Papers of John Adams, volume 8
Your favor of Aug. 4 came yesterday to hand with the Pamphlets.1 If the Chevalier does not take his Bias at Bethlehem or Easton where he is to be documented 2 or 3 days,2 I shall continue in the hopes which your good Judgement has inspired.
We have indeed had a stormy Time; and some Villains, I guess wanted to get hold of the Helm and the main Stays at a critical Moment.
We are going to tell Sfreely in Boats by that River on whose Banks they lay.3
The dull letter4 you mention has been received, and I believe wished never to have been written, by the poor Drudges in the Secretary's Office who are called upon for Copies by every lazy Member, and I assure you that is more than the sanctified Number 13.5
It would have been better for W H D if he had been of the Class; but he did, as does another whose broken Constitution is at this minute wishing pen and ink banished from his Sight for a Month.6
I have sent the Journals to your Family and shall continue the Numbers as they come out. By way of small politics; I send the Copy of a rough Copy in part of Something I sent you when we were stumbling in the dark about Ultimata.7
JCC
, 13:363–368). The passage is written on the verso of a piece of paper cut from the address page of a letter by George Washington, probably to the president of the congress, and bears the words “His Ex” and “Go. Was,” the first portion of Washington's signature endorsing the letter. The third enclosure, designated “No. 3,” labeled “Copy,” and docketed “Izard,” comprises less than two pages of Izard's full letter of this date, which is approximately seven and one-half pages long (PCC, No. 89, I, f. 90–97; Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev.
, 2:710–714).
No letter of 4 Aug. from JA to Lovell has been found.
Bethlehem and Easton, Penna., were on a common route to Philadelphia from New England, and Lovell may have feared that Gérard would meet La Luzerne there and, in the process of documenting or instructing him, would communicate his bias for Deane. In fact, Gérard and La Luzerne met at Bristol, Penna.
The instructions to the American Peace Commissioner adopted on 14 Aug. provided as one of the ultimata that the western boundary of the United States would be the Mississippi River, thus taking in the vast claims by Virginia and other states. Such an ultimatum had also appeared in the draft committee report of 23 Feb. on the objects to be pursued in any peace negotiations. There an additional ultimatum had provided “that free commerce be allowed to the subjects of the United States with some port or ports below the southern boundary of the said states.” The draft document also provided that if Britain ceded Florida to the United States it could be receded to Spain “for an adequate compensation” (
JCC
, 14:956–960; 13:239–244).
The instructions of 14 Aug. mentioned neither a port on the Mississippi nor the ultimate disposition of Florida. Instead, those questions were dealt with in instructions to the American minister charged with negotiating a treaty with Spain, which were being considered when Lovell wrote. Adopted on 29 Sept., the instructions provided that Spain, should it accede to the Franco-American alliance, would not be precluded from obtaining Florida and, indeed, that if Florida were conquered, the United States would guarantee Spain's possession, “provided always, that the United States shall enjoy the free navigation of the River Mississippi into and from the sea.” In addition, the minister was directed to “endeavour to obtain some convenient port or ports” on the Mississippi below the southern border: the 31st parallel (same, 15:1118–1120). Lovell, however, still thought that acquiring port rights should be an ultimatum in a Spanish treaty. Without a port or ports to which the produce of the western lands could be taken for shipment and through which they could be supplied, the acquisition of those lands in a peace treaty was of doubtful value.
The instructions of 29 Sept., intended to allay Spanish fears regarding American intentions toward Spanish possessions in North America, came to nothing. The United States, in Art. 8 of the peace treaty of 1783, gained the same right that Britain had acquired in Art. 7 of the definitive Anglo-French peace treaty ending the Seven Years' War: to navigate the Mississippi from its source to the sea. But Spain's acquisition of the Floridas in 1783 gave it control of both banks of the Mississippi below the 31st parallel, and thus a strong legal position for denying free passage to the sea. Not until Pinckney's treaty of 1795 did Spain agree to permit American vessels to navigate the Mississippi through its territory and make the concession meaningful by allowing American citizens to land goods at New Orleans or some other place within its territory (Miller, ed., Treaties
, 2:155, 321–322, 337; Samuel Flagg Bemis, Pinckney's Treaty, Baltimore, 1926, p. 1–4, 42, 51–55)
JA to the president of the congress, 4 Aug. (above).
