Papers of John Adams, volume 16
I have received the Letter your Excelly. did me the Honour of writing to me the 29th past.
The Annunciation directed by the Instruction you mention has not yet been made; some Circumstances and Considerations, not necessary to particularize at present, occasioned the Delay here; but it may now be done immediately by your Excellency, if you think proper, to the Imperial Minister at the Hague; or I will do it to Count Mercy, by presenting him a Copy of the Instruction itself.—1
I hope the Report that Mr Jay is appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs will prove true.— Such an Officer has long been wanted, and he will make a good one. It is said here that Mr Jefferson was talk’d
270
of to succeed me, of which I shall be glad on all Accounts; but I have no Letter, nor the least Hint from any one of the Congress relating to these Matters. I wrote to you a few Days since, and sent you Copy of the last Dispatch, and the only one I have received since January.— Mr Hartley who has been here more than two Months, is in a similar Situation. He has expected Instructions by every late Courier to treat with us on commercial Points; but they do not arrive. He thinks the Delay occasion’d by the Report of the Committee of Council on the Subject not having been ready to lay before Parliament. The Moment he is ready to treat, I shall acquaint your Excellency with it; for I make no doubt of its being “the Design and Expectation of Congress that we should join” in that Transaction.
Montgomery of Alicant appears to have acted very imprudently in writing to Morocco without the least Authority from Congress or any of their Ministers.— It might be well however to treat with that Prince if we were provided with the proper & necessary Presents;—in which Case this Court would assist our Negociations, agreable to their Treaty with Congress.—2
I have the honour to be, very respectfully, / Sir, / Your most obedient / & most humble Servant
RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “His Excellency John Adams Esqr”; endorsed: “Dr Franklin / 4. July. 1784. / ansd. 19. July.”
See JA’s first letter of 30 June to the Baron von Reischach, the Austrian minister to the Netherlands, and the minister’s reply of the same date, both above. For Franklin’s 30 July representation to the Austrian ambassador, the Comte Mercy d’Argenteau, see William Temple Franklin’s 1 Aug. letter, and note 1, below.
For the unauthorized efforts of Robert Montgomery, a merchant at Alicante, Spain, to open negotiations for a Moroccan-American treaty and Congress’ ultimate decision regarding the conclusion of treaties with Morocco and the other Barbary States, see John Jay’s 11 March 1785 letter to the commissioners, and notes 1, 7, and 8, below. With regard to France, Franklin refers to Art. 8 of the 6 Feb. 1778 Franco-American Treaty of Amity and Commerce wherein it was promised that “the most Christian King will employ his good Offices and Interposition” with the Barbary States “in order to provide as fully and efficaciously as possible for the Benefit, Conveniency and Safety of the said United States” (Miller, Treaties
, 2:8–9).
Having been obliged to come to Holland, the Beginning of this Year to obtain Money, to prevent Mr Morriss Bills from being protested, I have remained here untill this Time, in Expectation of
271
receiving the further Commands of Congress. From the Resolution of the 1. of May 1783 and from many private Letters, I expected that a Commission would have arrived to the late Ministers at the Peace, to treat with the maritime Powers, and this Expectation was so full that I have been Several Times upon the Point of going to Paris, to meet it.
But it is fortunate that I did not, Since no Such Commission is arrived and Mr Jay and Mr Laurens are now gone to America
The Instructions of Congress of 29. Oct. 1783, proceed upon the supposition that the definitive Treaty was not then Signed, and appear to have been given to any one or more of the Ministers, to the End that all might not be obliged to attend upon the Execution of them.2
The first Article, may be announced to the Emperor by one, as well as by more, and I Suppose it has been done:3 But I hope Congress will not rest there, but will proceed, further, and either write a Letter to the Emperor, announcing their Sovereignty and their Desire to live in Friendship with him: or send a Commission to some one or more to treat with him: or both.
In Conformity to the Second Article, I have met the Advances and encouraged the Dispositions of the other commercial Powers, as far as I had opportunity and have transmitted to Congress a Treaty prepared with the Prussian Minister here, ready for signature whenever Congress shall send a Full Power.
The other Instructions are such as I dont imagine it was ever the Intention of Congress that I Should go to Paris, to assist in the Execution of them.
When Congress had Several Ministers at Paris, it was very proper that they should join in the Execution of all Instructions. indeed it would have been proper and customary that they should have been all accredited to the King, for want of which, very many and very great Inconveniences were suffered. But it is not probable that Congress intended, the Peace being finished and their ministers Seperated to their Several other Stations, that they should all reassemble for the Execution of those Instructions.
I have the Honour to be with very great / Respect, Sir your most obedient and / most humble servant
MS (Adams Papers); internal address: “His Excellency Thomas Mifflin / President of Congress.”
The presence of this letter in the Adams Papers and the absence of a copy in the PCC may indicate that it was not sent. Compare it with JA’s 3 July letter to the president of 272 Congress, which may also not have been sent, above.
The first two articles of the commissioners’ 29 Oct. 1783 instructions, mentioned by JA in the following two paragraphs, were concerned, respectively, with relations with Austria and the negotiation of treaties with European nations (vol. 15:329, 331).
See JA’s first letter of 30 June 1784 to the Baron von Reischach, above.