The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Coinage and the Mint
• Hamilton to Jefferson
• On the Establishment of a Mint 1
• Hamilton to Jefferson
• Hamilton to Washington
• Industry and Commerce
• Fisheries: Hamilton to Goodhue
• Manufactures
• Iron
• Copper
• Lead
• Fossil Coal
• Wood
• Skins
• Grain
• Flax and Hemp
• Cotton
• Wool
• Silk
• Glass
• Gunpowder
• Paper
• Printed Books
• Refined Sugars and Chocolate
• Hamilton to Jefferson
• Commercial Relations
• Outline of Smith’s Speech On Madison’s Resolutions of January 3, 1794
• Foreign Relations
• Speech On the Treaty of Paris 1
• Letters From Phocion 1
• Letter I
• Letter Ii 1
• Repeal of All Acts Inconsistent With the Treaty
• Speech On the Passage of This Act 1
• Hamilton to William Short 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to William Short 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson (cabinet Paper.)
• Washington to the President of the National Assembly of France
• Draft By Hamilton. 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson (cabinet Paper.)
• Jefferson to Hamilton 2 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Washington to Hamilton (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington 2 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington
• Hamilton to Washington 1 (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Jefferson to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Jefferson to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Jefferson to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Jefferson (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.) ( Private .)
• Pacificus 1 (from the Gazette of the United States .)
• No. I
• No. Ii
• No. Iii
• No. Iv
• No. V
• No. Vi
• No. Vii

washington to hamilton
(Cabinet Paper.)

• Philadelphia,

April 18, 1793.

Sir:—The posture of affairs in Europe, particularly between France and Great Britain,1 places the United States in a delicate situation, and requires much consideration as to the measures which it will be proper for them to observe in the war between those Powers. With a view to forming a general plan of conduct for the Executive, I have stated and inclosed sundry questions, to be considered preparatory to a meeting at my house to-morrow, where I shall expect to see you at nine o’clock, and to receive the result of your reflections thereon.

• Question 1.—Shall a proclamation issue for the purpose of preventing interferences of the citizens of the United States in the war between France and Great Britain, etc.? Shall it contain a declaration of neutrality or not? What shall it contain?
• Question 2.—Shall a minister from the republic of France be received?
• Question 3.—If received, shall it be absolutely, or with qualifications; and if with qualifications, of what kind?
• Question 4.—Are the United States obliged, by good faith, to consider the treaties heretofore made with France, as applying to the present situation of the parties? May they either renounce them, or hold them suspended till the government of France shall be established?
• Question 5.—If they have the right, is it expedient to do either, and which?
• Question 6.—If they have an option, would it be a breach of neutrality to consider the treaties still in operation?
• Question 7.—If the treaties are to be considered as now in operation, is the guaranty in the treaty of alliance applicable to a defensive war only, or to war either offensive or defensive?
• Question 8.—Does the war in which France is engaged appear to be offensive or defensive on her part, or of a mixed and equivocal character?
• Question 9.—If of a mixed and equivocal character, does the guaranty, in any event, apply to such a war?
• Question 10.—What is the effect of a guaranty, such as that to be found in the treaty of alliance between the United States and France?
• Question 11.—Does any article in either of the treaties prevent ships of war, other than privateers, of the Powers opposed to France, from coming into the ports of the United States, to act as convoys to their own merchantmen? or does it lay other restraints upon them, more than would apply to the ships of war of France?
• Question 12.—Should the future regent of France send a minister to the United States, ought he to be received?
• Question 13.—Is it necessary or advisable to call together the two Houses of Congress, with a view to the present posture of European affairs? If it is, what should be the particular objects of such a call?

Geo. Washington,

cabinet opinion

April 19, 1793.

At a meeting of the Heads of Departments, and the Attorney-General, at the President’s, April 19, 1793, to consider the foregoing questions proposed by the President, it was determined by all, on the first question, that a proclamation shall issue, forbidding our citizens to take part in any hostilities on the seas, with or against any of the belligerent Powers; and warning them against carrying to any such Powers, any of those articles deemed contraband, according to the modern usage of nations; and enjoining them from all acts and proceedings inconsistent with the duties of a friendly nation towards those at war.

On the second question, “Shall a minister from the republic of France be received?” it was unanimously agreed that he shall be received.

The remaining questions were postponed for further consideration.1

[1]News had arrived of the war between France and England, and also that the minister of the new French Republic was on his way to the United States.

[1]Five days later, in accordance with the views of his Cabinet, Washington issued his famous proclamation of neutrality, which marked out our foreign policy as one of absolute abstention from the affairs of Europe, a principle of which the Monroe doctrine was the necessary corollary.