Saturday, December the 31st, 1780, eight o'clock, A. M. Received first intelligence that twenty-seven sail were, on the morning of December the 29th, just below Willoughby's Point. Sent off General Nelson, with full powers.
1781. January the 1st. No intelligence.
January the 2d, ten o'clock, A. M. Information from N. Burwell, that their advance was at Warrasqueak Bay. Gave orders for militia, a quarter from some, and half from other counties. Assembly rose.
Wednesday, January the 3d, eight o'clock, P. M. Received a letter from E. Archer, Swan's Point, that at twelve o'clock that day they were at anchor a little below Jamestown. At five o'clock, P. M., of the same day, I had received a letter from R. Andrews for General Nelson, that they were at Jamestown the evening of the 2d.
Thursday, January the 4th, five o'clock, A. M. Mr. Eppes and family, &c., came and informed me from the Speaker, that they had passed Kennon's and Hood's the evening before; the tide having made for them at one o'clock, P. M., of the 3d, and the wind shifted to the east strong. They had not, however,passed Hood's, but anchored at Kennon's. Called whole militia from adjacent counties. I was then anxious to know whether they would pass Westover, or not, as that would show the side they would land.
Five o'clock, P. M. Learned by Captain De Ponthiere, that at two o'clock, P. M., they were drawn up at Westover. Then ordered arms, and stores, &c., (which till then had been carrying to Westham,) to be thrown across the river at Richmond; and at half-past seven o'clock, P. M., set out to the foundry and Westham, and set Captain Brush, Captain Irish, and Mr. Hylton, to see everything wagoned from the magazine and laboratory to Westham, and there thrown over; to work all night. The enemy encamped at Four-Mile Creek. I went to Tuckahoe and lodged.
January the 5th. Went early over the river with my family; sent them up to Fine Creek; went myself to Westham; gave orders for withdrawing ammunition and arms (which lay exposed on the bank to the effect of artillery from opposite shore), behind a point. Then went to Manchester; had a view of the enemy. My horse sunk under me with fatigue; borrowed one, went to Chetwood's, appointed by Baron Steuben as a rendezvous and head-quarters; but finding him not there, and understanding he would go to Colonel Henry's, I proceeded there for quarters. The enemy arrived in Richmond at one o'clock, P. M. One regiment of infantry and thirty horse proceeded, without stopping, to the foundry; burned that and the magazine and Ballendine's house, and went as far as Westham. They returned that evening to Richmond. Sent me a proposition to compound for property. Refused.
January the 6th. In the morning they burned certain houses and stores, and at twelve o'clock of that day left Richmond, and encamped at Four-Mile Creek. I went to Westham, ordered books and papers particularly from magazine. In the evening I went up to Fine Creek.
January the 7th. I returned to Westham, and then came down to Manchester, where I lodged. The enemy encamped at Westover and Berkley. It had rained excessively the precedingnight, and continued to do so till about noon. Gibson has one thousand; Steuben, eight hundred; Davis, two hundred; Nelson, two hundred and fifty.
January the 8th, at half-past seven o'clock, A. M. I returned to Richmond. The wind gets, about this time, to north-west; a good gale; in the afternoon becomes easterly. The enemy remain in their last encampment. General Nelson at Charles City C. H. Colonel Nicholas with three hundred men at the Forest.
January the 9th, eleven o'clock. The wind is south-east, but almost nothing. The enemy remain in their last encampment, except embarking their horse.
January the 10th, at one o'clock, P. M. They embark infantry, and fall down the river, the wind having shifted a little north of west, and pretty fresh. Baron Steuben gets to Bland's Mills to-night, nine miles short of Hood's.
January the 11th, eight o'clock, A. M. The wind due west, and strong.
Loss sustained by the public.
The papers and books of the Council since the revolution. The papers of the auditors, but not their books. Five brass field-pieces, four pounders, which had been sunk in the river, but were weighed by the enemy. About one hundred and fifty arms in the Capitol loft. About one hundred and fifty in a wagon on the Brook road. About five tons of powder, and some made ammunition at magazine. Some small proportion of the linens, cloths, &c., in the public store. Some quarter-masters' stores; the principal articles was one hundred and twenty sides of leather. Some of the tools in the artificers' shops. Foundry, magazine, four artificers' shops, public store, quarter-masters' store, one artificers' shop, three wagons.
The legislature was sitting when the entrance of the enemy into James river was made known. They were informed, without reserve, of the measures adopted. Every suggestion from themembers was welcomed and weighed, and their adjournment on the 2d of January furnished the most immediate and confidential means of calling for the militia of their several counties. They accordingly became the bearers of those calls, and they were witnesses themselves, that every preparation was making which the exhausted and harassed state of the country admitted.
They met again at Richmond in May, and adjourned to Charlottesville, where they made a house on the 28th. My office of Governor expired on the 2d of June, being the fifth day of the session; and no successor had been appointed, when an enterprise on the 4th by Tarleton's cavalry drove them thence, and they met again at Staunton on the 7th. Some members attended there who had not been at Richmond at the time of Arnold's enterprise. One of these, George Nicholas, a very honest and able man, then, however, young and ardent, supposing there had been some remissness in the measures of the Executive on that occasion, moved for an inquiry into them, to be made at the succeeding session. The members who had been present and privy to the transactions, courted the inquiry on behalf of the executive. Mr. Nicholas, as a candid and honorable man, sent me, through a friend, a copy of the topics of inquiry he proposed to go into; and I communicated to him, with the same frankness, the justifications I should offer, that he might be prepared to refute them if not founded in fact. The following is a copy of both:—
1st Objection.—That General Washington's information was, that an embarcation was taking place, destined for this State.
Answer.—His information was, that it was destined for the Southward, as wasgiven outat New York. Had similar informations from General Washington, and Congress, been considered as sufficient ground at all times for calling the militia into the field, there would have been a standing army of militia kept up; because there has never been a time, since the invasion expected in December, 1779, but what we have had those intimations hanging over our heads. The truth is, that General Washington always considered as his duty to convey every rumor of an embarkation; but we (for some time past, at least)never thought anything but actual invasion should induce us to the expense and harassment of calling the militia into the field: except in the case of December, 1799, when it was thought proper to do this in order to convince the French of our disposition to protect their ships. Inattention to this necessary economy, in the beginning, went far towards that ruin of our finances which followed.
2d Objection.—Where were the post-riders, established last summer?
