TO BENJAMIN FRANKLIN.
Paris, April 25th, 1778.
Sir,
It is with the utmost astonishment, that I find myself so often obliged to remind you of your engagement to me. You have repeatedly given me the strongest assurances, that you would justify your conduct to me in writing, but you have not kept your word. Dr Bancroft and your grandson have both told me, that this justification has long ago been begun, and you have several times been employed about it.
The cautious manner in which you concealed the departure of M. Gerard, the French Plenipotentiary, and Mr Deane, from those who have complaints against you, manifest on your part no inclination to discontinue the causes of them. The losses of the public despatches to Congress, by accident at sea, by the capture of the enemy, and by the villany or negligence of those to whose care they have beenintrusted, ought to have deterred you from concealing so safe an opportunity from those, whose duty requires them to write. It might have been very proper, that the port from which they were to sail should have been concealed, as well as the manner of their going, but it appears to me to have been your indispensable duty to inform those gentlemen, who have the honor of holding commissions from Congress, whenever you know of a safe opportunity of writing to America.
It may not be necessary to discuss this point with you, as it will probably be laid before Congress, and they will form a proper judgment, both of the fact and your motives. My business with you at present respects your conduct previous to the departure of M. Gerard and Mr Deane, and I wish that neither your attention nor mine may be drawn from it. Mr Lloyd has informed me, that you told him there would be an opportunity of writing soon to America. I must request, that you will no longer attempt to amuse me with promises and excuses, but that you will give me the explanation, which you have so often bound yourself to give that it may be laid, by that opportunity, if necessary, before the representatives of my country, or that you will let me know in writing, that you will not give it me.
I am, Sir, &c.
RALPH IZARD.
JOHN J. PRINGLE TO RALPH IZARD.
Paris, April 26th, 1778.
Sir,
In compliance with your request I waited on Dr Franklin and delivered to him your letter; he had scarcely read it when he said, “Mr Izard has written me a very angry letter; please to tell him, that he has only made use of general assertions of my having done wrong, which I cannot otherwise answer than by denying. If I have given him any causes of offence, he should let me know what they are.” To this I replied, “that you had been kind enough to form so good an opinion of me, as to admit me into a share of your confidence, therefore I could take upon me to say, that you were persuaded you had clearly stated, in the several letters he had received from you, circumstances affording sufficient grounds of offence.” He said, “he should be glad to know what those circumstances were.” I answered in the first place, “that conceiving it your duty as a member of the States, having a considerable fortune there, and intrusted with a commission from Congress, to communicate as occasion offered all the intelligence you could, you found this communication greatly obstructed by a concealment on the part of Dr Franklin of proper opportunities, when it was quite unnecessary, or when the end of secrecy might be answered, though you had been intrusted with the knowledge of them.” Upon which Dr Franklin told me, “that you had only complained of this in the present letter, and as to the particular opportunity you mentioned by Monsieur Gerard, or Mr Deane, he had not himself looked upon it as a good or proper one, and had not himself made use of it to write.”
As another ground of complaint I observed, “that while the commercial treaty was on the carpet, you considered one article as highly unreasonable and inexpedient, and therefore expressly objected to it; you had in a letter fully specified the reasons upon which your disapprobation was founded, and had sent this letter to Dr Franklin,in hopes of his removing your scruples, and setting you right if you were wrong, or letting your reasons and objections, if they were just, produce some good effect before the conclusion of the treaty, but you had never been favored with any answer on the subject, though you had repeatedly requested it.” Dr Franklin alleged, “that he would have given a full and satisfactory answer, but he had been prevented by business and various avocations, that he was still willing to give one, but could not conceive why you should be so impatient. Suppose he could not give it for a month hence, what great inconvenience would it occasion?” I observed, “that the sooner you had it, you might be the better prepared to guard against any misrepresentation.” Dr Franklin assured me, that he had not been, nor would he ever be, guilty of any misrepresentation; so far from it, that he had not even written anything concerning the matter. I told him, perhaps you might choose to lay it before Congress, and his answer might enable you to do it more fully and satisfactorily. Dr Franklin said you should have an answer, but you must be patient, for he really was very much engaged by other business, and interrupted by people continually coming in upon him, though some upon frivolous errands, as was the case with the two Frenchmen, just gone away, who came only to ask him to buy cloth.
