Title: A Letter from Phocion to the Considerate Citizens of New York, [1–27 January 1784]
From: “Phocion”,Hamilton, Alexander
To: Citizens of New York

[New York, January 1–27, 1784]
While not only every personal artifice is employed by a few heated and inconsiderate spirits, to practise upon the passions of the people, but the public papers are made the channel of the most inflammatory and pernicious doctrines, tending to the subversion of all private security and genuine liberty; it would be culpable in those who understand and value the true interests of the community to be silent spectators. It is, however, a common observation, that men, bent upon mischief, are more active in the pursuit of their object, than those who aim at doing good. Hence it is in the present moment, we see the most industrious efforts to violate, the constitution of this state, to trample upon the rights of the subject, and to chicane or infringe the most solemn obligations of treaty; while dispassionate and upright men almost totally neglect the means of counteracting these dangerous attempts. A sense of duty alone calls forth the observations which will be submitted to the good sense of the people in this paper, from one who has more inclination than leisure to serve them; and who has had too deep a share in the common exertions in this revolution, to be willing to see its fruits blasted by the violence of rash or unprincipled men, without at least protesting against their designs.
The persons alluded to, pretend to appeal to the spirit of Whiggism, while they endeavour to put in motion all the furious and dark passions of the human mind. The spirit of Whiggism, is generous, humane, beneficent and just. These men inculcate revenge, cruelty, persecution, and perfidy. The spirit of Whiggism cherishes legal liberty, holds the rights of every individual sacred, condemns or punishes no man without regular trial and conviction of some crime declared by antecedent laws, reprobates equally the punishment of the citizen by arbitrary acts of legislature, as by the lawless combinations of unauthorised individuals: While these men are advocates for expelling a large number of their fellow-citizens unheard, untried; or if they cannot effect this, are for disfranchising them, in the face of the constitution, without the judgment of their peers, and contrary to the law of the land.

The 13th article of the constitution declares, “that no member of this state shall be disfranchised or defrauded of any of the rights or privileges sacred to the subjects of this state by the constitution, unless by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers.” If we enquire what is meant by the law of the land, the best commentators will tell us, that it means due process of law, that is, by indictment or presentment of good and lawful men,

   Coke upon Magna Charta, Chap. 29, Page 50.

 and trial and conviction in consequence.
It is true, that in England, on extraordinary occasions, attainders for high treason, by act of parliament have been practiced, but many of the ablest advocates for civil liberty have condemned this practice, and it has commonly been exercised with great caution upon individuals only by name, never against general descriptions of men. The sense of our constitution on this practice, we may gather from the 41st article, where all attainders, other than for crimes committed during the late war, are forbidden.
If there had been no treaty in the way, the legislature might, by name, have attainted particular persons of high treason for crimes committed during the war, but independent of the treaty it could not, and cannot, without tyranny, disfranchise or punish whole classes of citizens by general discriptions, without trial and conviction of offences known by laws previously established declaring the offence and prescribing the penalty.
This is a dictate of natural justice, and a fundamental principle of law and liberty.
Nothing is more common than for a free people, in times of heat and violence, to gratify momentary passions, by letting into the government, principles and precedents which afterwards prove fatal to themselves. Of this kind is the doctrine of disqualification, disfranchisement and banishment by acts of legislature. The dangerous consequences of this power are manifest. If the legislature can disfranchise any number of citizens at pleasure by general descriptions, it may soon confine all the votes to a small number of partizans, and establish an aristocracy or an oligarchy; if it may banish at discretion all those whom particular circumstances render obnoxious, without hearing or trial, no man can be safe, nor know when he may be the innocent victim of a prevailing faction. The name of liberty applied to such a government would be a mockery of common sense.
The English Whigs, after the revolution, from an overweening dread of popery and the Pretender, from triennial, voted the parliament septennial. They have been trying ever since to undo this false step in vain, and are repenting the effects of their folly in the overgrown power of the new family. Some imprudent Whigs among us, from resentment to those who have taken the opposite side, (and many of them from worse motives) would corrupt the principles of our government, and furnish precedents for future usurpations on the rights of the community.
Let the people beware of such Counsellors. However, a few designing men may rise in consequence, and advance their private interests by such expedients, the people, at large, are sure to be the losers in the event whenever they suffer a departure from the rules of general and equal justice, or from the true principles of universal liberty.
These men, not only overleap the barriers of the constitution without remorse, but they advise us to become the scorn of nations, by violating the solemn engagements of the United States. They endeavour to mould the Treaty with Great-Britain, into such form as pleases them, and to make it mean any thing or nothing as suits their views. They tell us, that all the stipulations, with respect to the Tories, are merely that Congress will recommend, and the States may comply or not as they please.
But let any man of sense and candour read the Treaty, and it will speak for itself. The fifth article is indeed recommendatory; but the sixth is as positive as words can make it. “There shall be no future confiscations made, nor prosecutions commenced against any person or persons, for, or by reason of the part which he or they may have taken in the present war, and no person shall, on that account, suffer any future loss or damage, either in his person, liberty, or property.”
As to the restoration of confiscated property which is the subject of the fifth article, the states may restore or not as they think proper, because Congress engage only to recommend; but there is not a word about recommendation in the 6th article.
Quotations are made from the debates in Parliament to prove that the whole is understood as recommendatory; but the expressions in those quotations, turn altogether upon those persons who have been actually proscribed and their property confiscated; they have no relation to those who come under the sixth article, or who might be the objects of future prosecution or punishment. And to this it may be added, that it is absurd and inadmissible in fair reasoning, to combat the plain and authentic language of solemn treaty by loose recitals of debates in newspapers.
The sound and ingenuous construction of the two articles taken collectively, is this—that where the property of any persons, other than those who have been in arms against the United States, had been actually confiscated and themselves proscribed, there Congress are to recommend a restoration of estates, rights and properties; and with respect to those who had been in arms, they are to recommend permission for them to remain a twelvemonth in the country to solicit a like restoration: But with respect to all those who were not in this situation, and who had not already been the objects of confiscation and banishment, they were to be absolutely secured from all future injury to person, liberty or property.
To say that this exemption from positive injury, does not imply a right to live among us as citizens, is a pitiful sophistry; it is to say that the banishment of a person from his country, connexions and resources (one of the greatest punishments that can befal a man) is no punishment at all.
The meaning of the word liberty has been contested. Its true sense must be the enjoyment of the common privileges of subjects under the same government. There is no middle line of just construction between this sense and a mere exemption from personal imprisonment! If the last were adopted, the stipulation would become nugatory; and by depriving those who are the subjects of it, of the protection of government, it would amount to a virtual confiscation and banishment; for they could not have the benefit of the laws against those who should be aggressors.
Should it be said that they may receive protection without being admitted to a full enjoyment of the privileges of citizens, this must be either matter of right under the treaty, or matter of grace in the government. If the latter, the government may refuse it, and then the objection presents itself, that the treaty would by this construction be virtually defeated; if matter of right, then it follows that more is intended by the word liberty, than a mere exemption from imprisonment, and where shall the line be drawn—not a capricious and arbitrary line, but one warranted by rational and legal construction?
To say that by espousing the cause of Great-Britain they became aliens, and that it will satisfy the treaty to allow them the same protection to which aliens are entitled is to admit that subjects may at pleasure renounce their allegiance to the state of which they are members, and devote themselves to a foreign jurisdiction; a principle contrary to law and subversive of government. But even this will not satisfy the treaty; for aliens cannot hold real property under our government; and if they are aliens, all their real estates belong to the public. This will be to all intents and purposes, a confiscation of property. But this is not all, how does it appear that the persons who are thus to be stripped of their citizenship, have been guilty of such an adherence to the enemy, as in legal contemplation amounts to a crime. Their merely remaining in their possessions under the power of the conqueror does not imply this; but is executed by the laws and customs of all civilized nations. To adjudge them culpable, they must be first tried and convicted; and this the treaty forbids. These are the difficulties involved, by recurring to subtle and evasive instead of simple and candid construction, which will teach us that the stipulations in the treaty, amount to an amnesty and act of oblivion.
There is a very simple and conclusive point of view in which this subject may be placed. No citizen can be deprived of any right which the citizens in general are entitled to, unless forfeited by some offence. It has been seen that the regular and constitutional mode of ascertaining whether this forfeiture has been incurred, is by legal process, trial and conviction. This ex vi termini, supposes prosecution. Now consistent with the treaty there can be no future prosecution for any thing done on account of the war. Can we then do by act of legislature, what the treaty disables us from doing by due course of law? This would be to imitate the Roman General, who having promised Antiochus to restore half his vessels, caused them to be sawed in two before their delivery; or the Platææ, who having promised the Thebans to restore their prisoners, had them first put to death and returned them dead.