Answer.—They were established at Continental expense, to convey speedy information to Congress of the arrival of the French fleet, then expected here. When that arrived at Rhode Island, these expenses were discontinued. They were again established on the invasion in October, and discontinued when that ceased. And again on the first intimation of the invasion of December. But it will be asked, why were they not established on General Washington's letters? Because those letters were no more than we had received upon many former occasions, and would have led to a perpetual establishment of post-riders.
3d Objection.—If a proper number of men had been put into motion on Monday, for the relief of the lower country, and ordered to march to Williamsburg, that they would at least have been in the neighborhood of Richmond on Thursday.
Answer.—The order could not be till Tuesday, because we then received our first certain information. Half the militia of the counties round about Richmond were then ordered out, and the whole of them on the 4th, and ordered not to wait to come in a body, but in detachments as they could assemble. Yet were there not on Friday more than two hundred collected, and they were principally of the town of Richmond.
4th Objection.—That we had not the signals.
Answer.—This, though a favorite plan of some gentlemen, and perhaps a practicable one, has hitherto been thought too difficult.
5th Objection.—That we had not look-outs.
Answer.—There had been no cause to order look-outs morethan has been ever existing. This is only in fact asking why we do not always keep look-outs.
6th Objection.—That we had not heavy artillery on travelling carriages.
Answer.—The gentlemen, who acted as members of the Board of War a twelvemonth can answer this question, by giving the character of the artificers whom, during that time, they could never get to mount the heavy artillery. The same reason prevented their being mounted from May, 1780, to December. We have even been unable to get those heavy cannon moved from Cumberland by the whole energy of government. A like difficulty which occurred in the removal of those at South Quay, in their day, will convince them of the possibility of this.
7th Objection.—That there was not a body of militia thrown into Portsmouth, the great bridge, Suffolk.
Answer.—In the summer of 1780, we asked the favor of General Nelson, to call together the County Lieutenants of the lower counties, and concert the general measures which should be taken for instant opposition, on any invasion, until aid could be ordered by the Executive; and the County Lieutenants were ordered to obey his call; he did so the first moment, to wit, on Saturday, December the 31st, at 8 o'clock A. M., of our receiving information of the appearance of a fleet in the bay. We asked the favor of General Nelson to go down, which he did, with full powers to call together the militia of any counties he thought proper, to call on the keepers of any public arms or stores, and to adopt for the instant such measures as exigencies required, till we could be better informed.
Query.—Why were not General Nelson, and the brave officers with him, particularly mentioned?
Answer.—What should have been said of them? The enemy did not land, nor give them an opportunity of doing what nobody doubts they would have done; that is, something worthy of being minutely recited.
Query.—Why publish Arnold's letter without General Nelson's answer?
Answer.—Ask the printer. He got neither from the Executive.
Objection.—As to the calling out a few militia, and that late.
Answer.—It is denied that they were few or late. Four thousand and seven hundred men (the number required by Baron Steuben) were called out the moment an invasion was known to have taken place, that is on Tuesday, January 2d.
Objection.—The abandonment of York and Portsmouth fortifications.
Answer.—How can they be kept without regulars, on the large scale on which they were formed? Would it be approved of to harass the militia with garrisoning them?
To place me on equal ground for meeting the inquiry, one of the representatives of my county resigned his seat, and I was unanimously elected in his place. Mr. Nicholas, however, before the day, became better satisfied as to what had been done, and did not appear to bring forward the inquiry; and in a publication, several years after, he made honorable acknowledgment of the erroneous views he had entertained on those transactions. I therefore read in my place the inquiries he had proposed to make, and stated the justifications of the Executive. And nearly every member present having been a witness to their truth, and conscious all was done which could have been done, concurred at once in the following resolution:
"The following resolution wasunanimouslyagreed to by both houses of the General Assembly of Virginia, December the 19th, 1781.
"Resolved, That the sincere thanks of the General Assembly be given to our former Governor, Thomas Jefferson, Esquire, for his impartial, upright, and attentive administration whilst in office. The Assembly wish in the strongest manner to declare the high opinion they entertain of Mr. Jefferson's ability, rectitude, and integrity as Chief Magistrate of this Commonwealth, and mean, by thus publicly avowing their opinion, to obviate and to remove all unmerited censure."
And here it is but proper to notice the parody of these transactions which General Lee has given as their history. He was in a distant State at the time, and seems to have made up a randomaccount from the rumors which were afloat where he then was. It is a tissue of errors from beginning to end.
The nonsense which has been uttered on thecoup de mainof Tarleton on Charlottesville is really so ridiculous, that it is almost ridiculous seriously to notice it. I will briefly, however, notice facts and dates. It has been said before, that the legislature was driven from Charlottesville by an incursion of the enemy's cavalry. Since the adjournment from Richmond, their force in this country had been greatly augmented by reinforcements under Lord Cornwallis and General Phillips; and they had advanced up into the country as far as Elk Island, and the Fork of James river. Learning that the legislature was in session at Charlottesville, they detached Colonel Tarleton with his legion of horse to surprise them. As he was passing through Louisa on the evening of the 3d of June, he was observed by a Mr. Gouett, who, suspecting the object, set out immediately for Charlottesville, and knowing the byways of the neighborhood, passed the enemy's encampment, rode all night, and before sunrise of the 4th, called at Monticello with notice of what he had seen, and passed on to Charlottesville to notify the members of the legislature. The Speakers of the two houses, and some other members were lodging with us. I ordered a carriage to be ready to carry off my family; we breakfasted at leisure with our guests, and after breakfast they had gone to Charlottesville; when a neighbor rode up full speed to inform me that a troop of horse was then ascending the hill to the house. I instantly sent off my family, and after a short delay for some pressing arrangements, I mounted my horse; and knowing that in the public road I should be liable to fall in with the enemy, I went through the woods, and joined my family at the house of a friend, where we dined. Would it be believed, were it not known, that this flight from a troop of horse, whose whole legion, too, was within supporting distance, has been the subject, with party writers, of volumes of reproach on me, serious or sarcastic? That it has been sung in verse, and said in humble prose, that forgetting the noble example of the hero of La Mancha, and his wind-mills, I declined a combat singly against atroop, in which victory would have been so glorious? Forgetting, themselves, at the same time, that I was not provided with the enchanted arms of the Knight, nor even with his helmet of Mambrino. These closet heroes, forsooth, would have disdained the shelter of a wood, even singly and unarmed, against a legion of armed enemies.
