Title: Report on the Improvement and Better Management of the Revenue of the United States, [31 January 1795]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, January 31, 1795Communicated on February 2, 1795]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]
The Secretary of the Treasury respectfully makes the following report to the House of Representatives.
According to the present laws imposing duties on articles imported into the United States, not much Short of one third of the whole amount of the duties is derived from articles rated advalorem.
In other nations, where this branch of revenue, as with us, is of principal, or very considerable consequence, and where no peculiarity of situation has tended to keep the rates of duty low, experience has led to contract more and more, the number of articles rated ad valorem, and of course, to extend the number of those rated specifically, that is, according to weight, measure, or other rule of quantity.
The reason of this is obvious. It is to guard against Evasions which infallibly happen in a greater or less degree, where duties are high. It is impossible for the merchants of any country to have manifested more probity, than those of the United States, on this Subject. And it is firmly believed, that there never was one, in which illicit practices, to the disadvantage of the revenue, have obtained So little as hitherto in this. Yet it would be a delusive expectation, that with duties so considerable as those which now exist, a disposition will not be experienced in some individuals, who carry on our import trade, to evade the payment of them, and this to an extent sufficient to make it prudent to guard with circumspection, and by every reasonable precaution against the success of such attempts. It is needless to repeat that this will contribute as much to the interest of the fair trader, as to that of the revenue.
It is believed, that in our System, the method of rating ad valorem could, with convenience, be brought within a much narrower compass; and it is evident, that to do so, will contribute materially to the Security of the revenue.
The Secretary has not hitherto had leisure to digest the details of a plan for this purpose; but if the idea is approved, it can be carried with due accuracy into effect, at a future session, by an order upon the head of this department, to prepare in the mean time, a tariff proportioned to the actual rates of duty.
It may also be found expedient with a similar view, to adjust anew the proportional rates of duty of different kinds or qualities of certain articles. This observation is believed to apply with particular force to teas. It would be, in the opinion of the Secretary, advisable to throw them into three classes; to raise somewhat the lowest rate, and to diminish considerably the higher rates. A persuasion is entertained, founded partly upon observation of the course of importations, that a regulation of this kind, would benefit the revenue. The same thing might be conveniently extended to some other articles.
Advantages will also accrue from a re-adjustment of the rates in certain cases, by combining several rates on the same articles, established by different acts, into one rate, and by dismissing inconvenient fractions, which serve to perplex the calculation of the duties. Some alteration in the terms of credit for duties, may, it is conceived, be made with advantage. Where four months are allowed, three and six months may be substituted; and three, six, nine, twelve and fifteen, to the cases of six, nine and twelve months. This will apportion the course of receipts more according to the course of payments, and prevent inconvenient pressures at particular junctures.
The compensations to inspectors, especially in the ports where the expense of living is great, and to collectors and Surveyors in the less productive parts, urgently demand revision, in order to an increase of them.
The Security of the revenue, in every branch, turns (it will not be strong to say) principally upon the officers of the lowest grade. Hence it is a policy, no less mistaken than common, to leave those officers without such compensations as will admit of a proper selection of character, and prevent the temptation from indigence to abuse the trust. It is certain, that in many places, the present allowance to inspectors, on the most liberal application of it, is inadequate to those important ends.
A similar reasoning will apply to those officers of the principal grades, who being in districts which produce little, are ill compensated by the emoluments to which they are at present entitled. It cannot escape, that the safety of the revenue must depend on equal fidelity and due vigilance in all the districts; else it may become, in many cases, worth the while to resort to particular districts, because there is a deficiency of the one or the other. Besides, that it is in itself just and proper, that all who are in the public service, should receive adequate rewards for their time, attention and trouble.
The aggregate expense of collecting the duties on impost and tonnage, is at present, truly moderate; a circumstance which facilitates the extension of allowances where they are necessary. The System of the revenue cutters needs revision. The utility of every institution depends on the competency of the agents who are to execute it. The present compensations to officers and men, compared with what may be obtained in other similar employment, unaided by collateral motives, creates a degree of embarrassment which very much impairs the usefulness of the thing. It would have been, in the judgment of the Secretary, a great mean of rendering it competent to its object, if, as was early suggested by him, the officers of the customs had had rank in the navy of the United States.
With regard to that branch of revenue, which is constituted by the duties upon Spirits distilled within the United States, and upon Stills, it is believed that it would be an improvement, and one which could be now made without inconvenience, to abolish the option to pay by the gallon, of the Spirits distilled in the cases where the duties are charged on the Stills. This will leave the alternative of paying by the year, or for less periods upon licenses, at the choice of the party—an alternative which affords sufficient accommodation to the difference of circumstances. The option to pay by the gallon, of the Spirits distilled, according to an account to be rendered on the oath of the party, though expedient in the first experiment of the law, is objectionable as a permanent regulation in a double view.
The additional discretionary latitude given to compensations to the officers concerned in the collection of those duties, is restricted to a term which will expire at the end of the next Session of Congress. It will be essential to extend it, or to fix the compensations which shall have been allowed. It is believed that further experience will still be useful towards a definitive legislative adjustment.
Embarrassments are experienced from the want of a concurrent authority in these officers, similar to that of the officers of the customs, to make seizures within each other’s surveys or divisions. On the borders of such as are adjacent, the officers are exposed to hazard in making seizures, and better opportunities are afforded of escaping detection.
The revenue to result from the act of the last session, laying duties upon licenses to retailers of wines and distilled Spirits, may be improved, favorably to proportional equality, by changing the form.
One licence for selling one or more kinds of wines, puts the greatest and the Smallest dealer upon the same footing, and is so far inequitable. To class wines into a few obvious and strongly marked discriminations, and to render a licence necessary for each class, with a duty upon each licence, would favor a just distribution of the tax among great and small dealers, and would, at the same time, benefit the revenue. The classes may be as follow: 1st. Madeira wine. 2d: Sherry wine. 3d: port wine. 4th: Other wines.
To secure the defect of the discrimination in favor of small dealers, who may be in the practice of selling and sending out different kinds of wines in small quantities, it may be provided, that not more than one licence shall be necessary to any dealer, who never sells or sends out at one time, more than three gallons. And suitable penalties may be annexed to guard the condition of the exemption.

Similar observations are applicable to licenses to retailers of spirituous liquors. These may be thrown into three classes: 1st: Spirits distilled from the grape, commonly called brandy. 2d: Spirits distilled from the produce of the Sugar Cane, commonly called rum. 3d: Other distilled Spirits: and there may be a like provision in favor of dealers who never sell or send out more than three gallons at one time.
Distillers may be put in this respect, as to the spirits they distil, upon the same footing with importers; that is, they may be exempt from the licence duty; but it would seem proper to annex these conditions to the exemption, that they shall not sell and send out a less quantity in one cask, vessel or package, than ten gallons; and that they shall not deal in the selling at retail, of any other Spirits than those they themselves distil.
Or another rule may be adopted, for proportioning the tax to the extent of the dealing; which is, to add to the present rate of the licence, certain supplemental rates, according to the yearly rent or yearly value, by appraisement of the house or building in which the retailer of wines or spirituous liquors shall carry on the business.
This has been found in practice, a convenient, and, upon the whole, an equitable rule of proportion; evidently more so than one licence, with the same duty to all dealers indiscriminately.
It is a general and a wise national policy, to make these articles of wine and spirits as contributory to the revenue as they can be made, which can only be effected by subdividing the duties upon them, in the different stages of their passage to the consumer. The branch under consideration, might be an important one. As it is now regulated, it is feared that it may prove of inconsiderable consequence. The confining of the licences for selling spirituous liquors to foreign Spirits, must give great facility to evasions. And it has an unequal operation upon different portions of the community.
It would promote the object of the Act which imposes duties on sales at auction, to allow two and a half per centum to each auctioneer, in lieu of the one per centum allowed by the ninth Section of that Act. It is believed, that the present allowance is insufficient to defray the expense of clerkship incident to a compliance with the requisitions of the law, which cannot be rendered less particular or exact, without prejudice to the revenue.
The tax upon Snuff, according to a rate per pound will be liable to very great evasions, without regulations for a close inspection of the course of the business. Dispensing with these, it seems advisable to modify the tax upon a different plan. The proposition to lay it upon the mortar, is as good a substitute as has occurred. It appears, upon evidence which is credited, that a Snuff mill usually works about one half the year; that is, one hundred and fifty six working days in a year, and yields per mortar of the whole number of mortars contained in a mill, an average of forty five pounds of snuff per day. It follows, that five hundred and sixty one dollars and sixty cents per mortar, per annum, is the equivalent of the present duty of eight cents per pound. There are objections to this form of the tax, but as it appears to be generally desired by the manufacturers, it seems advisable to forego them; especially, as the present plan demands far more rigorous precautions for the effectual collection of the duty, than now exist, or than would be expedient.
A similar difficulty attends the tax upon refined sugar. But a proper substitute for the present plan, is not perceived. It will fortify the revenue, and produce no undue inconvenience to the manufacturer, if he be required to annex a ticket or tickets to each loaf of sugar, specifying the weight in pounds; and to each cask, barrel, key, box or other package of refined Sugar, specifying the contents, and weight in pounds—Corresponding certificates or tickets to accompany imported refined sugar. The kinds of tickets to be furnished by the respective supervisors, and accounted for to them. The observance of this regulation to be secured by proper penalties.
The Act which lays a duty on carriages for the conveyance of persons, exempts from the duty carriages usually and chiefly Employed in husbandry, and in carrying commodities. It is a material defect in this Act, as has been already experienced, that it provides no summary mode for determining what carriages are within the exempting description. Now, every disputed case must be the subject of a suit in all the legal forms; which is equally objectionable on the score of delay and expense. It is not perceived, that any insurmountable difficulty lies in the way of providing a remedy consistently with a due reference in the last resort to the judiciary authority.
In revenue laws, too much is as great a fault as too little Simplicity. It leaves them unprovisional; incapable of execution in a manner convenient either to the public, or to individuals.
The Acts imposing duties on licences for selling wines and Spirituous liquors, at retail, and upon Sales at auction, authorize allowances not exceeding two and a half per cent for compensation to officers, and for incidental expenses. The Acts laying duties upon carriages for the conveyance of persons, and upon snuff and refined sugar, makes no provision for such compensations, or other expenses of collection. It is the opinion of the Secretary, that the rate of two and a half per cent in the two first mentioned Acts, is inadequate—that it ought to be extended to five per cent; and that an equal provision should be made for the expense of collection, under the two last mentioned Acts.
The restrictions upon Officers of the Customs, and upon the Supervisors and other officers of inspection, with regard to the public funds, appear to the Secretary, unnecessary and inconvenient; unnecessary, because those officers having no concern whatever, with any branch of public business, that respects the management of the funds, can have no official influence upon the policy or execution of the measures which regard them, further than by a punctual collection of the revenues; inconvenient, because it deprives them of a mean of investing any little sums they may save or acquire, in a mode very convenient to men, who, from situation, are less able to avail themselves of other opportunities. If the being Stock-holders, can have any influence upon them, as officers, it must be of a kind favorable to the public Service, by increasing their personal interest in the exact collection of the revenue. If the idea which dictated the restrictions, was, that they might use the public money in speculations in Stock, the answer is, that this is not in their power, from the rapidity with which it is transferred to the Treasury; and if it were practicable for them to divert the public money, and a disposition to do it should in any case exist, it might operate through other channels. In lieu of the restrictions concerning the funds, the employment of public money for private purposes, may, if thought necessary, be still further guarded against, by penalties. Those restrictions in reference to the immediate officers of the Treasury department, and the Commissioners of Loans, are entirely proper, and ought to be maintained; but it is believed, that it is not only useless, but injurious to give them greater extension. The multiplication of restrictions on the public officers will render greater compensations necessary, and be a source of expense to the public.
All which is respectfully submitted,

