informs me that from the month of June last till he left Georgia, there had been kept on foot from a thousand to twelve hundred Militia and that arrangements appeared to be going on for encreasing the number. The expense you will perceive, has been out of all proportion of what was contemplated.
I am compelled to state it as my opinion, that precise orders ought to be given to the Agent of the United States for supplying the forces in Georgia, not to authorise issues of any supplies on account of the United States for the Militia, or Corps called out, or embodied under the Authority of the State of Georgia, or of it’s Officers, except in cases specially sanctioned by this Government, and previously notified to him from the proper department. If this idea be adopted it will be requisite to communicate to him, what Corps may regularly be kept on foot under subsisting authority.
The bearer of Mr Habersham’s letter returns in the course of this week. It is desireable that a decision on the above point should be had in time to be conveyed by him.
with great respect   I have the honor to be &c.

Alexander Hamilton
The Secretary at War.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edmund Randolph, 12 February 1794
From: Randolph, Edmund
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia] February 12, 1794. Requests “original papers transmitted in a letter from Mr. Morris … in order to complete the papers from that minister called for by the Senate.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 12 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

[Philadelphia] February 12, 1794. Transmits “the … extract of a letter from the Supervisor of Virginia.”


Title: Enclosure: William Short to Wilhem and Jan Willink, Nicholaas and Jacob Van Staphorst, and Nicholas Hubbard, 12 February 1794
From: Short, William
To: Willink, Wilhem,Willink, Jan,Van Staphorst, Nicholaas,Van Staphorst, Jacob,Hubbard, Nicholas

Madrid Feb. 12. 1794.
Gentlemen

The duplicate of your letter of Dec. 27. has come to my hands with its inclosures. The first has not yet been recieved. I mention this as a guide. In future I will thank you to send under the cover of Mr Humphreys who has returned to Lisbon, such letters as you address me by that route.
Your letter informed me of the loan you had opened for the U.S. & by the copy of that you wrote to the Sec. of the Treasury, I observe the conditions of it; & particularly that you have exceeded the charges he prescribed, & referred to him the extension thereof. As this matter is altogether out of my control & beyond any power I have I might omit mentioning any thing of it to you. I think it proper I should inform you however that in the letter which the Sec. of the Treasury wrote to me on the subject of this particular loan he expressly confined the charges to 4. p cent. I imagine therefore he had on a full view of the subject decided that it was for the interest of the U S. rather to forego the loan than exceed these charges. I mention this circumstance that you may view in a proper light the decision of this point which you have now referred to the Sec of the treasury & through him to our Government. I should add also that it does not appear to me that you have furnished the data which ought to be made known to Government before they extend the charges Permited—via the distribution of those charges so as to shew the part which remains clear to you after that to undertakers, brokers & notary are deducted. I know you have ever expressed an aversion to this, as being contrary to usage—but it is so conformable to propriety in every case & particular in the present that I think you should have done it. In the confidence which Government have ever shewn you (& which I shall be ever free to own I think your zeal & exertions have entitled you to) I never could see any reason for your aversion to confide to them the repartition of the charges allowed on their loans. Being persuaded that your intention is to be satisfied with as moderate if not more moderate gains than those made by the other houses which make foreign loans at Amsterdam, it seems to me on the contrary you should state them for your own satisfaction & that of the U.S.
The power which you sent for me to pass with respect to this loan in The Dutch language is now with the translator & shall be forwarded to you as soon as it can be completed. I must inform you however that from the usage here it cannot be passed before the Notary in either of the languages you mention, & indeed only in the Spanish language. As soon therefore as it is translated from the Dutch into that language it shall be passed before the notary, legalised by the Dutch minister & sent to you. As I take it for granted there are public translators at Amsterdam acquainted with the Spanish language, I suppose it unnecessary to have this act retranslated into French, as is sometimes done here, & certified by the sworn translator. He is not sufficiently acquainted with the Dutch language I believe, or at least is not accustomed, to certify translations in it—& there seems even some difficulty in translating from it. I hoped on my being sent so far from Holland that some less dilatory mode would be adopted for transacting the business of the loans than through me. Its not having been done probably proceeds from its not having been foreseen that I should be so long absent. The present state of letter conveyance is such that until the arrival of yesterdays mail the letters from Philadelphia by the way of Lisbon were of later date by six days than those from Amsterdam by the way of Coruña.
The object of your remittance to M. de Wolf was to pay the annual interest due on the loan there. He informs me that the excess of his draught this year above the last amounting to f 3966.18. 8. was in consequence of the exchange being different this year from what it was the last—& of which he had sent you an authentick extract from the registers of the brokers. The U.S. are bound to pay the interest at Antwerp & of course the fluctuation of the exchange does not concern the holders of the bonds there. M de Wolf therefore is entitled to recieve the amount of the interest in Antwerp money, & I will therefore desire you to pay it, on its appearing to you that the exchange was as he states it. I write him to that effect in the letter which is herein enclosed to you & which I beg you to forward after having read & sealed it. The design of my first authorization to you was to pay him the amount of the interest due at Antwerp on the 2850 bonds at 4½. p. cent, for which it was not my intention to specify any particular sum in Holland Currency. As you directed him in the year 92. to draw on you instead of remitting him the sum I supposed you considered that mode more safe & more advantageous for the U.S. & as you have done the same now I suppose your opinion is the same.
We have just learned that the Packet from Coruña to Falmouth which carried the letters from hence of the 11th of Decr. was taken by the French. I therefore inclose a duplicate of my letter of that date—& remain very sincerely Gentlemen, your obedient servant