I suggested as a third ground of complaint, that you had been directed by the Congress to propose to the Court of Tuscany a commercial treaty similar to the one concluded with this Court, which you therefore required as necessary for your regulation, in pursuance of the instructions of Congress, who directed you should have, not only the original treaty, but also the alterations which might be proposed; both were nevertheless withheld from you by Dr Franklinwithout the least regard to your applications. Dr Franklin replied, “did he go into Tuscany? Has not the treaty been sent to him?” I said, you had good reasons for staying; that the treaty was kept from you till the other day, when perhaps it was necessary for you to have had it as early as possible, even previous to your departure, to give it the maturer consideration, and because there might be explanations you would like to have made here, or observations might occur to you, which you might think it advisable to communicate to Congress, to have their further instructions as soon as you could.
I do not recollect, that Dr Franklin made any direct reply to this. He observed, that he was clear he had not given you any just cause of offence, or reasonable grounds of complaint, that he was studious to avoid contention; he acknowledged that he owed you an answer, but though he was in your debt he hoped you would be a merciful creditor; he would say, as the debtor in the Scripture, “have patience and I will pay thee all;” that you certainly ought to give him time, as you had urged so much matter as would require a pamphlet in answer. I told him, that I was sure it was far from your disposition to court quarrels, that if the reasons he gave in his answer to you were just and satisfactory, you would undoubtedly allow them their full weight; that satisfaction you were desirous of having, and were anxious to have the affair ended. He said he should endeavor to do it as soon as possible; in the mean time, he hoped to have no more such angry letters from you; his answer he promised should be a cool one, and that people who wrote such angry letters should keep them, till they sufficiently reflected on the contents, before they sent them.
The above is nearly, to the best of my recollection, the substance, if not for the most part the words, of the conversation, which passed between Dr Franklin and myself, upon delivering him your letter today.
I have the honor to be, &c.
JOHN JULIUS PRINGLE.
COMMITTEE OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO RALPH IZARD.
York, May 14th, 1778.
Sir,
Your favor of December the 18th came to hand the 2d of this month, with the despatches of our Commissioners at the Court of Versailles, from whom we had received nothing regularly for about a whole year.
The decisive part, which His Most Christian Majesty has at length taken in our cause, must greatly influence other crowned heads in Europe, not immediately allied to Britain, to desire a portion in our friendship and commerce, and must prepare the way for your welcome reception at the Court of Tuscany. We are pleased to find, that you have formed a connexion with one, who promises to be so friendly to your Commission as your correspondent, the favorite Minister of the Grand Duke, and we think you could not have done better than in following his past advice.
The enclosed resolve of Congress of the 7th inst will remove any doubts about your support, which may have arisen in your mind from an omission on our part, which did not occur to us until we received a hint of it from the gentlemen at Paris, in their letter of February the 16th.
Other papers herewith sent will convey to you a general idea of our affairs, and we hope you will be particularly industrious to expose those attempts of our enemies, which are calculated to lead Europe to think we are not thoroughly fixed in our plan of independence. You may observe, that we proceeded on the draughts only of two intended bills, which had been sent to America by the British Ministry. We should not have done this, but from a conviction of insidious intentions founded upon former attempts to hurt our character abroad. We were so well satisfied of the spirit of these States to persevere in a noble cause, that we should have waited for the bills themselves, if we had not been anxiously attentive to the good opinion of Europe and the rest of the world. We were altogether strangers to the happy state of our affairs in France, accident and knavery having suppressed the despatches of our friends, as our former letters will prove, if any attempts shall be made to attribute our late determined conduct to a knowledge of our new alliance. Congress unanimously ratified the treaties on the 4th, and the people have showed their satisfaction, wherever the knowledge of the proceeding has reached. The army also, which is daily increasing in strength, has expressed its joy, and is now prepared either for honorable peace, or a continuation of the just war.
We shall endeavor to procure an enlargement of your powers, and shall immediately forward them to you. There can be no danger of any clashing of future treaties with those now made, provided the plain principles of mutual benefit, without any exclusive privileges, are made the basis. We send you the first volume of the Journals ofCongress, another will be out in a few days, and shall be forwarded also. We recommend to you the frequent communication of your proceedings, and we wish you every felicity, being, Sir, your affectionate humble servants,
R. H. LEE,JAMES LOVELL,ROBERT MORRIS.
P. S.You are to have Plenipotentiary Commissions, with instructions not limiting the terms of the proposed treaties of amity and commerce.
TO ARTHUR LEE.
Paris, May 18th, 1778.