Such fraudulent subterfuges are justly considered more odious than an open and avowed violation of treaty.
When these posture-masters in logic are driven from this first ground of the meaning of the treaty; they are forced to that of attacking the right of Congress to make such a stipulation, and arraigning the impudence of Great-Britain in attempting to make terms for our own subjects. But here as every where else, they are only successful in betraying their narrowness and ignorance.
Does not the act of confederation place the exclusive right of war and peace in the United States in Congress? Have they not the sole power of making treaties with foreign nations? Are not these among the first rights of sovereignty, and does not the delegation of them to the general confederacy, so far abridge the sovereignty of each particular state? Would not a different doctrine involve the contradiction of imperium in imperio? What reasonable limits can be assigned to these prerogatives of the union, other than the general safety and the fundamentals of the constitution? Can it be said that a treaty for arresting the future operation of positive acts of legislature, and which has indeed no other effect than that of a pardon for past offences committed against these acts, is an attack upon the fundamentals of the state constitutions? Can it be denied that the peace which was made, taken collectively, was manifestly for the general good; that it was even favourable to the solid interests of this country, beyond the expectation of the most sanguine? If this cannot be denied; and none can deny it who know either the value of the objects gained by the treaty, or the necessity these states were under at the time of making peace?—It follows that Congress and their Ministers acted wisely in making the treaty which has been made; and it follows from this, that these states are bound by it, and ought religiously to observe it.
The uti possiedetis, each party to hold what it possesses, is the point from which nations set out in framing a treaty of peace; if one side gives up a part of its acquisitions, the other side renders an equivalent in some other way. What is the equivalent given to Great-Britain for all the important concessions she has made. She has rendered the capital of this state and its large dependencies. She is to surrender our immensely valuable posts on the frontier, and to yield to us a vast tract of western territory, with one half of the Lakes, by which we shall command almost the whole furr trade; she renounces to us her claim to the navigation of the Mississippi, and admits us a share in the fisheries, even on better terms than we formerly enjoyed it. As she was in possession by right of war of all these objects, whatever may have been our original pretensions to them, they are by the laws of nations to be considered as so much given up on her part; and what do we give in return? We stipulate that there shall be no future injury to her adherents among us. How insignificant the equivalent in comparison with the acquisition! A man of sense would be ashamed to compare them: A man of honesty, not intoxicated with passion, would blush to lisp a question of the obligation to observe the stipulation on our part.
If it be said that Great-Britain has only restored to us what she had unjustly taken from us, and that therefore we are not bound to make compensation—This admits of several answers. First, That the fact is not true, for she had ceded to us a large tract of country to which we had even no plausible claim: Secondly, That however the principle of the objection might have been proper to prevent our promising an equivalent, it comes too late after the promise has been made: Thirdly, That as to the external effects of war, the voluntary law of nations knows no distinction between the justice or injustice of the quarrel; but in the treaty of peace puts the contracting parties upon an equal footing; which is a necessary consequence of the independence of nations; for as they acknowledge no common judge, if in concluding peace both parties were not to stand upon the same ground of right, there never could be an adjustment of differences or an end of war. This is a settled principle.
Let us examine the pretext upon which it is disputed. Congress, say our political jugglers, have no right to meddle with our internal police. They would be puzzled to tell what they mean by the expression. The truth is, it has no definite meaning; for it is impossible for Congress to do a single act which will not directly or indirectly affect the internal police of every state. When in order to procure privileges of commerce to the citizens of these states in foreign countries, they stipulate a reciprocity of privileges here, does not such an admission of the subjects of foreign countries to certain rights within these states operate, immediately upon their internal police? And were this not done, would not the power of making commercial treaties vested in Congress, become a mere nullity? In short if nothing was to be done by Congress that would affect our internal police, in the large sense in which it has been taken, would not all the powers of the confederation be annihilated and the union dissolved?
But say they again, such a thing was never heard of as an indemnity for traiterous subjects stipulated in a treaty of peace. History will inform them that it is a stipulation often made. Two examples shall be cited: The treaty of Munster which put an end to the differences between Spain and the United Provinces, after the revolution of those provinces: The treaty concluded in 1738, between the Empire, France, Spain, Poland, and several other powers, called the Christian peace. The war which preceded this treaty was one of the most complicated in which Europe had been engaged; the succession to the Spanish Monarchy, and the right to the throne of Poland had been included in it, Stanislaus having been obliged to abdicate the crown. Different parts of the nations concerned had taken opposite sides. Many of the German Princes had been in arms against the Empire to which they owed obedience: This treaty not only mutually stipulates indemnity to the subjects of the respective powers, but even restitution of property and offices. The Emperor, who contracted in behalf of the Empire, has much less extensive powers as head of the Empire, than Congress as representative of the United States.
But let it be admitted that Congress had no right to enter into this article. Do not equity and prudence strongly urge the several states to comply with it? We have in part enjoyed the benefit of the treaty; in consequence of which, we of this state are now in possession of our capital; and this implies an obligation in conscience, to perform what is to be performed on our part. But there is a consideration which will perhaps have more force with men, who seem to be superior to conscientious obligations; it is that the British are still in possession of our frontier posts, which they may keep in spite of us; and that they may essentially exclude us from the fisheries if they are so disposed. Breach of treaty on our part will be a just ground for breaking it on theirs. The treaty must stand or fall together. The wilful breach of a single article annuls the whole.

   Vatel, Book 4, Ch. 4, § 47. Grotius, Book 3, Ch. 19, § 14.

