It is said that Hamilton, with Jay and others, at this very time suppressed the Doctor's Mob, which took place on April 13, 1787, on the occasion of the exposure of a part of a human body in one of the windows of the New York Hospital by young medical students who were engaged in dissection, and this riot was the culmination of great popular indignation that had been caused by body snatching. It is related by Lossing that Hamilton had already been engaged on The Federalist and had written the fifth essay, but was so badly injured by the rioters that he was laid up for a long period. Though some of the Madison papers which he contributed to The Federalist were published in the New York Packet and Daily Advertiser, the bulk of them appeared, eventually, in the Independent Journal and afterward in the other papers.
The Independent Journal was published by J. and A. McLean of Hanover Square who, in 1788, collected the essays and printed the book as a whole.
The original edition was in two volumes, sometimes bound together, but there is nothing in it to indicate the authorship of the many essays.
Despite the evident importance of the work it did not at first have a large sale, although published at the moderate price of six shillings; yet since its appearance it has gone through many editions, has been translated into many languages, and a copy of the original first edition within a year or two has brought at auction the sum of one hundred and twenty dollars.
In this connection the following letter from the printers, who, apparently, found the venture anything but profitable, may be reproduced:
From Arch. McLean to Robert Troup
New York, Oct. 11th, 1788.
Sir: The inclosed Account is my charge for printing and binding The Federalist. When Coll. Hamilton, or the Gentlemen of the Committee examine the Work, they will find the charge exceeding low, considering the bulk of it.
When I engaged to do the work, it was to consist of twenty Numbers, or at the utmost twenty-five, which I agreed to print for thirty pounds, five hundred copies. I made my calculations accordingly and issued proposals, each Subscriber to pay six shillings.
The Work increased from 25 numbers to 85, so that instead of giving the subscribers one VoUume containing 200 pages for six shillings, I was obliged to give them two voUumes containing upwards of 600 pages.
The money expended for Printing, Paper, Journeyman's Wages and Binding was upwards of two hundred and twenty Pounds; of which sum I have charged Coll. Hamilton with 144 pounds, which is not three shillings per Vol; I have several hundred copies remaining on hand, and even allowing they were all sold at the low price I am obliged to sell them at, I would not clear five pounds on the whole impression. However I must abide by the consequances, nor could I expect the Grentlemen would make up a loss, which was sustained, in a great measure, by my own voluntary aid.
The many obligations. Sir, I lay under to you and Coll. Hamilton will ever be remembered, and I hope the amount will meet with the approbation of that Honorable Gentlemen.
I am. Sir, with the utmost respect your obliged, humble servant
Arch. McLean,
Robert Troup.
There is no doubt that its influence in the affairs of other nations and our own has been far-reaching and of the greatest importance. The Baron Kaneko, one of the most learned and advanced Japanese, who has had much to do with the renaissance of his native land, told me that when the Japanese Constitution was framed, reference was frequently made to The Federalist; which was considered by them to be the greatest authority upon constitutional subjects extant. It was of the greatest use to those who recently brought about the unification of the South African Colonies, and I am in receipt of a letter from Sir Walter Hely-Hutchinson, who had always had so much to do with the reconciliation of Boor and Britain. Certainly with us to-day, especially in the United States Courts, it is of valuable assistance to many jurists. The opinions of competent critics are all in accord, and Oliver speaks of this book as "one of the most remarkable of human documents. . . . The crowning merit of these papers, which were produced under great pressure—often while the printer's boy was waiting in the office—is that they succeeded in accomplishing what they set out to accomplish. They were the greatest forces that worked on men's minds to make them consent to the adoption of the Constitution."
Despite the assertion that Hamilton was lukewarm in regard to this instrument, Oliver' very properly says: "When he signed it he became its champion, and afterward labored to perfect it and make it possible, and to teach his fellow citizens what he really meant."
Much controversial discussion has arisen as to the authorship of the different articles in this great work, and this has often been acrimonious.
Henry B. Dawson, one of the greatest and most exact students of American history, in his edition of The Federalist has presented the different tables of contents, using the data in Hamilton's own handwriting given to Egbert Benson, that given to Chancellor Kent by Hamilton, the entries in the copies of the book left by Madison, which is now in the Congressional Library, and strangely enough bears the autograph of Mrs. Hamilton as well as that of Madison, and a list by Rush. He also had access to Kent's manuscript notes and Mr. Jay's "Recollections." There seems to be no dispute about the authorship of the first sixteen articles, but as to the others, there is some difference of opinion. As to these, the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth are claimed by Madison to be entirely his own, while joint authorship was asserted on all occasions by Hamilton, and this claim was held by Ames, who knew much about the preparation of the book. All agree that the articles from twenty to thirty-seven, and from fifty-four to eighty-five inclusive, were from Hamilton's pen. Much unnecessary speculation has been indulged in as to what part Hamilton took in the preparation of Washington's Farewell Address, and as to the qualifications of the two men. Some of the many who have discussed the matter have declared that it was wholly Hamilton's work, while others, among them John Jay, who were equally positive, have insisted that no other hand than that of the first President could have composed it. Jay, in writing to Judge Richard Peters early in 1811, takes this position. Richard Peters wrote to Jay in February, 1811, stating that a copy of the Farewell Address in Hamilton's handwriting had been found among the latter's papers, and that another copy had been found in the possession of "a certain gentleman" in the same handwriting. To this Jay replied, that "this intelligence is unpleasant and unexpected," and went on to say that it may be presumed from these facts that General Hamilton was the real and the President only the reputed author. This he doubts, for the reason that Washington was "a character not blown up into transient splendour by his great and memorable deeds, but stands, and will forever stand, a glorious monument of human excellence." He then proceeds to argue further that "it was impossible for the President, because of his very greatness and the excellence of all his virtues and his familiarity with all the public affairs, to be anything else than the author of the document. But his ability to write well need not be proved by the application of maxims (which he quotes); it is established by facts. We are told to judge a tree by its fruit; let us, in like manner, judge of his pen by its performance." After this he proceeds to give the history as it was known to him, to wit: Some time before the address appeared Colonel Hamilton told Jay he had received a letter from Washington, with a draft of a farewell address which the latter had prepared, and on which was required an opinion. An appointment was made and kept, and Hamilton told Jay that he had read the address, and the "easiest and best" way was to leave the draft untouched and in its fair state, and to write the whole over with such amendments, alterations, and corrections as he thought were advisable, and that he had done so. It was read over and agreed to by both and met with " mutual approbation." There was one provision that did not meet with Jay's approval, and he hints at it in a letter to the President. Binney has reviewed the whole matter of the authorship, and Ford has published nearly all the correspondence. James A. Hamilton has produced copies of letters from Washington to Hamilton, and vice versa, which certainly prove that the major part of the final adopted address was the work of Hamilton. Oliver who, it must be admitted, is a capable, historical scholar, goes so far as to say, "In September, 1796, Washington issued his Farewell Address, one of the most famous documents in American history, and this also was from Hamilton's pen." Binney says Washington was undoubtedly the original