Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James Wilkinson, 12 August 1800
From: Wilkinson, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

City of WashingtonAugt. 12th. 1800
My Dr Sir

I have your favor by Van Ranselear & shall support his Views with my utmost Ingenuity, tho tis a difficult case & our Secty is I fear rather timid. He may however be held on the Rolls on the ground of expediency, until the Legislature meets, & then the glaring propriety, not to say necessity, of the establishment, will certainly give us a remedy even among Demons or Idiots.
I am sorry to press you, but the Nomination to fill vacancies cannot be suspended longer than this Week, and the Secty is anxious as I am myself for your recommendations. Have all the recruiting parties East of the Delaware been ordered in? We have not yet 300 Men on paper at Pitts Burgh, a number far short of your calculations, and from the best documents I can find it would appear that the Old Establishment is deficient more than 2000 Men.
What are your Opinions of the functions of an “Inspector of Artillery” who is to be “instructed by the Secretary of War”—are his Duties scientific or mechanical? is He the Inspector exclusively of “the Corps of Artillerists & Engineers” as to dress, discipline, Arms, Accoutrements, police &c:, or will he not find more than sufficient employ in carrying his attentions to Cannon & ordnance, and their complication of apparatus, ammunition, Implements & machinery from the foundary to the platform—are the Duties compatible under the regulations of the Inspectorate, & the expression of the Law making this Officer—are not Brigade Inspectors to Inspect whole Brigades of whatever Troops composed—can the “Inspector of Artillery” run the circle of our wide spread Posts Monthly—has He a power to depute Subordinates? would not his exercise of such a power, vitally wound the principles of Command, & confound the details of the particular Corps over which he exercised this Authority. Do you discern a distinction in the Duties of an “Inspector of Artillery” “an Inspector of fortifications” & “an Inspector of the Troops”? and are not the duties of the last already ascertained—are not our Artillerists armed & Accoutred in the manner of our Infantry, and are they not exposed to the same Duties, & subject to the same Laws of police & discipline. Have not the Inspectors of the Troops heretofore Inspected the Artillery, & has inconvenience or Injury arisen from the practice? is it not the most convenient regulation, to order the Commanding officers of posts to Inspect in Ordinary, when the regular Inspecting Officer cannot attend? Is not this the only practicable mode, while our posts are extended over the great distance we at present occupy. Can one officer acting under a Staff appointment, which will require almost incessant mobility, from one extreme of the Union to the other, exercise the Command & govern the Details of a stationary Corps? can the functions of an Engineer or of an Inspector of ordnance, derived from a particular course of Scholastic Education & from long experience, be deligated? would not such deligation, if Permited be destructive of responsibility? reposing with confidence on your Friendship, I offer you these questions without apology, and will thank you for a laconic response, so soon as may be convenient—will you suffer me to add in strict confidence. do you Know T——d. have you measured his Talents. what are they. He has aimed to do every thing, & I have not yet discovered capacity for any thing—but our Acquaintance is in the Bud, as I had never seen Him until my Arrival here. Adieu
with respect & affection   I am   Yrs. truly
J W:
General Hamilton
I have heard, but know not the fact, that a Capt. Lyman is at Springfield with a Compy. He waits orders I am told, but will not report Himself. I have therefore addressed the Enclosed to Him which I will ask the favor of you to Seal & forward if my information Should be correct.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James A. Bayard, 18 August 1800
From: Bayard, James A.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Wilmington [Delaware] 18. August 1800.
Dear Sir.

I willingly communicate such information as I possess on the subjects of the enquiries contained in the letter you did me the honor to write on the 6 Inst. and which I received the day before yesterday.
I had a ten years acquaintance with Doctor Wharton which invariably continued on a footing of intimacy and friendship. I esteemed him a Scholar & a Gentleman.
His classical knowledge is extensive & critical & he has taught with much reputation mathematicks natural philosophy and astronomy. In ethicks he is a master and is acquainted with politicks as a branch of moral philosophy.
He is a man of mild & amiable temper of polite manners of correct conduct and of principles equally sound in morals & in politicks.
With these qualities there is a great desideratum in the character necessary to direct the education of youth. The cloisters of St Omers were extremely unfriendly to a just knowlege of human nature. They afforded leisure for the Study of books, but not the means of becoming acquainted with men. It was probably too late when the Doctor came into the world to give a turn to his mind entirely new. He contented himself with pursuing the knowlege of books, but did not or could not qualify himself to judge of men.
That knowlege which would enable the President of a college to discriminate the dispositions & talents of his pupils, to attribute their actions to the proper motives, to know when & how praise ought to be bestowed or censure applied in order to produce a certain effect in short as to that skill which enables us to teach with dexterity & effect the keys of human action, I consider the Doctor as greatly deficient.
He does not possess that imposing manner which belongs to the deportment of some men and which if not an essential is at least a useful quality in those who have much intercourse with young men who probably are more restrained & better directed by personal respect & attachment than by the severity of discipline.
There is an occasional levity about the Doctor which is little short of trifling. What is meant by gravity he has nothing of. I do not mean to say that he cannot perform the serious offices of life in a serious manner, but that serious as he may be, there is a want of solemnity & impression.
Such is the imperfect view which I can present to you of the character of Dr. Wharton. A view certainly not shaded by an unfriendly sentiment, nor do I believe coloured by the sincere esteem & regard which I have always entertained for Him. I must beg you to allow it no weight but as corroborative of the opinions of others.
I thank you for the view you have given me of the state of things relative to the election of President to the Eastward. I cannot pretend to add to your information as to our Situation to the Southward tho’ I shall offer you the result of the information I have received on the subject.
In Pennsylvania I take it every thing depends upon the ensuing election of the State Legislature. The federal Majority is not so great in the Senate as to be beyond the operation of this election. The event however is not much dreaded. If the present state of things continue the federalists would consent to district the State so as to give to Mr. Jefferson 8 votes.
Delaware is safe. They may hesitate whether they will give Mr. Adams a vote.

The present election law of Maryland is by Districts. Such an election would probably give to Mr. J. 3 votes. It is the better opinion however that the federalists will avail themselves of the means they possess of commanding the entire vote of the State.
Virginia is sold and past salvation. My knowlege of N Carolina was derived during the Sitting of Congress from the members of that State.
I consulted the most of them on the federal side and set down the votes of the state 7. for J. & 5 for A. & P. as to the 5. less certainly perhaps for the latter than the former.
It is thought the votes of S. Carolina will count equally for Mr. J & Mr. P—Georgia Tennessee & Kentucky may be thrown into the scale of Mr. J.
But there is no reason to despond unless the eastern States play a foul game. And if they do a second time they ought never to be forgiven. If they do—they forfeit forever the confidence of their friends to the Southard.
They will beget a system of miserable intrigue between the members of the same Party whose efforts can not be united, but thro’ mutual confidence and whose united efforts are absolutely necessary to maintain their ground against their adversaries. What is the charm which attaches the East so much to Mr. A.? It can be nothing personal.
The escape we have had under his Administration is miraculous. He is liable to gusts of passion little short of phrensy which drive him beyond the controll of any rational reflection.
I speak of what I have seen. At such moments the interest of those who support him or the interest of the nation, would be outweighed by a single impulse of rage.
This is enough but not all. He wants magnanimity. The President is not exempt from the little interests—the little jealousies and little animosities of Mr. Adams.
We may thank the guardian Genius of the country which has watched over its destinies for the last 4 years.
I do not hold this language to the multitude because I suppose we must vote for him and therefore cannot safely publish what we think of him. But he has palsied the ⟨Si⟩news of the Party and if I relied on forebodings as ominous, I should believe, that before another presidential cycle has compleated itself, he would produce a ruinous & fatal Schism among the federalists.
I hope my sentiments do not scandalize the faith or works of the Supporters of the true cause.
I see no terror in anything which can happen but am not indifferent to the dangers or evils which threaten the country.
I have made you my Confessor and frankly confessed my heresies. They are not I hope beyond the power of remission.
I am Sir   With great respect & esteem   Your very Obt. Sert.

James A. Bayard


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William R. Putnam, 18 August 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Putnam, William R.

New York Aug 18. 1800
Sir

I lately took the liberty to request your Agency in regard to five shares of land, which I have in the Ohio Company purchase, & sent you Bank Bills for sixty Dollars to pay the taxes which I understand have been heretofore assessed. My letter went to the care of Col Hamtramck, Pittsburgh.
Lest any accident should happen I write to you again to request that you will at all events make an arrangement for satisfying the taxes & I will immediately remit what may be necessary.
With consideration & esteem   I am Sir   y Obedt sr

A Hamilton
R W Putnam Esq


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Philip Schuyler, 18 August 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Schuyler, Philip

[New York, August 18, 1800. On August 25, 1800, Schuyler wrote to Hamilton: “Your favor … of the 18th by the mail I received yesterday.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Jay, 19 August 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Jay, John

New York Aug 19. 1800
Dr Sir

I have occasion for a public purpose to allude to the reprobated instructions to our commissioners for making peace with Great Britain obliging them to act under the direction of the French Assembly. But though I have a general recollection of their tenor it is not precise enough for my object. I take it for granted your papers can afford the exact information. You will much oblige me by giving it to me without delay; being assured that you will in no shape be brought into view as the source.
I will also thank you for a copy of that letter which I wrote to you while Envoy to G Britain & which you told me you had shewn to Lord Grenville in which I express the opinion that unless an arrangement on solid terms can be made it will be better to do nothing or something of that import. I did not keep a copy.
Yrs. respectfully & affect.

A Hamilton
John Jay Esq


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Marshall, 19 August 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Marshall, John

[New York, August 19, 1800. On August 23, 1800, Marshall wrote to Hamilton: “I receivd to day your letter of the 19th inst.” Letter not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 19 August 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.

