No More Learning

? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? n AMILTOff.
235
"Tenthly--In granting the United States the sole pow-
er 'of regulating the alloy and value of coin struck by their
own authority, or by that of the respective states,' without
the power of regulating foreign coin in circulation, though
one is essential to the due exercise of the other, as there
ought to be such proportions maintained between the na-
tional and foreign coin, as will give the former a prefer-
ence in all internal negotiations; and without the latter
power, the operations of government, in a matter of prima-
ry importance to the commerce and finances of the United
States, will be exposed to numberless obstructions.
"Eleventhly--In requiring the assent of nine states to
matters of principal importance, and of seven to all others,
except adjournments from day to day, a rule destructive
of vigour, consistency, or expedition, in the administration
of affairs, tending to subject the sense of the majority to
that of the minority, by putting it in the power of a small
combination to retard and even to frustrate the most neces-
sary measures, and to oblige the greater number, in cases
which require speedy determinations, as happens in the most
interesting concerns of the community, to come into the
views of the smaller; the evils of which have been felt in
critical conjunctures, and must always make the spirit of
government a spirit of compromise and expedience, rather
than of system and energy.
"Twelfthly--In vesting in the federal government the
sole direction of the interests of the United States in their
intercourse with foreign nations, without empowering it
to pass all oenekal laws in aid and support of the laws
of nations; for the want of which authority, the faith of
the United States may be broken, their reputation sullied,
and their peace interrupted, by the negligence or miscon-
ception of any particular state.
"And whereas experience hath clearly manifested that
the powers reserved to the union in the confederation, are
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 236
THE LIFE OF
unequal to the purpose of effectually drawing forth the re-
sources of the respective members, for the common vxlfare
and defence; whereby the United States have, upon sev-
eral occasions, been exposed to the most critical and
alarming situations; have wanted an army adequate to
their defence, and proportioned to the abilities of the
country; have on account of that deficiency seen essen-
tial posts reduced--others imminently endangered--whole
states, and large parts of others, overrun and ravaged by
small bodies of the enemy's forces; have been destitute of
sufficient means of feeding, clothing, paying, and appoint-
ing that army, by which the troops, rendered less efficient
for military operations, have been exposed to sufferings,
which nothing but unparalleled patience, perseverance,
and patriotism could have endured. Whereas, also, the
United States have been too often compelled to make the
administration of their affairs a succession of temporary
expedients, inconsistent with order, economy, energy, or
a scrupulous adherence to the public engagements, and
now find themselves, at the close of a glorious struggle for
independence, without any certain means of doing justice
to those who have been its principal supporters--to an ar-
my which has bravely fought, and patiently suffered--to
citizens who have cheerfully lent their money--and to
others who have jn different ways contributed their pro-
perty and their personal service to the common cause;
obliged to rely for the only effectual mode of doing that
justice, by funding the debt on solid securities, on the pre-
carious concurrence of thirteen distinct deliberatives, the
dissent of either of which may defeat the plan, and leave
these states, at this early period of their existence, in-
volved in all the disgrace and mischiefs of violated faith and
national bankruptcy. And whereas, notwithstanding we
have, by the blessing of Providence, so far happily es-
caped the complicated dangers of such a situation, and
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON. 237
now see the object of our wishes secured by an honourable
peace, it would be unwise to hazard a repetition of the
same dangers and embarrassments, in any future war in
which these states may be engaged, or to continue this ex-
tensive empire under a government unequal to its protec-
tion and prosperity. And whereas, it is essential to the
happiness and security of these states, that their union
should be established on the most solid foundations, and it
is manifest that this desirable object cannot be effected but
by a government, capable, both in peace and war, of
making every member of the union contribute in just
proportion to the common necessities, and of combining
and directing the forces and wills of the several parts to a
general end; to which purposes, in the opinion of con-
gress, the present confederation is altogeter inadequate.