Here, too, I must note another instance of the want of that correctness in writing history, without which it becomes romance. General Lee says that Tarleton, in another enterprise some time after, penetrated up the south side of James river to New London, in Bedford county. To that neighborhood precisely, where I had a possession, I had carried my family, and was confined there several weeks by the effects of a fall from my horse; and I can assure the readers of General Lee's history, that no enemy ever came within forty miles of New London.
Among the manuscripts of Mr. Jefferson, andin his own hand writing, is the following paper in relation to the invasion of Virginia in 1780-1781. It is, therefore, inserted here, in connection with the foregoing extract from his diary.
Richmond, 1780. Dec. 31st, at 8 A. M. The Governor received the first intelligence that twenty-seven sail of ships had entered Chesapeake Bay, and were in the morning of the 29th just below Willoughby's point, [the southern cape of James river,] their destination unknown.
1781. January 2, at 10 A. M. Information received that they had entered James river, their advance being at Warrasqueak Bay. Orders were immediately given for calling in the militia, one-fourth from some, and half from other counties. The members of the legislature, which rises this day, are the bearers of the orders to their respective counties. The Governor directs the removal of the records into the country, and the transportation of the military stores from Richmond to Westham, [on the river seven miles above,] there to be carried across the river.
January 3d. 8 P. M. The enemy are said to be a little below Jamestown; convenient for landing, if Williamsburg is their object.
January 4th, at 5 A. M. Information is received that they had passed Kennon's and Hoods the evening before with a strong easterly wind, which determines their object to be either Petersburg or Richmond. The Governor now calls in the whole militia from the adjacent counties.
At 5 P. M. Information that at 2 P. M. they were landed and drawn up at Westover, [on the north side of the river, and twenty-five miles below Richmond,] and consequently Richmond was their destination. Orders are now given to discontinue wagoning the military stores from Richmond to Westham, and to throw them across directly at Richmond.
The Governor having attended to this till an hour and a half in the night, then rode up to the foundry, [one mile below Westham,] ordered Captains Brush and Irish, and Mr. Hylton to continue all night wagoning to Westham the arms and stores still at the foundry, to be thrown across the river at Westham, then proceeded to Westham to urge the pressing the transportation there across the river, and thence went to Tuckahoe [eight miles above, and on the same side of the river] to see after his family, which he had sent that far in the course of the day. He arrived there at 1 o'clock in the night.
Early in the morning he carried his family across the river there, and sending them to Teine creek, [eight miles higher up,] went himself to Breton's on the south side of the river, [opposite to Westham,] finding the arms, &c., in a heap near the shore, and exposed to be destroyed by cannon from the north bank. He had them removed under cover of a point of land near by. He proceeded to Manchester [opposite to Richmond]. The enemy had arrived at Richmond at 1 P. M. Having found that nearly the whole arms had been got there from Richmond, he set out for Chetwood's to meet with Baron Steuben, who had appointed that place as a rendezvous and head-quarters; but not finding him there, and understanding that he would be at Colonel Fleming's, [six miles above Breton's,] he proceeded thither. Theenemy had now a detachment at Westham, and sent a deputation from the city of Richmond to the Governor at Colonel Fleming's to propose terms for ransoming the safety of the city, which terms he rejected. The Governor returned to Breton's, had measures taken more effectually to secure the books and papers there. The enemy having burnt some houses and stores, left Richmond, after twenty-four hours stay there, and encamped at Four-Mile Creek, [eight or ten miles below,] and the Governor went to look to his family at Fine Creek.
He returned to Breton's to see further to the arms there, exposed on the ground to heavy rains which had fallen the night before, and then proceeded to Manchester, and lodged there. The enemy encamped at Westover.
At half-past 7 A. M. he crossed over to Richmond, and resumed his residence there. The enemy are still retained in their encampment at Westover by an easterly wind. Col. John Nicholas has now three hundred militia at the Forest, [six miles off from Westover,] General Nelson two hundred at Charles City Court House, [eight miles below Westover,] Gibson one thousand, and Baron Steuben eight hundred on the south side the river.
January 9th. The enemy are still encamped at Westover.
January 10th. At 1 P. M. they embark; and the wind having shifted a little to the north of the west, and pretty fresh, they fall down the river. Baron Steuben marches for Hood's, where their passage may be checked. He reaches Bland's Mills in the evening, within nine miles of Hood's.
January 11th. At 8 A. M. the wind due west and strong, they may make good their retreat. During this period time and place have been minutely cited, in order that those who think there was any remissness in the movements of the Governor, may lay their finger on the point, and say when and where it was. Hereafter less detail will suffice.
Soon after this General Phillips having joined Arnold with a reinforcement of two thousand men, they advanced again up to Petersburg, and about the last of April to Manchester. The Governor had remained constantly in and about Richmond, exerting all his powers collecting militia, and providing such meansfor the defence of the State as its exhausted resources admitted. Never assuming a guard, and with only the river between him and the enemy, his lodgings were frequently within four, five, or six miles of them.
M. de la Fayette, about this time, arrived at Richmond with some Continental troops, with which, and the militia collected, he continued to occupy that place, and the north bank of the river, while Phillips and Arnold held Manchester and the south bank. But Lord Cornwallis, about the middle of May, joining the main southern armies, M. de la Fayette was obliged to retire. The enemy crossed the river, and advanced up into the country about fifty miles, and within thirty miles of Charlottesville, at which place the legislature being to meet in June, the Governor proceeded to his seat at Monticello, two or three miles from it. His office was now near expiring, the country under invasion by a powerful army, no services but military of any avail, unprepared by his line of life and education for the command of armies, he believed it right not to stand in the way of talents better fitted than his own to the circumstances under which the country was placed. He therefore himself proposed to his friends in the legislature that General Nelson, who commanded the militia of the State, should be appointed Governor, as he was sensible that the union of the civil and military power in the same hands at this time, would greatly facilitate military measures. This appointment accordingly took place on the 12th of June, 1781.
