The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Foreign Relations ( Continued )
• Cabinet Opinion
• Cabinet Opinion—hamilton and Knox
• Washington to John Jay, Chief-justice, and James Wilson, James Iredell, and William Patterson, Associate-justices, of the Supreme Court of the United States
• Questions Proposed to Be Submitted to the Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States
• Washington to the Heads of Departments and the Attorney-general
• No Jacobin 1
• I.
• Ii
• Iii
• Iv
• V
• Instructions to the Collectors of the Customs 2
• Cabinet Opinion.—hamilton to Washington 1
• Notes By Hamilton, to Frame Letter of Secretary of State to Gouverneur Morris, Minister At Paris (cabinet Paper.)
• Cabinet Opinion
• Hamilton to Washington
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Report.
• Americanus (from the American Daily Advertiser .)
• I
• II.
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Points to Be Considered In the Instructions to Mr. Jay, Envoy Extraordinary to Great Britain
• Hamilton to Jay (cabinet Paper.)
• Treaty Project
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Randolph (cabinet Paper.)
• Hamilton to Randolph (cabinet Paper.)
• Remarks On Lord Grenville’s Project of a Commercial Treaty, Made At the Request of E. Randolph, Esq., Secretary of State
• Hamilton to Washington (cabinet Paper.)
• Remarks On the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, Made Between the United States and Great Britain
• Supplementary Remarks
• Horatius 1
• Camillus
• No . I
• No . Ii
• No . Iii
• No . Iv
• No . V
• No . Vi
• No . Vii
• No . Viii
• No . Ix
• No . X
• No . Xi
• No . Xii
• No . Xiii
• No . Xiv
• No . Xv
• No . Xvi
• No . Xvii
• No . Xviii
• No . Xix
• No . Xx
• No . Xxi
• No . Xxii
• No . Xxiii 1

hamilton to jay
(Cabinet Paper.)

• Philadelphia,

May 6, 1794.

MyDearSir:

I send you herewith sundry papers and documents which contain information that may not be useless to you in your mission. I had wished to have found leisure to say many things to you, but my occupations permit me to offer only a few loose observations.

We are both impressed equally strongly with the great importance of a right adjustment of all matters of past controversy and future good understanding with Great Britain. Yet, important as this object is, it will be better to do nothing, than to do any thing that will not stand the test of the severest scrutiny—and especially, which may be construed into the relinquishment of a substantial right or interest.

The object of indemnification for the depredations committed on our trade, in consequence of the instructions of the 6th of November, is very near the hearts and feelings of the people of this country. The proceeding was an atrocious one. It would not answer in this particular to make any arrangement on the mere appearance of indemnification. If nothing substantial can be agreed upon, it will be best to content yourself with endeavoring to dispose the British Cabinet, of their own accord, to go as far as they think fit in reparation, leaving the United States at full liberty to act afterwards as they deem proper. I am, however, still of opinion that substantial indemnification, on the principles of the instruction of January 8th, may in the last resort be admissible.

What I have said goes upon the idea of the affair of indemnification standing alone. If you can effect solid arrangements with regard to the points unexecuted of the treaty of peace, the question of indemnification may be managed with less rigor, and may be still more laxly dealt with, if a truly beneficial treaty of commerce, embracing privileges in the West India Islands, can be established. It will be worth the while of the government of this country, in such case, to satisfy, itself, its own citizens who have suffered.

The principle of Great Britain is that a neutral nation ought not to be permitted to carry on, in time of war, a commerce with a nation at war, which it could not carry on with that nation in time of peace. It is not without importance in this question, that the peace system of France allowed our vessels access to her islands with a variety of our principal staples, and allowed us to take from thence some of their products; and that, by frequent colonial regulations, this privilege extended to almost all other articles.

The great political and commercial considerations which ought to influence the conduct of Great Britain towards this country are familiar to you. They are strengthened by their increasing acquisitions in the West Indies, if these shall be ultimately confirmed, which seems to create an absolute dependence on us for supply.

I see not how it can be disputed with you, that this country, in a commercial sense, is more important to Great Britain than any other. The articles she takes from us are certainly precious to her; important, perhaps essential, to the ordinary subsistence of her islands; not unimportant to her own subsistence occasionally; always very important to her manufactures, and of real consequence to her revenue. As a consumer, the paper will show that we stand unrivalled. We now consume of her exports from a million to a million and a half sterling more in value than any other foreign country; and while the consumption of other countries, from obvious causes, is likely to be stationary, that of this country is increasing, and for a long series of years will increase rapidly. Our manufactures are no doubt progressive. But our population and means progress so much faster, that our demand for manufactured supply far outgoes the progress of our faculty to manufacture. Nor can this cease to be the case for any calculable period of time.

How unwise then in Great Britain, to suffer such a state of affairs to remain exposed to the hazard of constant interruption and derangement, by not fixing on the basis of a good treaty the principles on which it should continue.

Among the considerations which ought to lead her to a treaty, is the obtaining a renunciation of all pretension of right to sequester or confiscate debts by way of reprisal, etc., though I have no doubt this is the modern law of nations. Yet the point of right cannot be considered so absolutely settled as not to make it interesting to fix it by treaty.

There is a fact which has escaped observation in this country, and which, as there has existed too much disposition to convulse our trade, I have not thought it prudent to bring into view, which it is interesting you should be apprised of. An act of Parliament (27 Geo. III., chap. 27) allows foreign European vessels, single decked and not exceeding seventy tons burthen, to carry to certain ports in the British West Indies, particular articles therein enumerated, and also to take from thence certain articles.

This consequently puts an end to the question of precedent, which is so strongly urged against a departure from the British navigation act in our favor, since it gives the precedent of such a departure in favor of others, and to our exclusion—a circumstance worthy of particular notice. Our relative situation gives us a stronger plea for an exception in our favor, than any other nation can urge. In paper B the idea of a treaty of commerce on the footing of a statu quo, for a short period (say five years), is brought into view. I should understand this as admissible only in the event of a satisfactory arrangement with regard to the points unexecuted of the treaty of peace.

But you will discover from your instructions, that the opinion which has prevailed is, that such a treaty of commerce ought not to be concluded without previous reference here for further instruction. It is desirable, however, to push the British ministry in this respect to a result, that the extent of their views may be ascertained.

The navigation of the Mississippi is to us an object of immense consequence. Besides other considerations connected with it, if the Government of the United States can procure and secure the enjoyment of it to our Western country, it will be an infinitely strong link of union between that country and the Atlantic States. As its preservation will depend on the naval resources of the Atlantic States, the Western country cannot but feel that this essential interest depends on its remaining firmly united with them.

If any thing could be done with Great Britain to increase our chances for the speedy enjoyment of this right, it would be, in my judgment, a very valuable ingredient in any arrangement you could make. Nor is Great Britain without a great interest in the question, if the arrangement shall give to her a participation in that navigation, and a treaty of commerce shall admit her advantageously into this large field of commercial adventure.

May it not be possible to obtain a guaranty of our right in this particular from Great Britain, on the condition of mutual enjoyment and a trade on the same terms as to our Atlantic ports?

This is a delicate subject, not well matured in my mind. It is the more delicate, as there is at this moment a negotiation pending with Spain, in a position I believe not altogether unpromising, and ill use might be made of any overture or intimation on the subject. Indeed, in such a posture of the thing, an eventual arrangement only could be proper. I throw out the subject merely that you may contemplate it.

With the most fervent wishes for your health, comfort, and success, I remain, etc.