And whereas, on the spirit which may direct the coun-
cils and measures of these states, at the present juncture,
may depend their future safety and welfare--Congress
conceive it to be their duty, freely to state to their constit-
uents the defects which, by experience, have been discov-
ered in the present plan of the federal union, and solemn-
ly to call their attention to a revisal and amendment of
the same. Therefore resolved, That it be earnestly recom-
mended to the several states to appoint a convention, to
meet at on the day of , with full powers to
revise the confederation, and to adopt and propose such
alterations as to them shall appear necessary, to be finally
approved or rejected by the states respectively--and that
a committee of be appointed to prepare an address
upon the subject. "
These resolutions, as appears from a communication to
General Washington, Hamilton prepared with a view to
an address from congress as soon as they had ratified the
definitive treaty. "In a letter," he says, "which I wrote
to you several months ago, I intimated that it might be in
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 238
THE LIFE OF
your power to contribute to the establishment of our fede-
ral union upon a more solid basis. I have never since ex-
plained myself. , At the time, I was in hopes congress
might have been induced to take a decisive ground, to in-
form their constituents of the imperfections of the present
system, and of the impossibility of conducting the public
affairs with honour to themselves and advantage to the
community, with powers so disproportioned to their re-
sponsibility; and having done this in a full and forcible
manner, to adjourn the moment the definitive treaty was
ratified. In retiring at the same juncture, I wished you
in a solemn manner to declare to the people your intended
retreat from public concerns; your opinion of the present
government, and of the absolute necessity of a change.
Before I left congress I despaired of the first, and your
circular letter to the states hady anticipated the last.
"I trust it will not be without effect, though I am per-
suaded it would have had more, combined with what I
have mentioned; at all events, without compliment, sir, it
will do you honour with the sensible and well-meaning,
and ultimately, it is to be hoped, with the people at large,
when the present epidemic frenzy has subsided. "
With this purpose, not less grand in the conception
than in the mode in which it was to be effected, Hamilton
closed his career in congress.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? n AMILTON.
239
CHAPTER XIX.
[1783. ]
A rumour that the definitive treaty had been received,
led to a request that Hamilton would remain in congress
a few days. The apprehensions he had entertained of
obstacles to its conclusion being thus dispelled, he was
much elated with the event, and with the prospect, after so
long a public career, of enjoying the repose of private life.
"I am strongly urged," he wrote to his wife, "to stay a
few days for the ratification of the treaty; at all events,
however, I will not be long from you. I give you joy
of the happy conclusion of this important work in which
your country has been engaged. Now, in a very short
time, I hope we shall be happily settled in New-York.
My love to your father. Kiss my boy a thousand times.
A thousand loves to yourself. "
This information proving to be erroneous, he proceed-
ed by an interior route to Albany, where he remained
until the evacuation of New-York in November.
What a tide of thoughts must have passed through his
mind as he now sailed the tranquil Hudson, on whose
margin he passed many of his happiest after hours, and
breathed his latest sigh! How changed his present from
his former feelings, when hastening along its alarmed bor-
ders on his lonely, anxious way--amid deserted dwellings,
forsaken fields, a discordant population--to extort reluc-
tant aid from Gates, he detected those incipient intrigues
which would have lost Washington to his country!
Where, before, the timid shallop rarely ventured to dart
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 240
THE LIFE OF
its course across the mournful stream, was now seen the
bold canvass of its unrivalled craft wafting to their libera-
ted mart its joyous fugitives; each point and inlet, as he
passed, reviving some incident of his own eventful career,
or of his country's glorious history.
Poughkeepsie would recall the moment, when, in concert
with Schuyler, were framed those memorable resolutions,
the first to recommend a general convention to establish a
constitution. Approaching Fishkill, he would recur to the
time when, with early wisdom, he portrayed the evils of a
weak and the blessings of an efficient government. As his
eye turned upon the heights of Newburgh, now gleaming
in the morning sun, he would behold, as it were again, the
dark cloud which hung threatening over his companions
in arms, ready to burst and overwhelm them, until dissipa-
ted by his powerful interposition. West Point, crowned
with autumnal gloom, spoke of the weary hours of anxious
consultation with his chief, the marked victim of a deep laid
treason. The detection, the pursuit, the escape of Arnold,
were all before him. Beyond, the scene of Andre's fate,
immortalized by the touching narrative which would have
veiled his error with his misfortunes. The humble ferry-
house at Greensburgh would awaken happier associations,
where, retiring in the pride of a manly temper from the
family of Washington, he devoted his first leisure to those
capacious plans of national polity which placed him in
early manhood among the foremost sages of the revolution.
And now, New-York opened before him in all the often
recollected magnificence of its capacious bay, its world-in-
viting waters, its peaceful shores, its guardian isles, whence
proudly rose against the evening sky, the flag of the Union,
announcing that the conflict was over, and seeming to in
vite him to new triumphs in this much-loved scene of his
youthful imaginings, efforts, and distinctions. Cordial were
the greetings of this grateful city, as it welcomed, in its
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON.