 Congress are appointed by the constitution to manage our foreign concerns. The nations with whom they contract are to suppose they understand their own powers and will not exceed them. If they do it in any instance, and we think it proper to disavow the act, it will be no apology to those with whom they contract that they had exceeded their authority. One side cannot be bound unless the obligation is reciprocal.
Suppose then Great-Britain should be induced to refuse a further compliance with the treaty, in consequence of a breach of it on our part, what situation should we be in? Can we renew the war to compel a compliance. We know, and all the world knows, it is out of our power? Will those who have heretofore assisted us take our part? Their affairs require peace as well as ours, and they will not think themselves bound to undertake an unjust war to regain to us rights which we have forfeited by a childish levity and a wanton contempt of public faith.
We should then have sacrificed important interests to the little vindictive selfish mean passions of a few. To say nothing of the loss of territory, of the disadvantage to the whole commerce of the union, by obstructions in the fisheries; this state would loose an annual profit of more than £.50,000 Sterling, from the furr trade.
But not to insist on possible inconveniences, there is a certain evil which attends our intemperance, a loss of character in Europe. Our Ministers write that our conduct, hitherto, in this respect, has done us infinite injury, and has exhibited us in the light of a people, destitute of government, on whose engagements of course no dependence can be placed.

The men who are at the head of the party which contends for, disqualification and expulsion, endeavoured to inlist a number of people on their side by holding out motives of private advantage to them. To the trader they say, you will be overborne by the large capitals of the Tory merchants; to the Mechanic, your business will be less profitable, your wages less considerable by the interference of Tory workmen. A man, the least acquainted with trade, will indeed laugh at such suggestion. He will know, that every merchant or trader has an interest in the aggregate mass of capital or stock in trade; that what he himself wants in capital, he must make up in credit; that unless there are others who possess large capitals, this credit cannot be had, and that in the diminution of the general capital of the State, commerce will decline, and his own prospects of profit will diminish.
These arguments, if they were understood, would be conclusive with the Mechanic: “There is already employment enough for all the workmen in the city, and wages are sufficiently high. If you could raise them by expelling those who have remained in the city, and whom you consider as rivals, the extravagant price of wages would have two effects; it would draw persons to settle here, not only from other parts of this State, but from the neighbouring States: Those classes of the community who are to employ you, will make a great many shifts rather than pay the exorbitant prices you demand; a man will wear his old cloaths so much longer before he gets a new suit; he will buy imported shoes cheap rather than those made here at so dear a rate: The owner of a house will defer the repairs as long as possible; he will only have those which are absolutely necessary made; he will not attend to elegant improvement, and the like will happen in other branches. These circumstances will give you less employment, and in a very little time bring back your wages to what they now are, and even sink them lower. But this is not all: You are not required merely to expel your rival mechanics, but you must drive away the rich merchants and others who are called Tories, to please your leaders, who will persuade you they are dangerous to your liberty (though in fact they only mean their own consequence.) By this conduct you will drive away the principal part of those who have the means of becoming large undertakers. The Carpenters and Masons in particular, must be content with patching up the houses already built and building little huts upon the vacant lots, instead of having profitable and durable employment in erecting large and elegant edifices.”
There is a certain proportion or level in all the departments of industry. It is folly to think to raise any of them, and keep them long above their natural height. By attempting to do it the œconomy of the political machine is disturbed, and till things return to their proper state, the society at large suffers. The only object of concern with an industrious artisan, as such, ought to be, that there may be plenty of money in the community, and a brisk commerce to give it circulation and activity. All attempts at profit, through the medium of monopoly or violence, will be as fallacious as they are culpable.
But say some, to suffer these wealthy disaffected men to remain among us, will be dangerous to our liberties; enemies to our government, they will be always endeavouring to undermine it and bring us back to the subjection of Great-Britain. The safest reliance of every government is on mens interests. This is a principle of human nature, on which all political speculation to be just, must be founded. Make it the interest of those citizens, who, during the revolution, were opposed to us to be friends to the new government, by affording them not only protection, but a participation in its privileges, and they will undoubtedly become its friends. The apprehension of returning under the dominion of Great Britain is chimerical; if there is any way to bring it about, the measures of those men, against whose conduct these remarks are aimed, lead directly to it. A disorderly or a violent government may disgust the best citizens, and make the body of the people tired of their Independence.
The embarrassed and exhausted state of Great-Britain, and the political system of Europe, render it impossible for her ever to reacquire the dominion of this country. Her former partizans must be convinced of this, and abandon her cause as desperate. They will never be mad enough to risk their fortunes a second time in the hopeless attempt of restoring her authority; nor will they have any inclination to do it, if they are allowed to be happy under the government of the society in which they live. To make it practicable, if they should be so disposed, they must not only get the government of this state, but of the United States into their hands. To suppose this possible, is to suppose that a majority of the numbers, property and abilities of the United States has been and is in opposition to the revolution. Its success is a clear proof that this has not been the case; and every man of information among us, knows the contrary. The supposition itself would show the absurdity, of expelling a small number from the city, which would constitute so insignificant a proportion of the whole, as without diminishing their influence, would only increase their disposition to do mischief. The policy in this case would be evident, of appealing to their interests rather than to their fears.
Nothing can be more ridiculous than the idea of expelling a few from this city and neighbourhood, while there are numbers in different parts of this and other states, who must necessarily partake in our governments, and who can never expect to be the objects of animadversion or exclusion. It is confirming many in their enmity and prejudices against the state, to indulge our enmity and prejudices against a few.
The idea of suffering the Tories to live among us under disqualifications, is equally mischievous and absurd. It is necessitating a large body of citizens in the state to continue enemies to the government, ready, at all times, in a moment of commotion, to throw their weight into that scale which meditates a change whether favourable or unfavourable to public liberty.
Viewing the subject in every possible light, there is not a single interest of the community but dictates moderation rather than violence. That honesty is still the best policy; that justice and moderation are the surest supports of every government, are maxims, which however they may be called trite, at all times true, though too seldom regarded, but rarely neglected with impunity. Were the people of America, with one voice, to ask, What shall we do to perpetuate our liberties and secure our happiness? The answer would be, “govern well” and you have nothing to fear either from internal disaffection or external hostility. Abuse not the power you possess, and you need never apprehend its diminution or loss. But if you make a wanton use of it, if you furnish another example, that despotism may debase the government of the many as well as the few, you like all others that have acted the same part, will experience that licentiousness is the fore-runner to slavery.

How wise was that policy of Augustus, who after conquering his enemies, when the papers of Brutus were brought to him, which would have disclosed all his secret associates, immediately ordered them to be burnt. He would not even know his enemies, that they might cease to hate when they had nothing to fear.
How laudable was the example of Elizabeth, who when she was transfered from the prison to the throne, fell upon her knees and thanking Heaven, for the deliverance it had granted her, from her bloody persecutors; dismissed her resentment. “This act of pious gratitude says the historian, seems to have been the last circumstance in which she remembered any past injuries and hardships. With a prudence and magnanimity truly laudable, she buried all offences in oblivion, and received with affability even those, who had acted with the greatest virulence against her.” She did more—she retained many of the opposite party in her councils.
The reigns of these two sovereigns, are among the most illustrious in history. Their moderation gave a stability to their government, which nothing else could have affected. This was the secret of uniting all parties.
These sentiments are delivered to you in the frankness of conscious integrity, by one who feels that solicitude for the good of the community which the zealots, whose opinions he encounters profess, by one who pursues not as they do, the honour or emoluments of his country, by one who, though he has had, in the course of the Revolution, a very confidential share in the public councils, civil and military, and has as often, at least, met danger in the common cause as any of those who now assume to be the guardians of the public liberty, asks no other reward of his countrymen, than to be heard without prejudice for their own interest.
Phocion.
P. S. While the writer hopes the sentiments of this letter will meet the approbation of discreet and honest men, he thinks it necessary to apologize for the hasty and incorrect manner. Perhaps too, expressions of too much asperity have been employed against those who take the lead in the principles which are here opposed; and feelings of indignation against the pernicious tendency of their measures, have not admitted sufficient allowances for what is, in some instances, an honest, though mistaken, zeal. Though the writer entertains the worst opinion of the motives of many of them, he believes there are some who act from principle.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Chaloner, 8 January 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Chaloner, John

[New York, January 8, 1784. On January 21, 1784, Chaloner wrote to Hamilton: “I have before me yours of the 8th. & 15th Instt.” Letter of January 8 not found.]