Dear Sir,
The fifth article of the treaty of alliance has given me a great deal of uneasiness, as it seems to have been intended to exclude the United States of America from possessing themselves of the two Floridas. The article is as follows. “If the United States should think fit to attempt the reduction of the British power remaining in thenorthern parts of America, or the Islands of Bermudas, those countries or islands, in case of success, shall be confederated with or dependant upon the said United States.” I had the honor of stating my apprehensions to you and the other Commissioners at Passy, on the 3d instant.
Dr Franklin did not think they were well founded, nor that any such construction could possibly be put upon the article. North America, he said, strictly speaking, comprised all parts of the Continent north of the Equator, and the Floridas being in the latitude of thirty degrees north, would be comprehended within the meaning of thewords “northern parts of America.” I thought it would be best to put it out of all doubt by getting that explanation of the words under the hands of the French Ministry, especially as they would at least admit of dispute, and might in future produce disagreeable consequences. Dr Franklin said, that Congress had given some instructions respecting the cession of part of Florida to Spain, and objected to making any application on the subject to the French Ministry, as it might be taken ill, and added, if my apprehensions were ever so just, it was too late for any remedy in France, but that the Commissioner for the Court of Madrid might guard against any bad consequences in the treaty, which he had to conclude with that Court.
The resolution of Congress of the 30th of December, 1776, to which Dr Franklin alluded, extends only to the town and harbor of Pensacola, and circumstances are much changed in America since that resolution was made. It declares, “that if His Catholic Majesty will join with the United States in a war against Great Britain, they will assist in reducing to the possession of Spain, the town and harbor of Pensacola.” Had Spain complied with the request, had she stood forth our friend in the day of distress, the offer made by Congress might with propriety have been claimed. She did not declare war against Great Britain, and I do not know, that she has done anything yet to entitle her to any great share of our regard. It appeared to me, that if the French Ministry understood the words, as explained by Dr Franklin, they could not take it ill, that such an explanation should be required of them, but if they intended to have them understood as I feared they did, this was the proper place to have the doubts cleared up. If the words were meant to exclude the United States ofAmerica from the acquisition of the Floridas, it must have been intended for the benefit of Spain, and therefore the less likely was it to obtain any satisfaction from that quarter.
North America, strictly speaking, according to Dr Franklin, comprises all parts of the Continent north of the Equator. By the same rule it may be said to extend to the ninetieth degree of latitude. Considered in this point of view, no parts to the southward of fortyfive degrees can with propriety be called thenorthern parts of America. But the article seems to have no relation to so extensive a signification, and expresses the intentions of the framers of it very clearly. “If the United States should think fit to attempt the reduction of,” not the northern parts of America, but “theBritish powerremaining in the northern parts of America.” This power, without taking notice of an inconsiderable settlement on the Mosquito shore, or of Hudson’s Bay, may be said to have extended from the most southern point of Florida to the most northern part of Canada, and I am of opinion, that the United States of America will not be satisfied if any attempts are made to circumscribe their possessions within narrower limits.
The 9th article of the original treaty approved of by Congress in September, 1776, and transmitted by them to the Commissioners at this Court, not only confirms me in this opinion, but throws great light upon the intentions of the French Ministry. It is as follows; “The Most Christian King shall never invade, nor under any pretence attempt to possess himself of Labrador, New Britain, Nova Scotia, Acadia, Florida, nor any of the countries, cities, or towns on the Continent of North America; nor of any of the Islands ofNewfoundland, Cape Breton, St Johns, Anticosti, nor any other island lying near to the said Continent in the seas, or in any gulf, bay, or river, it being the true intent and meaning of this treaty, that the said United States shall have the sole, exclusive, undivided, and perpetual possession of all the countries, cities, and towns on said continent, and of all islands near to it, which now are, or lately were under the jurisdiction of, or subject to the King or Crown of Great Britain, whenever they shall be united or confederated with the said United States.” These words admit of no mistake, no hidden meaning is concealed under them, nor could there be any possibility of contentions respecting the countries therein described, had they been inserted in the treaty.