241
once stranger boy, the now powerful advocate of mercy
to its apprehensive . denizens, hastening to shield them from
persecation for the venial offence of mistaken loyalty.
The impression which his congressional career had pro-
duced, is shown in the letters received by him at this time.
McHenry, who had recently taken a seat in congress,
writes:--
Princeton, Oct. 22, 1783.
DEAR HAMILTON,
The homilies you delivered in congress, are still recol-
lected with pleasure. The impressions they made, are in
favour of your integrity, and no one but believes you a man
of honour and republican principles. Were you ten years
older, and twenty thousand pounds richer, there is no doubt
but that you might obtain the suffrages of congress for the
highest office in their gift. You are supposed to possess
various knowledge, useful, substantial, and ornamental.
Your very grave, and your cautious--your men who meas-
ure others by the standard of their own creeping politics,
think you sometimes intemperate, but seldom visionary,
and that were you to pursue your object with as much
cold perseverance as you do with ardour and argument,
you would become irresistible.
In a word, if you could submit to spend a whole life in
. dissecting a fly, you would be, in their opinion, one of the
greatest men in the world. Bold designs--measures calcu-
lated for their. rapid execution--a wisdom that would con-
vince, from its own weight--a project that would surprise
the people into greater happiness, without giving them an
opportunity to view it and reject it--are not adapted to a
council composed of discordant materials, or to a people
which have thirteen heads, each of which pays superstitious
adorations to inferior divinities.
I have reported on Fleury's case on the principle you
recommend. I fear his half-pay will not be granted.
31
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 242
THE LIFE OF
Adieu, my dear friend, and in the days of your happiness
drop a line to your
McHenry.
P. S. --Our exemplification of the treaty has passed, and
will be transmitted to the state officially.
The other was from Jay, at Passy:--
"DEAR SIR,
"You was always of the number of those I esteemed,
and your correspondence would be both interesting and
agreeable. I had heard of your marriage, and it gave me
pleasure, as well because it added to your happiness, as
because it tended to fix your residence in a state of which
I long wished you to be and remain a citizen.
"The character and talents of delegates to congress
daily become more and more important, and I regret your
declining that appointment at this interesting period. Re-
spect, however, is due to the considerations which influ-
ence you; but as they do not oppose your accepting a
place in the legislature, I hope the state will still con-
tinue to derive advantage from your services: much re-
mains to be done, and labourers do not abound.
"I am happy to hear that the terms of peace and the
conduct of your negotiators give general satisfaction.
But there are some of our countrymen, it seems, who are
not content, and that too with an article which I thought
to be very unexceptionable, viz: the one ascertaining our
boundaries. Perhaps those gentlemen are latitudinarians.
"The American newspapers for some months past con-
tain advices which do us harm; violences and associations
against the tories pay an ill compliment to government,
and impeach our good faith in the opinion of some, and
our magnanimity in the opinion of many. Our reputa-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON.
243
tion, also, suffers from the apparent reluctance to taxes,
and the ease with which we incur debts without providing
for their payment. The complaints of the army--the
jealousies respecting congress--the circumstances which
induced their leaving Philadelphia--and the too little ap-
pearance of national spirit pervading, uniting, and invigo-
rating the confederacy, are considered as omens which
portend the diminution of our respectability, power, and
felicity. I hope that as the wheel turns round, other and
better indications will soon appear. I am persuaded that
America possesses too much wisdom and virtue to permit
her brilliant prospects to fade away for want of either.
"The tories are almost as much pitied in these coun-
tries as they are execrated in ours; an undue degree of
severity towards them would, therefore, be impolitic, as it
would be unjustifiable. They who incline to involve that
whole class of men in indiscriminate punishment and ruin,
certainly carry the matter too far. It would be an in-
stance of unnecessary rigour and unmanly revenge, with-
out a parallel, except in the annals of religious rage in
times of bigotry and blindness. What does it signify
where nine-tenths of these people are buried? Victory
and peace should in my opinion be followed by clemency,
moderation, and benevolence, and we should be careful
not to sully the glory of the revolution by licentiousness
and cruelty. These are my sentiments, and however un-
popular they may be, I have not the least desire to conceal
or disguise them. Believe me to be, with great regard
and esteem. "
Notwithstanding urgent solicitations, Hamilton adhered
to his purpose of retiring wholly from public life, and was
soon immersed in the labours of his profession; in which,
without the advantages of much previous study, by the
energies of a mind peculiarly adapted to the analysis of first
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 244
THE LIFE OF
principles, he rose to an unequalled, unapproached dis-
tinction.