[New York, August 19, 1800. On September 3, 1800, Wolcott wrote to Hamilton: “I am favoured with your Letters of the 3d. and 19th.” Letter of August 19 not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from George Cabot, 21 August 1800
From: Cabot, George
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Brookline [Massachusetts] Augt. 21. 1800
My dear sir—

An exposition of the reasons which influence many men of unquestionable patriotism & loyalty to withhold from Mr Adams the confidence he once enjoyed, may be useful by satisfying the intelligent & candid part of the public that those men act, as they have ever done, on genuine national principles; the reasons are strong & require only to be placed in a clear light—but this must be done with infinite care & circumspection that neither anger nor jealousy may be excited—it must be done in a manner that shall clear up the doubts, which now exist, of the sincerity & consistency of the Party who promote the union of votes for Adams & Pinkney.
it is perceived by Mr. Adams’s personal friends that while the party profess a zealous desire to unite All the federal votes for A & P there are many or at least some individuals among those who compose it whose wishes are known to be that the election may issue in favor of Mr P, & therefore it is inferred such persons will not act & do not aim as they profess. to this charge it is generally answered “that without a union of all the Federalists neither Mr A nor Mr P can probably be chosen, but that with such an Union one may probably be President & the other Vice President & considering all the circumstances of the case the chance & the preponderance of wishes is in favor of Mr A,”—“that altho’ there may be many & doubtless are some Individuals who woud think it by no means propitious to the national welfare that Mr Adams shou’d be reelected yet they yield to the superior consideration of Union by which alone Jefferson can be kept out & Adams or Pinkney put into the office, & therefore these men act & will act fairly toward Mr Adams giving him all their support upon the just expectation of a similar support to Mr P from those who prefer Mr. Adams”—“that the plan formed at Philadelphia to support both was a compromise which contemplated Mr Adams” ⟨as President⟩ but liable however to be superseded by Pinkney from ⟨the⟩ nature of the election, & “that good faith wou’d & ought to be observed as the only means of success, & as the only ground of content after success.” such is the tenor of our language to the public—we think it true, & we shall be greatly embarrassed if at this late period after our Sentiments are extensively known there shou’d be a new or different ground taken—you must allow me therefore to insist that whatever display is made of Mr Adams’s misconduct it must be continually recollected that he may be again chosen by us, & that we are pledged to give him the full chance of the united vote concerted at Philadelphia. So that whatever is said against him must be explicitly avowed to be the complaint of those of us who have yielded individual opinions to the general opinion of the party as a matter of expediency & not the language of the ⟨pa⟩rty, & it ought to be admitted ⟨that the⟩ party from various considerations rather prefer the election of Mr Adams to Mr Pinkney. I understand thro’ a friend that the Carolinians adhere to these ideas as they were dige⟨sted⟩ & agreed to at Philadelphia. Mr Harper writes from Balt⟨imore on the 11th⟩ instt “that our friends may now count with some certa⟨inty, indeed⟩ very great certainty on a unanimous vote for ⟨Adams & Pinck⟩ney in Maryland.” Altho’ I think some good ⟨may⟩ be derived from an exhibition of Mr Adams’s misconduct yet I am well persuaded that you may do better than to put your name to it—this might give it an interest with men who need no such interest but it will be converted to a new proof that you are a dangerous man. Ames & I agree that you will give the enemy an advantage to which he has no claim.
in every situation believe me afty & faithfully yours

George Cabot


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James McHenry, 22 August 1800
From: McHenry, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Baltimore 22 Augt. 1800
My dear Hamilton.

Do you possess enough of the second sight to tell me what our friends have done and intend doing to the Eastward? God forgive me, if I make false calculations about them or deliver myself up too easily to dreams and reveries. I see nothing ex cathedra in that division of Country from which I can augur a determination adverse to the election of the present chief. Johnson says somewhere, in his account of Swift, that the October Club consisting of Tory members of Parliament, “met to animate the zeal and raise the expectations of each other.” Does the conduct of our federal members of Congress differ essentially, in this respect, from the October Club? These gentlemen I am told keep up each others zeal and expectations by writing to each other. Perhaps, generally speaking they can do little more, and that certainly is doing very little to obtain repose & retirement for a man whom they know absolutely exhausts and kills himself by being President.
Are there good grounds for believing, that General Pinckney will have all the votes to the Eastward of New York, and that Mr. Adams will fall short in that quarter at least nine votes in the whole number? Will General Pinckney get any votes in New York? I have secretly flattered myself that he might. And will he obtain more votes in New Jersey than the man in possession? In Maryland, the probability is, that, should the electors be chosen by its Legislature, each of the candidates (Mr. A. & Gen. P.) will have the whole number of votes: if by the people under the existing district law, each may fall short of three of the whole number. Judge Moore of N. Carolina (one of the Judges of the supreme court of the U. S.) told me the other day, that the federal electors in that State would all of them vote for Mr. Adams & Genl. Pinckney. In South Carolina, according to late information from Mr Dessasure, the probability is, that whether the federal or antifederal interest preponderates in the Legislature of that State General Pinckney will get the whole number of votes. Mr. Habersham, who is just from Georgia mentioned to me, that he thinks General Pinckney will not lose all the votes in Georgia.
Give me, my dear friend, your solution of the problem and view of the subject, and believe me always truly & affly your friend &c.
Alexr Hamilton Es


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from George Cabot, 23 August 1800
From: Cabot, George
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Brookline [Massachusetts] August 23: 1800
My dear sir

I have shewn to several of our wisest & best men a copy of what I wrote you on the 21st instant—they all concur in the sentiments it contains, Still it is probably fit & it may be indispensable to expose Mr Adams fully to the public; the countenance & authority given by him & his friends to the vile calumnies against us may strengthen their credit so much as to render them irrefutable without such an exposition. I don’t think however we can discard Mr Adams as a Candidate at this late period without total disarrangement & defeat in this quarter. it is true there is an apparent absurdity in supporting a man whom we know to be unworthy of trust; it is a dilemma however into which we are brought by the proceedings at Philadelphia & which we cou’d not shun—or perhaps it is a natural result of the mode of election & cou’d not have been avoided, but be this as it may we have considered as an agreed point among the Federalists that Adams & Pinkney are to be voted for together, & we accordingly have urged with great confidence that this is the intention of the Federal party generally & that it is acquiesced in by most of those who are supposed to influence them; I think therefore you cannot omit to make a clear & explicit reference to this known State of things in whatever you may publish, & possibly as a consequence of it to ground the publication chiefly on the necessity of it to exculpate those whom it vindicates from the abominable charges insinuations & unmerited denunciations of Mr Adams & some of his personal friends. indeed I see no impropriety in regretting that a compromise has been made which must be observed at every hazard, it being too manifest that Mr Adams has relinquished the System he was chosen by the Federalists to support & that he has become hostile & will necessar[i]ly become more & more hostile to the firm advocates of that System & all who adhere to it. I think however it must be shewn that the opposition to Mr. Adams is founded upon broad public principle. for myself I often declare that the mission to France tho’ impolitic unjustifiable dangerous & inconsistent, the expulsion of able upright & faithful officers,
   since Mr. Pickering was expelled the President has said of him to a Gentleman “as honest man as ever lived.”
 tho’ a ruinous precedent—the pardon of Fries tho’ a sacrifice of the Safety as well as dignity of the State, that many other transactions of inferior magnitude tho’ shamefully wrong—yet that all these wou’d not of themselves induce me to oppose the President’s reelection if I did not view them as evidence explained and confirmed by other evidence that he has abandoned the system he was chosen to maintain & that he is likely to introduce its opposite with all its pernicious consequences, as fast as he can and as far as his influence will go. if this idea is correct, as it appears to me, it cannot be too strongly impressed on the sound part of the public. A long letter full of good sense ⟨&⟩ interesting information is just received from Mr. W ——. he thinks an examination of P. Adams’s adminis[tra]tion has been so long delayed that it can only now be made to grow out of the unjust accusations of his present friends. this excellent letter has been read & admired by several persons whose judgement you respect but whose opinions remain perfectly fixed that we cannot now change the arrangement, we are not strong enough to break up & new form in the face of our enemy. I have sent to Mr W a copy of mine to you of the 21st, which will explain to him sufficiently our situation. Mr. Gordon tells me that the N H electors will all vote for A & P certainly except one, of whom the same is probable but not certain. the persons for Electors are supposed to be predestinated by the Legislature.
Col Burr is to be at Providence as to day. he probably may except that as Gov Fenner will vote for Jefferson he may also be induced to vote for him. as he is a very sanguine man he may expect even more.
yours faithfully

George Cabot


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from William Bingham, 24 August 1800
From: Bingham, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada August 24th 1800
Dear Sir

Mr Adams had 70 & Mr Jefferson 68 Votes at the last Election. In Pennsylvania, Virginia, N Carolina, he had a Vote in each State. From the result of the Enquiries I have made, & the best Calculation I can form, Mr J cannot procure more than 58 Votes, on a presumption that this State will have no agency in the Election, & that he obtains half of those of No Carolina. Great Efforts are making in Maryland to Secure a Majority in the Legislature favorable to the respective Views of the two Parties. My Information Satisfies me, that the Electors will be chosen by the Legislature, & that they will be federal. We may therefore rely with considerable Confidence on the Success of the Election, if no unfair Proceedings or untoward Events baffle our Expectations.
With Sincere Esteem & Regard   I am   Yours &c   Wm Bingham
Major Genl Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Jay, 25 August 1800
From: Jay, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Albany 25 Augt. 1800 Monday
Dr Sir

I was this moment favd. with yours of the 19th Instant; requesting Copies of the Instruction, and of the Letter mentioned in it. I shall without Delay look for these papers. I presume that I have preserved them, but am not certain. When I removed from my House in the Broadway to the Govt. House, all such of my papers as were not in use, or which did not respect Property, were packed up with little order—nor have they been since separated or arranged, nor indeed unpacked.
As to the Letter—all the papers respecting the Mission to G. Britain, were kept together, until I removed to this place, when they were packed up also, with many others not in use and so they still remain. That I have preserved the Letter is probable but not certain; for I usually destroy those private Letters which either ought not, or which do not appear of sufficient Importance, to be kept. My Recollection of its Contents is imperfect, but corresponds with the general Idea You give of it. As to the use I made of it, that was communicated to you in Confidence, and conseq⟨uently⟩ cannot be given to the public. If I find it, as I hope may be the Case, you shall certainly have a Copy of it.
Yours sincerely

John Jay
Majr Gen. Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Philip Schuyler, 25 August 1800
From: Schuyler, Philip
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Albany Monday August 25 1800
My Dear Sir

Your favor of the 13th Instant with the plan of your intended house was delivered me on Thursday last that of the 18th by the mail I received yesterday.
I have deliverd Mr Putnam the builder the plan and a paper of which you have a copy on the other side, and Expect his answer to morrow.