With all due deference to Dr Franklin, I cannot help declaring, that I am firmly persuaded that the Court of France would not have substituted the 5th article in the place of the above, if they had not had some designs contrary to the intentions of Congress, so clearly expressed in their 9th article. His Most Christian Majesty, in the 11th article of the Treaty of Alliance, does not guarantygenerallyto the United States their possessions, and the additions or conquests that their confederation may obtain during the war, from any of the dominions now, or heretofore possessed by Great Britain in North America, but stipulates that the guaranty shall only beconformable to the 5th and 6th articles. The latter of these contains nothing but a renunciation on the part of France of the Islands of the Bermudas, and of the whole continent of North America. As France does not pretend to any claim upon the Floridas, this renunciation can in no respect affect those Provinces. Spain, who was at the peace in 1763 obliged to cede them to Great Britain, may bedesirous of resuming them, and the 5th article in the Treaty of Alliance seems to lay the foundation of such a claim. Should that event ever take place, it would prove extremely prejudicial to the interests of the United States in general, but particularly to those of the South. Spain would by that means have a direct communication with the Indians on our frontiers, and have it in her power to disturb our settlements whenever she pleased.
Lieutenant Governor Moultrie, in his letter from Augustine, of the 4th of October, 1775, to General Grant, which was intercepted and published by Congress, among other reasons why General Gage should protect Florida, gives the following; “Consider, says he, that this is the best and only immediate communication between Great Britain and our red brothers,” the Indians. What a horrid use our enemies have made of this communication, you are well acquainted with. Florida was never of any advantage to Spain when in her possession, nor is it probable it ever would be, were it so again; but it will be of the greatest importance to the States of America, on account of security, which in all negotiations has been thought a sufficient reason for a claim, though no right existed, which is not the case in the present instance. In the 11th article, France guaranties to the United States, “their possessions and the additions or conquests, that their confederation may obtain during the war from any of the dominions now, or heretofore possessed by Great Britain in North America, conformable to the 5th and 6th articles.” In the 6th article, I observe, that “The Most Christian King renounces forever the possession of the Islands of Bermudas, as well as of any part of the continent of North America.” Nothing is said about Newfoundland,St Johns, Cape Breton, and the other islands on our coasts. Were they understood to be included in the renunciation and guarantee? Congress, in their original treaty, did not choose to trust to any future constructions, but mentioned each of these islands particularly by name. Whatever power may be in possession of them will in a great measure command the fishery.
This is a matter of great consequence, but, however just my apprehensions may be on this point also, I fear it is now too late to receive any satisfactory explanation respecting it at this Court, and we must again turn eyes towards you for relief. If the Court of Madrid could be prevailed upon to guaranty the Floridas, and these islands also to the United States, you would render an essential service to your country. I have upon many occasions experienced, that whenever her welfare has stood in need of your exertions, you have been ready to afford them, and, therefore, I cannot doubt but you will also do it in the business, which I have just laid before you.
I have the honor to be, &c.
RALPH IZARD.
ARTHUR LEE TO RALPH IZARD.
Chaillot, May 23d, 1778.
Dear Sir,
I have received your favor of the 18th, and remember well the conversation you mention. The 5th article stood originally thus. “Si les Etats Unis jugent à propos de tenter la conquête de la Canada, de la Nouvelle Ecosse, de Terrenueve, de St Jean, et des Bermudes, cesconquêtes en cas de succès appartiendront aux dits Etats Unis.” Even this did not appear to me adequate to the intentions of Congress; I therefore proposed that it should be as extensive and explicit, as was marked out to us in the 9th article of the plan proposed by Congress. My colleagues did not agree with me, and I remember perfectly Dr Franklin’s answer was, that Congress had receded from those claims since, by the concessions directed to be made to Spain. I submitted mine to the opinion of my colleagues.
I have already asked the commands of Congress, relative to conceding anything to Spain agreeably to the instruction of the 30th of December, 1776, which you mention, and you may be assured that I will never subscribe the cession of one inch of what Congress has claimed in the 9th article of their plan, without their express orders. I shall make no observations respecting the degree of gratitude to which Spain may be entitled, but the leaving of articles so loose as to occasion disputes, or making cessions which may plant a thorn in the side of any of the United States, is not the manner I should choose of showing it. How the 5th article came changed so much from what it was at first I never could learn. In my own justification I must observe, that from the conduct of one of my colleagues, and the intrigues of the other, I was furnished with a kind of half information, and secretly counteracted, so as to render it very difficult for me to be of any utility whatever in this negotiation.
I have the honor to be, &c.
ARTHUR LEE.
TO BENJAMIN FRANKLIN.
Paris, June 17th, 1778.