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Chaloner, 15 January 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Chaloner, John

[New York, January 15, 1784. On January 21, 1784, Chaloner wrote to Hamilton: “I have before me yours of the 8th. & 15th Instt.” Letter of January 15 not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Chaloner, 21 January 1784
From: Chaloner, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada. Jany. 21st: 1784
Dear Sir
I have before me yours of the 8th. & 15th Instt. Yesterday I waited on the President of the Bank with your power of Attorney. He thought it sufficient had Mr Carters to you accompanied it, but for want thereof they could not pay me his divident. You must therefore send me Mr Carters original Power of Attorney to you. Your draft favour of Mr Hoffman I will take up. A Mr P Thompson applied to me for some money on your Account saying you promised to write me on the subject. Must I pay him & how much?
The Bank have agreed to enlarge their shares the new subscriber to pay 500 Dollars—50 of which he gives to the Old Stock as a premium for coming into the partnership. This measure has occasioned some of the wealthiest Merchants to Combine & establish a new Bank. Subscriptions I beleive will be soon open at four hundred dollars a share. I have not a doubt from the Characters that I hear are engaged in this matter but that it will be a permanent source and profitable as the present one, & will I doubt not have the preference whilst the Old Stock is encumbered with the Clog of fifty Dollars advance. If any oppo to London pray advise our friends of this measure.
I am in haste Dear Sir    Your most Obdt Servt
John Chaloner


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Gouverneur Morris, 27 January 1784
From: Morris, Gouverneur
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philadelphia 27 Jany 1784
My dear friend
I arrived here on Thursday Evening, after a mighty disagreable Ride, and a mighty whimsical Accident in crossing the Delaware, the Particulars of which I shall reserve till we meet. As I promised to write you the Politics and News of Philadelphia, I will do it this Day; for the Snow Storm rages so incessantly that I can’t go abroad. This you will say bodes a long Letter, and I fear you will not be mistaken.

I would entertain you with a splendid Account of those Illuminations and fire Works, which, if we may believe the Philadelphia News Papers, were to have been the most splendid imaginable; but I arrived too late, & only know by Hearsay the Accident which happened to them, and which you may know too by consulting the News Papers. The Exhibition would have been perfectly ridiculous, but for the Death of one Spectator, & the Wounds of others. These are Subjects on which Pleasantry is misplaced. I have been however to see the Place, which was to have been the most splendid of all possible Places, and truly if the Projectors had intended to fire their City, it was an ingenious Invention. Only think of a large wooden Stage, raised in the Middle of a Street, to hang Canvass on, with a Number of Lamps o[n] the Inside, & no precautions against the Flames. You will perhaps be curious, as I was, to know what put it into their Heads. The Account I received is to this Effect. The Quakers, who have more than one Reason for not illuminating their Houses, and some others who have (on this Occasion) at least one Reason for the same Thing, wished to serve both their Class and their Principles. But how was this to be brought about, without offending certain Persons, whose Whiggism consists in abusing the Tories? The President (who is said to be clever at Expedients) undertook the Task. The Mountain labored long and hard, & then outpopp’d Captain Peale. This is a Politician by Birth, & a Painter by Trade, whose History, like that of the ancient Nobles, can be traced back till it is lost in the Clouds of Obscurity. He it seems is one of those who have supported the Revolution by the Powers of Eloquence, notably displayed at the Corners of Streets, to such Audiences as can usually be collected in such Places. In order to secure the aforesaid Whigs, Captain Peale was employed to prepare Decorations & Devices for the triumphal Arch, & to superintend the Expenditure of the Sum of six hundred Pounds, appropriated by Government to the splendid Exhibition. At the same Time all Illuminations were forbidden, & by a wise Foresight, Squibbs were also prohibited. This you see is the age of Coalitions; and so, blessed be the Peacemakers.
A Man who arrives in this City from New York, beholds a Scene as perfectly new as if he went to the Moguls Dominions. The Philadelphians, long famous for their Progress in the Arts, have already compleated what we have but just begun. For the violent Whigs and the violent Tories, who turned their Backs upon every Body else about two years ago, have each performed a Semi Circle and met at the opposite Point. You know the present Influence is the Banko-mania and this Day’s News Paper gives us the Plan of the intended Pensilvania, or, as some call it, Coalition Bank. That you may judge of the propriety of the latter Name, I will give you the Characters of the Parties named in the Advertisement, as I had them at Breakfast from our friend.
The first is Samuel Howel. A quaker who would have been a Whig, if he had not been afraid; but as Providence had otherwise ordained, he remitted his Property to the House of Hopes in Amsterdam at the begining of the Contest. With them it remained during the War & in Return for this Confidence, several Dutch men have brought him Letters of Recommendation from that House. This Circumstance has raised the Idea that he possesses great Credit abroad, which Credit will, it is supposed give Stability to the Bank. Be this as it may, he is said to be an honest Man, which is no bad thing in any Case.

The next is Archibald McCall. A good name would be to him a good Purchase. And yet all his Conduct is swayed by the gentler Affections. He loved the british Cause so well, that he would have resigned his Neck to serve it, but for the greater Lover he bore himself. And in Order that he might reconcile those contrarient Emotions he took a full Share in the Labor of depreciating our Money & transmitting Intelligence. To these patriotic Deeds his Benignity added the charitable one of supplying small Sums, to Men in Distress, at a moderate Interest; such as five, or ten, per Cent per Month, according to their Necessities.
Next comes John Bayard. You may remember that when we met last Summer, at Poughkeepsie, you lent me a Pamphlet written by General Cadwallader. This is the Colo. Bayard whose Sensibilities are recorded in that Pamphlet. The Colo. is as good a Whig, tho not quite so great a Man as Captain Peale.
The next (Edward Shippen) has the Misfortune to be general Arnold’s Father in Law, but he bears no Resemblance to his Son except that their political Principles were the same from Arnold’s Defection ’till the Treaty of Peace.
Close on his Heels comes George Emlen. In many Traits of Character there is a strong Resemblance between him & McCall. But if McCall has more of the milk of human kindness, Friend Emlem as far exceeds him in the Meekness of Christian Love. He has therefore a more pious Charity, & seeks more distressed Objects on which to exercise it. This superior Endowment has been justly rewarded, in some Instances, with twelve per Cent per Month. See how good a Thing it is to be Merciful to the Poor.
Jared Ingersol comes next. He is a good Whig a worthy young Man and his Friends are sorry to see him in such Company.
Thomas Fisher is a quaker and a Tory, but John Steinmetz is one of those Whigs who staid in Philadelphia when the Enemy took Possession. It was during that Period perhaps, that he learnt of McCall & Emlen the Practice of monthly Loans, which he has since pursued with no small Degree of Edification. It is supposed that these good Christians, in establishing the Coalition Bank, are actuated by the laudable Desire of extending their monthly Charities. For if by their Influence over the Corporation, they can obtain its Funds; as they will thereby procure Money at one half per Cent per Month, they may afford particular Accomodations for two and an half, or three per Cent, according to Circumstances; which will you know be a great Relief to the Poor. This single Consideration will shew the Use of the Institution.
Tench Coxe comes next in the List. I believe you know him, for I think you mentioned to me the Anecdote of his being excluded from the dancing Assembly, on Account of Toryism.
David Rittenhouse is known to the World. If the Representation given of the other Characters be true, your Sensibility will be wounded (as Mine was) to see his Name in this Place.