Alexander Hamilton,Secretary of the Treasury.
Treasury Department,January, 31, 1795.

☞ Note. Since the conclusion of this report, the Secretary has learnt, that a bill (the progress of which his peculiar situation had prevented his observing) had actually passed the two Houses, for changing the terms of six, nine and twelve months, into eight, ten and twelve. This bill, besides interfering disadvantageously with arrangements of the Treasury, founded upon the existing provisions of the laws, will, it is apprehended, tend to increase an inconvenience, which the above suggestions were meant to lessen—the too great concentration of mercantile payments. Any accidental derangement of the mercantile body, from overtrading or other cause, would, in this situation, endanger consequences to the Treasury, which it might be difficult to meet by other expedients; whereas a subdivision into Shorter and more numerous periods, by diminishing the effect, would admit in such cases, of an easy substitute. The merchants themselves are particularly interested in this question, for the re-action upon them of any embarrassment of the Treasury, might render that a general and lasting mischief, which might otherwise have been only a partial and transient disorder.


Title: Report on the Petition of Thomas Coit, [31 January 1795]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, January 31, 1795Communicated on February 2, 1795]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]
The Secretary of the Treasury, respectfully makes the following report upon the petition of Thomas Coit, referred to him by the House of Representatives.
The petitioner seeks a discharge from the responsibility from a sum of 157 dollars, which were in his hands as a collector of the revenue, and which are alledged to have been wholly lost, in the destruction of a house by fire.
In the opinion of the Secretary, that the powers of the accounting officers of the Treasury, exercised on the principles of common law are adequate to relief in every similar case, in which it is proper to grant it; and consequently, that the special interposition of the Legislature is unnecessary and inexpedient.
Which is respectfully submitted,

Alexander Hamilton,Secretary of the Treasury.


Title: Report on the Petition of William Gardner, [31 January 1795]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, January 31 1795Communicated on February 2, 1795]
[To the Speaker of the House of Representatives]
The Secretary of the Treasury, to whom was referred the petition of William Gardner, Commissioner of loans for New Hampshire, respectfully reports thereupon, as follows:
There is no branch of the public service which more than this requires such an arrangement as will secure a selection of fit characters willing to accept the office, and to continue in it. The system of the transfers of stock at fourteen different offices, and from one office to another, and of paying interest at Each, is necessarily extremely complicated, requiring great accuracy and punctuality every where, to prevent its running into disorder, and producing very serious hazards and inconveniences to the public and to individuals—A system which is without example in any other Country, but which local circumstances and the public Engagements have rendered, and continue to render indispensable. The responsibility, importance and delicacy of the trust which it implies, are witnessed by the simple statement of the fact. It is only to consider, what is the nature of the power, as it regards the implication of the public in pecuniary responsibility which is confided to so many individuals, to be convinced that it is Essential to make effectual provision for obtaining and keeping competent and unexceptionable agents. It is a subject which even ought to excite particular solicitude in this respect.
It cannot be doubted, that an essential mean to this End, will be adequate compensations. It cannot be expected in a Country where talents for business, united with integrity and Character, are in high demand, and in which the expense of living at the places where public business must be carried on, is, and is likely to continue high, that the government will be so well served, without liberal compensations for the service. There is no truth more clear to the eye of reason, nor better established by experience, than that undue parsimony, in this particular, is in time the very worst œconomy. It tends to throw the business of the nation into hands unqualified, or unworthy of trust—whence, of course, it will be ill done—disorders, and even frauds will Ensue; and the pecuniary loss sustained in one year, perhaps in one day, by the infidelity or inability of unfit agents, may exceed the difference of compensation which would have procured fit ones for a long series of years. True œconomy, as applied to a nation, does not consist in the penurious apportionment of the compensations of its officers, but in the steady adherence to an enlightened and comprehensive system, which, among other effects, placing the management of its affairs in able and faithful hands, causes all its great pecuniary operations to be conducted both with skill and integrity. The experience of the United States, at various periods, sufficiently attests this fact.
These observations do not aim at countenancing prodigality even in this branch of public expenditure; they are only designed to imply, that parsimony, in this particular, is not as it Seems by some to be thought, the great hinge of national œconomy—that carried too far, it turns against its own object, and produces the worst effects of prodigality. There is, no doubt, measure in this, as in every other thing; though the Compensations should be adequate, they ought not to be excessive. But in adjusting the measure, it is Essential to weigh well the nature of the trust—the talents necessary for it—the uses to which they can be turned in private life for the benefit of the possessor, and the indemnification which he will consequently expect, to be induced to serve the public—the degree of character which is requisite, and the probable extent of emolument which will command the due degree of character—the expense of living where the service is to be performed.
In the case of the Commissioners of loans, the extent of the occupation which they will respectively have, though a criterion of allowance, is not the only one. Similar qualifications are necessary with regard to all of them, whether having more or less business to attend to. And the power of all being equal, the trust with respect to all is equally delicate. There should be nowhere a man who is not an intelligent man of business, of established integrity, and of respectability of character. It merits reflection also, that it will sometimes happen, that the official duties of the officer may not be sufficient to occupy him wholly, yet sufficient to interfere, and perhaps incompatible with the effectual pursuit of other business for which he may be qualified.
In the particular case referred to him, the Secretary Combining and weighing to the best of his judgment, all the considerations which belong to it, is of opinion that it is just and expedient to allow a yearly salary of one thousand dollars for compensation and all expenses, except stationery.
Which is respectfully submitted,

Alexander Hamilton,Secretary of the Treasury.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, [31 January 1795]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

[Philadelphia, January 31, 1795]
Mr. Hamilton presents his respects to the President—sends him some memorandums of recommendations of officers of Inspection.
With regard to the Supervisor of the So. Western Territory, he is of opinion that still further information is necessary.
He believes Mr. William Nichols who is the brother of Colo. Nichols to be a fit person for Inspector of the Revenue for the first survey of Pennsylvania.
He also entertains a favorable opinion of Colo. Dearborne for the like office in the province of Maine. But doubts the legality of his nomination as he was a member of Congress last Session when provision was made for an increase of the Compensations of these officers among others.
Jany. 31. 1795.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 31 January 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir,
Treasury DepartmentJanuary 31. 1795.
I have the honor to send you the copy of a Letter of the 27 instant from the Collector of Philadelphia—of another letter of the 30 ultimo from that officer to the Atty. of the District of Pennsylvania, and of a deposition of Charles Hemes taken before Judge Peters.
These documents establish an improper attempt of Mr. Petri the French Consul to evade a Law of the United States, and allow a suspicion of the privity of a higher official character. It is impossible to avoid the reflection that there is too much connexion between the affair of the Powder, and the unlawful equipment of the privateer Les Jumeaux.
I fear that agents of France have not ceased to countenance proceedings which not only contravene our neutrality but may prove a source of very serious expense to the United States.
With perfect respect,   I have the honor to be &c.