His letter to McHenry was written to obtain an exem-
plification of the treaty. The state of New-York was
ruled at this time by cruel counsels. Taking advantage
of the doubt as to the period of its execution, it passed
laws in direct violation of this treaty, and, in despite of the
most earnest intercessions, refused to stay the prosecutions
commenced against proscribed persons. Shocked at these
proceedings, Hamilton took up the cause of these perse-
cuted individuals with all the zeal of his boundless benevo-
lence.
The definitive treaty having arrived, he addressed a
memorial to congress asking a record of it; in which, to
prompt its immediate ratification, he stated that there ap-
peared to be no probability that the legislature will inter-
pose its authority to stay the prosecutions until it is an-
nounced; a measure that would "conduce to the security
of a great number of individuals who derive their hopes
of safety from the national faith. "
Hamilton now commenced his professional career; and
it is one of the most interesting incidents of that career,
that the first exertion of his talents as an advocate, was in
the cause of clemency and good faith. It was in the in-
most privacy of his quiet hours, reflecting on such exer-
tions, that he exclaimed, "The Almighty has given me a
good head, and thank God, he has also given me a good
heart. "
This was a suit in the mayor's court of the city of New-
York, to recover the rents of property held by the defend-
ant under an order of Sir Henry Clinton, and was found-
ed on a recent enactment called "The Trespass Act. "
This act authorized an action of trespass in favour of per-
sons who had left their abodes irt consequence of the
invasion of the enemy, against those who had been in pos-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON.
245
session of them during the war, and expressly precluded a
justification of this occupancy by virtue of a military or-
der. It was contended that the case was not within the
statute; that the laws of nations controlled it and barred
the suit, and that the treaty included an amnesty, which
extinguished the statute right.
No precedent, it is believed, exists for such an act of
legislation; an act providing that after a war solemnly
terminated by a treaty duly executed, suits could be com-
menced by the subjects of one belligerent against those
of another for injuries committed during the war by mili-
tary order.
No case could have arisen of greater interest, higher
moment, or larger considerations. It was a question of
national faith and national character--it was a question
between the subjects of two independent nations, relating
to transactions in a war between those nations.
It involved a determination of the powers of the con-
federacy, and of its constitutional supremacy over a law
of a member of that confederacy. It was of the most
grave and weighty magnitude, for it would decide wheth-
er a state tribunal would recognise the laws of nations and
of the confederation as the rule of its decisions when in
conflict with a local statute. It might determine the con
duct of Great Britain as to the execution of the treaty, the
surrender of the posts, and the peace of the union.
It involved property of a great amount, and numerous
cases depending on the same principle. It was the deci-
sion of a controversy between a wealthy merchant--a
British subject, an adherent of the enemy--and a fugitive,
an exile, a poor American widow, impoverished by the
war. It was tried while the strife of the fierce contest
was recent, in the midst of a dilapidated and yet disorder-
ed city, when all around were beheld the ravages of the
invader, in a hall of justice desecrated and marred by
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 216
THE LIFE OF
the excesses of its late occupants, a licentious soldiery.
On one side was the attorney-general of the state, armed
with all its authority to sustain its laws, representing the
passions of an inflamed community, pleading for the
widowed exile. On the other stood Hamilton, resting on
the justice of this mighty cause.
The plaintiff's task was obvious. It was to insist upon
the statute. The statute was explicit. Both the parties
were within its provisions. It was obligatory, and no
court of that state, no court especially of limited jurisdic-
tion, could look beyond it. Look where? To the laws
of nations,--laws having no settled foundation, undergo-
ing constant change, affording no certain rule, and which
ought to have no influence on the government of this state
or upon the people. The war was unjust, admitted by
the enemy to be unjust. By an unjust war, the unjust
party acquires no rights, for no rights can be derived from
an injury. It was not a solemn war, and therefore con-
ferred no rights upon the captor. Nor was that court to
be controlled by the treaty. New-York was a sovereign,
independent state. Congress had no right to bind the
state in this matter; it was interfering with its internal
police. Can they by treaty give away the rights of its
citizens 1 A case like this had never before been heard
of. It was without a precedent, and stood upon the sta-
tute.