Samuel Pleasants & Joseph Swift are tories, & not remarkable for any Thing else; which cannot be said of Jeremiah Warder. Of the same Religion with the pious Emlene, and of equal political merit, he exceeds him in some of the moral Qualities; and chiefly in Fortitude, justly considered as the Base of every other Virtue. A remarkable Instance of it was exhibited in the Affair of one Mease, late Cloathier General. This Man was prosecuted for Fraud, yet some how or other, he was acquitted, altho Jeremiah in his Zeal for the Conviction of so capital an Offender, affirmed both the Thing which was, & the Thing which was not. This Conduct, by which he risqued his Ears for the Good of his Country, has very justly endeared him to all Ranks and orders of Men.
Peter Knight and Robert Knox are good Sort of Men, & as they bear Whig Characters, they Mark with true Distinctions of Light and Shade the Merits of the Coalition. Your Friend Phocion has written a Book in Favor of Moderation, He certainly means well, but if he were here he would see what goodly Fruit is produced, in the Fulness of time, from those Seeds of Contention which he has labored to destroy; and he would find out the Truth of that old Proverb, “the farthest Way about, is the nearest Way Home.”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Chaloner, 2 February 1784
From: Chaloner, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada Febry 2. 1784
Dear Sir
I wrote you the 21st Ulto Copy of which you have annexd. At that period few or no Subscriptions to the Bank of Pensylvania had taken place but its progress has been so rapid as to obtain Seven hundred & fifteen shares on friday last. Thursday next they choose directors & begin to prepare for business. Its Constitution or at least the proposed Constitution is exactly the same as the Bank of No America except the controul & restriction which the Finnancier has over it & they do not make their notes equal with Specie to tax getherers—by this I mean there is no compulsion on the tax collectors to receive them as such: with them it will be matter of choice it is not so with the Bank of No America. The president of the State the Speaker of Assembly & the Chief Justice are all times to have a right of inspecting into its state & situation.
The Subscriptions to the old Bank open this day on the terms I mentioned in my last. I believe no Stock of the former proprietors are to be bought without considerable advance 20 to 25 ⅌ Cent.
Your draft was sent me for acceptance on Saturday by your friend Mr Gouvernieur Morris. I informed him I would pay it as soon as you forwarded me Mr Carters power of attorney to you & desired his young man to acquaint him if it was not convenient for him to wait until then I would immediately accept it. I have heard no more of it & suppose him satisfied therewith—if not I will immediately pay it. Mrs. Chaloner joins me in Compts to Mrs. Hammilton & yourself & I remain   Dear Sir   Your much obliged hble Servt
John Chaloner
Alexr Hammilton Esqr


Title: Petition to the New York Legislature, [4 February 1784]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: New York Legislature

[New York, February 4, 1784]
To The Honorable The Representatives of the State of New York
In Senate and Assembly
The Memorial and Petition of Alexander Hamilton humbly sheweth
That Your Memorialist early in the year 1776 entered into the service of this State having been previously a resident therein, in the command of a company of Artillery raised for its particular defence, and continued in the command of that company till 1777 when he was called by His Excellency General Washington to occupy a place in his family; in which station he acted ’till the year 1781.
That he made the campaign of 1781 at the head of a corps of light infantry, composed principally of the troops of this state; after which he obtained leave of absence from the Commander in Chief; the situation of public affairs then affording no probability of future activity in the military line.
That though he retained his rank in the army to be ready to return into military service, if any unforeseen change of circumstances should still require exertions in that line; yet from scruples of delicacy, he voluntarily relinquished his pay from the end of the year 1781 and with it his right to half pay and other allowances made to officers after the war.
That by a settlement of his account of pay and subsistence to that period, there was found a ballance due him of three thousand five hundred and twenty five dollars; of which there still remains due Two thousand Eight hundred and twenty dollars; for which he has a certificate from the treasury of the United States.
Your Memorialist observing the delays and obstacles that occur in any Continental provision for the payment of public debts is induced to pray that the Honorable the Legislature would be pleased to grant him in lieu of his present certificate securities similar to those which have been given to the officers in general, who were previous to the war citizens of this state; which prayer he flatters himself will be the more readily granted, not only as there remain very few who have not already been comprehended in the provisions made by the state but as the sacrifice already mentioned of so large a part of his claims upon the public encourages him to expect, that he will not be left as to the residue, upon a worse footing than the generality of his fellow citizens in the same circumstances.
With full confidence in the equity and generosity of the Legislature Your Memorialist respectfully submits his prayer.

Alexander Hamilton
New York 4th. of February 1784


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Chaloner, 5 February 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Chaloner, John

[New York, February 5, 1784. On February 12, 1784, Chaloner wrote to Hamilton: “Your two favours of the fifth & Eighth Instant are both reced.” Letter of February 5 not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John B. Church, 7 February 1784
From: Church, John B.
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Paris Feby. 7th 1784
I received a few Days since my Dear Sir your Favor of the 12th Decemr. I observed your Account of the Project of the Bank, I fear by Letters I have Received from Chaloner that the Plan will be carried into Execution before this Reaches you, if it is and the Shares are not all taken up pray buy for me Two hundred and fifty Shares. I shall direct Chaloner to draw on me to supply you with the money; if the Plan is not decided on before you receive this, I am clear for the Augmentation propos’d and beg you immediately on its being determined to buy for me the 250 shares above-mentioned. It will be necessary to keep your Intentions a secret, as I have no doubt but there are some People who hope by this Increase to buy largely and prevent us from a preponderance in the Bank which is to us a very capital Object; and if we want Funds for a Bank that we may establish in New York the Bank Shares will be always saleable. I should be sorry if Mr. Sayre should effect his Establishment before we are able to Return and carry our Plan into Execution, but I shall be astonish’d if Men of Property are weak and credulous enough to give him their Confidence. We are taken measures to vest our Property in America by exporting from here and England a large Quantity of ready money Articles and I hope that we shall be at New York in June or July.
I have heard nothing from Genl Schuyler nor do you say a Word about him or the Family & I wish to know whether he has made the Purchases I requested him to make for me.
The Power respecting the Bank Stock gives you a Right to sell and transfer, so that if there is any Difficulty about voting you can transfer the Shares into your own Name which will obviate every Difficulty.
I hope by this Time order and good Government prevail in the State and that Lenity and moderation have taken Place of Violence and Resentment. I shall be glad if Moses can carry his Vindue Scheme into Execution as I think it will prove a very beneficial one.
Angelica joins me in Love to Mrs. Hamilton and yourself she is very well the little maid is fat and handsome. Phil is in Pension he jabbers now more French than English. The inclement Weather prevents our leaving Paris but I think we shall set out in 10 or 12 Days, they have experienc’d here the severest Winter that has been felt for many Years. Adieu My Dear Sir. I am very sincerely and affectionately    Your Friend & Servant
J B Church


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John B. Church, 7 February 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Church, John B.