Alexander Hamilton


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 31 January 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir
Treasury DepartmentJanuary 31 1795
Previous to the leaving my present Office there are a few points which I think it my duty to bring under the consideration of the President.
The first regards the present state and arrangement of the Mint.
It is certain that this establishment is capable of producing very important benefits to the community. At this moment when an unusually large and a sudden exportation of silver has produced a very inconvenient Scarcity of that Species of money, the full activity of the Mint would be of primary utility. Large quantities of Silver lie in the Banks and other places in Ingots, which if turned into coin would be of the greatest advantage to Trade and to all pecuniary operations public and private.
Hitherto the Mint has comparitively done nothing. This is matter both of Surprise and complaint with all that part of the community, whose dissatisfactions are the less known, because they are not lightly promulgated. The institution itself by not fulfilling the public expectation grows into discredit and those who have had the principal Agency in its establishment are wounded by a growing disrepute which is attributable truly to an insufficient execution. The President probably knows better than I do, what have been the causes of the deficiency. They may afford a justification; but uninformed as I am I cannot help thinking that with due exertion the business of the Mint might have been far more matured, and its present powers of Action far greater than they are: And I am led to fear that as long as it continues under its present management the public expectation will be disappointed. The Director, though a most respectable & excellent man, can hardly be expected on several accounts to give that close and undivided attention to it which in its first stages is indispensable.
There is another point in relation to the same subject on which I should have been silent as long as I could be supposed to have any personal motive to influence my opinion. But now that this is at an End, I Yeild without hesitation to my co[n]victions of the public interest, in presenting with the greatest deference those convictions to the Consideration of the President. They amount to this, that the Mint Establishment will be, most advantageously for the Service of the United States, placed under the Superintendence of the Department of the Treasury.
It is Obvious, that that establishment forms a most material link in the money-system of the Country. This system, as it regards public operations, is in the Management of the department of the Treasury. It follows, that in the theory of the case there is an intimate relation between this Department and that establishment.
The Law constituting the Mint also establishes some relations between them.
The fifth Section refers to the Judgment of the Secretary of the Treasury, the competency of the Sureties to be given by the officers of the Mint.
The fourteenth Section, providing for the exchange of bullion for Money with a deduction of ½ pr. Ct. towards defraying the expences of the Mint, makes it the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to furnish the Mint from time to time whenever the State of the Treasury will admit of it, with such sums as may be necessary for effecting those exchanges. To engage the Secretary to dispossess the Treasury with confidence of large Sums for such exchanges, it is necessary that he Should be very certain of their regular and punctual return. The assurance of this would be not a little Strengthened by that intimate knowlege of Situation which would result from the duty of Superintending. The efficient operation of this provision is of no Small consequence to the œconomy of the establishment. Hitherto its Situation has been such as to preclude absolutely the effect of it.
Moreover the Secretary of the Treasury, called daily & habitually to observe the progress of money transactions, awake to every thing which Can affect them well or ill, because the Credit of his Department depends upon it, must be more likely than any other officer to feel a due sensibility to the efficient & proper Course of the Mint, and Consequently to exert himself to give it such a Course.
The post Office on the other hand, if the idea which as repeatedly appeared in Congress be adhered to, that of rendering it an instrument of the improvement of public roads, instead of a means of Revenue, may without inconvenience be placed under the Department of State while the Mint establishment is transferred to the Treasury.
These Observations proceed on the Supposition that the President has adopted in principle & practice the plan of distributing all the particular branches of the public service, except that of the Law, among the three great Departments, a plan which is believed to be founded on Good reasons.
Another point to which I would invite the attention of the President, is the Scheme of Mounted volunteers—as established in the Laws, and as it has Operated in practice.
The expence of it is enormous; & from the nature of the thing has a tendency to continue so. Though the compensation of a dollar per man is not fixed absolutely, but as a limit not to be exceeded the effect is that [the] extent of the sum is expected, and that from this expectation the men could not probably be Obtained for less. The executive too in an emergent service will never be willing to, incur the responsibility of failing by a restriction of the sum; And thus the ultimatum becomes the ordinary rule.
It will be happy if a revision of the measures for defensive protection should issue in a conviction, that the number of volunteer horse can be reduced by a Substitution of Infantry. It is imagined that on calculation it would appear, that a more than proportional increase of infantry would cost less.
In the last place I beg leave to Submit an impression, that advantages would accru⟨e⟩ in the view of œconomy at least, if the Agents for India⟨n⟩ affairs in the So Western and No. Western Territories, wer⟨e⟩ distinct from the Governors. These might Still retain the political direction of affairs, and there would result a check in the business of Supplies.
With the highest respect   I have the honor to be   Sir   Your Obedient Servant

Alexander Hamilton
The President of the United States


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Wilhem and Jan Willink, Nicholaas and Jacob Van Staphorst, and Nicholas Hubbard, 31 January 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Willink, Wilhem,Willink, Jan,Staphorst, Nicholaas van,Staphorst, Jacob van,Hubbard, Nicholas

Gentlemen,
Treasury Department January 31st. 1795
It is probable that before this reaches you you will have heard of my determination to resign my Office of Secretary of the Treasury as on this day. The event will accordingly take place.

I could not permit myself to renounce my official situation without placing among my last Acts the expression of the high sense I continue to entertain of the fidelity and ability with which you have uniformly served the United States. This testimony is due to you and it is with great pleasure I give it.
The Gentleman whom The President has determined to nominate as my Successor and who will be no doubt appointed is Oliver Wolcott Esquire the present Comptroller of the Treasury. I do him no more than Justice, by assuring you, that he is a Gentleman of undoubted intelligence, probity and good principles with regard to Public Credit. The confidence of yourselves and your Countrymen may be safely reposed in him. With sincere wishes for your future welfare and with increased consideration & esteem
I am Gentlemen   your Most Obedt. Servt.

A H.
Messrs. Wilhem & J. Willink& Nicholas & J. Van Staphorst& HubbardMerchants Amsterdam
Original Via Hamburgh under cover to John Parish Esqr Consul of the UStates.
Duplicate through the same Channel.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from George Washington, [1 February 1795]
From: Washington, George
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dear Sir,
[Philadelphia, February 1, 1795]
I received the enclosed letter with the document therein, last night.
For reasons which will appear obvious, I make you acquainted with the contents of them, being
Yours

Go: Washington
Sunday1st Feby 1795


Title: Enclosure: Tench Coxe to George Washington, 31 January 1795
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Washington, George

Sir
Walnut Street [Philadelphia] Jany. 31. 1795
I trust you will believe my solemn assurance of you, that a very painful sense of duty has impelled me to the Communication, which I have now the honor to make to you. As it will be perceived, that it is one of those cases in which an obedience to that sense may produce inconveniencies, I address you, Sir, as much in confidence as you may conceive the nature of the case to admit.
The inclosed Authorization, by the Secretary of the Treasury, of the Comptroller, to execute in virtue thereof, the duties of the former, is the subject of my representation. The Authorization by the first and the acquiescence by the last are in my Judgment contraventions and infractions of the 8th. Section of “the act” (of the 8th. day of May 1792) “making Alterations in the Treasury & War Departments.” They also operate a suspension of the Check upon the first Officer of the Treasury provided by “the act” (of the 2d. day of September 1789) “to establish the Treasury department.”
It is proper, that you should be informed, Sir, that a report was made by a Committee of the Representatives to that House in 1792, calculated to give that duty and that occasional standing in the department to the Comptroller, in the Event of the Absence &ca. of the Secretary of the Treasury. That report, which was framed with the Secretary’s co-operation, was not adopted in that and another particular by the House of Representatives. The same parts, in reference to the proposed powers &ca. to the Comptroller, were copiously discussed, and formally rejected by the Senate. The ample provision in the 8th. Section, as it now stands, was adopted by the Senate and confirmed by the House.
Substitutions for a variety of officers, commissioned by you, have been only admitted after regular provision by Law. It appears by the 6th. Section of the altering act refered to, that the Legislature duly adverted to the Necessity of explicitly granting to the Secretary the power of transferring the Business of the Customs before he could do it, and of such other transfers of portions of the Secretary’s duties as the public Service might require or admit the Commissioner of the Revenue to perform. It also appears, that the Legislature judged, that even the President of the United States could not commit the powers and duties of the Secretary of the Treasury to any other person without the formal investment of him with Authority so to do.
I sincerely wish my Ideas may be inaccurate, but entertaining them as I really do, it appears to be my duty to submit them to you.
With the highest respect, I have the honor to be, Sir, your most obedt. & most humble Servant

Tench Coxe
The President of the United States.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Quincy Adams, 2 February 1795
From: Adams, John Quincy
To: Hamilton, Alexander

The Hague, February 2, 1795. Discusses the political situation and the money market in Europe.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Nathaniel Appleton, 2 February 1795
From: Appleton, Nathaniel
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Boston] February 2, 1795. Requests his salary “as Commissioner of the United States Loan Office in the State of Massachusetts, for the Quarter ending 31st Decemr. 1794.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Frazer, 2 February 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Frazer, William

My Dear Sir
PhiladelphiaFeby. 2d. 1795
The near approach of the time of my departure from this City prevented my sending back Master Philip. I thank you for your obliging conduct in regard to him and my other boy & generally towards this family.
Have the goodness, My Dear Sir, to send me your account with as little delay as possible.
Mrs Hamilton also requests that you will send here by the first opportunity Philip’s Bedstead Bedding & Books & joins in best compliments to the ladies.
With great regard   I am Sir   Your Obedt serv

* P S. These articles may perhaps now come by Water.

