Jacob E. Cooke

The Compromise of 1790

T THE Compromise of 1790 is generally regarded as one of the most important bargains in American history, ranking just below the better known Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of i850. It was arranged by Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson over the dinner table at Jeffersons house on or around June 20,1 surely one of the most famous dinner parties in our history. The compromise was on two controversial issues, the location of the national capital, which Virginians fervently wished to be situated on the Potomac River, and the assumption of state debts, a measure which Hamilton regarded as an indispensable feature of the fiscal program he had proposed in his Report on the Public Credit, submitted to Congress some five months previously. A compromise linking the two issues appeared possible because the Potomac site, urged by the Southerners, had been opposed successfully by Northern votes while assumption, supported by many Northerners, had been defeated some two months earlier, largely by its Southern opponents. The arrangement agreed upon was that certain provisions of the assumption which Virginians regarded as inequitable would be modified; that Madison, while not voting for it, would not oppose the amended measure; that Hamilton would round up enough votes for passage of the residence bill; and that Jefferson or Madison would then secure enactment of assumption by persuading two Virginia congressmen-

Tench Coxe, Alexander Hamilton, and the Encouragement of American Manufactures

T t ENCH Coxes contributions to the famous Report on Manufactures submitted to Congress by Alexander Hamilton on December 5, I79i, and to the conception and launching of the Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures, the new nations pioneering experiment in industrialization, have long been subjects of inconclusive historical conjecture. Certainty has been precluded largely by the unavailability of Coxes papers, which only recently have been opened to scholars. An examination of this voluminous manuscript collection and of Coxes published writings suggests that in both instances his role was instrumental. Just as he was the one individual who most decisively influenced Hamiltons Report on Manufactures, so he provided the inspiration for the SEUM and played an important part in arrangements for its organization, incorporation, location, and operations.

Historian by Happenstance: One Scholar's Odyssey

B] ORN and raised in tidewater North Carolina, I never thought of continuing my education at any place other than the state university of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. My stay there was ended after two years by the onset of World War II and induction in the armed forces. After assignment to various military schools at several airfields in the Midwest, I was sent off to fight the Japanese from the safety of posts in India and Burma. The most important (and only lasting) benefit I derived from military service was eligibility for the G. I. Bill, which in a rather convoluted way prompted my career as a historian. After the war, I re-enrolled at the University of North Carolina, where (perhaps to compensate for my previous mediocre performance there) I became something of an academic grind. Although I majored in history, largely because I could garner high grades in that subject, I also took a smattering of economics courses to improve my chance of admission to business graduate school. After graduating, I was persuaded by a classmate to accompany him to New York City, where he was contagiously confident that we would get rich quickly. He did, but I didnt. With or without money, New York in the late I940s and on into the early sixties was an enchanting city. In order to remain there I decided to get a graduate degree in history at Columbia University. Columbias history department glittered with talent, including such stars as Garrett Mattingly, Jacques Barzun, Robert Livingston Schuyler, Henry Steele Commager, Richard B. Morris, and Allan Nevins. Whether because I was starstruck or became intellectually involved, I decided after getting a masters degree to stay on at Columbia. My dissertation was directed by Nevins, who furthered my career in decisive ways. As a graduate school advisor he was neither particularly solicitous nor accessible, but in other ways he was cooperative and generous. When I told him I had not settled on a dissertation topic, he recommended a biography of Frederic Bancroft (gentleman scholar best known for his Slave Trading in the Old South), whose papers, along with a generous financial bequest, Nevins was instrumental in securing for Columbia.1 Although Nevins provided little guidance while I was .writing the dissertation, he made copious editorial changes and recommendations once it was submitted. A close and frequent study of these was the most rewarding instruction I ever received in the craft of writing.