[New York, February 7, 1784. On May 2, 1784, Church wrote to Hamilton: “I have within a few Days Received your Favors of the 7th and 18th Feby. and 6th March.” Letter of February 7 not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Chaloner, 12 February 1784
From: Chaloner, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada. Febry 12th 1784
Dear Sir
Your two favours of the fifth & Eighth Instant are both reced, the latter covering Mr Carters power of Attorney to you. The utillity of another bank to the Mercantile Interest is very evident the rapid progress of the New one has already in some Instances dictated to the Old. I will mention a Case. On application with your power of Attorney to me, I was told it was irregular & could not receive the Dividends on Mr Carters Shares untill his power was lodg’d. I informd them I was sorry they did not inform me of this, when I enquired of them what authority was necessary, to enable me to receive the devidents on those Shares—that you had done all that they informd me was requisite, & was now drawing on me for the money—a bill for a part had come to hand. Mr Willing said it could not be help’d, but I must get the power, & in the mean time if I required it he would pay the draft. I told him on that Account it was not material, here ended the matter. Some few days afterwards, when the subscribers to the New bank were in No Sufficient to choose directors, I waited on them with a letter from Mr Peter Colt, in favour of whom J. Wadsworth had executed & lodg’d at the bank a power of Attorney. Colts letter was to the Cashier, informing that J Wadsworth had wrote him that he executed & lodged a power of Attorney at the bank for him to receive his dividend on his Shares of Stock & in consequence thereof had drawn on him the Cashier in favour of me for the amt of J Wadsworths dividend, on his several shares, it was immediately accepted, & the dividends placed to my Credit, & altho then I had not received nor heard nothing from you respecting Mr Carters power, they offerd to place his shares also to my Credit. Both your drafts are come to hand & duly honourd. The Subscriptions in both banks are nearly compleated. Both are under the auspices of Wealthy Merchants. The Stockholders to the New One are most Numerous, and composed generally of People who have but little Interest in the Old One, a very great proportion are Men distinguished from neutrality in the late Contest: Many of them have been punishd for Tories. I think they will equal the Old bank in business & their directors are Men of the first Rank of Merchants before the war. After their Subscriptions were so Numerous as to render their Success beyond a doubt, I subscribed 8 Shares for Mr Church & 2 for myself. I think both Wadsworth & him would wish to be Interested especially as the Old Bank will at their pleasure augment & increase their Subscriptions it is next to impossiable for them to continue their influence if necessary. If they pursue their Scheme of bankg in New York & should want their bills taken up here, they Stand a Chance of makg better terms if two are established & they Interestd in both than with one only & both will I doubt not share equal dividends to what the Old has already done. I congratulate you on Mr Church’s reception with his Family in London, Mrs Chaloner joins me in Compliments to Mrs Hamilton & I remain Dr Sir   Your most Obdt Servt
Alexr Hamilton Esqr


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John Chaloner, 12 February 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Chaloner, John

[New York, February 12, 1784. On February 17, 1784, Chaloner wrote to Hamilton: “Yours of the 12th. Instant I have just reced.” Letter not found.]


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Chaloner, 17 February 1784
From: Chaloner, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada Febry 17th. 1784
Dear Sir
Yours of the 12th. Instant I have just reced & am glad to find your Sentiments coinside with mine respecting the deposit of Bank Stock. I will immediately subscribe two thousand dollars for Mr Church. By the very next oppo. I will send a Sketch of the Acct between us.
I am with respect    Sir    Your most Obdt Servt
A Hamilton Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Egbert Benson, 18 February 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Benson, Egbert

[New York] February 18, 1784. “I am engaged in several causes depending on the Trespass law on the side of the defendants. Three of my Clients who are British Merchants are anxious to have your assistance.… The actions are brought in the Mayor’s Court; so that I suppose the argument will come on in about five weeks. Will it be convenient for you to be here?”


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Gouverneur Morris, 21 February 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Morris, Gouverneur

New York Feby. 21. 1784
I duly received my dear Sir your letter of the 27th: of January and I would have sooner told you how much pleasure it gave me, if I had had time; but legislative folly has afforded so plentiful a harvest to us lawyers that we have scarcely a moment to spare from the substantial business of reaping. Today being sunday I have resolved to give an hour to friendship and to you. Good people would say that I had much better be paying my devotions to the great
⟨devotions I mean; for with so lively an imagination as yours it is necessary to be explicit, lest you should be for making a different association that would not suit me quite as well.
To say that I was amused with your letter was to say what must have happened of course; a good theme in good hands could not fail to be amusing. The coalition you mention is not to be wondered at, though in a political light it is whimsical enough; but the meeting of extremes at the same point is a common case. I expect in another year to see our political antipodes in this city shaking hands, but whenever it happens it will not affect me as it seems to have done you in the instance you mention, because probably I shall not have the same reasons. To be serious:
The erection of a new bank in Philadelphia does not appear to me an evil to the community. The competition may indeed render the large profits of⟩ the old bank less permanent; but they will always remain considerable enough; and the competition will cause business to be done on easier and better terms in each to the advancement of trade in general. If I reason wrong correct me. That a stock holder of the old bank should feel his interest wounded—that those who have made their property in it subservient in some measure to the support of the revolution should feel a degree of indignation at the kind of rivalship which has started up—are both natural sensations—but that large profits should produce rivalship—that men in a matter of this kind should empl⟨oy their money⟩ where they expect the greatest advantage ⟨and the cheapest⟩ market in purchasing
⟨second bank has been established, I think you will, on reflection, agree with me that they ought to wish to be interested in both the institutions, and that therefore it is the duty of those who have the laying out of their money to purchase in the new bank, on the principle I have hinted at as well as the circumstances of a lower price. The whole of this business, my dear friend, is a mere mercantile speculation, and I am sure when there has been time to cool down the considerate proprietors of the old bank will blame nobody for adventuring upon mere mercantile principles. To you I need not say that it is chimerical to expect any other will prevail.
Were I to advise upon this occasion, it would be as soon as possible to bring about a marriage or, perhaps what you will prefer, an intrigue between the old bank and the new. Let the latter be the wife or, still to pursue your propensity, the mistress of the⟩ former. As a mistress (or you’ll say a wife) it is to be expected she will every now and then be capricious and inconstant; but in the main it will [be to] the interest of both husband and wife that they should live well together and manage their affairs with good humour and concert. If they quarrel they will not only expose themselves to the gibes of their neighbours, but the more knowing part of these will endeavour to keep them by the ears in order to make the favours of each more cheap, and more easily attainable.
I ought in return to give you an account of what we are doing here; but I will in the lump tell you that we are doing those things which we ought not to do, and leaving undone those things which we ought to do. Instead of wholesome regulations for the improvement of our polity and commerce; we are labouring to contrive methods to mortify and punish tories and to explain away treaties.
Let us both erect a temple to time; only regretting that we shall not command a longer portion of it to see what will be the event of the American drama.
Adieu very sincerely    Yr. Affectionate
A Hamilton
New York Feby. 21. 1784
G Morris Esqr


Title: Constitution of the Bank of New York, [23 February–15 March 1784]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[New York, February 23, 1784–March 15, 1784]
Constitution
Article 1st.
That the Bank shall be called by the Name and Title of the Bank of New York.