A Hamilton
The Reverend Mr. Frazer


Title: Report on the Petition of Robert Oliver and Hugh Thompson, [2 February 1795]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[Philadelphia, February 2, 1795,Communicated on February 2, 1795]
[To the President of the Senate]
The Secretary of the Treasury to whom was referred by the Senate, the Memorial of Oliver and Thompson respectfully makes thereupon the following report.
It is the object of this Memorial to obtain restitution for a sum of duties alleged to have been overpaid in the district of Baltimore in consequence of certain mistakes.
The business of rectifying mistakes in similar cases after a considerable period of time has elapsed and the accounts of the Officers made up rendered and settled is very delicate, and even very dangerous. If the rectifying of these mistakes too is to let in evidence, subsequent to the entry of a different value or a different quality of Goods from that which appeared at the entry, the practice would be liable to insuperable objections. It would amount to nothing less than the dispensing with the evidence of that identity, which results from the actual inspection of Goods by the public Officers at the time of their entry and landing.
Where mistakes are those of the Public Officers, and are early discovered and capable of being indubitably ascertained, they are rectified of course. Where they are of the parties so as to render supplementary proof necessary and especially where they have been of long standing, they ought not to be rectified. These rules are equally applicable where they operate for or against the public.
The mistakes alleged by the present Memorial are of so long standing as to suggest a very strong Objection on that account.
Upon the whole matter the Secretary is of opinion that a special interposition of the Legislature in favour of the Memorialists is inexpedient.
Which is respectfully submitted.

Alexander HamiltonSecy of the Treasy


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from George Washington, 2 February 1795
From: Washington, George
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dear Sir,
Philadelphia Feby. 2d. 1795
After so long an experience of your public services, I am naturally led, at this moment of your departure from office—which it has always been my wish to prevent—to review them.
In every relation, which you have borne to me, I have found that my confidence in your talents, exertions and integrity, has been well placed. I the more freely render this testimony of my approbation, because I speak from opportunities of information wch cannot deceive me, and which furnish satisfactory proof of your title to public regard.
My most earnest wishes for your happiness will attend you in your retirement, and you may assure yourself of the sincere esteem, regard and friendship of
Dear Sir   Your affectionate

Go: Washington
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 2 February 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir
Philadelphia February2. 1795
I forbear to make any comments on that violent sense of duty which at this late and critical hour has compelled the virtuous mind of Mr. Coxe to make to you the communication contained in his letter of yesterday.

I shall proceed to submit to The President with candour and truth my view of the case. Towards this it will be useful to cite the expressions of the Act referred to.
They are these “In case of the death absence from the seat of Government or sickness of the Secretary &c it shall be lawful for the President of the UStates, in case he shall think it necessary, to authorise any person or persons at his discretion to perform the duties of the said respective Offices &c.”
It is evident that these words do not contemplate that in every case of absence &c The President is absolutely to make the substitution authorised, for he is only to do it in case he shall think it necessary. Cases therefore are supposed in which it may not be necessary. And yet it is evident that in every absence whether long or short there must be some person to act for the Secretary of the Treasury—for the nature of the department is such that the business of it must proceed.
I understand the Act then as merely enabling The President to constitute a temporary substitute for the head of the Department in cases where he may think the public service requires this extraordinary interposition.
It does not oblige to the substitution in any case. It is left matter of discretion whether the duties of the officer shall be performed by his Agent empowered by himself and acting for him or by a substitute for him appointed by the President and acting as The Officer.
This I take to be the distinction. In the first case the business must be done in the name of the principal and upon his responsibility. In the second it would be done in the name of the substitute and upon his own responsibility. The head of the Department would be exonerated.
In the case in question the first move was pursued. Mr. Woolcot did not sign a single warrant in my stead. Blanks were left with my own Clerks with my signature who were to fill up the warrants as became necessary to enter them on the proper record and in the proper Account and then hand them over to be countersigned by the Comptroller and registered by the Register. In other respects in formal Acts which were to be avoided as far as practicable and when blanks could not have been properly or safely left my name was to be used. These things appear from the paper transmitted to you.
It is therefore (as I conceive not true) that a breach of the Section of the Act cited has been committed. This could only have been true if you had exercised your power in appointing one person and I had committed the business to another.
As little true is it that it operated a suspension of the Check established by the Act of the 2d. of September 1789. That check essentially consists in the responsibility of two officers. This responsibility existed. My name was to all the Acts to which the check is applicable. Mr. Wolcott during my absence acted in constant communication with me and under my special direction in all important points. On my return I thought myself bound at my peril to reexamine all that had been done and did reexamine it.
Having stated what I suppose to be the true view of the subject, I will go on to state frankly what was really done in reference to The President—what was further intended and why it was not executed.
In conversation with you concerning my going upon the expedition, I mentioned that the business of the Department could without injury be conducted in my absence by The Comptroller. I do not remember that you made any direct reply; but I inferred your concurrence either from what you said or from your having made no observation by way of objection.
But on ultimate reflection, I had concluded to ask you more explicit sanction for two reasons 1 Because I thought from the nature and probable length of the absence this mode of proceeding would be upon the whole the most unexceptionable and 2 Because I thought it would better shelter me from imputations of the illintentioned.
It was my fortune however in this as in some other instances to be more anxious for the advancement of the public service than for my personal exemption from censure or inconvenience.

I suffered the hurry of the period incumbered as I was by the weight both of the Treasury & War Departments, under circumstances that required great exertions in both, to press out of sight a measure which motives of caution had recommended.
If I may trust my present recollection I kept back the letter to Mr. Wolcott to the moment of my leaving the War Office to come to your house with intention previously to ask a substitution by you; but I unavoidably overstaid the appointed time by incidents that occurred to occupy me to the last instant, and which being of primary urgency diverted my attention from what I only consider as of secondary importance.
After having departed leaving the matter upon the footing of my letter, I did not think it essential to resort to a different plan.
But whatever cause of blame may have ensued falls upon me exclusively. It was natural for Mr. Woolcott to presume me to be in order. If he had deemed your formal sanction necessary it was natural for him to suppose that I had obtained it. The law does not designate the mode by which you shall authorise whether verbally or in writing whether to the substituted person immediately or by instruction to the head of the Department. And If a doubt had rested on Mr. Wolcott’s mind; with the President and the head of the Department both absent, it would have been a blameable scrupulousness to have suffered the business of the department to stagnate or run into disorder for want of his Agency. I assure you upon my honor that to this moment there never has been an explanation with Mr. Woolcot of the ground on which I committed the business to him.
In the absence of General Knox, I at his request acted for him with your privity & under your direction; but there was no formal substitution.
I think, I remember too, that in a case which occurred in the Auditor’s Office I proposed to you to substitute the first clerk under the act, but upon your seeming rather to prefer to avoid any formal arrangement on the subject it was left to a course of expedients to receive form afterwards.
I mention these things to shew that Mr. Coxes idea of a formal direct authorisation by you, as indispensable in cases of absence, has not been that pursued in practice in other instances.
His statement respecting the Report of a Committee, the discussions in the two houses of Congress & in regard to the provisions of the Act making alterations in the Treasury and War Departments weighs little in my mind. My memory does not serve me to establish or reject the particulars he suggests. I remember however that some points in the report of the Committee, which Mr. Coxe did not like, were introduced without my concurrence, and that I told him so at the time; that his intrigues which have been incessant, in an incessant struggle for preeminence over Mr. Wolcott, had marshalled some personal friends of his with the usual opposers of the department to embarrass the progress of the Bill and give it a complexion favourable to his ambition—that there was a diversity of opinions & that finally the Bill was shaped in conformity with suggestions from me to Individuals.
But I have always viewed Mr. Coxe’s pretensions to make the opinions of his friends the standard for the execution of the law as neither modest nor correct.
In fine, I should have thought what Mr. Coxe would have deemed most consistent with the principles of the Department very wrong. I considered him as having already more business confided to him than his talents for execution were equal to a large part of which has since been with drawn from him at his own pressing request. I considered him as an inferior officer in the department to Mr. Woolcott and after the disposition he had shewn I should have regarded it as treating Mr. Wollcott ill to have invested him even with a temporary superiority. In the last place I had much greater confidence in the proper and efficient execution of the business by Mr. Wolcott than by him.
With perfect respect I have the honor to be Sir   Your most Obedient serv

A Hamilton
The President of The UStates


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 3 February 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir
Philadelphia February3. 1795
My particular acknowlegements are due for your very kind letter of yesterday. As often as I may recall the vexations I have endured, your approbation will be a great and precious consolation.
It was not without a struggle, that I yielded to the very urgent motives, which impelled me to relinquish a station, in which I could hope to be in any degree instrumental in promoting the success of an administration under your direction; a struggle which would have been far greater, had I supposed that the prospect of future usefulness was proportioned to the sacrifices to be made.
Whatsoever may be my destination hereafter, I entreat you to be persuaded (not the less for my having been sparing in professions) that I shall never cease to render a just tribute to those eminent and excellent qualities which have been already productive of so many blessings to your country—that you will always have my fervent wishes for your public and personal felicity, and that it will be my pride to cultivate a continuance of that esteem regard and friendship, of which you do me the honor to assure me. With true respect and affectionate attachment I have the honor to be
Sir   Your obliged & obedt servt

A Hamilton
The President of The UStates


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Thomas Willing, 3 February 1795
From: Willing, Thomas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir,
Bank United States [Philadelphia]February 3rd 1795
The President & Directors of the Bank of the United States acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 31st. Ulto. & feel with peculiar sensibility the notification of your Resignation; With sincerity they offer their best wishes, that you may be as happy in private, as your administration has rendered you useful, in public life.
They recollect with extreme satisfaction the liberal and enlightened Principles, on which you have conducted the great & various operations of your Department with this Institution; such as tend to cement a connection, which it is their mutual Interest to maintain & which can only be permanent, whilst founded on reciprocal advantage.
It must be to you a source of the most pleasing sensations to reflect on the extensive utility of an Institution, which you had such an essential agency in organizing; which has been strikingly evident, as well in the aid it has afforded to the fiscal Administration as in the important support, it has given to public & private Credit.
They will again recur to the Consideration of the propriety of establishing a Branch in Virginia and if it should appear that the advantages that will result therefrom, will supersede the obstacles & inconveniencies that have hitherto retarded the operation, they will not hesitate in carrying it into prompt Effect; In discussing the subject, the arguments which you have suggested, & which have been derived from experience, will have their due weight, in influencing their Determination.
They anticipate with confidence, in the person who is contemplated by the President as your Successor, the possession of those qualities which will lay claim to every facility & support, which an attention to the Interests of their Constituents, combined with a wish to promote the public service, will enable the President & Directors to afford.