Sir,
Mr Pringle, who was the bearer of my last letter, has given me an account of his conversation with you on the subject of it. It would have been much more satisfactory to me, if, instead of speaking to him about the contents of it, you had done me the honor of writing an answer to it. Words which pass in conversation are sometimes forgotten and sometimes misunderstood. Misrepresentations are sometimes the consequence, which though produced by mistake, to a mind affected by ill treatment, of which neither the occasion can be learned nor the progress stopped, may pass from effects proceeding from either causes. I enclose you a copy of Mr Pringle’s letter. You will be so good as to correct any mistakes that may be found in it. Some there probably are; I do not, for instance, think it likely you could have said that you did not know what I complained of, at the same time that my complaints appear so numerous, that it would require a pamphlet to answer them. It is impossible that both these assertions can be true; and though I cannot agree with you in either, I shall not dispute about them, but refer you to the several letters which I have written since the receipt of your favor of the 29th of January.
I have requested to be informed of your reasons for withholding from me all communications respecting the treaty of commerce during the negotiation, contrary to an express instruction of Congress. You have constantly, in spite of every endeavor on my part to get your reasonsin writing, wrapped yourself up with caution, and notwithstanding the repeated breach of your engagement with me, have not been ashamed to make promises of the same kind and break them again, to amuse me till Mr Deane had an opportunity of going privately away. I shall not examine your inducements for so carefully avoiding to commit yourself to paper on this subject, but only observe that this determination compels me to mention the reasons given by Dr Bancroft and your grandson, which it would have been more agreeable to me to have had under your own hand. Those gentlemen have informed me, that some proposals which Mr Lee had made to you and Mr Deane, respecting his brother and me, made you apprehensive, that it was intended to have us admitted into all consultations, and that every question should be carried by a plurality of voices; that this had determined your conduct with respect to communications to me; but that if you had been ever so well inclined to communicate anything relative to the treaty, you lay under such strong injunctions of secrecy from the French Ministry, that it was out of your power to do it.
With respect to the first of these reasons I shall observe, that if Mr Lee ever made any such proposal, it was entirely unknown to me. I have spoken to him on the subject, and he declares that he never said anything that could in the least justify such an apprehension. There does not indeed seem the least probability that such a proposal could have been made. The unfortunate dispute in which he was engaged with you and Mr Deane, and the decided majority of which you were possessed, would have made such an attempt on his part too weak for a man of common understanding. With regard to the injunctions ofsecrecy, which the French Ministry are said to have laid you under, I answer, that you had no right to lay yourself under any such injunctions. Before you can avail yourself of that excuse, you should show that you had reminded the French Ministry of there being at that time in Paris two other Commissioners of Congress, to whom your duty required you to communicate not only a copy of the treaty originally proposed by Congress, but also whatever subsequent alterations might be proposed on either side. Had this been done, and had they expressed a desire that those Commissioners also should be unacquainted with the transaction, rather than the smallest obstruction should have been thrown in the way of the negotiation, I should have been contented to have had it kept from me as long as you thought proper.
Having examined these reasons, and I hope at least shown the probability of their being only pretended ones, I shall proceed to state what appears to me to be the true cause of your conduct, and as it will be necessary to trouble you with a dull narrative, you will I hope excuse it on account of the importance of it. I received a letter in October last from Mr William Lee, one of the joint commercial agents for conducting the affairs of the Congress in this kingdom, desiring my attendance at your house at Passy, and informing me, that he had something of importance to lay before the Commissioners. I accordingly attended, and heard an account of some very extraordinary abuses and embarrassments in the commercial department, owing to the misconduct of Mr Thomas Morris, late one of the joint commercial agents, and to the claim which certain persons made to the management of the affairs of the Congress at Nantes. Mr Lee complained of great obstructions, which he had met with from thesecircumstances, that so far from receiving any assistance from the Commissioners, they seemed to have encouraged the persons who opposed him in the discharge of his duty, and that he had repeatedly written to the Commissioners for their support, without ever having been able to obtain the favor of an answer. He expressed his desire of returning to Nantes, and using his endeavors to prevent the repetition of such abuses as had been stated, and did not doubt but with the support of the Commissioners he should be able to render this material service to the public. The support which he required was a letter from the Commissioners, addressed to all such captains of ships as were in the service of the United States, informing them, that he was an agent properly authorised by Congress to manage their commercial concerns in this country, and that it would be proper for them to follow his instructions. This request, which appeared to me extremely reasonable, was to my astonishment rejected both by you and Mr Deane.