–2–
That the Capital Stock consist of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars in Gold or Silver, divided into One Thousand Shares of Five Hundred Dollars each Share and that a Majority of all the Directors may at their discretion open new Subscriptions for encreasing the Capital Stock, when they shall judge it for the Interest of the Bank so to do, provided the said New Subscriptions do not exceed the Sum of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars.
–3–
That Thirteen Directors be annually chosen by a Majority of Votes, who are to have the sole Conduct and Management of the Bank. At the first General Election, the President and Cashier are to be elected by the Subscribers to the Bank, but for ever afterwards the Thirteen Directors are to chuse a President from among themselves; and the Cashier as well as every other Person employed in the Bank is to be appointed and paid by them and be under their immediate controul.
–4th–
That the first Election be on the 15th. day of March 1784; that the next General Election for thirteen Directors shall be on the Second Monday in May 1785; and so continue Yearly and every Year, but in case of any Vacancy in the Direction by Death, Resignation or otherwise, public notice shall be given within one Week after such an Event, that the Vacancy may be filled; the Election to be within fourteen days after such notice.
5th.
That every Holder of one or more Shares to the Number of Four, shall have One Vote for each Share—A Subscriber of Six Shares shall have Five Votes, Eight Shares, Six Votes, and Ten Shares, Seven Votes, and One Vote for every Five Shares above Ten.
–6th–
That no Stockholder after the first Election shall be entitled to Vote, unless such person has possessd the Stock three months previous to the day fixed for an election of Directors or any other General purpose; And if any Stockholder (who shall have been a Resident in this State at least Twelve months immediately preceeding such Election) should be absent, he shall be entitled to Vote by Proxy properly appointed; but in no other case shall any Vote be admitted by Proxy.
–7th–
That no Person shall be eligible to Serve in the Office of Director unless he be a Stockholder.
–8th–
That the Board of Directors determine the manner of doing business and the Rules and Forms to be pursued, appoint and employ the various Clerks and Servants, which they may find necessary, and dispose of the Money and credit of the Bank for the interest and benefit of the Proprietors; but they are not to employ the money or Credit of the Bank in the drawing or negotiating of any Foreign Bill or Bills of Exchange, or advance a Loan to any Foreign Power whatever.
–9th–
That if at any time it shall be the opinion of a Majority of the Directors that any of their Body are guilty of neglect of Duty or any Mal Practice whereby the Interest of the Bank is or may be affected, such majority of the Directors with or without the consent of the President, may advertise for a general Meeting of the Stockholders to lay before them a Complaint of such neglect of Duty or breach of Trust, and if it appears to the Stockholders to be well founded such Director or Directors may be removed by a majority of Votes.

–10th–
That if any of the Directors shall convert any of the Money or Property of the Bank to his own particular use, or be guilty of fraud or Embezzlement, he shall forfeit his whole share of Stock to the Company and be expelld the Direction by a Majority of all the Directors and thereby rendered incapable of ever serving again in that Office
–11th–
That no President or Director shall receive any other Emolument for his attendance on the Duties of his Office than such as shall be fixed and agreed to by a majority of Votes at a General Election.
–12th–
That there shall be a Meeting of the Directors Quarterly for the purpose of regulating the affairs of the Bank and not less than Seven shall constitute a Board, who may adjourn from time to time; and the President if necessary may call a Meeting of the Directors at any intermediate time; At every Meeting of the Directors all Questions are to be decided by a majority of Votes.
–13th–
That the President or a Majority of the Directors shall have Power to call a General Meeting of the Stockholders by an Advertisement in the public Papers whenever it appears to them there is urgent occasion.
14th.
That the Cashier and every principal Clerk do give a Security for their Trust to such an Amount as a Majority of all the Directors shall require.
–15th–
That all Notes issued by the Bank, shall be Signed by the President for the Time being, or any Director who may be fixed upon by the Board for that Purpose, and Counter Signed by the Cashier, or in his absence by a Clerk to be appointed by the Directors.
–16th.–
That no Stockholder shall be accountable to any Individual or the Public for Money lodged in the Bank for a greater Sum than the amount of his Stock.

–17th.–
That such a Dividend on the Profits of the Bank as a Majority of all the Directors shall determine to make, shall be declared at least fourteen days previous to the General Election in May 1785; and that all Subsequent Dividends shall be made half yearly.
–18th.–
That all Shares shall be transferable, such Transfer to be made by the Proprietor or Proprietors or his her or their lawful Attorney in Books kept at the Bank for that purpose, which Books shall be always kept open at the usual Office Hours except on particular days previous to the declaring a Dividend of which due Notice shall be given.
–19th–
That the President and Directors shall Petition the Legislature to incorporate the Subscribers or Stockholders under the Name and Title of the President Directors and Company of the Bank of New York, and to pass Laws for inflicting the most exemplary punishment on those who may commit Fraud or Embezzlement; and also to punish the Counterfeiters of Bank Notes and Checks in the like exemplary manner, with such other Clauses in the Act as they shall judge necessary and proper for the Security of the Stockholders and the Public.
–20th–
That the Constitution shall be fairly transcribed upon Parchment and remain at the Bank; the President and Directors when chosen, and prior to the opening of the Bank, shall severally Sign and Seal the same, and take an Oath or Affirmation before a Magistrate, that he will to the best of his Knowledge and abilities conduct the business of the Bank for the Interest and benefit of the Proprietors and agreable to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution which Oath or Affirmation shall also be taken by every future Director when chosen, and before he enters upon the execution of his Trust.


Title: Outline of a Charter for the Bank of New York, [23 February–15 March 1784]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

[New York, February 23–March 15, 1784]
Plan for the Incorporation of a Bank

1st:The Stile of the Bank to be “The Bank of New-York.”
2.The Capital Stock not to Exceed 1,000,000 Dollars; each Share consisting of 500 Dollars.
3.The Subscribers to Elect on the 2d. Monday of May, in each year thirteen Directors to Conduct the Affairs of the Bank, who shall be authorised to Chuse a President; the Mode of Election to be determined by a Majority of the Stockholders.
4.Two permanent Officers of the State, together with the Treasurer to be appointed by the Government as Inspectors of the Bank; who shall at all Times have free Access to its Books, Papers and Deliberations.
5th:In Case the United States should think proper to deposit any Part of their Funds in the Bank, The Commissioners of the Treasury to have the like Inspection, as specified in the preceding Article.
6th.One Fifth of the Actual Stock of the Bank to be always let out on landed Security to the Several Counties of the State, according to such Quotas, and in such manner as the Legislature shall appoint; the Sums lent to be paid by Installments in four years with lawful Interest. The Interest for the first Year to be deducted at the Time of Advancing the money: The Bank to be Judge of the Sufficiency of the Security.
7th.The Bank to make all Payments in Gold or Silver Coin or Bank Notes, at the Election of the Receiver, and not to be obliged to Receive any other Species of money.
8th.If at any Time the Dividend of the Bank should Exceed Eight per Cent; the Surplus to be added to the Capital in Proportion to the Shares held by each Subscriber; and this Surplus to be also lent on landed Security, in addition to the one Fifth Part of the Stock, as Specified in the 6th. Article, and on the Same Conditions.
9th.The Bank never to Engage in Trade.
10th.The Charter to be in Force for Fifteen Years.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to John B. Church, 10 March 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Church, John B.