This was the state of things when, his office having actually expired, and no successor as yet in place, Colonel Tarleton, with his regiment of horse, was detached by Lord Cornwallis to surprise Mr. Jefferson (whom they thought still in office) and the legislature now sitting in Charlottesville. The Speakers of the two houses, and some other members of the legislature, were lodging with Mr. Jefferson at Monticello. Tarleton, early in the morning, when within ten miles of that place, detached a company of horse to secure him and his guests, and proceeded himself rapidly with his main body to Charlottesville, where he hoped to find the legislature unapprized of his movement. Notice of it, however, had been brought, both toMonticello and Charlottesville, about sun-rise. The Speakers with their colleagues, returned to Charlottesville, and with the other members of the legislature, had barely time to get out of his way. Mr. Jefferson sent off his family to secure them from danger, and was himself still at Monticello making arrangements for his own departure, when a Lieutenant Hudson arrived there at half speed, and informed him that the enemy were then ascending the hill of Monticello. He departed immediately, and knowing that he would be pursued if he took the high road, he plunged into the woods of the adjoining mountain, where being at once safe, he proceeded to overtake his family. This is the famous adventure of Carter's mountain, which has been so often resounded through the slanderous chronicles of federalism. But they have taken care never to detail the facts, lest these should show that this favorite charge amounted to nothing more than that he did not remain in his house, and there singly fight a whole troop of horse, or suffer himself to be taken prisoner. Having accompanied his family one day's journey, he returned to Monticello. Tarleton had retired after eighteen hours' stay in Charlottesville. Mr. Jefferson then rejoined his family, and proceeded with them to an estate he had in Bedford, about eighty miles south-west, where, riding on his farm some time after, he was thrown from his horse, and disabled from riding on horseback for a considerable time. But Mr. Turner finds it more convenient to give him this fall in his retreat before Tarleton, which had happened some weeks before, as a proof that he withdrew from a troop of horse with a precipitancy which Don Quixotte would not have practiced.
The facts here stated most particularly, with date of time and place, are taken from the notes made by the writer hereof for his own satisfaction at the time. The others are from memory, but so well recollected that he is satisfied there is no material fact mis-stated. Should any person undertake to contradict any particular on evidence which may at all merit the public respect, the writer will take the trouble (though not at all in the best situation for it) to produce the proof in support of it. He finds,indeed, that of the persons whom he recollects to have been present on these occasions, few have survived the intermediate lapse of four and twenty years. Yet he trusts that some, as well as himself, are yet among the living; and he is positively certain that no man can falsify any material fact here stated. He well remembers, indeed, that there were then, as there are at all times, some who blamed everything done contrary to their own opinion, although their opinions were formed on a very partial knowledge of facts. The censures which have been heralded by such men as Wm. Turner, are nothing but revivals of these half-informed opinions. Mr. George Nicholas, then a very young man, but always a very honest one, was prompted by these persons to bring specific charges against Mr. Jefferson; the heads of these in writing were communicated through a mutual friend to Mr. Jefferson, who committed to writing also the heads of justification on each of them. I well remember this paper, and believe the original of it still exists; and though framed when every real fact was fresh in the knowledge of every one, this fabricated flight from Richmond was not among the charges stated in this paper, nor any charge against Mr. Jefferson for not fighting singly the troop of horse. Mr. Nicholas candidly relinquished further proceeding. The House of Representatives of Virginia pronounced an honorable sentence of entire approbation of Mr. Jefferson's conduct, and so much the more honorable as themselves had been witness to it. And Mr. George Nicholas took a conspicuous occasion afterwards, of his own free will, and when the matter was entirely at rest, to retract publicly the erroneous opinions he had been led into on that occasion, and to make just reparation by a candid acknowledgment of them.
Whereas, instructions bearing date the 29th day of October, 1783, were sent to the Ministers Plenipotentiary of the United States of America at the Court of Versailles, empowered to negotiate a peace, or to any one or more of them, for concerting drafts or propositions for treaties of amity and commerce with the commercial powers of Europe:
Resolved, That it will be advantageous to these United States to conclude such treaties with Russia, the Court of Vienna, Prussia, Denmark, Saxony, Hamburg, Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, Genoa, Tuscany, Rome, Naples, Venice, Sardinia, and the Ottoman Porte.
Resolved, That in the formation of these treaties the following points be carefully stipulated:
1st. That each party shall have a right to carry their own produce, manufactures, and merchandise, in their own bottoms to the ports of the other, and thence the produce and merchandise of the other, paying, in both cases, such duties only as are paid by the most favored nation, freely, where it is freely granted to such nation, or paying the compensation where such nation does the same.
2. That with the nations holding territorial possessions in America, a direct and similar intercourse be admitted between the United States and such possessions; or if this cannot be obtained, then a direct and similar intercourse between the United States and certain free ports within such possessions; that if this neither can be obtained, permission be stipulated to bring from such possessions, in their own bottoms, the produce and merchandise thereof to their States directly; and for these States to carry in their own bottoms their produce and merchandise to such possessions directly.
3. That these United States be considered in all such treaties,and in every case arising under them, as one nation, upon the principles of the federal constitution.
4. That it be proposed, though not indispensably required, that if war should hereafter arise between the two contracting parties, the merchants of either country, then residing in the other, shall be allowed to remain nine months to collect their debts and settle their affairs, and may depart freely, carrying off all their effects, without molestation or hinderance; and all fishermen, all cultivators of the earth, and all artisans or manufacturers, unarmed and inhabiting unfortified towns, villages or places, who labor for the common subsistence and benefit of mankind, and peaceably following their respective employments, shall be allowed to continue the same, and shall not be molested by the armed force of the enemy, in whose power, by the events of war, they may happen to fall; but if anything is necessary to be taken from them, for the use of such armed force, the same shall be paid for at a reasonable price; and all merchants and traders, exchanging the products of different places, and thereby rendering the necessaries, conveniences, and comforts of human life more easy to obtain and more general, shall be allowed to pass free and unmolested; and neither of the contracting powers shall grant or issue any commission to any private armed vessels empowering them to take or destroy such trading ships, or interrupt such commerce.
5. And in case either of the contracting parties shall happen to be engaged in war with any other nation, it be further agreed, in order to prevent all the difficulties and misunderstandings that usually arise respecting the merchandise heretofore called contraband, such as arms, ammunition and military stores of all kinds, that no such articles, carrying by the ships or subjects of one of the parties to the enemies of the other, shall, on any account, be deemed contraband, so as to induce confiscation, and a loss of property to individuals. Nevertheless, it shall be lawful to stop such ships and detain them for such length of time as the captors may think necessary, to prevent the inconvenience or damage that might ensue, from their proceeding on their voyage, paying, however, a reasonable compensation for the loss sucharrest shall occasion to the proprietors; and it shall be further allowed to use in the service of the captors, the whole or any part of the military stores so detained, paying the owners the full value of the same, to be ascertained by the current price at the place of its destination. But if the other contracting party will not consent to discontinue the confiscation of contraband goods, then that it be stipulated, that if the master of the vessel stopped, will deliver out the goods charged to be contraband, he shall be admitted to do it, and the vessel shall not in that case be carried into any port; but shall be allowed to proceed on her voyage.