This appeared the more extraordinary to me, as you both acknowledged, that you were perfectly convinced of the truth of what Mr Lee had stated to you, and said you had laid these abuses before Congress, and complained in the strongest terms against Mr Thomas Morris, whose misconduct had occasioned some of them; that Congress had given you a tacit reproof, by taking no notice of the complaints you had made, and that Mr Robert Morris, a member of the committee for foreign affairs, had given youa rap over the knucklesfor having made them. I begged you to consider that the silence of Congress, which you had construed into a reproof, might have been occasioned by the multiplicity of business they had to transact, or they might haveattended to it, and their letter on the subject have miscarried. This you said could not have been the case, as the complaints to Congress against Mr Morris made but part of your letter; there were several other matters contained in it, which were all answered, and as the complaint against Mr Morris was the only part unnoticed, you considered it as a reproof to you for having written to Congress about it. You had attempted once to correct the abuses, which every body knew were practising at Nantes to a very scandalous degree. Mr Robert Morris had misrepresented your good intentions, and had insinuated in his letter to Mr Deane of June 29th, that your complaints against his brother were made from interested motives, and that you wished him removed to make way for your nephew. As your conduct had in one instance, relative to the abuses at Nantes, been thus misrepresented, you were determined it should in no other, by adhering to your resolution of not meddling with them.
Your reasons did not appear at all satisfactory to me, and I took the liberty of telling you so, which gave you very great offence. I was extremely sorry for it, but did not at that time, nor have I upon the most mature deliberation since been able to conceive how it could have been avoided consistent with my duty. I requested you to consider how unreasonable it was, to allow your resentment against the Committee for a supposed tacit reproof, and against Mr Robert Morris for what you calleda rap over the knuckles, to operate to the prejudice, perhaps to the destruction of the commercial concerns of your country. Your answer was direct and positive; “If these consequences should happen, Mr Robert Morris and the Committee must be answerable for them, but you were determined not to meddle withthe matter.” In this determination Mr Deane co-operated, and we parted without Mr Lee’s having been able to obtain any satisfaction on the subjects of his complaints, except a promise on your part to countermand an order you had given relative to the sale of one of the prizes at Nantes. This promise, however, I understand was not fulfilled. I most solemnly protest, that I believe this interview to have been the cause of your excluding me from all communications.
Perhaps it may be said, that you were not required by Congress to make those communications. This may be considered in the nature of those injuries against which no positive law can be produced, but which are, notwithstanding, known to be injuries by all the world. Had the directions of Congress, however, in these points, been as explicit as words could make them, I doubt not but you would have found the means of evading them, as you have in others, if it suited your purpose, and have drawn arguments for your justification from every source. I shall trouble you with my reasons for thinking so. I requested of you at Chaillot, to let me know why you had disregarded the instructions of Congress respecting the treaty; you expressed your doubts whether Congress intended to have anything communicated to me, except the treaty after it wasconcluded. I referred you to the words of the instruction itself, which I had quoted to you in my letter, and asked you if you thought it possible, that the gentlemen who had written them could have been so ignorant, as not to know the distinction between apropositionand aconclusion. Other doubts arose. If I had been at Florence, the department which was assigned me by Congress, it might have been inconvenient to have followed the strict letter of the instructions, by sending every alteration of thetreaty, that might have been proposed on either side, on account of the danger of their being intercepted.
In this I agreed with you perfectly, and told you that if I had been at Florence, you would have had an excuse which at that time was of service to you. I am sorry to be obliged to refer to words spoken in conversation; I have wished to avoid it, but you have put it out of my power. Had you written down what I have just related, which you promised me to do, it might have been of service to you in one instance. You would have recollected having already given it as your opinion, that if I had been at Florence, it would have been improper to have sent me the alterations proposed in the treaty, and would probably not have mentioned to Mr Pringle a reason in your justification totally the reverse of this. As you have, however, done it, it will be necessary to remind you that my not having gone to Florence has been entirely owing to reasons given me by the Tuscan Minister at this Court, which I have informed Congress of. These reasons were also communicated to you and the other Commissioners, and you thought they ought to be complied with.
You observed to Mr Pringle, that I had written you an angry letter. When you reflect upon your proceedings towards me, that ought not to surprise you. Having considered myself injured by you, I make a complaint to you in writing; you deny that it is well founded, and promise me an explanation of your conduct. Relying upon your word, I suffer myself to be amused from time to time by promises and excuses, till Mr Deane, who has supported you in all your measures, sails for America. Would it not have been fair and honorable to have given meyour reasons in justification of your conduct before that gentleman’s departure, that I might have had an opportunity either of being convinced by them or of refuting them, and that his verbal representations in America might not be made without having anything from me to oppose them.