W Short
Messrs. W & J Willink N & J Van Staphorst & Hubbard


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to ———, [16 February 1794]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, February 16, 1794]

I recollect that Mr. Morris sometime previous to the first of May instant mentioned to me the subject of some new emission money with inquiry what was to be done with it & that I advised its being presented at the Treasury.

Feby. 16. 1794Alex Hamilton


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Bush, 17 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Bush, George

Treasury Department,February 17th. 1794.
Sir,

In your letter of the 5th. instant it is mentioned that the Merchants of Wilmington claimed an indulgence of 30 days after Bonds for duties fall due on a supposition of a similar indulgence at the Bank of the United States.
This is probably a mistaken conception of a different arrangement for selling drafts at the Bank upon collectors, for which in some instances a credit of 30 days is allowed to the purchaser and which does not operate to prolong the term of credit to the merchant.
The subject respecting drawbacks will be attended to in the present session of Congress and I believe will be regulated as desired.
In a recent settlement made at the Treasury with the Judge of the District of Delaware for salary it appears that two quarters salary have been paid to Mr. Bedford by you. Though the payment will be admitted as a credit in your account it ought to be observed that it was not authorised by any instruction from this Department and therefore irregular as well on that account as also deviating from the rule that salary accounts (where there is no instruction to the contrary) are to be paid quarterly upon settlements at the Treasury.
It is hoped that proper exertions will be made to bring up such of your returns as may be in arrears.
I am Sir   Your Obedient Servant

Alexander Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Jeremiah Olney, 17 February 1794
From: Olney, Jeremiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

CustomhouseDistrict of Providence 17th. Feby. 1794.
Sir

I have had an Interview with Ray Greene Esqr. District Attorney, on the Subject of Defending the Suits of Messrs. Arnold & Dexter in the case of the Brigantine Neptune now pending before the Superiour Court to be held in this Town on the 17th March next—but as he has been heretofore, employed by those Gentlemen in the prosecution of these Suits—he now finds his Situation extremely delicate and upon reflection has thought proper to Decline any Further agency in this business—which renders it expedient for me to employ other counsel to assist David Leonard Barnes Esqr. on the Part of the United States, in view to this I have written on the Subject to James Sullivan Esqr. attorney at Law at Boston. I am informed he is a Gentleman of Eminence in his profession.
The Justice and propriety of my Defending against these Suits, Supported by able counsel, I presume cannot fail to ensure Success.
I have the Honor to be very respectfully   Sir   your Most Obed. Hum. Servt.

Jereh. Olney Collr.
Alexander Hamilton Esqr.Secretary of the Treasury


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Seton, [18 February 1794]
From: Seton, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[New York, February 18, 1794]
My Dear sir

The enclosed I have just received from Mr. Church with a very polite Letter to myself. He did not then know of the purchases I had made for him, but I am sure they will be satisfactory—the price of Shares still ⟨con⟩tinues at 13 to 13½ ⅌ Cent & Exchange about 5 ⅌ Cent. ⟨I hope to⟩day or tomorrow to receive a few lines from you ⟨on the su⟩bject.
I am with the greatest esteem & respect   Dear sir   Your Obliged Obedt Sert

Wm Seton
New York 18 Feby 94
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Pierce Butler, 19 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Butler, Pierce

Treasury DepartmentFeby 19. 1794
Sir

The President has communicated to me an application from you on behalf of the State of South Carolina for the original vouchers of that State, which were deposited by its Agent with the commissioners for settling Accounts between the United and Individual States—and by them with the Treasury as part of the Materials upon which the settlement made by them was founded, with direction to reply to it.

