Papers of John Adams, volume 12
1. If the Houses of Fizeaux Grand & Co. John Hodshon & Son Mess. Crommelin, Mess. Van Staphorst, Mess. De la Lande & Fynje and Mr. John de Neufville & Son, will all join together in an American Loan, Mr. Adams will open it without demanding any Stipulations for any certain Sum.
2d. If the first Proposition is not agreed to, Mr. Adams will open a Loan with as many of these Houses as will agree together, and enter into a Stipulation with him to furnish the sum of Five Millions by the Month of August.
3d. If no Number of Houses will join, Mr. Adams will open the Loan with any One that will first undertake and contract to furnish that Sum.
4d. Mr. Adams proposes that all those Gentlemen should meet and consult upon the Matter and propose their Thoughts.1
With this letter JA sought to bring banking firms allied to the Patriot party into the effort to raise an American loan. His intention was to increase the loan’s chances for success by appeasing those critical of his choice of John Hodshon & Zoon for the task, most notably Nicolaas and Jacob van Staphorst, for which see John Thaxter’s letter of 22 April, and note 2, above. This letter, however, did not achieve JA’s purpose. In their letter of 24 Nov. 1785 to Jay the van Staphorsts offered a critical assessment of JA’s financial dealings in the Netherlands: “We received a Note from him, a Copy whereof 472We take the Liberty to inclose you
Although John Hodshon was displaced from the American loan his relationship with JA continued. Hodshon assisted JA in the move from his residence in Amsterdam to the Hôtel des Etats Unis at The Hague (
Adams Family Correspondence
, 4:321). And on 13 June (LbC, Adams Papers) JA wrote that “Justice and Gratitude will forever oblige me to Say, that your Conduct through the whole affair
I ought to make an apology, for delaying So long to answer your Favour of the Sixteenth accompanied with Some printed Copies, of the Address of Thanks from the Body of Merchants and Manufacturers of the City of Leyden, to the great Council.
The great Qualities, which this Nation has always displayed upon occasions proper to call them Forth, appear with too much Splendour upon this occasion to be mistaken.
The next extant letter from JA to Luzac is 18 Feb. 1783 (LbC, Adams Papers).
I have the honour to return you, with many thanks the collection of the constitutions of America, which you was So obliging as lend me, the translation of the pieces I wanted to compleat the whole, is finishd, and the printer Mr. F wanner of this city, is making all possible diligence with the Impression, So that I hope it will be publish’d in a month or two.1
The readiness and politeness with which you acquiesed to my 473former request encourages me to ask Some more favours from you. It appears to me that the Treaty of commerce now on the carpet between the States of America (and which I presume will be Soon concluded) and this Republic, would form a very proper appendix to the present publication, if it Strikes you in the Same light, and you Should think it Sufficiently advanced to insert it, I would request a copy of it as Soon as possible. But This I must leave intirely to your discretion—but another request I have to make, in the printers name as well as my own, as it depends intirely upon your Self, I hope you will not refuse: as the first part of the work was dedicated (I think with great propriety) to the pensionary Van Berkel and with his permission, it Will afford the printer and me great Satisfaction, if he may be allowd to dedicate this part to you.2
I observe by the 11 Article of the Treaty of commerce with France that the plenipitentiaries have taken care that the Americans Should not become liable to the Droit daubaine and Droit le Detraction. This induces me to take the liberty of informing you that a Similar unjust Law prevails in the cities of Holland, by which they have a right to demand (and this not less than 10 perCt) upon all heritages, as well abintestato as extestamento which, fall within and are carried out of their Jurisdictions, an act of Injustice founded upon a remnant of that enormous power possess’d by the old Courts of Holland, and however adapted it may have been to those feudal times, I am persuaded it is at present impolitic; Indeed most of the cities are So Sensible of this, that they have mutually desisted from this right upon each other, but Foreigners are Still liable to it, It is calld het regt van Exu or Exu geld.3
Congratulating you Sir on your admission as Envoy plenipitentiary by the States, assuring you of my constant esteem en Sincere offers of my Service I remain Sir Your Most obed: Servt.
Van Bracht returned The Constitutions of the Several Independent States of America; . . . , Phila., 1781, that JA lent him in February (to van Bracht, 1 Feb., above). Translated into Dutch, it formed the second volume of Verzameling van de Constitutien . . . van Amerika, . . . , 2 vols., Dordrecht, 1781–1782, which appeared in August (from van Bracht, 12 Aug., Adams Papers). Two sets of the edition are in JA’s library at MB (
Catalogue of JA’s Library
).
JA replied on 3 May (LbC, Adams Papers), indicating that he thought it inappropriate to publish the Dutch-American treaty prior to its ratification, but consenting to the proposed dedication so long as “nothing be said offensive to any one.”
The droit d’aubain was the right of the French king to seize the property of deceased foreigners. The droit de detraction was a tax paid on property moved out of France. Americans were exempted from both by Art. 11 of 474the Franco-American Treaty of Amity and Commerce (Miller, ed., Treaties
, 2:10–11). An exemption, similar to that in the Franco-American treaty and presumably intended to cope with such laws as mentioned by van Bracht, was included as Art. 6 of Congress’ plan of Treaties
, 2:65–66).