6. That in the same case, when either of the contracting parties shall happen to be engaged in war with any other power, all goods, not contraband, belonging to the subjects of that other power, and shipped in the bottoms of the party hereto, who is not engaged in the war, shall be entirely free. And that to ascertain what shall constitute the blockade of any place or port, it shall be understood to be in such predicament, when the assailing power shall have taken such a station as to expose to imminent danger any ship or ships, that would attempt to sail in or out of the said port; and that no vessel of the party, who is not engaged in the said war, shall be stopped without a material and well-grounded cause; and in such cases justice shall be done, and an indemnification given, without loss of time to the persons aggrieved, and thus stopped without sufficient cause.
7. That no right be stipulated for aliens to hold real property within these States, this being utterly inadmissible by their several laws and policy; but when on the death of any person holding real estate within the territories of one of the contracting parties, such real estate would by their laws descend on a subject or citizen of the other, were he not disqualified by alienage, then he shall be allowed a reasonable time to dispose of the same, and withdraw the proceeds without molestation.
8. That such treaties be made for a term not exceeding ten years from the exchange of ratification.
9. That these instructions be considered as supplementary to those of October 29th, 1783; and not as revoking, except whenthey contradict them. That where in treaty with a particular nation they can procure particular advantages, to the specification of which we have been unable to descend, our object in these instructions having been to form outlines only and general principles of treaty with many nations, it is our expectation they will procure them, though not pointed out in these instructions; and where they may be able to form treaties on principles which, in their judgment, will be more beneficial to the United States than those herein directed to be made their basis, they are permitted to adopt such principles. That as to the duration of treaties, though we have proposed to restrain them to the term of ten years, yet they are at liberty to extend the same as far as fifteen years with any nation which may pertinaciously insist thereon. And that it will be agreeable to us to have supplementary treaties with France, the United Netherlands and Sweden, which may bring the treaties we have entered into with them as nearly as may be to the principles of those now directed; but that this be not pressed, if the proposal should be found disagreeable.
Resolved, That treaties of amity, or of amity and commerce, be entered into with Morocco, and the Regencies of Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli, to continue for the same term of ten years, or for a term as much longer as can be procured.
That our Ministers, to be commissioned for treating with foreign nations, make known to the Emperor of Morocco the great satisfaction which Congress feel from the amicable disposition he has shown towards these States, and his readiness to enter into alliance with them. That the occupations of the war, and distance of our situation have prevented our meeting his friendship so early as we wished. But the powers are now delegated to them for entering into treaty with him, in the execution of which they are ready to proceed, and that as to the expenses of his Minister, they do therein what is for the honor and interest of the United States.
Resolved, That a commission be issued to Mr. J. Adams, Mr. B. Franklin, and Mr. T. Jefferson, giving powers to them, or the greater part of them, to make and receive propositions for suchtreaties of amity and commerce, and to negotiate and sign the same, transmitting them to Congress for their final ratification; and that such commission be in force for a term not exceeding two years.
The next levee day at Versailles, I meant to bring again under the view of the Count de Vergennes, the whole subject of our commerce with France; but the number of audiences of ambassadors and other ministers, which take place, of course, before mine, and which seldom, indeed, leave me an opportunity of audience at all, prevented me that day. I was only able to ask the Count de Vergennes, as a particular favor, that he would permit me to wait on him some day that week. He did so, and I went to Versailles the Friday following, (the 9th of December.) M. de Reyneval was with the Count. Our conversation began with the usual topic; that the trade of the United States had not yet learned the way to France, but continuedto centre in England, though no longer obliged by law to go there. I observed, that the real cause of this, was to be found in the difference of the commercial arrangements in the two countries; that merchants would not, and could not trade but where there was to be some gain; that the commerce between two countries could not be kept up, but by an exchange of commodities; that, if an American merchant was forced to carry his produce to London, it could not be expected he would make a voyage from thence to France, with the money, to lay it out here; and, in like manner, that if he could bring his commodities, with advantage, to this country, he would not make another voyage to England, with the money, to lay it out there, but would take in exchange the merchandise of this country. The Count de Vergennes agreed to this, and particularly that where there was no exchange of merchandise, there could be no durable commerce; and that it was natural for merchants to take their returns in the port where they sold their cargo. I desired his permission then, to take a summary view of the productions of the United States, that we might see which of them could be brought here to advantage.
1. Rice. France gets from the Mediterranean a rice not so good indeed, but cheaper than ours. He said that they bought of our rice, but that they got from Egypt also, rice of a very fine quality. I observed that such was the actual state of their commerce, in that article, that they take little from us. 2. Indigo. They make a plenty in their own colonies. He observed that they did, and that they thought it better than ours. 3. Flour, fish, and provisions of all sorts, they produce for themselves. That these articles might, therefore, be considered as not existing, for commerce, between the United States and the kingdom of France.
