Complete Works. Hamilton Alexander

why others did not think and act as he did, the righteous necessities of the case seemingly being so apparent. The energy of his nature is often shown in his letters, some of which are full of resentful impatience. In writing to Rufus King in regard to repudiation of the national debt, he says:

       Alexander Hamilton to Rufus King

      Kingston, Feb. 21, 1795.

      My dear King: The unnecessary and capricious and abominable assassination of the national honor by the rejection of the propositions respecting the unsubscribed debt in the House of Representatives haunts me every step I take, and afflicts me more than I can express. To see the character of the government and the country so sported with—exposed to so indelible a blot—puts my heart to the torture. Am I, then, more of an American than those who drew their first breath on American ground? Or what is it that thus torments me at a circumstance so calmly viewed by almost everybody else? Am I a fool—a romantic Quixote—or is there a constitutional defect in the American mind? Were it not for yourself and a few others, I could adopt the reveries of De Paux as substantial truths, and could say with him that there is something in our climate which belittles every animal, human or brute.

      I conjure you, my friend, make a vigorous stand for the honor of your country! Rouse all the energies of your mind, and measure swords in the Senate with the great slayer of public faith-the hackneyed veteran in the violation of public engagements. Prevent him if possible from triumphing a second time over the prostrate credit and injured interests of his country. Unmask his false and horrid hypotheses. Display the immense difference between an able statesman and the man of subtleties. Root out the distempered and noisome weed which is attempted to be planted in our political garden, to choke and wither in its infancy the fair plant of public credit.

      I disclose to you without reserve the state of my mind. It is discontented and gloomy in the extreme. I consider the cause of good government as having been put to an issue and the verdict rendered against it.

      Introduce, I pray you, into the Senate, when the bill comes up, the clause which has been rejected, freed from embarrassment by the bills of credit, bearing interest on the nominal value. Press its adoption in this, the most unexceptionable shape, and let the yeas and nays witness the result.

      Among the other reasons for this is my wish that the true friends of public credit may be distinguished from its enemies. The question is too great a one to undergo a thorough examination before the community. It would pain me not to be able to distinguish. Adieu. God bless you!

      P. S.—Do me the favor to revise carefully the course of the bill respecting the unsubscribed debt and let me know the particulars. I wish to be able to judge more particularly of the under-plot I suspect.

      He never hesitated to assail the corrupt wherever they were to be found, to quickly ferret out abuses and to publicly expose them. For this reason he made numerous bitter enemies, who did not hesitate on repeated occasions to try to ruin him. In a way he was at times tactless, but it cannot be denied that he rarely erred in judgment. The passing of years undoubtedly has increased the number of his admirers, and has diminished the force of such faults as he had during his lifetime. As to his influence with men, reference may be made to the words of Oliver, who says:

      "No man whose object is personal glory will sacrifice his popularity to his opinions, and this was Hamilton's constant habit. At no great crisis of his life do we ever find him engaged in considering whether a certain course of action will or will not conduce to his personal aggrandizement. He belonged to the class of men with whom the accomplishment of their objects is their most powerful motive. In the pursuit of renown he hardly rose above the average of public characters, but his desire for achievement was a passion."

      John Adams disliked him in his way no less than Jefferson or Burr, and eventually quarrelled with nearly all the Federalists who were friendly to Hamilton. Some years before the powerful Livingstons in his own State had deserted the Federal cause, being ambitious of more power than was accorded them by Hamilton and Schuyler, and resented the election of Rufus King to the Senate, so that at the end but a few adherents remained, among them the doughty Timothy Pickering, who upon every occasion assailed not only Adams but Jefferson, and even after Hamilton's death worked valiantly to defend his memory against the assaults of unscrupulous political adversaries.

      During Hamilton's official career his vigorous methods kept him constantly in hot water, but he always emerged from each particular trouble, after the discomfiture of his enemies, quite ready for a new experience. While it is not possible in the limited space here available to go into these various plots, two or three well-known examples may be referred to that throw light upon his character and evidence his preparedness, for he was not found napping, and the accounts of his office were in such good condition and so well systematized that he never had any trouble whatever in producing documents and briefs to vindicate his good name in all attacks. In 1783, after he had won the test case of Rutgers vs. Waddington which was the death of the unfair trespass act, he was most unpopular.

      After Jay's treaty with Great Britain he was violently assailed in print, and as was the custom in those days replied in a forceful series of letters signed Phocion, to those of one Ledyard who was known as Mentor. The repudiation policy which had been favored by Governor Clinton at one time, and which was obnoxious to Hamilton and conflicted with his ideas of justice, was attacked by him with a force and convincing directness which enraged Ledyard's adherents. The result was that the members of a club of amiable gentlemen, of which the latter was the head, determined that Hamilton was best dead and out of the way, and without the knowledge of their president gravely proposed that they should challenge him in turn to fight until some one was so successful as to remove him. They, however, were quickly taken to account by Ledyard, who angrily repudiated this absurd plan, and taunted his associates because their act, if carried out, would be an admission that they were unable to refute Hamilton's charges. Upon two other occasions he was charged with financial irregularities by discharged treasury clerks who found the ears of his political enemies (see p. 54); in fact, it would appear that during his entire tenure of office much of his time was given to meeting assaults upon his integrity.

      The admixture of Scotch and French blood which flowed in his veins was responsible for many of his striking traits and for many of his inconsistencies, if it be a fault, his great obstinacy in pursuing objects which were to be attained only at great risk and effort may be instanced and he sometimes persisted in disregard of the caution that ordinarily belongs to the Scot. This often implied that he did not resort to the smaller methods where conciliation would have been much better than coercion. He was not always a diplomat and did not possess the qualities of Burr or other more astute politicians; in fact, he was above chicanery.

      Upon an early occasion his dislike for Governor Clinton, which was an outgrowth of the behavior of the latter at the Poughkeepsie Convention and his imperious methods, led to the alienation of members of his own party and subsequent defeat, and undoubtedly the election of Burr and Jefferson was largely brought about by his insistence, and failure to provide for lesser politicians who surrounded him.

      It is not extraordinary that a person whose mind was so constantly engaged to the point of profound absorption—for what he did was with the exercise of all his powers—should have his periods of absent-mindedness. We are told by Trevelyan that "the New York Company of Artillery was a model of discipline; its captain a mere boy with small, delicate, and slender frame who, with cocked hat pulled down on his eyes, and apparently lost in thought, marched behind his cannon, patting it every now and then as if it were a favorite horse or pet plaything." Possibly this was the same kind of abstraction that was later shown and described in a letter written by General Schuyler to his daughter.

       Philip Schuyler to Elizabeth Hamilton

      Albany, October 6, 1789.

      My beloved Eliza: The following anecdote which I learned from Judge Benson may amuse. A gentleman travelling from New York to this place stopped at Kinder-hook and made several turns in the street passing to and fro before the store of a Mr. Rodgers. Apparently in deep contemplation, and his lips moving as rapidly as if he was in conversation with some person—he entered the store, tendered a fifty-dollar bill to be exchanged. Rodgers refused to change it,