If the house is boarded on the out side, and then Clap boards put on, and fitted in the inside with brick I am persuaded no water will pass to the brick If the Clap boards are well painted, and filling in with brick will be little If any more expensive than lath & plaister. The former will prevent the nuisance occasioned by rats and mice, to which you will be eternally exposed if lath & plaister is made use of instead of brick.
The partitions between the appartments in the interior of the house If made of Joice and then lathed and plaistered also have vacancies as receptacles for rats & mice. It is a little but not much more expensive to have the partitions of planks of 2 or 2½ Inches thick set vertically from floor to ceiling, and Jointed together but not planed, on these planks the lath & plaister to be put, and thus a solid partition is formed.
In the bill of Scantling which you have sent me I do not find any timber for the Gutters, perhaps this has been omitted.
Should Mr Putnam refuse to contract unless for the whole house in all its parts, except the Masonry, I will receive his proposals on a statement which I shall make and transmit it to you without delay, or should he be extravagant in his demands—I shall as soon as Cornelia is brought to bed, go up and contract for the timber and purchase the boards & planks, and If possible I will cause the boards and planks to be put into water for two months and then piled up with sticks between them, that they may be seasoned before they are worked up.
It will save very considerable expence If the clap boards and boards for the floors were sawed to the proper breadth & thickness at the Saw mills, I therefore wish you to send me how many of each Mr Weeks thinks will be wanted, their breadth & thickness.
I rejoice My Dear Son that My Philip has Acquited himself so well, and hope that his future progress may correspond with Your & My wishes.
If I cannot procure the names of the persons who keep a land office at Uttica before the Mail closes I shall send It by next post.
All here unite in Love to you My Eliza & the Children.
I am My Dear Son   Ever most affectionately Your st

Ph: Schuyler
Hnl. M Gen: Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Benjamin Stoddert, 25 August 1800
From: Stoddert, Benjamin
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Navy Depart. 25. August 1800.
Sir

I am honored with your letter of the 18, enclosing papers respecting the conduct of Capt Perry, towards the Danish schooner, William & Mary.
The Gentlemen at whose request you transmitted me these papers, may be assured that a strict scrutiny shall be made into this affair—& that no proper step shall be omitted to vindicate the Character of Capt Perry, if innocent, or to punish him, if guilty.
I have the honor to be   with great respect & esteem   sr   Yr. Most Obed. Serv.

Ben Stoddert.
General Hamilton. New York.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Fisher Ames, 26 August 1800
From: Ames, Fisher
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Dedham [Massachusetts] August 26th, 1800
Dear Sir

I have communicated your letter, by Mr Coolidge, to Mr Cabot and two or three friends I have desired him and he has promised to write to you on the subject. Since it’s reception I have had a long profoundly sensible and interesting letter from Mr Wolcot. The same friends have also considered that, and we all agree in the result.
We understand that at the close of the late session the Feds. consulted on the measures proper to be taken by the friends of order and true liberty to keep the Chair from being occupied by an enemy of both. This was the principal object to which all inferior considerations must be made to yield. It was known and allowed that Mr A has conducted strangely and unaccountably, and that his re election wd. be very inauspicious to the U. S. But great as that evil appeared, it was thought indispensibly necessary to run the risk of it, and to agree fairly to vote for him and General P. Because chance might exclude the former, and because any other arrangement would, by dividing the party, inevitably exclude both and absolutely secure the success of Mr Jefferson. and because also many, perhaps most of the Federalists, will believe it is better to have him—Mr A—again than Mr Jefferson. The question being not What opinion we must have of the candidates but what conduct we are to pursue. I do not see cause to arraign the policy of the result of that meeting.
For in the first place, it is manifestly impossible to get votes enough for Gen P. to prevent the choice of Mr. Jefferson, in case he should be supported in open hostility to Mr A. The 16 votes of this state and 4 of Rh Island may be counted as adhering in all events to Mr A. Then why should we ground any plan of conduct on a known impracticability of it’s execution. By taking that course of open hostility, generous as it may seem, we are at issue with all the Feds who would not join us, and whose vexation & despair would ascribe the certain ill success of the party to us and not to the Jacobins They would say we make Mr J. President and the vindictive frien⟨ds of⟩ Mr A wd. join in the accusation. The fed⟨eralists⟩ would be defeated which is bad, and disjointed and enraged against one another which wd. be worse. Now it seems to me that the great object of duty and prudence is to keep the party strong by it’s union and spirit. For I see almost no chance of preventing the election of Mr Jefferson. Pensylvania will be managed eventually by Govr. McKean and Govr. Dallas to throw it’s whole weight into that scale. The question is not I fear how we shall fight, but how we and all Federalists shall fall—that we may fall like Anteus the stronger for our fall.
It is I confess awkward and embarrassing to act under the constraints that we do. But sincerity will do much to extricate us. Where is the inconsistency of Saying: President A. has not our approbation of some of his measures nor do we desire his reelection—But many Federalists do, and the only chance to prevent the triumph of the Jacobins is to unite and vote according to the compromise made at Philadelphia for the two candidates. That this gives an equal chance and a better than we would freely give to one of them. But strong as our objections are, and strongly as we could and are willing to urge them to the public we refrain, because the effect of urging them would be to split the Federalists and Absolutely to ensure Mr. Jefferson’s success. That however if the rancorous and absurd attacks of Mr A’s personal friends and the meditated intrigues with our legislature should make it necessary, we shall not fail to prevent the effect of that compromise which they thus abuse and turn against the avowed design of those who made it—and that we shall not sit still but resort to such measures as they will render necessary That this compromise not only exhibits the condescension and pliancy of Mr A’s opposers but is the only good basis of the success of either Mr A’s or Genl P’s friends in the event—as it engages before hand for the acquiescence of the disappointed part of the Federalists and also as it is the only step that can unite them to oppose this Election of a Jacobin, and in that sad event that can keep them united as a party, without whose union oppression and revolution will ensue.
Where is the absurdity or inconsistency of this language? It is besides that which we have held for some time and it is difficult now to change it.
I am therefore clear that you ought not with your name, nor if practicable in any way that will be traced to you, to execute your purpose of exposing the reasons for a change of the executive. But a strong appeal to the sense and principles of the real Federalists would not, or need not, contradict or discredit the language above stated. I have tried to compress as much as I can into one sheet. But I have much more I wish to suggest to you. I have no occasion to say how highly I respect your judgment, but I exceedingly desire to discuss with you the point of the changes which the Jacobins may force the nation to make in the plan of the Govt.
Yrs truly

Fisher Ames


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to William Jackson, 26 August 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Jackson, William

New-York Aug 26 1800.
My dear Jackson.

Never was there a more ungenerous persecution of any man than of myself.—Not only the worst constructions are put upon my conduct as a public man but it seems my birth is the subject of the most humiliating criticism.

On this point as on most others which concern me, there is much mistake—though I am pained by the consciousness that it is not free from blemish.
I think it proper to confide to your bosom the real history of it, that among my friends you may if you please wipe off some part of the stain which is so industriously impressed.
The truth is that on the question who my parents were, I have better pretensions than most of those who in this Country plume themselves on Ancestry.
My Grandfather by the mothers side of the name of Faucette was a French Huguenot who emigrated to the West Indies in consequence of the revocation of the Edict of Nantz and settled in the Island of Nevis and there acquired a pretty fortune. I have been assured by persons who knew him that he was a man of letters and much of a gentleman. He practiced a⟨s⟩ a Physician, whether that was his original profession, or one assumed for livelihood after his emigration is not to me ascertained.
My father now dead was certainly of a respectable Scotch Fami⟨ly.⟩ His father was, and the son of his Eldest brother now is Laird of Grang⟨e.⟩ His mother was the sister of an ancient Baronet Sir Robert Pollock.
Himself being a younger son of a numerous family was bred to trade. In capacity of merchant he went to St Kitts, where from too generous and too easy a temper he failed in business, and at length fell into indigent circumstances. For some time he was supported by his friends in Scotland, and for several years before his death by me. It was his fault to have had too much pride and two large a portion of indolence—but his character was otherwise without reproach and his manners those of a Gentleman.
So far I may well challenge comparison, but the blemish remains to be unveiled.
A Dane a fortune-hunter of the name of Lavine came to Nevis bedizzened with gold, and paid his addresses to my mother then a handsome young woman having a snug fortune. In compliance with the wishes of her mother who was captivated by the glitter of the  but against her own inclination she married Lavine. The marriage was unhappy and ended in a separation by divorce. My mother afterwards went to St Kitts, became acquainted with my father and a marriage between them ensued, followed by many years cohabitation and several children.
But unluckily it turned out that the divorce was not absolute but qualified, and thence the second marriage was not lawful. Hence when my mother died the small property which she left went to my half brother Mr Lavine who lived in South Carolina and was for a time partner with Mr Kane. He is now dead.
As to my fathers family Mr McCormick of this city, merchant, can give testimony and will corroborate what I have stated.
Yours truly and affectionately.