I proceeded to those capable of becoming objects of exchange between the two nations. 1. Peltry and furs. Our posts being in the hands of the English, we are cut off from that article. I am not sure even, whether we are not obliged to buy of them, for our own use. When these posts are given up, if ever they are, we shall be able to furnish France with skins and furs, tothe amount of two millions of livres, in exchange for her merchandise; but at present, these articles are to be counted as nothing. 2. Potash. An experiment is making whether this can be brought here. We hope it may, but at present it stands for nothing. He observed that it was much wanted in France, and he thought it would succeed. 3. Naval stores. Trials are also making on these, as subjects of commerce with France. They are heavy, and the voyage long. The result, therefore, is doubtful. At present, they are as nothing in our commerce with this country. 4. Whale oil. I told him I had great hopes that the late diminution of duty would enable us to bring this article, with advantage, to France; that a merchant was just arrived (Mr. Barrett) who proposed to settle at L'Orient, for the purpose of selling the cargoes of this article, and choosing the returns. That he had informed me, that in the first year, it would be necessary to take one-third in money, and the remainder only in merchandise; because the fishermen require, indispensably, some money. But he thought that after the first year, the merchandise of the preceding year, would always produce money for the ensuing one, and that the whole amount would continue to be taken annually afterwards, in merchandise. I added, that though the diminution of duty was expressed to be but for one year, yet I hoped they would find their advantage in renewing and continuing it; for that if they intended really to admit it for one year only, the fishermen would not find it worth while to rebuild their vessels, and to prepare themselves for the business. The Count expressed satisfaction on the view of commercial exchange held up by this article. He made no answer as to the continuance of it; and I did not choose to tell him, at that time, that we should claim its continuance under their treaty with the Hanseatic towns, which fixes this duty for them, and our own treaty, which gives, us the rights of the most favored nation. 5. Tobacco. I recalled to the memory of the Count de Vergennes, the letter I had written to him on this article; and the object of the present conversation being, how to facilitate the exchange of commerciable articles between the two countries, I pressed that of tobacco, in this point of view; observed that France, atpresent, paid us two millions of livres for this article; that for such portions of it as were bought in London, they sent the money directly there, and for what they bought in the United States, the money was still remitted to London, by bills of exchange; whereas, if they would permit our merchants to sell this article freely, they would bring it here, and take the returns on the spot, in merchandise, not money. The Count observed, that my proposition contained what was doubtless useful, but that the King received on this article, at present, a revenue of twenty-eight millions, which was so considerable, as to render them fearful of tampering with it; that the collection of this revenue by way of Farm, was of very ancient date, and that it was always hazardous to alter arrangements of long standing, and of such infinite combinations with the fiscal system. I answered, that the simplicity of the mode of collection proposed for this article, withdrew it from all fear of deranging other parts of their system; that I supposed they would confine the importation to some of their principal ports, probably not more than five or six; that a single collector in each of these, was the only new officer requisite; that he could get rich himself on six livres a hogshead, and would receive the whole revenue, and pay it into the treasury, at short hand. M. de Reyneval entered particularly into this part of the conversation, and explained to the Count, more in detail, the advantages and simplicity of it, and concluded by observing to me, that it sometimes happened that useful propositions, though not practicable at one time, might become so at another. I told him that that consideration had induced me to press the matter when I did, because I had understood the renewal of the Farm was then on the carpet, and that it was the precise moment when I supposed that this portion might be detached from the mass of the Farms. I asked Count de Vergennes whether, if the renewal of the Farm was pressing, this article might not be separated, merely in suspense, till government should have time to satisfy themselves on the expediency of renewing it. He said no promises could be made.
In the course of this conversation, he had mentioned the libertywe enjoyed of carrying our fish to the French islands. I repeated to him what I had hinted in my letter, of November the 20th, 1785, that I considered as a prohibition the laying such duties on our fish, and giving such premiums on theirs, as made a difference between their and our fishermen of fifteen livres the quintal, in an article which sold for but fifteen livres. He said it would not have that effect, for two reasons: 1. That their fishermen could not furnish supplies sufficient for their islands, and, of course, the inhabitants must, of necessity, buy our fish. 2. That from the constancy of our fishery, and the short season during which theirs continued, and also from the economy and management of ours, compared with the expense of theirs, we had always been able to sell our fish, in their islands, at twenty-five livres the quintal, while they were obliged to ask thirty-six livres. (I suppose he meant the livre of the French islands.) That thus, the duty and premium had been a necessary operation on their side, to place the sale of their fish on a level with ours, and that without this, theirs could not bear the competition.
I have here brought together the substance of what was said on the preceding subjects, not pretending to give it verbatim, which my memory does not enable me to do. I have, probably, omitted many things which were spoken, but have mentioned nothing which was not. It was interrupted, at times, with collateral matters. One of these was important. The Count de Vergennes complained, and with a good deal of stress, that they did not find a sufficient dependence on arrangements taken with us. This was the third time too, he had done it; first, in a conversation at Fontainebleau, when he first complained to me of the navigation acts of Massachusetts and New Hampshire; secondly, in his letter of October the 30th, 1785, on the same subject; and now, in the present conversation, wherein he added, as another instance, the case of the Chevalier de Mezieres, heir of General Oglethorpe, who, notwithstanding that the 11th article of the treaty provides, that the subjects or citizens of either party shall succeed,ab intestato, to the lands of their ancestors, within the dominions of the other, had been informed from Mr. Adams, and by me also, that his right of succession to the General'sestate in Georgia was doubtful. He observed too, that the administration of justice with us was tardy, insomuch that their merchants, when they had money due to them within our States, considered it as desperate; and that our commercial regulations, in general, were disgusting to them. These ideas were new, serious and delicate. I decided, therefore, not to enter into them at that moment, and the rather, as we were speaking in French, in which language I did not choose to hazard myself. I withdrew from the objections of the tardiness of justice with us, and the disagreeableness of our commercial regulations, by a general observation, that I was not sensible they were well founded. With respect to the case of the Chevalier de Mezieres, I was obliged to enter into some explanations. They related chiefly to the legal operation of our Declaration of Independence, to the undecided question whether our citizens and British subjects were thereby made aliens to one another, to the general laws as to conveyances of land to aliens, and the doubt whether an act of the Assembly of Georgia might not have been passed, to confiscate General Oglethorpe's property, which would of course prevent its devolution on any heir. Mr. Reyneval observed, that in this case, it became a mere question of fact, whether a confiscation of these lands had taken place before the death of General Oglethorpe, which fact might be easily known by inquiries in Georgia, where the possessions lay. I thought it very material, that the opinion of this court should be set to rights on these points. On my return, therefore, I wrote the following observations on them, which, the next time I went to Versailles, (not having an opportunity of speaking to the Count de Vergennes,) I put into the hands of M. Reyneval, praying him to read them, and to ask the favor of the Count to do the same.
Explanations on some of the subjects of conversation which I had the honor of having with his Excellency, the Count de Vergennes, when I was last at Versailles.
The principal design of that conversation was, to discuss those articles of commerce which the United States could spare, whichare wanted in France, and if received there on a convenient footing, would be exchanged for the productions of France. But in the course of the conversation, some circumstances were incidentally mentioned by the Count de Vergennes, which induced me to suppose he had received impressions, neither favorable to us, nor derived from perfect information.
