Papers of John Adams, volume 8
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.
That Mr. John Adams threatned Mr. Izard with the Displeasure of Congress in his opposing the 11th. and 12th. Articles of the Treaty of Commerce; and, that the said Mr. John Adams entertained Expectations that Congress would be inattentive to the Interests of nine States of America to gratify the Eaters and Distillers of Melasses.
Evidence. Mr. Izards Letter to the President 12th. Sepr. 1778.
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 Melasses business would certainly have proved the source of continual disputes, if it had not been altered;1 but the mischief which might have been expected from that is beyond doubt comparison less than what is pointed out in my letter to Mr. Lee of 18th. May.2 My apprehensions on this subject were communicated to the Commissioners at this Court; but I am sorry to say that they made no impression upon them. Mr. Lee alone seemed to think it possible I might be 150right; the other two Gentlemen were perfectly satisfied. Dr. Franklin's usual consciousness of infallibility was apparent; and Mr. Adams insinuated that the business of the Treaties was put intirely into the hands of the Commissioners at this Court, and nobody else had any right to give their opinions about them; that he understood I had objected to the 11th. and 12th. Articles in the Treaty of Commerce, respecting Melasses, but he believed I should find myself greatly mistaken in that matter; that he did not doubt but these Articles would be extremely popular in Congress and that they would be very angry when they were informed that I had objected to them. I answered that I was sensible the Conclusion of the Treaties was committed solely to the Gentlemen he mentioned; but that the principles in which I had been educated militated against the other part of his Opinion; that I had thought it my duty to oppose the proceedings of the King and Parliament of Great Britain when they were injurious to my Country; that the same motives had occasioned my opposition to the articles in question; that I had submitted my objections to the Treaty to the President and hoped that he would make them known to Congress; that if they thought I had done wrong, I should of Course be informed of it by him; that I should in that case look upon myself to be no longer fit to be employed, when my opinion differed so totally from that of my Employers, and should request the favor of the President to procure the Leave of Congress for me to return to my own Country. I have had the Satisfaction however, of finding that Mr. Adams as well as his Countrymen Doctr. Franklin and Mr. Deane have been mistaken in their Expectation that Congress would be inattentive to the Interests of nine States of America, to gratify the Eaters and Distillers of Melasses.
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 151this 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 content of all or some notes that appeared on pages 151 and 152 in the printed volume has been moved to the ends of the preceding documents: James Lovell to John Adams, 14 Sept. 1779 and 13 June 1779.
The “Melasses business” stemmed from the controversy surrounding Arts. 11 and 12 in the Franco-American Treaty of Amity and Commerce as originally negotiated, but which were later deleted. For Ralph Izard's, as well as Arthur Lee's, earlier objections to the two articles and a detailed examination of the reasons for their deletion, see the Committee for Foreign Affairs to the Commissioners, 14 May 1778, and note 4; and the Commissioners' reply of 29 July, and note 1 (vol. 6:116–120, 332).
Arthur Lee, who had been appointed Commissioner to the Court at Madrid, never received Izard's letter, which was largely devoted to his concern that provisions of the Franco-American Treaty of Alliance might prevent the United States from acquiring the Floridas (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev.
, 2:586–588).