Alexander Hamilton
Major. Jackson.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Charles Carroll of Carrollton, 27 August 1800
From: Carroll, Charles (of Carrollton)
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Brooklandwood near Baltimore27th. Aug. 1800
Dear Sir

I recd this morning at this place, the country residence of my Son in law Mr. Caton, your letter of the 7th instant.
I wish it were in my power to give you pleasing intelligence of the politics in this my State—Our county (Ann Arundel) wh was lately so federal, is at present much divided; in the upper part of it, I suspect, there is a majority for antifederal Delegates to our State Legislate: this change of sentiment has been principally effected by a few characters, who profiting of the report that our Legislature would take from the people the right of chosing the electors of President & vice President, have infused such jeaulousies into the minds of the people, that I fear the federal ticket will not prevail in Ann Arundel, unless the Candidates will promise not to take from ye People the choice of Electors.
Notwithstanding the arts & lies, & indefatigable industry of the Jacobins in this State, I am of opinion a great majority of its Inhabitants are friendly to the federal government and its measures. I suspect Jefferson & Burr will have 3 votes in this State, & that the Electors will be chosen by districts, and not by the Legislature. The federal Electors will vote for Adams & Pinkney, altho’ the former has lost the confidence of many federals from the incidents, to which you allude, & which are pretty generally circulated thro’ this State.
It is the character of age to be timid & suspicious; and this infirmity so natural to men of my time of life, has no doubt its influence on my mind. I much fear that this country is doomed to great convulsions, changes, & calamities; the turbulent and disorganising spirit of Jacobinism, under the worn out disguise of equal liberty, & rights and division of property held out as a lure to the indolent, & needy, but not really intended to be executed, will introduce anarchy which will terminate here, as in France, in a military despotism.
I understand Jefferson & Burr will have all the votes in Virga—how the votes will be to the southward of that State I can form no opinions having no sure data to form one. If the Virginia Electors, should suspect that Burr might outvote their favourite Jefferson, they will leave out Burr or give him only a few votes.
I hope the eastern Electors, in a case of so much importance, & when they come to consider the baneful effects which may result from their giving a chance to ye. Election of Jefferson or Burr for President, will vote unanimously for Adams & Pinkney; if they do not act in this manner, it is highly probably that Jefferson will be elected President.
Altho’ I dislike laws & changes suited to the spirit of the occasion, yet as so many evils are likely to result from the choice of a Jacobinical President, the insidious policy of Virga. should in my opinion be counteracted, & if we should have a federal house of Delegates (of which I really have doubts from ye present ferment in People’s minds) I hope the Legislature will choose, pro hac vice, the Electors of Presdt. & vice President. I say I Hope; for I am not certain even if the new house of Delegates, should be federal, that they would pass such a law, as many of the members will probably be instructed not to vote for it.
I have given you my sentiments upon the subject of your letter, & all Information I possess, which to speak the Truth, is chiefly derived from others, and those well disposed to our present government—

Burr will probably act with more dicision than Jefferson; if elected President and will go all lengths with his party; but will not Jefferson be afraid to disobey his party, & may he not be driven to measures, which his own judgment would reject?
A wise & federal Senate may restrain for a considerable time the wild projects of the Jacobin faction; and in politicks, as in war, who gains time, I will not say with ye great Frederick gains every thing, but gains a great deal.
If the war in Europe should be protracted to another year, I fear the antifederal party will endeavour to precipitate this country into a war with England, & ye depredations committed by her cruizers on our trade will aid their designs. I hope however the coming winter will produce a general peace; in that event we shall have one evil the less to dread from the machinations of the enemies of order & good government.
It is much to be wished that our envoys to France may be able to accomodate our differences with that Nation, before peace is concluded between it & England, otherwise Buinaparte will, I fear, make us purchase the forbearance of the great Nation at a very dear rate.
I am with sentiments of high esteem & respect   Dr. Sir   Yr. Most hum. Servant

Ch. Carroll of Carrollton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Jay, 27 August 1800
From: Jay, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Albany 27 Augt. 1800
Dear Sir

I recd. and answered your Letter of the 19 Inst: on Monday. Yesterday I found the Instructions, & immediately wrote to you a Letter containing a Copy of the Paragraph in question.
My search for the Letter of which I made the use you mention, was fruitless until this morning, when I found it, and now enclose a Copy—It does not quite answer your Expectation as to the opinion—But I know and am ready to certify that you gave me in Substance the Opinion you mention vizt. that unless an arrangement on solid Terms could be made with G. Britain, it would be better to do nothing.
Yours

John Jay
Majr. Genl. Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Edward Carrington, 30 August 1800
From: Carrington, Edward
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Richmond Aug 30. 1800
Dear Sir,

I have received your friendly and confidential letter of the 7th. Inst. and am much obliged by your information as to the state of public opinion in the Eastern & Middle states in regard to the approaching presidential election. In return I will give you such as I possess Southwardly; yours however must be far the most perfect, as to particular circumstances, from your late tour through the Eastern States. Yet I can be pretty positive upon two points; first that every federal Elector in the southern states will Vote for Mr. Adams—2dly that no antifederal one will vote for Genl Pinckney except (possibly only) in South Carolina from personal attachment, but even there, it is to be expected that the same influence in the Legislature, where the Electors will be chosen, which may carry a ticket for Mr. Jefferson, will exclude Pinckney; for so fixed and well trained, is that party throug[h]out the UStates, on its object, that no personal considerations either of attachment or dislike, can operate to disunite those who will have to vote. try this position in your own State—do you believe that were Mr. Jay or any other distinguished federal character there, a Candidate, in the present situation of the Legislature, he could get a vote in that State; or that Jefferson could lose a vote, even though a personal enemy should happen to be an Elector?
From Georgia I have received but little information, but so far as any intelligence has reach[ed] me, I have no expectation of a federal Elector there. From south Carolina it is generally learned, that by different elections, a majority of Electors would be federal, but as they are to be chosen by the Legislature, where the best abilities will be on the Antifederal side, and used with great industry under peculiar advantages, it is more than probable that an anti-federal ticket will be carried. From North Carolina, as to preference of candidates, there is but one source of information—with the federalists, Adams is the object in preference to any Man living—with the Antifederalists Jefferson is alike preferred. All the Candidates for Electors, make these assertive declarations. Pinckney it is presumed will get the 2d. votes of the first, and Burr the 2d. of the latter. Rely upon it, however, that an idea of an Eastern division to Adams, would greatly abate the zeal of federalists in that state. The Electors will be chosen by districts—how the division will be, is differently calculated on, three, five, & seven federalists have been said to be probable. I hope the first is too low, and fear the 2d. is full high at best. Of Virginia it is needless to say any thing, as you are already apprised of the prospect. Maryland is now in greater agitation on this subject than it ever experienced in any case before. The elections to the state Legislature are depending, and the ground of contest is, Whether there shall be a legislative choice of Electors, with a view to an Unanimous federal vote, or a choice by districts as heretofore, in which latter case, several Antifederalists will be chosen. It appears to be understood that the federalists will succeed, but the exertion is for Adams, for whom alone, it is said the effort would be so strenuously made. It is expected that the second vote will be for Pinckney should no dissatisfaction arise on the ground of division in the Eastern States.
If I am tolerably correct in this information and, I believe it will surely turn out that I am, you must readily perceive that it will require an unanimous vote in the five Eastern States to give a flattering prospect of the election of either Adams or Pinckney. Then my dear Sir, consider what must necessarily be the effect of a perseverence of those who are dissatisfied with Mr Adams in that quarter, in their opposition. Should Connecticut be ultimately considered as to vote against him, will not N. Hampshire, where you say he is the first Object vote against Pinckney from disgust? and will not Massachusetts, at least in part, do the same? Should these events take place, even without a like effect Southwardly, the election of both would be inevitably gone. I would not calculate at all upon the issue of a Congressional election in case of the failure of a majority amongst the Electors. As Congress stood at the last session, it was not clear that an election could have been effected there; and as some federalists who were in at that time, will, by resignations, be out at the next session, it is to be feared, that an election of the President in that Body, would terminate antifederally.
It appears to me that the federalists throughout the Union, have but one plain and easy game to play. Let them Unite unreservedly on Adams & Pinckney, leaving the issue as between them to its fate. And I verily believe this will be the case, if not prevented by apprehension of scisms in the Eastern States. As such apprehensions have arisen, it is essential, in my opinion, that they be quickly removed, and that the doctrine of Union on the two federal Candidates, be speedily inculcated by those who have discovered a dissatisfaction with Mr. Adams. I will add this further remark, for the consideration of those Gentlemen—Preferring Pinckney to Adams, this course will, while it may secure them, in common with other federalists, against an Antifederal election, give them a chance of their further object, if it turns out that Pinckney gets antifederal votes in south Carolina; and as this is the ground on which they have contemplated a safe opposition to Adams, it will be the less difficult for them to adopt this new course of conduct. It would be lamentable indeed that even though our opponents may prove unable to beat us by their own strength, we should assist them in their object by our own divisions.
I shall on all occasions receive your communications with pleasure, and shall endeavor to return you such as appear to me founded on the real state of opinions within my limited sphere of information, being with unalterable regard
My Dear Sir,   Your friend & sr:

E Carrington
Genl Alexander Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from “Hambden”, [30 August 1800]
From: “Hambden”
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[Kingston, New York, August 30, 1800]
sir,
A young Man, who, from his Situation in Life has some Leisure; and who wishes to devote it, to, what he most conscientiously considers, the true Interests of his Country, incloses you a paper, which is intended as the first of a series of the like Tendency & Style. Unknown to, and by, You, it will hardly be considered even a Compliment, when I profess to view your person as the most regularly Operating Spring, in the Machinery of federal Measures. Unaccustomed to flattery, I should not have made a Declaration which has even the Appearance of it were it not by Way of Apology for the Intrusion of this Letter. To your Judgment it is intended to submit the Propriety of giving Publicity to the enclosed. I should prefer the Spectator—which has most general Circulation in the Country—tho perhaps the Daily Gazette may do nearly as well.
Federal Writers—indeed, almost all federal Men have, contented themselves with acting on the Defensive. They have often repelled the attacks of their Adversaries & have been then content—their Adversaries seem to have acquired New Strength from every Defeat, & have returned, with Fresh Vigor to the Charges. Our Method, I am afraid will do niether in War, or in politics. Our Enemies must be pursued into their Dens, and there destroyed, and how easy is the Task! Such a Collection of blotched Reputations need but be exposed to excite Horror. If the Tree known by its Fruit; why not the Fruit by the Tree. If the fountain corrupt, how can pure Waters be expected to flow from it? Has Rottenness entered into the Heart, how can the Blood remain untainted?
Had fortune thrown her sunshine over me, I should not court Secrecy—but perhaps the Subsistence of a little Family depends upon my being concealed. In any Event therefore I have no Doubt but that even the local Source from whence this Letter is derived will not be exposed.
I am sir   Yrs. respectfully
Hambden
30th. Aug. 1800


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Herman Le Roy and William Bayard, 1 September 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Bayard, William,Le Roy, Herman

New York, September 1, 1800. Has reviewed their request for compensation from the Holland Land Company and concludes that their “Claim is reasonable and moderate.”


Title: Receipt from Isaac McComb and Company, [2 September 1800]
From: Isaac McComb and Company
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[New York, September 2, 1800]
Mr Isaac McComb & Co for Genll. Hambleton
By Van Geld
S.

Septb 2 1800
To 3 Cask Lime @
14 ⅌ Cask

To Carting
 2
£ 2.4. 0

Content pd.   By Ab Van Geld


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Jay, 3 September 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Jay, John

New York Sep 3. 1800
Dear Sir
I thank you for your three letters in compliance with my request. They contain what I desired. But as they mingle the fact, respecting the communication of my letter to you to Lord Grenville, which I always understood to be confidential, I will thank you to send me a certificate of the sentiment which you recollect to have been given by me, and I will beg you to let it be as full and as explicit as your memory will serve.
A french family (Dupont’s) very good people, from kind heartedness, interest themselves in the misfortune of the person mentioned in the inclosed paper. It is to no purpose to tell them that according to the statement itself nothing can be done. I will thank you to enable me to disembarrass myself of importunity by telling them some result of the transmission to you. Their object is a pardon.
Very respectfully & truly   Dr Sir   Yr Obed serv
AH
Gr. Jay


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 3 September 1800
From: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Washington Sept. 3d. 1800
Dear Sir.
I am favoured with your Letters of the 3d. & 19th. instant. You will have thought it strange that the first has not been acknwledged—it has been out of my power: the effects of a new Climate want of exercise and too much application to official business, produced a serious indisposition, which disabled me from writing for a forth-night; I am now recovering, though I remain weak.
I had commenced the Statement which I promised & soon found myself embarrased with the reflection which has occurred to you. We know that the present humiliation of the federal party, is to be attributed to the violent & inconsistent conduct of the President. We also know that opinions have been frequently express⟨ed⟩ by him, not only unjust to individuals, but highly imprudent & dangerous in relation to the public Interests. It is as I conceive perfectly proper & a duty, to make known those defects & errors which disqualify Mr. Adams, for ⟨th⟩e great trust with which he is now ⟨inves⟩ted; but the publication of particular ⟨inci⟩dents & conversations, the knowledge of ⟨which⟩ has resulted from official relations ⟨will⟩ by many good men be considered as improper. The most flagrant outrages in decency attended the demands of Mr. McHenrys resignation—perhaps there exists no obligation to conceal what occurred at the time when the official relation was disolved & it is I presume equally fair to deduce evidences of unfitness from any notorious circumstances, which have attended the Presidents administration—my Statement will be made on these principles.
But the situation in which we are both placed is delicate & somewhat perplexing—whatever you may say or write, will by a class of people be attributed to personal resentment—while it will be said that the President has not injured me; that he has borne with my open disapprobation of his measures & that I ought ⟨not to⟩ oppose his administration by disclosing what some will term, personal or official Secrets.
Having reflected on the dilemma, I have concluded, that as it respects myself, I was justifiable in continuing in Office during the present year, on the ground of the sudden innovations in ⟨the⟩ adminstration which afforded ⟨me no⟩ opportunity for reflection, befor⟨e the⟩ termination of the last Session of Congress: that the unsettled state of the Departments; the removal of the Offices to this place; the absence of the President from the Seat of Government & the duty of preserving order in that branch of business, which had been committed to my care, were circumstances, which justly disuaded me from an abrupt resignation, while they left me free to exercise my opinion & rights as an individual, upon any question relative to the public policy & interests.
To secure myself against the imputation of being concerned in a secret Cabal, I have however thought it my duty to express my opinions and intentions frankly to my Colleagues, in the same manner as I have done to my private correspondents. I am apprized that I shall by some be considered as factious but the accusation is less offensive, than the suspicion of cunning or subserviency to measures which I seriously disapprove, to which I should otherwise be exposed.
The result of a free correspondence with my friends in Massachusetts & Connecticut is, that the former are disinclined to a public discussion of the conduct of the President: those of Connecticut, think as we do, & probably may express their sentiments by their Votes, but they will not agitate the public mind without perceiving that some important object is to be acquired.
I have been much surprized & chagrined to find our party so unstable & inefficient. We must however take things as we find them—they are indeed bad, but they may be made worse. I am clearly of opinion that you ought to publish nothing with your signature at present. It is the business of some less conspicuous characters to commence an investigation: the President cannot except for a moment injure your character—his project of placing himself at the head of a new Party will not succeed & the impressions which his declarations respecting a British Party first made, have already in a great measure been effaced. From my correspondence I infer that Genl. Pinckney will obtain all the Votes of Massachusetts. I conclude however that Mr. Jefferson will certainly be elected Prest. The Anties have the command of the Press. The current of public opinion is in their favour. Those who are confirmed in opposition are interested in classing the friends of Mr Adams & Genl. Pinckney together. Their Interests could only be seperated by a bold & united effort. The time for making this effort has been permitted to elapse. The only remaining chance is to be expected from the result of the mission to France & I am inclined to think that even this will operate in favour of Mr. Jefferson.
Our dispatches are only to the 17th. of May at which time nothing had been done beyond a mutual disclosure of the points in controversy—the discussions had been temperate, but firm on both sides. I have little doubt that the negociation has failed and that the report from St. Sebastians is true both as to the general fact as well as the particular cause of rupture. You will judge, whether in the present languid state of the federal party it will be possible to resist the impression which the Democrats will attempt to make, that an accomodation ought to take place, on the ground of compensation for illegal captures on one hand and a revival of the old Treaties on the other. Will our people listen to arguments derived from a sense of national honour & permanent policy in opposition to their desire for Peace & to the immediate Interests of the merchants? will they patiently bear to be told, that the Treaty with G. B. already the supposed cause of much embarrassment opposes an insuperable obstacle to the revival of the antient Treaties with France?
To return to the point in which we are interested—namely whether a formal defense against Mr. Adams’s observations is expedient—permit me to say, that the poor old Man is sufficiently successful in undermining his own Credit and influence. Strange Reports are in circulation many of which are well founded and believed. At N Haven he told Mr. Edwards, that a British faction existed here, which it was necessary to break up—to another person of great respectability, he said that this Country could not get along without an hereditary Chief. The Jacobins report both Stories & the people believe that their President is Crazy. This is the honest truth & what more can be said on the subject.
I have attended to the publications in the Aurora, we may regret, but we cannot now prevent the mischiefs which these falshoods produce. The Aurora is but one of many papers, which contain similar misrepresentations. They are echoed by organized Committees through a great part of the Union; we may as well attempt to arrest the progress of fire in a mess of gun powder as to suppress these calumnies; they must have their course and the vindication of official characters must be left to an enquiry by Congress.
I feel entire confidence, that the manner in which the business of the Treasury has been conducted both during your own & my administration, will bear the strictest scrutiny. The accounts relative to the payment of pensions and Interest while you was in Office, have long since been settled, and it will appear that no improper advances were made. The accounts which have been published, through the infidelity of some of the Clerks are among the most recent transactions of the Department. Colo. Pickerings conduct will be found correct; Mr. Daytons incorrect—but the advances were made on his written applications & it was impossible for me to foreknow, that he intended to force a Loan from the Treasury, or that he would unjustifiably delay to settle his Accounts. The advances for Pensions never exceeded and frequently fell short of the precise sums required by the War Department; the payments for dividends of Interest have been governed by a person which rendered Estimates unnecessary. It is my present intention to invite an Enquiry, which will confute every calumny against your or my character & shew the state of the Dept. at the close of this year. It is incumbent on those who have raised the Storm to watch its future progress & effects.
At the moment of closing this Letter I have recd. a Letter from Mr. Cabot, by which I find that Mr. Adams will be supported in Massachusetts in conjunction with Genl: Pinckney. This confirms the ideas which I have suggested of the inexpediency of any thing being published with your signature. I will soon compleat my statement though I do not see that it can be of any present use. We must it seems renounce our plan or continue it, without support.