The case of the Chevalier de Mezieres was supposed to furnish an instance of our disregard to treaties; and the event of that case was inferred from opinions supposed to have been given by Mr. Adams and myself. This is ascribing a weight to our opinions, to which they are not entitled. They will have no influence on the decision of the case. The judges in our courts, would not suffer them to be read. Their guide is the law of the land, of which law its treaties make a part. Indeed, I know not what opinion Mr. Adams may have given on the case. And, if any be imputed to him derogatory of our regard to the treaty with France, I think his opinion has been misunderstood. With respect to myself, the doubts which I expressed to the Chevalier de Mezieres, as to the success of his claims, were not founded on any question whether the treaty between France and the United States would be observed. On the contrary, I venture to pronounce that it will be religiously observed, if his case comes under it. But I doubted whether it would come under the treaty. The case, as I understand it, is this: General Oglethorpe, a British subject, had lands in Georgia. He died since the peace, having devised these lands to his wife. His heirs are the Chevalier de Mezieres, son of his elder sister, and the Marquis de Bellegarde, son of his younger sister. This case gives rise to legal questions, some of which have not yet been decided, either in England or America, the laws of which countries are nearly the same.
1. It is a question under the laws of those countries, whether personsborn before their separation, and once completely invested, in both, with the character of natural subjects, can ever become aliens in either? There are respectable opinions on both sides. If the negative be right, then General Oglethorpe having never become an alien, and having devised his lands to his wife, who,on this supposition, also, was not an alien, the devise has transferred the lands to her, and there is nothing left for the treaty to operate on.
2. If the affirmative opinion be right, and the inhabitants of Great Britain and America,born before the Revolution, are become aliens to each other, it follows by the laws of both, that the lands which either possessed, within the jurisdiction of the other, became the property of the State in which they are. But a question arises, whether the transfer of the property took place on the Declaration of Independence, or not till an office, or an act of Assembly, had declared the transfer. If the property passed to the State on the Declaration of Independence, then it did not remain in General Oglethorpe, and, of course, at the time of his death, he having nothing, there was nothing to pass to his heirs, and so, nothing for the treaty to operate on.
3. If the property does not pass till declared by an office found by jury, or an act passed by the Assembly, the question then is, whether an office had been found, or an act of Assembly been passed for that purpose, before the peace? If there was, the lands had passed to the State during his life, and nothing being left in him, there is nothing for his heirs to claim under the treaty.
4. If the property had not been transferred to the State before the peace, either by the Declaration of Independence, or an office, or an act of Assembly, then it remained in General Oglethorpe at the epoch of the peace; and it will be insisted, no doubt, that, by the sixth article of the treaty of peace, between the United States and Great Britain, which forbids future confiscations, General Oglethorpe acquired a capacity of holding and of conveying his lands. He has conveyed them to his wife. But she being an alien, it will be decided by the laws of the land, whether she took them for her own use, or for the use of the State. For it is a general principle of our law, that conveyances to aliens pass the lands to the State; and it may be urged, that though, by the treaty of peace, General Oglethorpe could convey, yet that treaty did not mean to give him a greater privilege of conveyance than natives hold, to wit: a privilege of transferring the property topersons incapable, by law, of taking it. However, this would be a question between the State of Georgia and the widow of General Oglethorpe, in the decision of which the Chevalier de Mezieres is not interested, because, whether she takes the land by the will, for her own use, or for that of the State, it is equally prevented from descending to him: there is neither a conveyance to him, nor a successionab intestatodevolving on him, which are the cases provided for by our treaty with France. To sum up the matter in a few words; if the lands had passed to the State before the epoch of peace, the heirs of General Oglethorpe cannot say they have descended on them, and if they remained in the General at that epoch, the treaty saving them to him, he could convey them away from his heirs, and he has conveyed them to his widow, either for her own use, or for that of the State.
Seeing no event in which, according to the facts stated to me, the treaty could be applied to this case, or could give any right whatever, to the heirs of General Oglethorpe, I advised the Chevalier de Mezieres not to urge his pretensions on the footing of right, nor under the treaty, but to petition the Assembly of Georgia for a grant of these lands. If, in the question between the State and the widow of General Oglethorpe, it should be decided that they were the property of the State, I expected from their generosity, and the friendly disposition in America towards the subjects of France, that they would be favorable to the Chevalier de Mezieres. There is nothing in the preceding observations which would not have applied against the heir of General Oglethorpe, had he been a native citizen of Georgia, as it now applies against him, being a subject of France. The treaty has placed the subjects of France on a footing with natives, as to conveyances and descent of property. There was no occasion for the Assemblies to pass laws on this subject; the treaty being a law, as I conceive, superior to those of particular Assemblies, and repealing them, when they stand in the way of its operations.
The supposition that the treaty was disregarded on our part, in the instance of the acts of Assembly of Massachusetts and NewHampshire, which made a distinction between natives and foreigners, as to the duties to be paid on commerce, was taken notice of in the letter of November the 20th, which I had the honor of addressing to the Count de Vergennes. And while I express my hopes that, on a revision of these subjects, nothing will be found in them derogatory from either the letter or spirit of our treaty, I will add assurances that the United States will not be behind hand in going beyond both, whenever occasions shall offer of manifesting their sincere attachment to this country.
I will pass on to the observation, that our commercial regulations are difficult, and repugnant to the French merchants. To detail these regulations minutely, as they exist in every State, would be beyond my information. A general view of them, however, will suffice, because the States differ little in their several regulations. On the arrival of a ship in America, her cargo must be reported at the proper office. The duties on it are to be paid. These are commonly from two and a half to five per cent. on its value. On many articles, the value of which is tolerably uniform, the precise sum is fixed by law. A tariff of these is presented to the importer, and he can see what he has to pay, as well as the officer. For other articles, the duty is such a per cent. on their value. That value is either shown by the invoice, or by the oath of the importer. This operation being once over, and it is a very short one, the goods are considered as entered, and may then pass through the whole thirteen States without their being ever more subject to a question, unless they be reshipped. Exportation is still more simple; because, as we prohibit the exportation of nothing, and very rarely lay a duty on any article of export, the State is little interested in examining outward-bound vessels. The captain asks a clearance for his own purposes. As to the operations of internal commerce, such as matters of exchange, of buying, selling, bartering, &c., our laws are the same as the English. If they have been altered in any instance, it has been to render them more simple.