New York, March 10th. 1784
My Dear Sir
In my last to you I informed you that a project for a land bank had been set on foot by Mr. Sayre as the ostensible Parent; but that I had reason to suspect the Chancellor was the true father. The fact has turned out as I supposed; and the Chancellor with a number of others have since petitioned the Legislature for an exclusive charter for the proposed bank. I thought it necessary not only with a view to your project, but for the sake of the commercial interests of the state to start an opposition to this scheme; and took occasion to point out its absurdity and inconvenience to some of the most intelligent Merchants; who presently saw the matter in a proper light and began to take measures to defeat the plan.
The Chancellor had taken so much pains with the country members, that they all began to be persuaded that the land bank was the true Philosophers stone that was to turn all their rocks and trees into gold—and there was great reason to apprehend a majority of the Legislature would have adopted his views. It became necessary to convince the projectors themselves of the impracticability of their scheme and to counteract the impressions they had made by a direct application to the Legislature. Some of the Merchants to effect these purposes set on foot a subscription for a money-bank and called upon me to subscribe. I was a little embarrassed how to act but upon the whole I concluded it best to fall in with them, and endeavour to induce them to put the business upon such a footing as might enable you with advantage to combine your interests with theirs; for since the thing had been taken up upon the broad footing of the whole body of the Merchants, it appeared to me that it never would be your interest to persue a distinct project in opposition to theirs; but that you would prefer, so far as you might choose to employ money in this way, to become purchaser in the general bank. The object, on this supposition, was to have the bank founded on such principles as would give you a proper weight in the direction. Unluckily for this purpose I entered rather late into the measure: proposals had been agreed upon, in which among other things it was settled that no stockholder to whatever amount should have more than seven votes, which was the number to which a holder of ten shares was to be intitled. At an after meeting of some of the most influential characters I engaged them so far to depart from this ground as to allow a vote for every five shares above ten.
The stockholders have since thought proper to appoint me one of the directors. I shall hold it till Wadsworth and you come out and if you choose to become parties to this bank, I shall make a vacancy for one of you. I enclose you the constitution and the names of the President directors and Cashier.
An application for a Charter has been made to the Legislature with a petition against granting an exclusive one to the land bank. The measures which have been taken appear to have had their effect upon the minds of the partizans of the land bank.
The affairs of the bank in Pensylvania appear to be in some confusion. They have stopped discounts; but I have no apprehension that there is any thing more in the matter than temporary embarrassment, from having a little overshot their mark in their issues of paper, and from the opposition which the attempt to establish a new bank had produced.
I have had no tolerable offer for your land in Connecticut. Forty shillings that currency per acre has been the highest but I have written to Mr Campfield requesting him to inform himself well of the value of the land; and if he thinks it is not worth more to accept the offer. I am told he is a judicious and honest man and I presume the land where it is will never be worth anything to you if it remains unsold. Betsey joins me in best affections to Mrs. C & yourself. Our Compliments to W.
I am most sincerely    Dr sir    Yr. affectionate friend & servant
A Hamilton


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from John Chaloner, 16 March 1784
From: Chaloner, John
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Philada. March 16, 1784
Sir
Herewith you have a letter from Mr Church which came to hand by the last Post. Yesterday at a meeting of the Stockholders of the New Bank they agreed to withdraw their Petition for a Charter & that Institution does not go on. You will please therefore to give order respectg the monies I subscribed on acct of Mr Church for that Purpose.
I am with great respect Sir   Your
A Hamilton Esqr⅌ Post


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Gouverneur Morris, [21 March 1784]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Morris, Gouverneur

[New York, March 21, 1784]
Dr. Sir
Permit me to introduce to Your acquaintance and attention Mr Seaton Cashier of the Bank of New York. He is just setting out for Philadelphia to procure materials, and information in the forms of business. I recommend him to you, because I am persuaded you will with pleasure facilitate his object. Personally I dare say you will be pleased with him.
He will tell you of our embarrassments and prospects. I hope an incorporation of the two banks which is evidently the interest of both has put an end to differencies in Philadelphia. Here a wild and impracticable scheme of a land bank stands in our way; the projectors of it persevering in spite of the experience they have that all the mercantile and monied influence is against it.

March 21
G M Esqr.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to ———, 31 March 1784
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To:

New York, March 31, 1784. “I have considered the Patent to Mr. Woolley and am in doubt whether it is valid or not so far as it gives an exclusive right of ferriage; as this may be construed into a monopoly.”


Title: To Alexander Hamilton from Jacob Le Roy, March 1784
From: Roy, Jacob Le
To: Hamilton, Alexander

Greenwich [Connecticut] March, 1784. Instructs Hamilton to collect interest on money owed to Le Roy by John Reade.


Title: Promissory Note from John Campbell to Stephen Rapalje, [1 April 1784]
From: Campbell, John
To: Rapalje, Stephen

[New York, April 1, 1784.] Hamilton engages to pay promissory note from John Campbell to Stephen Rapalje if Campbell defaults.


Title: From Alexander Hamilton to Gouverneur Morris, [7 April 1784]
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Morris, Gouverneur

[New York, April 7, 1784]
Pardon me My Dr. Sir for not sooner having obeyed your orders with respect to the inclosed. I part with it reluctantly; for that is so rare an article, that when we get so much of it in so small a compass we can not easily consent to be dispossessed of it.

I am very happy to hear of the union of your two banks; for you will believe me when I tell you, that on more deliberate consideration, I was led to view the competition in a different light from that in which it at first struck me. I had no doubt that it was against the interests of the proprietors; but on a super[fi]cial view I perceived benefits to the community which on a more close inspection I found were not real.
You well call our proceedings here strange doings; if some folks were paid to counteract the prosperity of the state, they could not take more effectual measures than they do. But it is in vain to attempt to kick against the Pricks.
Discrimination bills—Partial taxes—schemes to engross public property in the hands of those who have present power—to banish the real wealth of the state and substitute paper bubbles are the only dishes that suit the public palate at this time.
Permit me to ask your opinion on a point of importance to the NY bank—the best mode of receiving and paying out Gold. I am aware of the evils of that which has been practiced upon in Philadelphia—weighing it in quantities—but I cannot satisfy myself about a substitute; unless there could be a coinage.
Favour me with your sentiments on this subject as soon as you can.
Believe me with equal warmth and sincerity. Yrs.
AH
N YorkApril 7. 1784
G Morris Esqr