I am very gravely told, that as a proof of your not having thought it a good opportunity, you had not yourself written by Mr Deane. Is there a man of common sense in the world, who will not see, that as Mr Deane is a party concerned in the contest, which has unhappily subsisted between us, and of course will be interested in your justification, there was no absolute necessity for your writing, but that the very reverse was the case with me? Having thus blown up a flame about me, you are unreasonable enough to be surprised at my being warmed by it. Does not this resemble the conduct of the tyrant Kouli Khan, who, having cut the tendons of a man’s legs with his sword, would afterwards have compelled him to dance? I must be very plain in telling you, that I envy not the feelings of that man, be his reputation ever so highly exalted, who can with coldness either offer or receive an injury.
I have been told by a gentleman, that the French Ministry had desired that Mr Arthur Lee and myself,expressly mentioned by name, might have certain matters concealed from us. I cannot take a step in this business without having some insinuation to encounter. My informant was not so explicit as I wished him to be. He did not acquaint me with the points intended to be concealed, whether they related to the treaties or to the departure of Mr Deane. I must beg the favor of you, therefore, to let me know if you were desired by the French Ministry to conceal either or both the matters from meby name, orwhether, as I believe to be the case, you had no such injunctions at all. There is reason to believe, that the insinuation is injurious both to the French Ministry and to us. I have never, by any part of my proceedings, subjected myself to be refused admittance into their presence. I have never been compelled to have recourse to any person to soothe and deprecate their resentment, excited by transactions, which they thought obliged them to make use of expressions highly reflecting on the honor of my country, at the very time when perhaps the interests and even the safety of America might have been affected by that resentment. Will you undertake to make the same declaration? If you do, it shall appear, that I do not deal in insinuations; and if the Ministry were inclined to show any marks of their dissatisfaction, the world will judge who were the persons most likely to experience them.
If after having been made acquainted with the instructions of Congress relative to the treaty, the Ministry desired to have the proposed alterations concealed from me, and there was any danger of an obstruction to your negotiation if the directions of Congress were insisted on, I shall endeavor to learn what could have induced them to such a conduct. The mischievous tendency of some parts of the treaty might have been pointed out, had they been communicated to me before it was too late, and a troublesome and ineffectual application to the Court of Spain for relief might have been rendered unnecessary.
I am, Sir, &c.
RALPH IZARD.
TO HENRY LAURENS,PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS.
Paris, June 28th, 1778.
Dear Sir,
The treaties are expected to arrive soon in France, as Congress received them by the Sensible, a French frigate, in the month of April. In some of my letters I informed you of my sentiments on one or two of the articles in the treaty of commerce, and of the ineffectual steps, which I took in consequence of them. Whether Congress has been made acquainted with these sentiments, or whether they approve of them, I know not, as I have not received a letter from you, from the Committee, nor from any member of Congress, since my arrival in France. The treaties were not communicated to me till the 30th of March, when they were half the way over to America, and of course too late for any alterations to be made until they had undergone the inspection of Congress.
From the dispositions of the principal parties concerned in the negotiation, and from the manner in which my application respecting the eleventh and twelfth articles of the treaty of commerce was received, there is very little reason to think, that any objections, however justly founded, would have made any impression. I have, however, done every thing in my power, and I shall be very happy if any good effects should be produced by my endeavors. It has been my constant wish to avoid contentions of every kind; it has been particularly my desire to avoid them with Dr Franklin from every consideration. His abilities are great, and his reputation high. Removed as he is at so considerable a distance from the observationof his constituents, if he is not guided by principles of virtue and honor, those abilities and that reputation may produce the most mischievous effects. I send you by this opportunity some papers, which I desire may be communicated to my countrymen from South Carolina, who are members of Congress, and if it is your opinion, that they or any part of them should be laid before Congress, you will be so good as to do it. If, on the contrary, you think the situation of affairs will make it improper to trouble Congress with them, you will withhold them. It is my wish, however, that you may approve of their being communicated to Congress. Whatever may be your determination, I shall think I have acted right in communicating them to you. You will find from them with what caution the treaties were concealed from me, while they were negotiating, and even after they were signed. When Dr Franklin thought Mr Deane had been gone long enough to get to America, before any observations could be written on the contents of them, they were sent to me. The article respecting molasses, in the treaty of commerce, may be productive of considerable mischief.
