Giles, while exonerating Hamilton of the charge of dishonesty, did not desist from pressing his motion for further investigation of the Treasury Department.  But he admitted that imputations upon the Secretary’s integrity had been quite removed, and he now urged that “the primary object of the resolution is to ascertain the boundaries of discretion and authority between the Legislature and the Treasury Department.”  In thus shifting his ground he presented a new issue in which the House—­and indeed Giles’s own party associates—­took little interest.  The fact was that the attack on Hamilton had failed, that the purpose of showing him to be unworthy of Washington’s confidence had been abandoned as impracticable, and that all that remained was a proposal that the House should again engage in a laborious investigation of the desirability of attempting a new delimitation of the functions of the Treasury Department and of Congress.  But this, of course, did not concern Hamilton.  He had acted under existing laws and with responsibilities which were defined by them.  If Congress saw fit to make new laws, the consequences would fall upon his successor in office, not upon him since he was about to retire.  If Congress made fetters for the Secretary, it might even be that some member of Giles’s own party would have to wear them.  Thus, however Giles’s latest proposal might be viewed, it was not attractive.  Moreover, it was presented at a time when the House had much more urgent matters to consider.  The country was wild with excitement over the retaliating orders and decrees of Great Britain and France, which subjected American interests to injury from both sides.  Giles and Page appear to have been the only speakers on the resolution when it was taken up for consideration on February 24, 1794, and both disclaimed any intention of reflecting upon Hamilton.  The resolution received decent interment by reference to a committee, with no one objecting.  The practical conclusion of the matter was that Hamilton had beaten his enemies once more and beaten them thoroughly.

Before resigning his office, Hamilton added still another great achievement to his record of illustrious service in establishing public authority.  The violent agitation against the excise act promoted by the Jeffersonians naturally tended to forcible resistance.  One of the counts of Jefferson’s indictment of Hamilton’s policy which had been presented to Washington was that the excise law was “of odious character ... committing the authority of the Government in parts where resistance is most probable and coercion least practicable.”  The parts thus referred to were the mountains of western Pennsylvania.  The popular discontent which arose there from the imposition of taxes upon their principal staple—­distilled spirits—­naturally coalesced with the agitation carried on against Washington’s neutrality policy.  At a meeting of delegates from the election districts of Allegheny county held at Pittsburgh, resolutions