Hamilton felt the advantageous position of his oppo-
nent. He passed by the immediate parties to the suit, and
spoke to the question. In a brilliant exordium,* he dila-
ted on its importance in all its various aspects; declared
that the decision might affect all the relations of two great
empires, might be discussed in Europe, and might produce,
* The outline of this speech is framed from an extended brief, giving all
the points of the argument and the authorities.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON.
247
according to the issue, a good or bad impression of our
country. It would establish precedents that might give a
complexion to future decisions, would remain a record of
the spirit of our courts, and would be handed down to
posterity as indicating the character of our jurisprudence.
It was a question of a most comprehensive nature; its
merits include all the principles which govern the inter-
course between nations. Heretofore our courts have
seemed to consider themselves in an inferior light; their
decisions must hereafter form precedents.
Having thus appealed to the pride of the court, he pro-
ceeded :--" We are told there is no precedent. Then, in-
deed, it is a new case, and a new case must be determined
by the law of nature and the public good. Where the
law is silent, the judge speaks; and the most ancient au-
thority states that in England cases were adjudged accord-
ing to equity, before the customs of the realm were writ-
ten and made certain. This question must be decided by
the laws of nations. But what, it is asked, are the laws of
nations? Where are they to be found? --They are the
deductions of reason, to be collected from the principles
laid down by writers on the subject and established by
the authorized practice of nations, and are a part of the
law of the land. The laws of nations and the laws of
war are part of the common law. "
He then stated the two great divisions of the laws of
nations. The natural, necessary, or internal, universally
binding on the conscience of nations; but in its external
obligations, controlled by the positive or voluntary law
for the good of mankind, which is equally obligatory, and
is enjoined by the natural law.
By the necessary law, the party making an unjust war
acquires no rights, and is bound to make reparation for all
damages. By the voluntary law--which may be defined,
that system of rules which grow out of the independence
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 218
THE LIFE OF
of distinct political associations, qualifying their natural
rights as individuals--both parties have equal rights, hav-
ing no common judge; and the effects of a war on both
sides, are the same.
These effects are principally impunity, the acquisition
of property; a rule established to promote the general
peace of mankind, by removing discussions about the jus-
tice of the war, and the proportion of the damages to the
injury and the security of purchasers, especially neutrals.
But it is objected, this was not a solemn war. The ap-
proved practice of nations is against this objection. But
it was a solemn war. Formalities are arbitrary--an act
of parliament authorized hostilities. The declaration of
independence speaks of an open war subsisting. Congress
formally authorized our citizens to cruise. It has been
said that the state of New-York has no common law of
nations. The answer is, that law results from the relations
of universal society--that our constitution admits the
common law, of which the law of nations is a part--and
that the United States direct our foreign intercourse, and
have expressly become parties to the law of nations. What
are the effects of a war? The general proposition is, that
movable goods belong to the captor forever, as soon as
the battle is over; the fruits of immovables, while they are
in possession. Other rules have been laid down with re-
spect to movables; but the true rule is, the battle being
over. The ancient precedents of pleading are not that
the prize remained a night with the enemy, but that it was
gained by battle of the enemy; and pleading is the touch-
stone of the law. The common law carries the rights of
war so far as to give property in a prisoner, and an action
of trespass for taking him away. Hence, we see the com-
mon law not only adopts the law of nations in its full ex-
tent as a general doctrine, but particular adjudications
recognise the operation of capture.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON. 249
r
The second branch of the discussion related to the effect
of the treaty of peace, and tended to show that this action
could not be maintained without a violation of the treaty;
every treaty of peace including an amnesty, which is of
its very essence, between private persons as well as the
contending publics. To the objection, that congress had
no right to bind the state, that it was meddling with its in-
ternal police, he replied, that on that construction," the
confederation was the shadow of a shade;" but that con-
gress had an unquestionable right; that " the sovereignty
and independence of the people began by a federal act;
that our external sovereignty is only known in the union--
that foreign nations only recognise it in the union; that the
declaration of independence was the fundamental consti-
tution of every state, all of which was acceded to by the
convention of New-York, which does not pretend to au-
thenticate the act, but only to give their approbation to it:"
that hence it followed," that congress had complete sover-
eignty; that the union was known and legalized in the
constitution of New-York previous to the confederation,
and that the first act of the state government adopted it as
a fundamental law; from which reflections," he says, " we
are taught to respect the sovereignty of the union, and to
consider its constitutional powers as not controllable by
any state. "
The confederation is an abridgment of those powers;
but, mutilating as it is, it leaves congress the full and ex-
clusive powers of war, peace, and treaty. The power of
making peace, is the power of determining its conditions.