The reference is to the demand for more copies than one for each state of JA's long letter of 4 Aug. on political conditions in the various European states (above).
William Henry Drayton, delegate from S.C., had died on 4 Sept. (Samuel Holten's Diary, Burnett, ed., Letters
, 4:401). Lovell means that it would have been better for Drayton if he had not written so much (i.e. been lazy), “but he did, as does another” (i.e. Lovell). Lovell had also been ill, but recovered to live a long life.
That is, Lovell copied his letter to JA of 13 June (above), which JA did not receive until his return to Europe in 1780.
I shall not look through my Almanac to see whether I have written to you 22 or 24 Letters, I shall go upon the easier task of acknowledging all I have had from you—Decr. 6 1778 received Feb. 16 1779 answered 17th. and Sepr. 26. 1778 received Mar 4 1779 answered Apr. 28th.
3 months ago Mr. Gerard communicated to us in a private audience that Spain was mediating and that we ought to take speedy measures for Peace. London Gazettes tell the same. It has seemed astonishing that neither Doctr. Franklin Mr. Lee nor you should hint this, if you did not give it authoritatively. And we have some wise men here who are sure they could fish out all the Court Secrets. In the various attempts to pull down A Lee, to make way for some one to go from hence who knows all the present Circumstances of America and therefore could negotiate properly, your (the Commissioners)1 want of Ability to give us Information such as we wish for or fancy can be obtained, is said to spring from the Suspicions of the french Court respecting one of you: And something like an attempt to dictate a Choice here has been made. An Extract of a Letter from Count de Vergennes has been quoted “Je crains Mr. Ar. Lee et ses entours”: and it is said that therefore the Communication before mentioned came through Mr. Gerard. But this is inconsistent with what is alledged in other Cases. Mr. Deane was directed to tell Doctr. Franklin certain things, which he did not chuse to tell Doctr. Lee; or, as he wishes to have it believed, which he was forbidden to tell him. I am persuaded Doctr. Franklin would not readily blab any matter to Mr. Lee which the Court might confidentially tell him. But it may be said the Doctr. was perhaps at that period only on a par with Mr. Lee and you so that he could not officially convey the news of a Negociation from France to us without consulting Mr. Lee. It has been attempted to persuade us that Spain is disgusted with Mr. Lee. If more than Innuendoes had been adduced, we should have made a new appointment, perhaps; tho it is a very delicate matter. Mr. 149Deane says the Lees are unfit to deal with a “gallant” nation. To tell you the plain Truth of the matter, I believe the men who want to get his place in Negociation would be very gallant on certain Points. The eastern States are charged with wanting what they have no right to, and what is of “no interest to the southern States.” Plenty are these local Sentiments lately and R H Lee and Mr. Laurens are squinted at as two monsters on the other Side of the Susquehanna, who can be found to pursue points in which the Southern States have “no interest.” I expect, however, that we shall in a few days be able to join in some Ultimata for Peace to be ready at the moment when Britain shall come to her Senses. She is quite wild and foolish yet, in my opinion.
You will be able by our motly Journals and my Comments from Time to Time to understand what we are about. For instance you will know when I tell you why I voted to have your name inserted April 20th. page 10. A majority against me had resolved 1st. that the names should be added, 2dly. that Doctr. Franklin's should be inserted, but did not proceed by yeas and nays, therefore I was entrapped not having my nay to show in the first I was forced to go through uniformly; it being as true that Suspicions and Animosities had been minuted by the Committee respecting you as respecting the rest; for the Report did not say mutual Suspicions &c. It was calculated to open the Door for several new Elections.2
JCC
, 13:363–368). The passage is written on the verso of a piece of paper cut from the address page of a letter by George Washington, probably to the president of the congress, and bears the words “His Ex” and “Go. Was,” the first portion of Washington's signature endorsing the letter. The third enclosure, designated “No. 3,” labeled “Copy,” and docketed “Izard,” comprises less than two pages of Izard's full letter of this date, which is approximately seven and one-half pages long (PCC, No. 89, I, f. 90–97; Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev.
, 2:710–714).
The two words in parentheses were interlined for insertion here.
In the recipient's copy of 13 June this paragraph is much longer and provides detailed information regarding the charge against JA and Izard's letter to the president of congress. The omission of that material here probably results from the inclusion of the two extracts, which made such a detailed treatment redundant, and probably thus indicates that the extracts were not included with the original letter sent to France.