In Behalf of the President and Directors of the Bank of the United States
I have the honor to be Sir most respectfully, yr Obet.

Thos. Willing Prest:
Alexr. Hamilton Esqr


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 4 February 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir
Philadelphia Feby. 4. 1795
The circumstances of having offered my late report to Congress to the two houses which rendered two copies necessary & the extreme press of business in the office in preparing for my resignation, prevented my sending you a manuscript copy of that Report.
I have now corrected a printed copy for you which I have the honor to send herewith.
With true respect & attacht.   I have the honor to be Sir   Yr. obedt. servt

A Hamilton
The President of the UStates


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James Gordon, [6 February 1795]
From: Gordon, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
[Philadelphia, February 6, 1795]
Inclosed herewith you have the whole of the correspondence between the Governor and us. The first letter is in the News Papers and the other two are manuscript.
I am with perfect respect your Most Obedt. servt

James Gordon
6 Febry. 1795
Honble. Alexander Hamilton.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edward Carrington, 7 February 1795
From: Carrington, Edward
To: Hamilton, Alexander

My Dear Sir,
Richmond Feby. 7. 1795
By the last Mail I had the Honor to receive yours of the 29th. Ult. communicating the Presidents offer of the place of Comptroller of the Treasury. Calls to public Office from that source can never be received by me but with immotions of the highest reverence and gratification, dictated as they uniformly are by motives of public good, they constitute the most flattering evidences of merit, that can possibly be obtained. Under these impressions, it is with difficulty indeed, that I decline the offer. I am however under the irrevocable necessity of doing so. There have been periods in the History of our Country when private emolument, could not be placed in competition with public service—these trials are, I trust, now passed, and I find it absolutely necessary to attend, with diligence, to the improvement of the very moderate property I possess, as the only permanent resource for the future support of my family—removed at a distance, these improvements must be neglected, and a public employment scarcely yeilding my Current expences, could not but daily render my prospects worse.

Be pleased Sir to accept my acknowledgements for the very flattering terms in which you were so good as to make the communication, and to assure yourself of the sincere esteem with which I have the Honor to subscribe myself
Your Friend & H. st.

Ed Carrington
Alexander Hamilton Esq


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Ellery, 9 February 1795
From: Ellery, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Newport, Rhode Island, February 9, 1795. Discusses “The cause United States vs Preserved Pierce junr.”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Alexander J. Dallas, 10 February 1795
From: Dallas, Alexander J.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, February 10, 1795. “I will thank you to reimburse the four thousand Dollars, which I lent you at Carlisle. I have inclosed a copy of your letter and Mr. Blaines receipt upon the subject.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to ————, 11 February 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

My Dear Sir
Philadelphia Feby 11th1795
I expect early in the next week to leave this place with Mrs. Hamilton & the Children for Albany. Our stay at New York will be a very few days, but during the time we wish not to incommode any private family. Therefore you will oblige me by engaging for us lodgings while we stay at some lodging house.
Yrs. truly

A Hamilton

Thursday we may arrive.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 12 February 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir
Philadelphia Feby 12 1795
I have maturely reflected on the subject of the within papers. I do not hesitate to give it as my opinion that if it were not for very peculiar personal circumstances the fittest arrangement upon the whole would be to consign the temporary execution of the Comptroller’s office to The Commissioner of the Revenue. But I could not advise this, because it could not fail for strong reasons to be unpleasant to Mr. Wolcott, & because there is real danger that Mr. Coxe would first perplex and embarrass and afterwards misrepresent and calumniate.
The Treasurer would by no means answer, because as the Keeper of the money it is particularly essential that all the Checks upon him should be maintained in full vigour; and The comptroller is the officer who in the last resort settles his accounts as well as concurs in the first instance in authorising by the warrants which are issued by the Secy and countersigned by the Comptroller the payments & receipts of the Treasurer.
The Register is also one of the principal checks of the Department, first upon the Secretary & Comptroller whose warrants he must register & sign before they can take effect and secondly upon the settlements of the Comptroller & Auditor by recording their acts & entering them on the Books to the proper accounts.
Of any of the Officers of the Department, except the Commissioner of the Revenue, the business can be best managed through the Auditor, consistently with the preservation of the most material checks, with the restriction I mentioned this Morning—of his not deciding as Comptroller upon any account he may have settled as Auditor. The temporary suspension of the final conclusion of the Accounts, all the previous examination going on, cannot be attended with any serious inconvenience. If the laws admit of it (which I doubt as they now stand) the appointment of the Auditors first

   I do not think this would be liable to the same objection as the appointing a Clerk to act as Comptroller whose office imports the second trust in the Dept.

 Clerk to act as Auditor in his stead will be a conveniency. In one sense to appoint the Auditor to act as Comptroller will comport best with the spirit of the constitution of the Department. This is that the officer who is to settle the accounts, by countersigning the Warrants for receipts & payments, shall have an opportunity to observe their conformity with the course of business at it appears in the Accounts and shall have notice in the first instance of all payments and receipts in order to the bringing all persons to account for public monies. This reason operates to make the Auditor who is the coadjutor of the Comptroller in settlements his most fit substitute in this particular view.
On the whole I am of opinion that it is most adviseable to appoint the Auditor. A Clerk for reasons already mutually adverted to does not appear to me expedient.
I have the honor to be   Sir   Yr. Affectionate & Obed serv

A Hamilton

P.S. The restriction above suggested for greater caution had best be in writing in a letter to The Secretary of the Treasury.
The instrument appears to me in proper form.

The President of The UStates


Title: Introductory Note: From Tench Coxe, [13 February 1795]
From:
To:

This is one of a series of letters concerning Tench Coxe’s speculations in Pennsylvania lands. Most of the purchases were made by Coxe for a partnership which he had formed with John B. Church, Elizabeth Hamilton’s brother-in-law. When this partnership was established, Church was in England, and it was Hamilton as Church’s business representative and attorney in fact who drew up the agreement in 1793 with Coxe on Church’s behalf. Hamilton continued to represent Church in the negotiations with Coxe until 1797, when Church, who by then had arrived in the United States, relieved him of direct responsibility.