It is conceived, that these original vouchers cannot with propriety be delivered out of the possession of the Treasury, without some legislative direction for the purpose, until at least the Legislature shall have acted upon the Report of the Commissioners.
But if it shall be desired the state may at its own expence obtain copies of the vouchers whenever it shall be thought fit.
I have the honor to be Sir   Your most Obed serv

Pierce Butler Esqr


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Otho H. Williams, 19 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Williams, Otho H.

Treasury Department, February 19, 1794. Encloses “a copy of a letter from Mr Wm Jarvis … which was addressed to the Secretary of State, and by him transmitted to this Department.” States that “the proper course of proceeding is marked out by law.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Benjamin Lincoln, James Lovell, and Thomas Melville, 20 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Lincoln, Benjamin,Lovell, James,Melville, Thomas

Treasury Department, February 20, 1794. “I am to acknowlege the receipt of your letter of the 31st ultimo, respecting the Petition of the Inspectors and to assure you that early and proper attention will be paid to the subject.”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Nicholson, 20 February 1794
From: Nicholson, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Comp. Gen. Office [Philadelphia]Feby 20th. 1794
sir

My Counsel are desirous of having a Copy of your letter of 20th. March 179[3] in which you refer to Mr. Randolph for his opinion on the subscribability of New Loans of Pennsa. to the Loan of the United states. You have hitherto been so kind in supplying copies of such papers as I applied for that I am in hopes [you] will not think this application troublesome and I believe I shall not need to ask you for any other.
If it were not improper I should be glad to have your answer whether as the words subsisting debt is frequently mentioned as a necessary ingredient to the assumability of any State Certificate, whether that was not more particularly intended to guard the Loans from being filled by the States themselves respectively with Certificates before redeemed by them and therefore no longer subsisting debts, as I can have no ideas of a debt ceasing to subsist until it be paid or discharged.
I am &c

JN
The Honble The secretary of the Treasury


Title: Report Relative to a Lighthouse on Cape Hatteras, [20 February 1794]
From: Treasury Department,Hamilton, Alexander
To: President of the Senate

[Philadelphia, February 20, 1794Communicated on February 22, 1794]
[To the President of the Senate]

The Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to the order of the Senate of the 28th of March 1792 “directing the Secy of the Treasury to inquire into the expediency & report to Congress at their next session, the expediency of erecting a light house at Occracock island, or elsewhere, near the entrances of Occracock Inlet, & an estimate of the probable expense,” respectfully makes the following Report.
Upon receipt of that order, he instructed the Commissioner of the Revenue (who is charged with the immediate care of that branch of the Treasury business which respects Light House Establishments) to make the proper inquiries concerning the subject of it. But having for a long time entertained an opinion that a Light House on some part of Cape Hatteras would be an establishment of very general utility to the navigation of the united States, he judged it a fit occasion to unite with an examination of the scene indicated by the order an examination of the situations on the Cape adapted to a Light House and of such other circumstances as were necessary to be attended to in forming a judgment of the practicability and expediency of erecting and maintaining a light House on the Cape. And accordingly he charged the Commissioner with the collateral inquiry likewise.
The result of the Investigation on both points is herewith presented in a letter from the commissioner dated the 27th of January last, accompanied with an estimate of the expence of such an Erection as appears eligible within the scene designated by the order.
It is submitted as the opinion of the Secretary that it would be adviseable as well to erect a Light House of the first rate on Cape Hatteras (the requisite cession being previously obtained for the purpose) as to establish a beacon of the kind described in the Estimate on the land ceded by the State of North Carolina for the site of a Light House.
All of which is respectfully submitted

Alexander HamiltonSecy of the Treasy
Treasury Department February 20th 1794.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Wilhem and Jan Willink, Nicholaas and Jacob Van Staphorst, and Nicholas Hubbard, 24 February 1794
From: Willink, Wilhem,Willink, Jan,Van Staphorst, Nicholaas,Van Staphorst, Jacob,Hubbard, Nicholas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Amsterdam] 24 February 1794.
Sir!