I can, however, account for that transaction from natural causes. Two of the gentlemen engaged in it were born in New England. That part of America is possessed of very few articles of export, and the great use which is made there of molasses makes it a very desirable object, that it should be perpetually exempted from duty. The articles in the treaty of alliance, which I have complained of, are infinitely more mischievous, and when I attempt to account for the conduct of the gentlemen, who have concluded them, and at the same time set aside the clear and unequivocal article on the same subject, transmitted tothem by Congress, I am utterly incapable of doing it without suspecting the most dishonorable practices, which I cannot think they have been guilty of.
It appears the more unaccountable, when the instructions, which were transmitted by the Congress to the Commissioners at the time the original treaty was sent, are examined. Congress judged, that some alterations might be found necessary, and explained their intentions in the following manner. “It is the wish of Congress, that the treaty should be concluded, and you are hereby instructed to use every means in your power for concluding it,according to the plan you have received. If you shall find that to be impracticable, you are hereby authorised to relax the demands of the United States, and to enlarge their offers,according to the following directions.” In these instructions, such articles as it was thought would admit of alteration are pointed out. But the ninth article is not among the number. It seems indeed essential to the safety of the United States, that the countries and islands therein expressly mentioned, should be in their possession. There is a most uncommon degree of effrontery in Dr Franklin’s declaring, that the fifth article of the treaty of alliance could not possibly admit of such a construction, as I apprehended might be put upon it. I have not the least doubt but it was intended to leave an opening for negotiating Florida into the possession of Spain, if the successes of the House of Bourbon against England should put it in the power of the former to dictate the terms at the conclusion of a general peace. It is more than probable likewise, that what I have hinted at in my letter to Mr Lee, respecting Newfoundland, and the other Islands on our coasts, and thefishery, may in future be productive of a great deal of trouble, if proper explanations are not obtained in time.[67]
If anything was necessary to make the effrontery, which I have just taken notice of, complete, it was Franklin’s observation, that if my apprehensions were ever so just, it was now too late for any remedy here. His tricks and chicanery put it out of my power to make any objections before the treaties were signed and sent to America, and then he gives that as a reason, why no remedy should be attempted against the evil, which is pointed out. In my conscience, I believe him to be an improper person to be trusted with the management of the affairs of America in this kingdom. If he were sent to the Court of Vienna he could not have an opportunity of doing any harm. No affront could be taken at this exchange, as that Court is in general looked upon to be the first in Europe, and it is improper for the same person to have a commission both for Vienna and Berlin.
The English newspapers have given us the proceedings of Congress on the 22d of April, respecting the conciliatory bills. I am very anxious to know what reception the Commissioners have met with, and the extent of their powers. It is much to be lamented, that they have not been enabled by Parliamentary authority to acknowledge the independence. The Ministry are fully convinced themselves, that nothing else will do, and yet they continue to act under the same dreadful infatuation, which has already produced so many calamities to their country, and refuse to adopt any measures, however salutary, till it is too late. I most ardently wish for peace, provided it canbe obtained upon terms, which Congress may think proper to be accepted.
Mr William Lee has been some weeks at Vienna. He writes me, that the French Ambassador advises him “to wait there with patience, till the prospect of things open a little more than they do at present.” I have informed you in several of my letters, that my reception in Tuscany depends entirely upon the proceedings of the Court of Vienna. The Emperor and the King of Prussia are each at the head of a powerful army in Silesia, and within a few miles of one another. A negotiation has been for several weeks constantly carrying on with respect to the succession of Bavaria, and it is astonishing, that nothing is yet concluded. Each of those princes has two hundred and fifty thousand regular troops, and more are continually raising. The Emperor has, besides, the Hungarian nobility and their dependants, who may upon occasion be called upon to serve. They are supposed to form a body of about three hundred thousand men, and may be looked upon as militia.
The King of Prussia, although negotiating with the Emperor, is not idle in other matters. He is using his utmost endeavors to excite the northern powers to join him against the House of Austria, and if he succeeds in bringing about an accommodation between the Russians and the Turks, the Czarina will certainly afford him very powerful assistance. Whether either the Emperor or the King of Prussia will be connected with England does not yet appear. Neither of them seems inclined to offend her at present. The troubles in Germany have certainly produced this effect on the King of Prussia, for he made the clearest declaration before the death of the Elector of Bavaria,that he would be the second power in Europe to acknowledge the independence of America.
I am, dear Sir, &c.
RALPH IZARD.