After several meetings in March, 1793, between Coxe and Hamilton, acting as “Agent & Attorney in fact” for Church, they agreed “to a joint concern to be entered into between … [Coxe] and … Church for the purchase of lands in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.” At one of these meetings “about the latter end … of March it was verbally agreed … that the Sum of 10,000 Dollars should be forthwith invested in the purchase of lands in Pennsylvania on the joint and equal account” of Coxe and Church, “that the whole of the said Money should be advanced without any material delay by … Church,” and that Coxe would repay Church $5,000 “with Interest after a reasonable term of Credit.” “Chiefly in the course of the year 1793,” Hamilton advanced to Coxe “the said Sum of 10,000 Dollars at different times.” On February 20, 1795, Coxe bonded himself “in the penalty of 10,000 Dollars” to pay Church or Hamilton “5,000 Dollars with lawful Interest from the 25th day of September 1793, on or before the last day of December 1796.”
By April 10, 1793, Coxe had spent the entire $10,000 on the purchase of three parcels of land in Pennsylvania—one from Blackall William Ball and Francis Joseph Smith; another from William Steedman; and a third from Alexander Patterson, William Alexander Patterson, and Daniel Stroud. Because of delays in transferring the tract owned by Ball and Smith, Coxe in June, 1793, made an additional purchase of land from William Steedman “and others” for $3,200, all of which was advanced by Coxe and one-half of which was charged to Church’s account. Each of these four purchases had its own distinctive features, and each in its own way contributed to the confusion and complexities that attended the prolonged dispute between Coxe and Church over their partnership.
On March 12, 1793, before Coxe and Church had formed their partnership, Coxe had purchased at twenty-five cents an acre sixteen thousand acres of land owned by Ball and Smith “on the small Waters of the Susquehannah” and “on Brodhead’s Creek, waters of Delaware.” After the establishment of the partnership, Coxe, who had promised William Vans Murray four thousand acres from the Ball and Smith purchase, asked Hamilton if Church wished half of the remaining twelve thousand acres as part of his lands under the terms of the partnership. Hamilton agreed to this arrangement, but Coxe subsequently assigned some of his own lands to Murray to cancel Murray’s claim to the four thousand acres, which were then added to the lands owned by the partners. The upshot was that Coxe and Church eventually bought sixteen thousand acres for $4,000 from Ball and Smith.
Because of “unexpected Difficulties … in procuring immediately the lands included in the aforesaid contract with Ball and Smith,” Coxe arranged a substitute purchase from William Steedman and various associates, including Nathan Beach and Jeremiah Jackson. This purchase, which was made in June, 1793, was for forty-two tracts, or approximately 16,800 acres, at nineteen cents an acre and a total cost of $3,200. Although the evidence at this point is not clear, it appears that this land was purchased for the partnership in two equal parts of twenty-one tracts each. One of these was from Beach, Steedman, and Company and was presumably assigned to Church. The other was bought by Coxe and Thomas Ruston and Company from Jackson, Steedman, and Company. At least some of the “Difficulties” concerning the Ball and Smith contract arose from the fact that Smith’s right to sell his portion of the lands in question was in doubt, for part of this property had earlier been transferred to William Bingham, Samuel Rees, and James Chapman. The question of whether the Coxe-Church partnership or Bingham, Rees, and Chapman had a right to the lands in question was still before the courts in 1803.
Following the purchase from Ball and Smith, Coxe acquired eight thousand acres for the partnership from William Steedman. The sale was arranged by “contracts … in three parts on the 30th. March & 1st & 4th April 1793, for which lands have been recd. in 20 tracts and were patented to … John B Church Esqr. as far as one half & remained to … Coxe as far as the other half of the said contract between Wm. Steedman & Coxe.” The lands sold by Steedman, which were separate and distinct from those subsequently purchased from Steedman, Beach, and Jackson, were located “on the Mahoney [Mahanoy] & Mahontango [Mahantango] waters Northumberland County” and “on Nescopeak [Nescopeck] Creek Luzern County.”
On April 10, 1793, Coxe signed a contract with Alexander Patterson, William Alexander Patterson, and Daniel Stroud for the purchase of “57½ Tracts, containing about 23,566 Acres,” which was “to be taken out of 86 tracts containing 34,400 Acres.” These lands were “on the waters of Lehi [Lehigh], Tobihannah & Brodhead’s Creek Northampton County on or near the Edge of Luzerne County.” In August, 1794, before Coxe and Church had divided these lands, Coxe made “a conditional contract … on Account of the … Partnership, in conjunction with … Alexander Patterson whereby the following lands were sold to Whelan and Miller and Company of the City of Philadelphia—that is to say the said undivided 57½ Tracts belonging to the … partnership, & tracts containing about 3,243 Acres belonging to … [Coxe], in his private right, and 47½ Tracts containing about 18,986 Acres, belonging to the said Patterson and others for whom he acted, that in consequence of the contract the said lands were all conveyed to Robert Westcott in trust for the said Whelen Miller and Co by … December 1794, except one tract which was accidentally omitted.” Hamilton objected to this arrangement, and “some time about the month of January in the year 1795 … [he] expressed a desire to take back from … Whelen, Miller and Company … Church’s Share of the said lands at the same price for which they were sold.” For more than a year Whelen and Miller refused to sell back the land in question, but in “February 1796 a conveyance was made to … Church of Eleven tracts containing about 4495 Acres being on account of … Church’s interest in the contract … with … Whelen Miller & Company.” This contract, however, did not settle the matter, for Whelen and Miller not only expressed “dissatisfaction at the quality of part of the lands … [sold to them by Alexander Patterson in the original] contract,” but they were also “unpunctual in their ordinary payments,” with the result that “a great part of the purchase money … [was] unpaid.” After numerous conferences, Coxe and Whelen, Miller, and Company worked out a complicated agreement by which Whelen and Miller reconveyed to Alexander Patterson fifteen acres of the land which they had stated was inferior and reconveyed to Coxe “an undivided Moiety of 73 tracts.” Whelen and Miller were then given “Credit for sundry sums which they had paid on account of the … [original] contract.” After these arrangements had been completed, it was discovered that a “balance … was due to … Whelen Miller & Company of about twelve hundred pounds [$3,200] lawful Pennsylvania money.” On May 12, 1797, Coxe gave his bond for this amount, “upon which he … [was] sued,” with the “suit … [still] depending in the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania” in 1799. As a result of Coxe’s negotiations with Whelen and Miller, Church ended up with “eleven tracts conveyed to him … in the month of February 1796, and seventeen tracts & three quarters of a tract amounting to about 7300 acres conveyed to him in the Month of February 1798.” On the other hand, Coxe insisted that Church owed him “one half the Amount of the said bond with interest from the date thereof.”
As Church’s agent, Hamilton not only advanced the necessary funds to Coxe, but he also sought to protect his client’s interests by attempting—albeit without success—to collect the money which Coxe owed to Church and to ascertain just what lands actually belonged to Church. In March, 1795, a few weeks after he had left the Treasury Department and Philadelphia to resume the practice of law in New York, Hamilton asked Joseph Anthony, a Philadelphia merchant, to serve as Church’s agent in the negotiations with Coxe and instructed him to “receive for Mr. Church whatever proportion [of lands] is stated by Mr. Coxe to be his & obtain the patents.” But Anthony, like Hamilton, found it impossible to pin Coxe down. He reported to Hamilton that Coxe “cant give all Mr. Church’s proportion” and that he “talks in Such a Stammering Misterious way that I find it Difficult understanding him, and as I am Some in want of Confidence, I dont feel so Easy, tho he may mean well.” Nevertheless, throughout 1796 and the early months of 1797 Coxe, who was preoccupied by his desperate efforts to avoid bankruptcy, continued to report to Hamilton on what may charitably be described as his Byzantine maneuvers on behalf of the partnership.
By the summer of 1797 Church, who had arrived in the United States in May of that year, assumed direct responsibility for protecting his own interests in the partnership, and Hamilton was consequently freed of any further accountability in the negotiations with Coxe. The subsequent history of the partnership can, therefore, be briefly stated. In April, 1799, Church sued Coxe on the bond in the United States Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and obtained a judgment giving him “right title and interest to and in a certain Bond or obligation of Tench Coxe … for the sum of ten thousand Dollars … bearing the date on the 20th day of February 1795.” Coxe then made an unsuccessful effort to obtain an injunction against this judgment by instituting equity proceedings in the same court. In February, 1802, the bond became the liability of trustees—William Tilghman, Daniel W. Coxe, and William Coxe—to whom Coxe in an effort to protect his lands against attachment had assigned most of his real property. During the next seven years the debt was gradually reduced, and on June 1, 1809, the account was closed with the payment of the last installment to Church.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tench Coxe, [13 February 1795]
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Mr. Coxe presents his comps. to Col. Hamilton with a Statement of the Account for Lands in the case of Church, Coxe & Steedman—and in the Case of Church, Coxe, Ball, Smith &ca. The others are drawing out. These being ready are sent to give time for inspection. He has repeated his request for an Adjustment before monday in a letter to Wheelen Miller & Co.
Feby. 13th. 1795

Alexander Hamilton Esqr.Atty. for J. B. Church


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edward Jones, 14 February 1795
From: Jones, Edward
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dear Sir,
[Philadelphia] February 14th. 1795.
Mr. Wolcott has requested me to ask you whether you have not in your possession a Report of the Auditor on the subject of certain Accounts, which was intended for the House of Representatives?
It is with regret, that I am obliged to trespass so often on your patience, by asking you for a Certificate relative to my services. If I were to remain in my present situation such a thing altho~ flattering would not be of so much importance but, as I have long contemplated the emigrating to the newly settled parts of Pennsylvania or New-York, it is easy to forsee, that a Testimony of the kind requested by me, maybe of signal service in my efforts to provide for a numerous & destitute family. Accept my best wishes & believe me to be
Dear sir   Your Most Obedt. Servt.

Edward Jones
Colonel Hamilton


Title: Enclosure: [Account with John B. Church], [17–18 February 1795]
From: Coxe, Tench
To:

Alexr. Hamilton Esqr forJohn Barker Church, Esqr
To Tench Coxe Dr. (in accot. for the Investment of half of ten thousand Dollars in Lands)

To part amot. of the debit to Ball & Smith ⅌ a/c
37..19..2½

To half amount of cost of Lands with Steedman ⅌ account
305..13..1¼

647.15.10¼
To part of the amount of the cost of Lands with Ruston, Jackson & Compy. (being twenty One tracts about 8484 Acres—and 156 being out of three tracts—believed to contain a coalittion computed on the whole at
625.  0.0

To half amount of the cost of lands with Pattersons & Co
883..11..⟨9¾⟩

1852.  4.  1¾

balance on your half of 10,000 Drs. advanced to purchase lands in Co
  22. 15. 10¼

Feby. 17. 1795
£1875.  0.  0

Balance brought down Cr.
22. 15. 10¼

To ½ of after charge for carrying patents thro the offices in Patterson & Co’s Case
 19.  2.  6