We had the pleasure to address you our last respects the 4th Instant, and have now to acknowledge Receipt of the Triplicate of your esteemed favor of 26 November last, Original and Duplicate of which have not yet reached us.
We have advice of the Bank of the United States having drawn upon us a Bill for one hundred Thousand Guilders to the order of Mr. Samuel Meredith Treasurer of the United States. But the remittance of it is not come to our hands, neither have We received from the Bank any the least Information, of the provisional Arrangement you acquaint us to have made with that Institution, for securing payment of the Interests due here by the United States up to the first proximo inclusive: Such delays in the Arrival of Letters, evince most forcibly, the propriety of making early provision for the engagements of the United States falling due here, and of sending us by every opportunity, during the War, Copies of all interesting Communications You may have to make unto us; It affords us at same time an additional reason to the numerous Ones We before had, to be highly pleased at our success in the New Loan We opened the 1st ultimo.
Inclosed We hand You Copy of the Account Current of the United States with us between the 1st of February and the 30th of March last, and of the Letter in which We originally transmitted same to You.
We are respectfully   Sir!   Your most ob. hb. Servants

William & Jan Willink
N & J Van Staphorst & Hubbard
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Theodore Sedgwick, 25 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Sedgwick, Theodore

Treasury Department, February 25, 1794.
Sir:

The following are answers to the questions stated in your Letter of the 22d instant, viz.
Answer to question the first.
All moneys collected on account of the United States, and deposited in the Banks to the credit of the Treasurer, are considered as in the Treasury from the time of the deposite. The steady course with regard to the standing revenue is, that the money deposited in Bank passes immediately to the credit of the Treasurer.
But it is necessary to discharge the payers, that receipts of the Treasurer should be endorsed upon warrants signed by the Secretary, countersigned by the Comptroller, and registered by the Register, which is the course regularly observed.
Answer to question the second.
After moneys are deposited in Banks to the credit of the Treasurer, they are in his control, though they may not legally be disbursed but upon warrants of the above description. If deposited without passing in the first instance to the credit of the Treasurer, the means used for placing them in his custody and disposal are warrants of the like kind.
Answer to question the third.
In respect to any moneys of the United States, deposited in Banks, but not passed to the credit of the Treasurer, the Banks are considered as directly responsible to the United States; in the case of desposites to the credit of the Treasurer, they are responsible in the first instance, to him, ultimately to the United States.
Answer to question the fourth.
Only two cases are recollected, in which moneys of the United States may be considered as having been deposited in Bank without passing, in the first instance, into the account of the Treasurer. These relate, first, to the proceeds of foreign bills sold for the Government and received by the Bank, (all accounts of which are now closed;) second, to the sum of $200,000, being the only sum now so deposited, which arises from the last loan had of the Bank. It is left (subject to the eventual decision of the Legislature,) as an offset against the second instalment of the two million loan from the Bank.
The effect of the operation will be this: An interest of six per cent., payable to the Bank upon the instalment, will be extinguished from the 31st December last, by an interest of five per cent., payable to the Bank upon the sum borrowed of itself and left in deposite. And it has been endeavored, thereby, to preserve consistency and regularity in the arrangements of the Treasury. The first instalment, by leaving in deposite an equal sum of the proceeds of foreign bills, was considered as effected on the 31st December, 1792, though there was not power to consummate the payment till some months after. Hence, it becomes regular, that each succeeding instalment should be paid on the last of December of each year. The provisional measure, thus adopted, was the only expedient in the power of the Treasury to reconcile, as far as practicable, considerations relative to the public interest and credit, with the legality of procedure. Neither the sum in deposite, on the one hand, nor the instalment payable to the Bank, on the other, is brought into the probable state of cash lately presented to the House of Representatives; because they balance each other and leave the result the same.
There are no existing sources from which moneys can come into the Bank on account of the United States, except from the proceeds of the revenue, which, as far as known, are comprized in the statement before the House of Representatives. So that there is no resource but a loan which can supply the deficit of receipt in the course of the present and succeeding quarters, compared with the expenditure; without one, a failure in the public payments is inevitable.
If what has been said should not give the Committee the light they desire, it is imagined that personal explanations would lead more fully to their object than the course of written interrogatories and answers, which can only partially embrace the subject, and may procrastinate a right understanding of it.
I am sir, with esteem and regard, &c.,

Alex. Hamilton.
Theodore Sedgwick, Esq.,Chairman of the Committee.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Abraham Baldwin, 26 February 1794
From: Baldwin, Abraham
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia 26th. February 1794
Sir,

The Committee, appointed in pursuance of the inclosed resolutions, have directed me to make you acquainted with the business of their appointment. Whilst they assure themselves of your chearful co-operation in giving the fullest effect to the wishes of the House, they are desirous it should be done, in a manner, least troublesome to yourself, and most accommodated to your wishes.
The Committee will meet at 10 o’clock on Saturday next; any thing, which may occur to you on the occasion, which you wish to submit to the consideration of the Committee, either personally, or in writing, they will be happy to receive.
Yrs &c.