Mr. Jefferson will probably be elected, for I hold it to be impossible that men of sense should cordially support Mr. Adams, whatever they may affect. I am truely & sincerely yrs.
Oliver Wolcott.
Alexander Hamilton Esqr.

N.B. Mr. Adams’s Letters to Tench Coxe will serve instead of Volumns for an illustration of character. The enquiry of the Duke of Leeds after a Classmate, was a strange ground for impeaching the integrity of an old Soldier & Patriot as well as the wisdom of the American Govt. Besides the Journals of Congress will prove, that the limitation of Mr. Adams’s commission to three years, was established by the Votes of all the Eastern States and among others by the Vote of the favourite Gerry. See the Journal of the ⟨17th, 18th and 2⟩4th of February 1785.
O W.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from James McHenry, 4 September 1800
From: McHenry, James
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Baltimore 4 Sept. 1800
My dear Hamilton
I recd. this morning your letter dated the 27 Ulto. with the one at first intended for Major Jackson.
I sincerely beleive that there is not one of your friends who have paid the least attention to the insinuations attempted to be cast on the legitimacy of your birth, or who would care or respect you less were all that your enemies say or impute on this head true. I think it will be most prudent and magnanimous to leave any explanation on the subject to your biographer, and the discretion of those friends to whom you have communicated the facts.
Another subject. Will not a publication calculated to give a proper biass to the public sentiment come too late, except perhaps in particular States where a foundation may have already been laid?
You will see by the enclosed how we stand here.
Yours truly & affly
J McH
Alexr Hamilton Es


Title: Enclosure: James McHenry to Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 22 July 1800
From: McHenry, James
To: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.

[Baltimore] 22 July 1800.
Have our party shewn that they possess the necessary skill and courage to deserve to be continued to govern? What have they done? They did not (with a few exceptions) knowing the disease, the man and his nature, meet it when it first appeared, like wise and resolute patriots: they tampered with it, and thought of palliations down to the last day of the late session of Congress. Nay their conduct even now (notwithstanding the consequences full in their view, should the present chief be elected) in most if not all the States, is tremulous, timid, feeble, deceptious and cowardly. They write private letters to each other, but do nothing to give a proper direction to the public mind. They observe even in their conversations generally, a discreet circumspection, illy calculated to diffuse information or prepare the mass of the people for the result they meditate in private. Can good come out of such a system: If the party recovers its pristine energy and splendor shall I ascribe it to such cunning, paultry indecisive back-door conduct? Certainly I shall not but to a kind and watchful Providence alone, who will not punish the many for the faults of the few, who bears with our mistakes, who overlooks our feebleness and follies, and who guides unerringly, and according to the ends he has ordained all the governments of this world. I carry you see my religious principles into my politics.
Having thus expressed my decided disapprobation of the system which it would seem has been adopted through fear & feebleness I shall now say a few words relative to the state of things & opinions in Maryland particularly ‘idibus Decembris.’
We have not in this State on any great and critical question, as yet, undertaken to play a first part; we have however, generally speaking upon such occasions plaid a proper part. At present ideas, as far as I can collect them, are exceedingly mixed, fluctuating and confused. There is a desire among the federalists generally, if not all, to act right and to place in the Presidential chair a truely federal character. Then comes the difficulty. It is believed to have been a point settled by the federal members of Congress, at a meeting held previous to the late adjournment of Congress, that it was expedient that fair and honourable endeavours should be used by them, in their respective States, to obtain concurrent votes for Mr. Adams & Gen. Pinckney. This resolution is announced to the public, by one of the members of Congress who had generally taken a leading part in most debates on measures of importance, in a letter addressed to his constituents and published after the adjournment of Congress, with this further information that it was the wish of the meeting, Mr. Adams should be President.
Such is the information before the people of Maryland. If therefore the Eastern States remain silent upon this subject, or if no contrary expression by prominent characters is publickly divulged, from any quarter, what can be done here to obtain a superiority or even an equal number of votes for General Pinckney? Can we of this State feel assured, that the voters in one Eastern State, and a majority of the voters in another State nearly eastern will omit Mr Adams intirely? Or is it certain, that four of the Eastern States will give as many votes for General Pinckney as for Mr Adams? This must happen to provide against the necessary operation of the wish of the members of the caucus. Mr Harper is now clearly of opinion that Genl Pinckney ought to be preferred. Whether this will produce any effect I know not.
It is still uncertain and must remain so for some time, whether the votes for President in this State will be by electors chosen by the people under the existing district law, or by electors to be chosen by the General Assembly as we denominate o[u]r legislature. The latter mode, which seems to be generally desired by the federalists, is universally deprecated by the opposition party. The elections for members of the house of delegates, it would appear will be fought upon this ground, and should the federal side be succesful by a commanding majority, it is thought the governor & council are disposed to call the assembly by Proclamation (immediately after the new election which takes place in October).
Were the votes to be given now by electors chosen by the general Assembly, I think it probable Mr Adams and Genl. Pinckney would each have the whole number of votes. On the other hand if by electors to be chosen by the people, each would have three or four votes less, but perhaps each an equal number.
You must be thoroughly sensible how difficult it must be to counteract what appears to have been a well matured system devised by enlightened men, in possession of general facts, by any efforts or information of solitary individuals.
I may possibly satisfy some of our most prominent characters that the peace and prosperity of our country have been brought into jeopardy by the present chief to answer electioneering purposes: that under a government dissimilar from that of the Prussian, and with talents of a very different and inferior cast from those of the Great Frederick, like him he would be every thing and do every thing himself, that he wants the prudence and discretion indispensible to enable him to conduct with propriety and safety the colloquial intercourse permitted between a President and foreign ministers; that he is incapable of adhering to any system, consequently must be forever bringing disgrace upon his agents and administration; that his foibles passions and prejudices are of a stamp which must expose him incessantly and equally to the intrigues of foreigners, and the unprincipled and wickedly ambitious men of either party; and that the high and dearest interests of the U.S. cannot possibly be safe under his direction.
Shall I acknowledge to you that I fear tho’ some men among us of some influence too, may not have been able to resist such convictions, yet that they talk about the policy of giving him a vote with General Pinckney, and were they to be electors would do so. I am perhaps in this case too suspicious and draw my conclusions more from the knowledge I have of the future views of such men than a reliance I ought to have upon their good sense and patriotism.


Title: Enclosure: James McHenry to Philemon Dickinson, [3 September 1800]
From: McHenry, James
To: Dickinson, Philemon