£  3.  12.  4½

(see letter or Note to Mr. Hamilton of Feby 25. 1795) with copy hereof. Also dupl. sent 23d. June 1797.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James McHenry, 17 February 1795
From: McHenry, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Near Baltimore 17 Febry. 1795.
My Dear Hamilton
What shall I say to you? Convince you that though I have been a long time silent I have not therefore ceased to love you nor for a moment felt any abatement of my friendship.
You remember my last letter was an answer to yours respecting Perry. He was much disappointed and I had some reason to participate in it, for I had contemplated no opposition to the slender office with which he seemed satisfied and which I still think he diserved and would have filled with great fitness and fidelity. I then ascribed his not getting it to your not having taken your measures in time, to the press of important matters which incessantly occupied you, and a somewhat like intrigue in one of those who co-operated with you in office, and opposition from a Senator whose re-election Mr Perry has aided at my express solicitation. I concluded on the whole that by discontinuing my correspondence I should free you from like embarrassments and leave you in a situation to consult me only in cases should any such occur where you might suppose my local knowlege might conduce to a more perfect estimate of persons or things. You see how well I have persevered in this determination, and that it is only now when I can have nothing to expect and you nothing to give that I recall you to the remembrance of our early union and friendship.
It is during this period my dear Hamilton that you will find unequivocal instances of the disinterested friendship I feel for you and which ought to convince you how well I am intiled to a full return of yours.
The tempest weathered and landed on the same shore I may now congratulate you upon having established a system of credit and having conducted the affairs of our country upon principles and reasoning which ought to insure its immortality as it undoubtedly will your fame. Few public men have been so eminently fortunate as voluntarily to leave so high a station with so unsullied a character and so well-assured a reputation, and still fewer have so well deserved the gratitude of their country and the elogiums of history. Let this console you for past toils and pains, and reconcile you to humble pleasures and a private life. What remains for you having ensured fame but to ensure felicity. Seek for it in the moderate pursuit of your profession, or if public life still flatters in that office most congenial to it, and which will not withdraw you from those literary objects that require no violent waste of spirits, and those little plans that involve gentle exercise and which you can drop or indulge in without injury to your family.
I have built houses, I have cultivated fields, I have planned gardens, I have planted trees, I have written little essays, I have made poetry once a year to please my wife, at times got children and at all times thought myself happy. Why cannot you do the same, for after all if a man is only to acquire fame or distinctions by continued privations and abuse I would incline to prefer a life of privacy and little pleasures.
I shall expect to hear from you as soon as you get fairly settled. Not knowing whether I ought to address to you at Albany or New York I have sent this to Mr Murray who will forward it and who I suppose knows.
Adieu sincerely and affly.

James McHenry


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edmund Randolph, 17 February 1795
From: Randolph, Edmund
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dear sir
Philadelphia February 17. 1795.
I had intended to have paid my respects to you this morning. But being deprived of that pleasure by a bad cold, and bad weather, I beg leave to offer to yourself, Mrs Hamilton and family, my best wishes for your and their happiness; and to assure You of the true esteem and regard, with which I am
Dear sir   Your mo. ob. serv.

Edm. Randolph
Colo. Hamilton


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Theodore Sedgwick, [18 February 1795]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Sedgwick, Theodore

My Dear Sedgwik
[Bristol, Pennsylvania, February 18, 1795]
Every moment’s reflection increases my chagrin and disgust at the failure of the propositions concerning the unsubscribed Debt. I am tortured by the idea that the Country should be so completely and so unnecessarily dishonored. A day of reckoning must come. I pray you, let the yeas and nays seperate the wheat from the chaff. I may otherwise have to feel the distress of wounding a friend by a shaft levelled at an enemy. The case is an extreme one. Managements are every way improper.
Yrs. Affectly

A Hamilton
Bristol Feby. 18. 1795


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tench Coxe, [22 February 1795]
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir
[Philadelphia, February 22, 1795]
Messrs. Wheelen & Miller & Co. not having sent me the papers relative to the part of Patterson’s & Co’s. concern on Friday I walked up to your House with the inclosed Bond, which was all that remained for me to do alone in the land concerns or the Business of the Loan to me. I regretted to find you were gone. I had a wish to pay my last respects to Mrs. H—— and Mrs. Coxe called within an hour of my time for the same purpose with the same want of Success.
The Monies, out of which the moieties composing the principal of my Bond were taken, were paid at various times as the letters, receipts &ca. will shew. The 4th. purchase, of Jackson, Steedman & Co., was made in June, when the last four thousand dollars were not in my hands, and the little advances of about 200 Dollrs. to Ball & Smith were also made early. Taking into the estimate those facts it has upon consideration, tho without formal calculation, that the 25th. of September 1793 would be a fair medium time for interest to commence. Yet, if you will take the trouble to make an exact calculation and find ground to vary the day I am ready to make it, if equitable, different.
I propose on adjusting a few matters after the Session to remit you a Years interest which is due as ⅌ the Bond.
Wheelen & Co. assure me they will send to me as soon as they have got the papers made up. They are tedious, and busy as I suppose for the[y] really have made great Delays. You were to direct some person to concur with me in drawing for the Lands not yet divided—and to give me the name of a person to whom the conveyances should be made—but it is not yet done. When at leisure, I will thank you for attention to those two points.
Mrs. Hamilton will accept Mrs. Coxe’s Compliments and my own.
I am, Sir,   Your most obedt. hble Servant

T C.
Philada. 22d. Feby. 1795.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Bird, Savage, and Bird, 23 February 1795
From: Bird, Savage, and Bird
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir,
London 23 feby. 1795
In your retreat from the Office of Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, it can be of little moment to you to have any addition to the public & private testimonies you have receiv’d of the high opinion your Country entertains of your distinguish’d integrity & abilities, which have been so successfully employ’d in restoring her public credit, & placing it on the most favorable footing to her future prosperity. We cannot however refuse ourselves the gratification of communicating to you the applause that the wisdom of your financial measures has procur’d from all persons in this Country where the subject is so well known, & understood.
Joining in the general regret at your retreat, we beg leave to offer you our best services in whatever future walk of life you may fix on, & are with great respect,
Sir,   Yr. most obedt. Servts

Bird Savage & Bird
Alexander Hamilton Esqr.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tench Coxe, 25 February 1795
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Philadelphia, February 25, 1795. At the bottom of an account which Coxe enclosed in his letter to Hamilton on February 17–18, 1795, Coxe wrote: “(see letter or Note to Mr. Hamilton of Feby 25. 1795) with copy hereof.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 25 February 179[5]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir
New York Feby. 25. 179[5]
The evening I had last the pleasure of seeing you, you asked my opinion whether any and what measures could be taken with the Senate with reference to the Treaty with Great Britain in the event of its not arriving before the adjournment of the Legislature. I mentioned as a hasty thought that I feared it would be impracticable to detain them long in expectation of a Treaty not arrived; but that it might be adviseable immediately after the adjournment to notify another meeting as little distant as might be compatible with reasonable time of notice.
On reflection this opinion appears to me not well founded, as to the last point. I fear the first part will be found true & that the body would not upon casualty remain many days together after the expiration of the session.
In place of the course which I at first mentioned, I submit the following—
“That the Secretary of State write a letter to each member present & absent announcing the expectation of the Treaty & that when arrived the Senate will be convened by a proclamation for a time not exceeding six weeks.”
The letter of the Secy of State to be sent by land, & by water also to the most remote members, & when the proclamation for convening the Senate issues the same to be done; using special expresses for the land conveyance & having ready some swift sailing vessel for the water conveyance.
With these precautions I think six weeks notice will be enough.
The President cannot specially convene the Senate without announcing that an extraordinary occasion exists. He had when I left Philadelphia no such advice of the Treaty as would warrant the assertion & even if he had until it arrives there is a possibility of a miscarriage which might prevent his having it ready to lay before the Senate at the time of Meeting if they should be convened upon contingency. These reflections have led to the change of opinion.
In great haste I have the honor to remain   Sir   Yr. Affect & Obed servant

A Hamilton
The President of The UStates


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Rufus King, 26 February 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: King, Rufus

My Dear Sir,
N YorkFeby. 26. 1795
I have received your letter with the printed Bills. The new clause is an additional bad feature. Yet ’tis better the thing should pass as it is than not at all. Every thing should be gained that can be.
So: It seems that under the present administration of the Department, Hillhouse & Goodhue are to be the Ministers in the House of Representatives & Elsworth & Strong in the Senate. Fine work we shall have.
But I swear the Nation shall not be dishonored with impunity. Yr. Affecty.

A Hamilton
R King Esq


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 26 February 1795
From: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dear Sir
Philadelphia February 26. 1795
I enclose an extract for your Report to the House of Representatives of the 23d. of January 1792 which contains all that was then said respecting the Loan Office Certificates bearing Interest on a nominal Capital. It would have been sent sooner if the Report could have been readily found.
I am Dear Sir, with perfect respect, your most obed. servt.