It is a rule of reason and law, that to whomsoever any
thing is granted, that also is granted without which it can-
not exist. If congress have not a power to adjust an
equivalent for damages sustained, and remit the rest, they
have no power to make peace. It is true that this power
32
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 250
THE LIFE OF
does not permit the making all possible conditions,--such
as dismembering the empire, or surrendering the liberties
of the people; but it includes the power of making all rea-
sonable and usual conditions--such is a remission of dam-
ages,--for without it the state of war continues.
But it may be asked, tiow can congress, by treaty, give
away the rights of citizens of New-York? To this I an-
swer--First, that the citizens of New-York gave them
power to do it for their own safety--Secondly, that the
power results from this principle of all governments: that
the property of all the individuals of a state is the property
of the state itself, in regard to other nations. Hence, an
injury from the government gives a right to take away, in
war, the property of its innocent subjects. Hence, also,
the claim of damages for injuries done is in the public, who
may agree for an equivalent, or release the claim without
it; and, our external sovereignty existing in the union,
the property of all the citizens, in regard to foreign states,
belongs to the United States, as a consequence of what is
called the eminent domain. Hence, to make the defend-
ant answerable, would be a breach of the treaty of peace.
It would be a breach, also, of the confederation. Con-
gress have the exclusive right of war and peace. Congress
have made a treaty of peace, pursuant to their power; a
breach of the treaty is a violation of their constitutional
authority, and a breach of the confederation. The power
of congress in making treaties, is of a legislative kind:
their proclamation enjoining the observance of it is a law,
and a law paramount to that of any particular state. But
it is said," the sovereign authority may, for reasons of state,
violate its treaties, and the laws in violation of them bind
its own subjects. This allegation goes on bold ground,
that the legislature intended to violate the treaty. But I
aver that in our constitution it is not true that the sover-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? TIAMILTON.
251
eignty of any one state has legally this power. Each state
has delegated all power of this kind to congress. They
are equally to judge of the necessity of breaking, as of the
propriety of making, treaties. "
"The legislature of any one state has nothing to do with
what are called ' reasons of state/ We might as well say
a particular county has a right to alter the laws of the state,
as a particular state the laws of the confederation. It has
been said, and it may be said again, that the legislature
may alter the laws of nations. But this is not true in the-
ory, nor is it constitutional in our government; for con-
gress have the exclusive direction of our foreign affairs, and
of all matters relating to the law of nations. No single
state has any legal jurisdiction to alter them.
"It may again be said, that the accession to the confed-
eration was an act of our legislature. Why may not an-
other act alter or dissolve it? I answer, it is not true; for
the union is known in our constitution as pre-existing.
The act of confederation is a modification and abridgment
of federal authority by the original compact.
"But if this were not the case, the reasoning would not
apply. For this government, in acceding to the confeder-
ation, is to be considered, not as a sovereign enacting a law,
but as a party to a contract; as a member of a more ex-
tensive community agreeing to a constitution of govern-
ment. It is absurd to say, one of the parties to a contract
may, at pleasure, alter it without the consent of the others.
It will not be denied that a part of an empire may, in cer-
tain cases, dismember itself from the rest. But this sup-
poses a dissolution of the original compact. While the
confederation exists, a law of a particular state derogating
from its constitutional authority is no law. But how, you
ask, are the judges to decide? they are servants of the
state. I answer, the confederation vesting no judicial
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 252
THE LIFE OF
powers in congress, excepting in prize causes, in all other
matters the judges of each state must of necessity be judges
of the United States, and they must take notice of the law
of congress as a part of the law of the land. For it must
be conceded, that the legislature of one state cannot repeal
a law of the United States.