[Baltimore, September 3, 1800]
In Maryland from causes which you will easily comprehend it will be extremely difficult, if at all possible to bring the federalists generally into vigorous action, in favour of Mr. Adams, and yet from the force of the impulse which has been given to the people before the subject could be understood, it is likely, whether the electors be chosen by the people, or the Legislature, that Mr. Adams and General Pinckney will have each an equal number of votes. If by the people in their legal districts, the votes on the federal side may fall four short of the whole number for these candidates: If by the Legislature the whole number will be given to each. But it is most likely, from present appearances the choice of electors will be left to the people under the existing law owing to the growing lukewarmness respecting Mr. Adams.
I understand from good authority that we shall have at least five federal votes, (with a prospect of two more) in N. Carolina, and whether the Legislature of S. Carolina shall be federal or otherwise that General Pinckney will have all the votes to which this State is intitled.
What do you think of Mr Adams’s letter dated the 2d of May 1792, as it is published in the Aurora of the 28 & 29 ulto. This is the letter upon which I understand Duane & his party ⟨desired⟩ to prove British influence in our councils.
For my own part, I see in this letter no such evidence, but a new proof if such had been wanted, of the eternal vanity of its writer, his inextinguishable thirst for office, and deadly enmity to every man likely to become his rival or competiter.
The Duke of Leeds, to whom perhaps, nothing better occurred to say to our minister (our present chief and to whom I presume politeness might require he should say something), asks him a very innocent and natural question respecting two of his countrymen, who had been the Dukes class-mates, having received their education in England, as you know was customary before the revolution with the sons of men of fortune, particularly at the Southward. This question for it does not appear that there was further conversation on any subject, induces the letter writer to conclude, that Thomas Pinckney, one of the gentlemen inquired after by the Duke, “has many powerful old friends in England.” What a conclusion this from such a circumstance? Shall we most admire its weakness, or permit ourselves to suppose its object and intention wicked and malicious?
The next idea of the letter writer is equally sagacious and profound. It is couched in a kind of question, which includes a direct insinuation, that if an American citizen, has been known to an English Lord, at school, and that Lord, in or out of the ministry, twenty or thirty years after (revolution too intervening which tried this citizens principles) shall in a friendly manner inquire about his welfare or health, that this said citizen must be a contaminated person and unfit to be trusted as a minister at St. James’s. Is this the observation of a great mind, of a man of sense and experience, or of a dolard or designing little politician?
Again Mr. Thomas Pinckney’s family contributed to limit his (Mr Adams’s) commission of minister to the Court of London to three years, “In Order To make way for Themselves to succeed me.”
This charge, I can assure you, for I was then a member of Congress and voted for the limitation, is unfounded.
The resolution which directed that no commission of a minister, to any foreign court should continue in force more than three years, was brought up on the 17 Feby 1785, (see the Journals of Congress) upon a motion made by Mr Charles Pinckney of South Carolina (now a Senator in Congress) seconded by Mr. Howel, a member from Rhode Island. Mr. Jacob Read (the present Senator in Congress) a member from S. Carolina, seconded by Mr Hardy a member from Virginia, moved to postpone this motion, in order, to introduce a resolution declaring it impolitic and unnecessary to fix any determinate time to the continuation of a foreign minister in office. This motion was negatived. By what States? New Hampshire Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York New Jersey, Maryland & South Carolina. The restrictive motion was put and lost also. The States in its favour were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York & S. Carolina. Against it New Jersey Virginia & No. Carolina. Next day (18th) the restrictive motion was renewed and carried (after an attempt to dismiss it by a question of order) by the votes of the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania & S. Carolina (Mr Read against and Bull & Pinckney for it).
On the 24 Feby. following, Mr Adams, was elected minister Plenipotentiary to the Court of G. Britain upon the nomination of Mr Howel, who had seconded the motion of limitation, no other person (recollected to have been) in nomination.
You will perceive from this statement that the measure or restrictive resolution, was supported and voted for by what was then called the Eastern phalanx and that neither General Pinckney nor his brother Thomas Pinckney were members of Congress or could have influenced the Eastern votes on the occasion.
It will be recollected, by those conversant in the political history of that period, that there existed in Congress opinions, that Mr Adams, was not qualified from certain foibles and defects in character, to manage unaided and alone prudently and successfully the interests of the United States.
This creature then of the imagination, these abominable suspicions constitute a “long intrigue” of “the Pinckney family” and therefore “I knowing as I do the long intrigue, and suspecting as I do much British influence in the appointment (of Tho. Pinckney in 1792) were I in an Executive department, I should take the liberty to keep a vigilant eye upon them” the family of the Pinckneys.
Is it possible, for low ambition, envy and ridiculous vanity to go further in associating and combining malignant suspicions to wound the character of a fellow citizen? And will it be practicable, after the public shall have come to the knowledge and duly weighed the matter of this extraordinary letter, for the friends of Mr. Adams to keep him from sinking in the opinion of every man of sense, integrity and candour; or rather will then any friends remain to him among the sound and well judging part of the community after so plain and perspicuous an exposure by himself of his real character?
To whom must the British Influence which this letter writer suspects be applied? To General Washington the then President, to the Senate, to the heads of Departments or any of them? This he leaves in doubt or to be ascribed to all or either as his correspondent or readers may incline.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Francis A. Vanderkemp, 15 September 1800
From: Vanderkemp, Francis A.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Oldenbarneveld [New York] September 15, 1800. Recalls Hamilton’s kindness to him on his arrival in the United States. Proposes that the Society of the Cincinnati establish archives for “all what might be of any worth to Posterity” and that the archives include “all Orations Eulogys Sermons on Solemn occasions—all remarkable incidents anecdotes &c.”


Title: Receipt from John Scott, 18 September 1800
From: Scott, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

New York 18th September 1800
Mr & Hamelton to John Scott Dr

 1 Load of Brick Lime & Bords

 £ 1 12 0

Recvd payment
John Scott


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Jay, 22 September 1800
From: Jay, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Albany 22 Septr. 1800
Dear Sir
On my Return to this place on Friday last, I was favored with yours of the 3d. Instant.
It seems that contradictory Reports still prevail respecting our negociations at Paris. I am not yet persuaded that Buonaparte has adopted in all its Extent, the System of Domination which the preceding Rulers of France attempted to execute; and therefore I presume that a Treaty of peace with America on Fair and just Terms may comport with his Views. A Treaty of peace on any other than fair and just Terms is not desireable; and in my Opinion that nation must be deficient in spirit, power, or wisdom, that will accept of peace on any other. These Ideas however are not new to You—for I well remember your Opinion, relative to settling our then existing Differences with Great Britain, that unless an arrangement on solid Terms could be made with Great Britain, it would be better to do nothing.
With great Esteem and Regard I am   Dr. Sir   Your most ob. Sert
John Jay
Maj. General A. Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Charles Wilkes, 24 September 1800
From: Wilkes, Charles
To: Hamilton, Alexander

New York, September 24, 1800. Requests Hamilton to act as counsel for his brother-in-law, who as the guarantor of a large debt may lose twenty thousand dollars.


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Philip Schuyler, 29 September 1800
From: Schuyler, Philip
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Albany Sept: 29th 1800
My Dear Sir
On Saturday Mr Van Vechtnen Advised me that no Notice had been given by Mr Ogden to Jacob R Van Rensselaer that Special bail had been filed in the Suit of John R. V. Rensselaer Against Stephen Schuyler & Henry J V Rensselaer. in Conformity to Mr Ogdens directions to My Brother, I became Special Bail, and immediately Advised Mr Ogden thereof and that the bail price was filed. on Saturday last, I made a communication Similar to that to Mr Ogden pray give him the requisite directions.
Yesterday Cornelia was delivered of a Male Child. She is as well as our best wishes can expect, the Child perfectly so.
I hope we shall see you here at the Ensuing term of the Supreme Court. It is that It should be determined who are to be the Candidates for Governor & Lt Governor on the part of the Foedarilists. It is positively asserted that Mr Clinton has refused to be held up and It is said that Chief Justice Lansingh will be proposed by the Antifedarilists.
I have not received the plans of the Elevations of your intended house. Mr. Putnam has asked me for them, and seems Anxious to contract.
I hope My Eliza will accompany you to this place and bring with her Angelica and the three Youngest Children, William I hope you will permit to remain with me. If Eliza should be unable to come up, at least bring William with his Winter Cloaths.
We all unite in Love to you & yours.
Adieu My Dear Sir Ever most truley & Affectionately yours.
Ph: Schuyler


Title: Receipt from William Barton, [September 1800]
From: Barton, William
To: Hamilton, Alexander

[New York, September, 1800]
1800 Genl. Alexander Hammelton
To William Barton

Sept. 2d.
To an arch Bar & Crain eye

for a fire place
Wt 40 lb.
..
£ 2. 00

10
To a Crain for Ditto
Wt 36½ lb
..
 1. 16.0

£ 3. 16.0

Recd. payment   William Barton


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to ———, 1 October 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

New York Oct 1. 1800
Dr. Sir
I send you my account against this State. As I am building I want mony much. You will therefore oblige me by receiving & forwarding it without delay. I authorise you to give a receipt in full.
You will observe that the causes have been decided in our favour.
Wit great regard   I am Dr. Sir   Your Obed ser
A Hamilton


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Adams, 1 October 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Adams, John

New York October 1. 1800
Sir
The time which has elapsed since my letter of the first of August was delivered to you precludes the further expectation of an answer.
From this silence, I will draw no inference; nor will I presume to judge of the fitness of silence on such an occasion, on the part of The Chief Magistrate of a Republic, towards a citizen, who without a stain has discharged so many important public trusts.
But this much I will affirm, that by whomsoever a charge of the kind mentioned in my former letter may, at any time, have been made or insinuated against me, it is a base wicked and cruel calumny; destitute even of a plausible pretext to excuse the folly or mask the depravity which must have dictated it.
With due respect   I have the honor to be   Sir   Your obed Servt
A Hamilton
John Adams Eqr.President


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Oliver Wolcott, Junior, 1 October 1800
From: Wolcott, Oliver, Jr.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Washington October 1st. 1800
My Dear Sir
I have recd. your favour of September 26th. and have made a few notes, which I will revise and send to you to morrow. The style & temper is excellent, no observations occur to me upon the first part of the Draught.
You will judge of the expediency of sending the Letter, from the information which you possess of the public opinion. I have no lights beyond those which I suggested as from Massachusetts, in a late Letter which I wrote to you & which I hope you recd. The advice from that quarter was opposed to any publication with your signature. I am of opinion with you, that anonimous publications do no good.
Presuming that you would want the draught I enclose it. I will write more at large to morrow.
Yrs with sincere Esteem
Oliv Wolcott
Alexr Hamilton Esqr
P. S. I enclose a So. C. paper. There is in it a publication, not much to my mind. Mr. P—ought not to have suggested a doubt of the authenticity of the Letter to Tench Coxe.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to George Cabot, 2 October 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Cabot, George

[New York, October 2, 1800. On October 11, 1800, Cabot wrote to H: “Your letter of the 2d did not reach me until last evening.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Samuel Dexter, 2 October 1800
From: Dexter, Samuel
To: Hamilton, Alexander

War Department, 2d October 1800
Dear Sir
I have the Honor to enclose a Letter from General La Fayette, and one from the Widow of the late Colonel Fleury, which came to this Office with a number of others on the same subject under cover from Mr. Murray.
I have not formally requested your assistance to Mr. Puzy, respecting the fortifications in the Harbor of New York, because, as the Law of your state is construed by me, the whole Business is under the direction of Governor Jay; and also because I know your propensity to promote the public welfare too well to believe it to be necessary.
I have the Honor to be   Dear Sir, Very respectfully, Your very obed Servt.
Saml. Dexter
Genl. Alexr. Hamilton.


Title: Enclosure: France and America, [2 October 1800]
From: “Observator”,Hamilton, Alexander
To:

We have seen in the Gazette on Monday last, the result, as given under the Paris head of August the 8th, of the negociation between our Commissioners and the French Government. It seems, it has failed, and is for the present, suspended, the reasons of which are assigned. This account of the matter, tho without an official stamp, has strong marks of being an enunciation by authority of the French government.
It is not improbable, that the leading points in the statement are true; and considering the quarter from which it comes, and the views to be answered, it is not deficient in moderation. There are, however some discolourings, and several artful terms, of a nature to mislead the public opinion of this country, which may require an antidote by a fair explanation. This shall be offered.
After a preliminary view of the subjects discussed in the negociation, it is stated in the sequel, that “the negociation turned on three points.”
1. The continuance in force, or the modified renewal of the Treaty of 1778.