Ab. Baldwin, Chairman.
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.Secretary of the Treasury.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Stephen Girard, 26 February 1794
From: Girard, Stephen
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, February 26, 1794. “I have Sent to Bordeaux a new Ship … with a Cargo of Tobacco, Rice, Cotton, &c. That vessel arrived at her destination on the 13 day of July last and has been detained there for five Months, by an Embargo.… The Supercargo (my Brother John Girard a Citizen of the United States) … informs me that he had been forced to unload part thereof and … that the French Governement would take Possession of the Said Cargo. As the above vessel and Goods are my own Property I … hope You will … Take Such Steps therein as Justice and the Interest of a Citizen of the United States may requiere.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Abraham Baldwin, 27 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Baldwin, Abraham

Treasury Department Feby. 27. 1794
Sir

I have this morning received your Note of yesterday as Chairman of the Committee on the State of the Treasury Department.
I beg the Committee to accept my acknowlegement for the politeness they manifest. They are not mistaken in assuring themselves of my most cheerful cooperation to give the fullest effect to the object with which they are charged.
In this disposition, I shall with pleasure meet them at the time appointed when I hope a plan of proceeding may be concerted which will be mutually convenient, and effectual to the end in view.
I have the honor Sir to be   With perfect respect   Your most Obed serv

Abraham Baldwin EsquireChairman &c


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Stephen Moylan, 27 February 1794
From: Moylan, Stephen
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia] February 27, 1794. “The secretary of War has sent to this Office as list of the names & the Sums to which the Military Invalids of this State are entitled to for Six Months of their Annual Pension from the 4th day of Septr. 1793 and which will become due on the 5th day of March 1794 the Amount of which is Eight thousand two hundred & twenty five Dollars & sixteen Cents for which sum I crave a Warrant.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Frederick A. C. Muhlenberg, 27 February 1794
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Muhlenberg, Frederick A. C.

Treasury Department, February 27th. 1794.
Sir,

I have the honor to transmit Reports on sundry petitions heretofore submitted to me by the House of Representatives, as specified in the list herewith enclosed,

The enquiry lately instituted by the House into the State of the Treasury Department will necessarily occupy me so much, as cooperating with the requisite Attention to the general objects of the Department, must render it impossible for me in the course of the present Session to devote any part of my time to the Consideration of the individual Cases, which remain of those from time to time referred to me, and which are still numerous.
As several of these references are of long standing, owing to an Excess of business, and the Anxiety of parties has become very urgent, I submit it to the House whether it may not be advisable to revoke the remaining references to me and put them in another train.
With perfect Respect   I have the honor to be   Sir   Your most obedient Servant

Alexander HamiltonSecy. of the Treasury.
The HonorableThe Speaker of the house of Representativesof the United States.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Thomas Pinckney, 27 February 1794
From: Pinckney, Thomas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

London 27 Febry 1794
My dear Sir

I have no occasion to introduce Mr La Colombe to your acquaintance—as you are no stranger to his merit & services & to the confidence reposed in him by our unfortunate friend M. Lafayette—but I take the liberty of troubling you with my sollicitation that in case any difficulties should be made to this Gentleman’s receiving what is due to him from the United States, on account of the absence of his certificate (which it is impossible for him to produce under the existing circumstances) you will have the goodness to use your endeavours to obviate them. I have procured for him the interest in his certificate without the production of that instrument, which I trust, Knowing You, will be the case also with the principal.
Our fellow Soldier Col. Laumoy is nearly in the same situation with respect to his certificate give me leave also to recommend his case to your protection.
Mr. Cadignan an aide de camp & friend of M. Lefayette accompanies M. Lecolumbe. I beg to introduce him to your attention. Mr & Mrs Church with their family are well—be pleased to present my best respects to Mrs. Hamilton & believe me to be with sincere esteem
Your faithful & obed Servt:

Thomas Pinckney
Col. Hamilton


Title: Report on the Petition of Jacob Bailey, [27 February 1794]
From: Treasury Department,Hamilton, Alexander
To: Speaker of the House of Representatives

[Philadelphia, February 27, 1794Communicated on March 3, 1794]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]

The Secretary of the Treasury to whom was referred the Petition of Jacob Bailey by an Order of the House of Representatives of the 25th of May 1790, thereupon respectfully Reports—
That the Secretary has caused inquiry to be made at the proper Office of the Treasury concerning the Case of the Petitioner, and has received the following Information Vizt.
The Commissioner for settling the Accounts of the Quarter-Master Department, was directed by the resolution of Congress of the 30th of October 1783 to settle the Accounts of Jacob Bailey, which he had against the United States, for money advanced, supplies furnished, and for Services rendered by him. Pursuant to this resolution the Commissioner did on the 6th of November 1783 make a Settlement with the Petitioner for Supplies &ca. to the St Francois Tribe of Indians, and for secret Services performed by him under instructions from the Commander in Chief. Upon this Settlement a balance of 2905 dollars was paid to the Petitioner upon his giving an Obligation to the Commissioner that no further Charge whatever, should be brought against the United States on account of the Indians.
It appears also, that his Accounts relative to the Quarter-Master Department have been settled in June 1790, upon which Settlement he received a balance of 1298 Dollars and 63 Cents, and that the Petitioner has moreover made other Settlements with several State Commissioners.
Upon this View of the Case, there does not appear to the Secretary any ground for the Interposition of Congress in favor of the Petitioner.
All which is humbly submitted

Alexander HamiltonSecy. of the Treasury.
Treasury Department February 27th 1794.


Title: Report on the Petition of Elisha Bennett, [27 February 1794]
From: Treasury Department,Hamilton, Alexander
To: President of the Senate

[Philadelphia, February 27, 1794Communicated on March 3, 1794]
[To the President of the Senate]

The Secretary of the Treasury to whom was referred the petition of Elisha Bennett, by an order of the Senate of the 20th. of November 1792, thereupon Respectfully Reports
That the claim of the Petitioner is one, to the adjustment of which the power of the Treasury is competent.
That it has been rejected at the Auditors Office for the following reasons:
The only paper in that Office relating to the frigate Trumbull, while under the command of Dudley Saltonstall, is a muster Roll signed by him and dated the 15th of September 1777, by which it appears that Elisha Bennett entered on board the said frigate in the Capacity of second Mate on the 13th. of January 1777.
It appears from the Books and Records of the late Marine Department that Captn. Saltonstall received from the Public, through different channels, to the amount of 22,416 Dollars: the whole of which remains unaccounted for, and which it is to be supposed was advanced for the purpose of discharging the wages due to the Crew.
This supposition is supported by the following circumstances. It appears first—that the Vessels disbursements were made by the Agents, Secondly, That a Pay Master was not appointed for the Eastern Department until August or September 1778 previous to which period advances were generally made to the Captains for the purpose of paying the Crew; and thirdly, that very few applications have been made to the late Commissioner or at the Auditors Office for balances due for the time that Captain Saltonstall had the command of the Trumbull. Such as were made to the Commissioner were accompanied with Certificates signed by Captain Saltonstall, stating, that agreeably to the ship Books a certain sum remained due to the Claimant.
On the 12th. of June 1787 the late Commissioner of Marine accounts finding no regular Rolls relative to the Trumbull, for the time she was under the command of Captain Saltonstall, called on him to render his account and the Ships books. He received for answer that the papers of the Trumbull were burnt in the conflagration of New London, and that those relating to the Warren, while under his Command, were lost with that Vessel in the Expedition to Penobscot.
The bare information of Persons making demands upon the United States, not confirmed by any authentic document, as in the present instance, particularly as it relates to monies, which may have been received by the Claimants, on account, is considered as an insufficient ground for adjusting such demands. And under all the circumstances before mentioned it has hitherto appeared dangerous and improper to attempt a settlement with any of the Persons who served on board the Trumbull under Captain Saltonstall.
These reasons appear to the Secretary valid, and such as in his opinion would render any special interposition in favor of the Petitioner unadviseable.
Which is humbly submitted

Alexander HamiltonSecy of the Treasy
Treasury Department February 27th 1794.