Oliv. Wolcott Jr.
Alexander Hamilton Esq


Title: [An Act to Provide for Calling Forth the Militia], [28 February 1795]
From:
To:

[New York, February 28, 1795]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Meletiah Jordan, 28 February 1795
From: Jordan, Meletiah
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Frenchman’s Bay [District of Maine] February 28, 1795. Replies to Hamilton’s letter of January 26, 1795.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Wilhem and Jan Willink, Nicholaas and Jacob Van Staphorst, and Nicholas Hubbard, 2 March 1795
From: Willink, Wilhem,Willink, Jan,Staphorst, Nicholaas van,Staphorst, Jacob van,Hubbard, Nicholas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Amsterdam, March 2, 1795. Discuss the foreign debt of the United States.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Edward Jones, 8 March 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Jones, Edward

[Albany, March 8, 1795. On March 21, 1795, Jones wrote to Hamilton: “Agreeably to the request contained in your letter of the 8th. instant.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Pierre August Caron de Beaumarchais, 9 March 1795
From: Beaumarchais, Pierre August Caron de
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Hamburg, March 9, 1795. On October 29, 1796, Beaumarchais wrote to Hamilton and referred to “le mémoire en forme de lettre que, dans ma détresse a hambourg, je vous ai adressé en mars 1795.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Tjerck C. DeWitt, 16 March 1795
From: DeWitt, Tjerck C.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Kingston [New York] March 16, 1795. Asks Hamilton to serve as “Council in all Cases” for the town of Kingston.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Simmons, 17 March 1795
From: Simmons, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, March 17, 1795. “I have lately been informed that the office of Accountant to the War Department will positively be vacated on the 1st. of April next, and … I have applied … for that office…. I therefore … request that you will be pleased … to furnish me with such testimony in support of an application, as you … may think proper.”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Edward Jones, 18 March 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Jones, Edward

[Albany, March 18, 1795. On March 30, 1795, Jones wrote to Hamilton: “Your favor of the 18th. instant has been duly received.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Robert Morris, [18 March 1795]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Morris, Robert

Albany March 18th 1795
My Dear Sir

I called at your house the Evening before you left Town to bid you adieu & was sorry that I was not so fortunate as to find you at home. I am now here with Mrs. Hamilton at her Fathers house where we shall remain till the beginning of June & then take up our abode at New York where I shall be at all times happy to have it in my power to render you any service or pleasure. Your steady friend ship & firm support to me officially and Mrs. Morris and your kindness to Mrs. Hamilton & myself personally will not easily be forgotten.
Having made an investment for Mr. Church as I informed you was my intention I found it requisite to adopt temporary expedients to supply the place of the sum belonging to him in your hands.
I must therefore request you as speedily as may be to come to my relief. If not convenient to you to accelerate the payment, it will answer every purpose to me if you can make an arrangement for possessing me of your draft upon any good house in New York to be accepted payable within any term not exceeding four months. This by ascertaining the payment of the sum at a day certain in New York will enable me to shape the business in a manner more agreeable to my views & feelings than it now wears.
You will perceive in this my desire to consult your accommodation, and on the other hand I entertain a reliance that you will not suffer me to remain long under any embarrassment in a case in which I made an unauthorised use of another’s money merely through friendly motives.

Mrs. Hamilton joins in Compliments to Mrs. Morris. I remain Dr Sir with true respect & regard
Your obed servt

A Hamilton
Robert Morris Esqr


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Joseph Nourse, 18 March 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Nourse, Joseph

Dear Sir
Albany March 18th 1795.
You will oblige me by sending me as soon as may be (first obtaining the consent of Mr Wolcott) a statement of the respective amounts of the several Items, of the Domestic Debt as they originally stood distributed among the several states. You once made out such a paper for me.
Yours with regard

A Hamilton.
J. Nourse Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Pollock, 18 March 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Pollock, George

[Albany, March 18, 1795. On the back of a letter which Pollock wrote to Hamilton on January 15, 1795, Hamilton wrote: “Albany, March 18. 1795. Answer.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Thomas FitzSimons, 21 March 1795
From: FitzSimons, Thomas
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, March 21, 1795. “I have been desirous of writing to you for some days past about Mr Churchs Mortgage And only waited till I thot. you sufficiently settled As I am Anxious to put it on a different footing to What it stands on at present—I have allready Liberated the Estate from Prices mortgage which was paid off besides Which the Land has risen So much in Value that a part of it would be abundant Securitie for Mr Churchs Claim. While the Whole remains under his Mortgage no ⟨pro⟩ffitable sale can be made of any part…. I wish you, therefore ⟨to cons⟩ider the propriety of taking a New Mortgage on a part say 6 or 7000 Acres, and rely on the punctual payment of the Interest Annually which I ingage to make….”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edward Jones, [21 March 1795]
From: Jones, Edward
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dear Sir,
[Philadelphia, March 21, 1795]
Agreeably to the request contained in your letter of the 8th. instant (which must have lingered somewhere on the road, as I did not recieve it untill a few days since) I set about collecting the documents required, a portion of which, you will receive herewith. There is no Report of yours in our Office upon the petition of certain Pennsylva. Creditors, or indeed of any other persons, relative to bills bearing Interest on the nominal value. It is true however, that you have decided upon the point in question, without a reference to any such petition, in your Report to Congress of the 23d. of January 1792, an Abstract of which has been already forwarded to you by Mr. Wolcott.
I have some doubts whether I shall be able to procure all the papers on your list—if I should fail, it will not be for want of exertion. At all events you may rely on receiving such as can be had in the course of a few days. Accept my best wishes for your prosperity and believe me to be

Dr Sir   With much respect & esteem   Your Mo. Ob. Servant

Edward Jones
March 21st. 1795

Alexander Hamilton Esquire


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Robert Troup, 23 March 1795
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Troup, Robert

[Albany, March 23, 1795. On March 31, 1795, Troup wrote to Hamilton: “I have just this moment recived yours of the 23rd inst.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Richard Peters, 24 March 1795
From: Peters, Richard
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, March 24, 1795. “From your Position at Albany you might attack DeWit in Front Flank & rear ’till he yields in the Point of giving us the Deed from him for the Lands bought by Mr. Duane for my Father….”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 24 March 179[5]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

Sir
Albany March 24, 179[5]
I have heretofore had occasion to mention to you the merits of Mr. Simmons the writer of the inclosed letter. It is but justice, that I bear in his favour the testimony he desires. I can with truth give my opinion that he is well qualified for the office in question; insomuch that I believe it will be very difficult to find one who has better pretensions. From long service in the Department he understands thoroughly the course of business in it, as well under the former as under the present Government. His intelligence cooperates with his experience to recommend him; and one need not fear to speak too strongly of his assiduity and integrity.

So necessary was he in the department from his knowlege of the course of the old business that it cost me repeated pains to prevent his leaving it; and as he had a prospect of doing better in private business than upon a Clerks salary, one of the means employed was to give him the expectation of a recommendation at some future time to some more adequate station, (if an opportunity should occur) for which he was qualified.
The present Office is of that nature—and it is but fulfilling my promise to place him before you for consideration.
I will only add that if all the considerations proper to be consulted shall appear to you to coincide in him his appointment will give me pleasure.
With the most respectful and affectionate attachment   I have the honor to be   Sir   Your obedt Servt.

Alex Hamilton
The President of the UStates


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Miers and Samuel Fisher, 30 March 1795
From: Fisher, Miers,Fisher, Samuel
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia, March 30, 1795. Request Hamilton to serve as their counsel in a suit before the Circuit Court of the United States.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Robert Troup, 31 March 1795
From: Troup, Robert
To: Hamilton, Alexander

My dear sir
New York 31 March 1795
I have just this moment recived yours of the 23rd. inst. All I know of the bond & mortgage I have is that General Schuyler left them with me for you & as your property. They are executed to him by a Mr. Coenradt Burghdurf of York Town in West Chester County. I am wholly unacquainted with the man—but I have this moment written a letter to him informing him that payment of the final instalment by £200 is expected on the first of May next, the time appointed for the payment of it. I do not think it will be prudent to count upon the receipt of the money at the very time it falls due. Country creditors are generally deficient in punctuality. I shall forward the letter by the first safe opportunity.

Yesterday I received a letter from Mr. Williamson at Bath in Ontario County—whose friendship I have experienced upon several occasions. He informs me that he has for sometime past been making arrangements with English & Dutch Capitalists for raising a sum of money for the purchase of lands in the N. W. territory of the United States. His plan contemplates the purchase of several millions of acres. He has offered to associate me with his friends and he means to make the same offer to you and the Patroon. I have not conversed with a single soul on the subject. The business is communicated to me in the strictest confidence. I mean to embark for I see no risk. What will be expected from me will be principally advice & assistance in executing the plan if one be formed. The same will be expected of you. The lands of the United States like the lands of individuals in my opinion are fair objects of speculation and I cannot attach any share of dishonor to this species of commerce. Mr. Williamson also means to make an offer to Mr Jay. If he succeeds in the election I do not see why he might not embark—at least sub. rosa. His election looks well here also. This thing is a matter that we can order as we please.
Why should you object to making a little money in a way that cannot be reproachful? Is it not time for you to think of putting yourself in a state of independence? Be assured that the hard earned profits of the law will wear you out and leave a Net residue at the end of ten years that will not maintain a family with decent œconomy in this City.
If you do not wish your name to appear I will chearfully be your Trustee and will execute to you a declaration of trust accordingly. You may count upon my inviolable secrecy and honor. No event will contribute more to my happiness than to be enstrumental in making a man of fortune—I may say—a gentleman of you. For such is the present insolence of the World that hardly any man is treated like a gentleman unless his fortune enables him to live at his ease. All jesting apart—I am serious when I tell you that my name & services shall be at your command if you think it adviseable to embark with us. Mr. Williamson writes to me that he will soon open the business to you by letter. Pray write to me on this subject and consider this communication as being made in the most sacred confidence.

Be pleased to remember me in the Kindest terms to Mrs. Hamilton and rely upon my unceasing endeavours to serve you & yours.
In haste   I am My dear Sir,   Affecty. Yours

Rob. Troup

Williamson intimates to me that he will be governed by you & me in the final arrangements of the plan.
A Hamilton Esqr.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Joseph Nourse, 1 April 1795
From: Nourse, Joseph
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Sir!
Treasury DepartmentRegisters Office 1st April 1795
I had the Honor of your Letter a few days since and in compliance with the request therein (the consent of Mr. Wolcott having been obtained) I have now the pleasure to inclose an Official Statement of the public Debt distributed amongst the several States so far as the same can be ascertained. I believe this is in substance a Copy of a Paper wch: was laid before you during your Administration.
I am with the deepest Sense of Respect &c Sir, Your most Obedt. & most humble servt

Joseph Nourse.Register
Honorable Alexr. Hamilton Esqr.
late Secy of the Treasury