This point (it is alledged) was waved by France, in consequence of the assurance of our envoys that they could not renew it.
2. The principle of compensation for illegal captures.
This point (it is said) France offered to admit. But on conditions only that the Treaty of 1778 should be renewed, with the modifications contained in the instructions given by Washington.
3. The 25th article of the Treaty between the United States and Great-Britain, relative to the protection granted to the armed vessels of that nation.
France (it is said) will probably insist upon enjoying the same advantage as long as it is possessed to her injury by her enemy.
It is mentioned as supplementary, that
“There is another principle which France was anxious to establish, namely, That neutral bottoms should constitute neutral property.” But that our treaty of 1798, with Great Britain, prevented our acceding to this system.

On the very face of the statement, as to the two first points, we discover a stroke of French finesse.
France, it is pretended waved the point of a continuance of modified renewal of the treaty of 1778, upon the assurance of our Envoys that they could not renew it: Yet we are informed in the next sentence that acceding to the principle of compensation for illegal captures, she did it upon the express condition only that the treaty of 1778 should be renewed with modifications.
That is to say, she waved the modified renewal of the treaty of ’78, upon the condition that the United States would wave their claim of compensation for illegal captures—a claim by herself admitted to be just.
This, it must be confessed, was an odd method of waving. It was more properly an attempt to barter a bad debt for a good one, a nullity (in other words a treaty which for these very illegal captures in violation of it, and for other injuries had been rightfully declared void) for a valid claim equal to 20,000,000 of dollars.
The argument by which it is intended to color this subterfuge is this:
“That as the twin nations had never been in a state of war with each other, the treaty of 1778 could not have been annuled without the consent of both.”

But there is not a writer on the law of nations, who will not inform the French Government, that when one party to a treaty violates the compact in any material article, the other party is free to annul the whole.
France, before she had the least pretence of complaint against the U. States, had infringed the Treaty in some of its essential points especially the famous provision now again so much vaunted, that neutral bottoms shall constitute neutral property; and she went on increasing her violations down to the period of abrogating the treaty in this country: than which no national measure was ever justified by more cogent reasons.
But it isserted that this treaty is the only basis of our claim to compensation. This position is as unfounded as the other.
France, in her revolutionary phrenzy, denied the existence of a Law of Nations. Returned (as is hoped) to reason, she at present recognizes that law, and promises to be governed by it.
Then, as the greater part of the captures of which we complain were unjust and illegal; not by the peculiar stipulations of the treaty of ’73, but by the general law of Nations—it is plain that as to them our claim to compensation is independent of, and paramount to the treaty.
It follows that the ground which has been taken by France, in this particular, is untenable.
Further—as to the 25th article of the treaty, between the United States and Great-Britain, relative to the protection granted to the armed vessels of that nation.
Towards a clear understanding of this point it may be necessary to remind the public of some facts:
Our treaty with France already mentioned in the 17th article, contains stipulations equivalent to the 25th article of our treaty with Great-Britain.
As this article has an express saving of prior existing treaties, France was left by the treaty with Great-Britain in full posessession of the privileges in this respect which our treaties with them had granted.
The consequence was that France being at war with Great-Britain, might bring prizes made from the latter, into our ports, while British ships could not enter with prizes made from France. France, therefore, had no cause to complain of the article in question. It left her where she was before, and with a privilege not enjoyed by Great-Britain.

If the case is now altered, and Great-Britain has acquired the preference which before belonged to France—it is by accident, or, more properly speaking, by the fault of France, whose violence drove our government to the abolition of our treaty with her—thereby transferring to our treaty with Great-Britain, the advantages of priority, which formerly were attached to our treaty with France.
This priority, therefore occasioned by the misconduct of France, ought not to have been an obstacle to the formation of a treaty with us, which, in other respects, should have been the same as our treaty with Great-Britain. And doubtless it will appear hereafter, that our Envoys were authorised to offer, and did offer, such a treaty.
This circumstance ought the less to have been an obstacle, because the 25th is one of the articles of our Treaty with Great-Britain, which, by its own limitation, will expire in 12 years after the making of it, that is, in the year 1807.
Again—As to the principle, that neutral bottoms should make neutral property, which, it is said, France was anxious to establish—
It is not true, as alledged, that our treaty with Great-Britain was an impediment to our establishing that principle with France; unless it was meant to do more than was done by the treaty of 1778.
It is clearly shewn by Mr. Jefforson, in his correspondence on the subject, and has been otherwise amply demonstrated, that this treaty did nothing more than adopt the principle as a rule to be observed, between the United States and France, with regard to each other when one was at peace, the other at war—that it did not bind either party to enforce or insist upon the rule as against other nations.
If more was desired by France at this time; if it was meant that we were to agree to insist upon the rule as against other nations—it is evident that this was nothing more nor less than an attempt to involve us in war with Great Britain.
As a violation of our treaty with her, this would have been the natural consequence; as an attempt to change, by force, the present law of nations in a point which she is deeply interested to maintain, the same consequence was to be expected.

This would be another specimen of the old policy—War with Great Britain, as the price of friendship with France.
It is not unlikely that our Envoys have been instructed to decline in any shape, the stipulation, that neutral bottoms should make neutral property; and if they were, the instruction was a perfectly wise one.
Experience has shewn, in the conduct of France herself towards the United States, that is a stipulation not to be relied upon; too contrary to the spirit of maratime war to be observed—and that the most probable effect of making it, will always be to introduce a germ of contention between the parties to the contract. It has been a cause of extreme embarrassment to us in the prese[n]t war.
An unwillingness to repeat the experiment of this contentious innovation, ought certainly to have been no obstacle to a Treaty with the very power which has given us proof that it was worse than nothing, and taught us the necessity of distrusting it.
Hence we perceive the unreasonableness and futility of the ostensible motives which, on the part of France, have obstructed a treaty with the United States.
Let us now conjecture the true reasons of the failure of negociation. They were—1. The hope that an unsettled state of things between the two countries might favor, in the approaching election of Chief Magistrate the choice of person more complaisant to the views of France, namely Mr. Jefferson. 2. The expectation that with him a bargain more advantageous to France would be made than with our present executive.
Will the people of the United States be the dupes of this scheme? Will they think it their interest to elevate to the head of the Government a man with whom France expects to make such a bargain as will suit her purpose, after the repeated proofs they have had of the wish of France to entangle them in her interest, and embroil them with other nations? Why should they do this.
Things are now upon a good footing. A treaty, it is true, has not been made: but if we are to credit the French statement, their depredations on our commerce are to cease, and our neutral rights are in future to be respected. It is therefore in our option to have peace in fact with France, though not by treaty; and if she keeps her word (the only security a Treaty would give us) we shall be as well off (except in the article of compensation for captures) as if a treaty had been made.
In little more than six years the parts of our treaty with Great Britain respecting external commerce and navigation will expire. We can then stand both with France and her upon new ground, and, it is matter of indifference whether we ever again have a commercial treaty with either of them, unless upon better terms than heretofore. The trade between us and them may as well be left to regulate itself till bargains more positively advantageous for us can be made.
The getting rid, on fair ground, of the Guarantee of the French West Indies in our Treaty of Alliance with France, is a point of substantial interest gained to the U. States.
We observe that an attempt was made to revive this Guarantee in a qualified form; whether this revival was urged as an ultimatum or not does not appear. It is probable that it has been a very serious point with France. And the reasons which induce her to desire it, ought to induce the United States to avoid it. The Guarantee as it formerly stood, would have engaged this Country in every maratime war in which France was a defensive party. Commuted for a pecuniary aid, it would cost them a large sum of money in every such case, and would be hazardous to their peace.
President Washington wisely proposed the substitute when the treaties were yet in force. But France would not then listen to the moderate prepositions of this great man. Now, that the treaties are at an end, in consequence of French aggressions, we ought not voluntarily to resume so serious an incumbrance. It would be far better for the United States to compensate their own citizens for losses by French spoliations.
On this head it is to be observed, That nothing more than a promise of compensation could at present have been expected from France, with the best intentions on our part. The state of her finances does not permit more. The enjoyment of the boon must have been in future. In all probability, by patience and perseverance a more convenient opportunity will occur for a favorable settlement of the matter, and early enough to meet the resources of France for payment.
In the interim, let our government take preparatory measures; such as will thoroughly sift and ascertain the claims which ought to be compensated; and by this expedient the affair will be refined for definitive negociation, and little, if any time, will be lost.
As to the rest, a single and obvious course of conduct presents itself. Let hostilities on the part of the United States cease, and let the two countries pass into a state of peace in fact on the basis of the laws of nations. In this position it will be seen whether France is sincere, and at the same time able to execute her assurance that our rights, as a neutral nation, will hereafter be respected.
But in doing this, let us take care that we are not found hereafter unprepared. Let effectual measures be taken to increase our means of future resistance; if again we shall be compelled to protect our rights and defend our commerce by force. The posture of Europe is still eventful—eventful beyond all human calculation. Absurd indeed must be that American who will rest the safety of his country on any other foundation than her own ability to repel violence.
Observator.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Aaron Ogden, 2 October 1800
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Ogden, Aaron

New York October 2. 1800
Dear Sir
Will you do me the favour to inquire & inform me how soon we may depend on our carriage. I propose shortly to make a journey to Albany & to take Mrs. H with me, which is the cause of my now troubling you. Pray what are you going to do in New Jersey. We are all-apprehension about you.
Yrs. truly
A H
Col. Ogden