"What is to be done in such a case? It is a rule of law,
that when there are two laws, one not repealing the other,
expressly or virtually, the judges must construe them so as
to make them stand together. That golden rule of the
Roman orator may be applied: 'Primum igitur leges
oportet contendere considerando utra lex ad majores, hoc
est ad utiliores, ad honestiores ac magis necessarias res perti-
nent. Ex quo conficiscitur utsi leges duce aut si plures aut
quotcunque erunt conservari non possint quia discrcpent
inter se, ea maxime conservanda putetur qua? ad maxi-
mas res pertinere videntur'--'Where two or more laws
clash, that which relates to the most important concerns
ought to prevail. '
"Many of these arguments are on the supposition, that
the trespass act cannot stand with the laws of nations and
the treaty. It may, however, legally receive such a con-
struction as will stand with all; and to give it this con-
struction is precisely the duty of the court. We have seen
that to make the defendant liable, would be to violate the
laws of nations, and forfeit our character as a civilized
people; to violate a solemn treaty of peace, and revive the
state of hostility; to infringe the confederation of the United
States, and to endanger the peace of the whole. Can we
suppose all this to have been intended by the legislature?
The answer is,'the law cannot suppose it: if it were in-
tended, the act is void. '"
He then proceeded to state rules for the construction of
statutes, which rendered this extremity unnecessary, quo-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON.
253
ting the observation of Cato, "Leges enim ipsac cupiunt
ut jure regantur. "
The argument extended to an examination of the juris-
diction of the court, and to a minute investigation of the
distinctions to be taken between citizens and British sub-
jects, claiming the protection of the law of nations. It
closed with a strong exposure of the criminality of the
procedure, and with a vehement exhortation to preserve
the confederation and the national faith; quoting the
beautiful apothegm of Seneca, " Fides sanctificissimum hu-
mani pectoris bonum est. "
Amidst all the refinements which have been resorted to
in order to impair the powers of the constitution, and to
construe it as a compact of states, revocable at the will of
either of the contracting parties, it is deeply interesting
to advert to this early exposition of the true principles of
the American union. An union formed indeed by com-
pact, but by a compact between the people of these
colonies with every individual colonist before the ex-
istence of states; recognised by the people of each
state, in their state constitutions; confirmed by them
as states, in the articles of confederation; and sub-
sequently "perfected" in a constitution ordained and
established by the people "for the United States of
America. "
The result of this argument was a triumph of right over
usurpation. The decision indicates the difficulties with
which the defendant contended ; but the force of the
treaty to overrule the inhibition against pleading a milita-
ry order, was admitted. The court also declared--" Our
union, as has been properly observed, is known, and le-
galized in our constitution, and adopted as a fundamental
law in the first act of our legislature. The federal com-
pact hath vested congress with full and exclusive powers
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 254 THE LIFE OF
to make peace and war. This treaty they have made
and ratified, and rendered its obligation perpetual; and
we are clearly of opinion, that no state in this union can
alter or abridge, in a single point, the federal articles or
the treaty. "
This decision is the more meritorious, because made by
judges holding by a temporary tenure, soon after the ses-
sion of a legislature which had shown a fixed purpose to
persevere in their odious and impolitic violence.
A few days after this judgment was rendered, a large
public meeting was convened,* and an address to the peo-
ple of the state was passed. This address,f after remark-
ing on "the immense ability and learning" of the argu-
ment, exhorted the people, in their choice of senators, to
elect men who would spurn any proposition that had a
tendency to curtail the privileges of the people, and who
would protect them from judicial tyranny. "Having con-
fined themselves," it stated, "to constitutional measures,
and disapproving all others, they were free in sounding
the alarm. If their independence was worth contending
for against a powerful and enraged monarch, and at the
expense of the best blood of America, surely its preserva-
tion was worth contending for against those among our-
selves who might impiously hope to build their greatness
upon the ruins of that fabric which was so dearly estab-
lished. "
The legislature assembled soon after this meeting.
Without waiting the result of an appeal, which the consti-
tution secured, this decision, made in due form of law, and
with unimpeached fairness, was brought before the assem-
bly. Resolutions were passed, declaring it to be subversive
? Sept. 13th, 1784.
t It is related to have been from the pen of Melancton Smith.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-20 03:42 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uva. x000275492 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? HAMILTON.
255
of all law and good order, and the council of appointment
were recommended at their next session, "to appoint such
persons mayor and recorder of New-York, as will gov-
ern themselves by the known law of the land. "
The ability displayed by Hamilton on these occasions,
his liberal views and distinguished probity, gathered around
him the enthusiastic confidence and affection of the better
part of his fellow-citizens; and at a time when the judicial
character of the state was to be formed, and, from the dis-
turbed situation of the community, professional trusts were
of the most important and extensive influence, he was fore-
most in endeavouring to secure to the laws an honest and
enlightened administration.
This was not an easy task.