Lastly, as to the tardiness of the administration of justice with us, it would be equally tedious and impracticable for me to give a precise account of it in every State. But I think it probablethat it is much on the same footing through all the States, and that an account of it in any one of them may found a general presumption of it in the others. Being best acquainted with its administration in Virginia, I shall confine myself to that. Before the Revolution, a judgment could not be obtained under eight years in the supreme court, where the suit was in the department of the common law, which department embraces about nine-tenths of the subject of legal contestation. In that of the chancery, from twelve to twenty years were requisite. This did not proceed from any vice in the laws, but from the indolence of the judges appointed by the King; and these judges holding their office during his will only, he could have reformed the evil at any time. This reformation was among the first works of the legislature after our independence. A judgment can now be obtained in the supreme court in one year at the common law, and in about three years in the chancery. But more particularly to protect the commerce of France, which, at that moment, was considerable with us, a law was passed, giving all suits wherein a foreigner was a party, a privilege to be tried immediately, on the return of his process, without waiting till those of natives, which stand before them, shall have been decided on. Out of this act, however, the British stand excluded by a subsequent one. This, with its causes, must be explained. The British army, after ravaging the State of Virginia, had sent off a very great number of slaves to New York. By the seventh article of the treaty of peace, they stipulated not to carry away any of these. Notwithstanding this, it was known, when they were evacuating New York, that they were carrying away the slaves. General Washington made an official demand of Sir Guy Carleton, that he should cease to send them away. He answered, that these people had come to them under promise of the King's protection, and that that promise should be fulfilled in preference to the stipulation in the treaty. The State of Virginia, to which nearly the whole of these slaves belonged, passed a law to forbid the recovery of debts due to British subjects. They declared, at the same time, they would repeal the law, if Congress were of opinion they ought to do it. But, desirous that their citizensshould be discharging their debts, they afterwards permitted British creditors to prosecute their suits, and to receive their debts in seven equal and annual payments; relying that the demand for the slaves would be either admitted or denied in time to lay their hands on some of the latter payments for reimbursement. The immensity of this debt was another reason for forbidding such a mass of property to be offered for sale under execution at once, as, from the small quantity of circulating money, it must have sold for little or nothing, whereby the creditor would have failed to receive his money, and the debtor would have lost his whole estate without being discharged of his debt. This is the history of the delay of justice in that country in the case of British creditors. As to all others, its administration is as speedy as justice itself will admit. I presume it is equally so in all the other States, and can add, that it is administered in them all, with a purity and integrity of which few counties afford an example.
I cannot take leave altogether of the subjects of this conversation without recalling the attention of the Count de Vergennes to what had been its principal drift. This was to endeavor to bring about a direct exchange between France and the United States (without the intervention of a third nation), of those productions with which each could furnish the other. We can furnish to France (because we have heretofore furnished to England), of whale oil and spermaceti, of furs and peltry, of ships and naval stores, and of potash, to the amount of fifteen millions of livres; and the quantities will admit of increase. Of our tobacco, France consumes the value of ten millions more. Twenty-five millions of livres, then, mark the extent of that commerce of exchange, which is, at present, practicable between us. We want, in return, productions and manufactures, not money. If the duties on our produce are light, and the sale free, we shall undoubtedly bring it here, and lay out the proceeds on the spot in the productions and manufactures which we want. The merchants of France will, on their part, become active in the same business. We shall no more think, when we shall have sold our produce here, of making an useless voyage to anothercountry to lay out the money, than we think at present, when we have sold it elsewhere, of coming here to lay out the money. The conclusion is, that there are commodities which form a basis of exchange to the extent of a million of guineas annually; it is for the wisdom of those in power to contrive that the exchange shall be made.
Having put this paper into the hands of Monsieur Reyneval, we entered into conversation again, on the subject of the Farms, which were now understood to be approaching to a conclusion. He told me, that he was decidedly of opinion, that the interest of the State required the Farm of tobacco to be discontinued, and that he had, accordingly, given every aid to my proposition, which laid within his sphere; that the Count de Vergennes was very clearly of the same opinion, and had supported it strongly with reasons of his own, when he transmitted it to the Comptroller General; but that the Comptroller, in the discussions of this subject which had taken place, besides the objections which the Count de Vergennes had repeated to me, and which are before mentioned, had added, that the contract with the Farmers General was now so far advanced, that the article of tobacco could not be withdrawn from it, without unravelling the whole transaction. Having understood that, in this contract, there was always reserved to the crown a right to discontinue it at any moment, making just reimbursements to the Farmers, I asked M. Reyneval, if the contract should be concluded in its present form, whether it might still be practicable to have it discontinued, as to the article of tobacco, at some future moment. He said it might be possible.
Upon the whole, the true obstacle to this proposition has penetrated, in various ways, through the veil which covers it. The influence of the Farmers General has been heretofore found sufficient to shake a minister in his office. Monsieur de Calonnes' continuance or dismission, has been thought, for some time, to be on a poise. Were he to shift this great weight, therefore, out of his own scale into that of his adversaries, it would decide their preponderance. The joint interests of France and America would be insufficient counterpoise in his favor.
It will be observed that these efforts to improve the commerce of the United States, have been confined to that branch only which respects France itself, and that nothing passed on the subject of our commerce with the West Indies, except an incidental conversation as to our fish. The reason of this, was no want of a due sense of its importance. Of that, I am thoroughly sensible. But efforts in favor of this branch would, at present, be desperate. To nations with which we have not yet treated, and who have possessions in America, we may offer a free vent of their manufactures in the United States, for a full or modified admittance into those possessions. But to France, we are obliged to give that freedom for a different compensation; to wit, for her aid in effecting our independence. It is difficult, therefore, to say what we have now to offer her, for an admission into her West Indies. Doubtless, it has its price. But the question is, what this would be, and whether worth our while to give it. Were we to propose to give to each other's citizens all the rights of natives, they would, of course, count what they should gain by this enlargement of right, and examine whether it would be worth to them as much as their monopoly of their West India commerce. If not, that commercial freedom which we wish to preserve, and which, indeed, is so valuable, leaves us little to offer. An expression in my letter to the Count de Vergennes, of November the 20th, wherein I hinted that both nations might, perhaps, come into the opinion, that the condition ofnativesmight be a better ground of intercourse for their citizens, than that of themost favorednation, was intended to furnish an opportunity to the minister of parleying on that subject, if he was so disposed, and to myself, of seeing whereabouts they would begin, that I might communicate it to Congress, and leave them to judge of the expediency of pursuing the subject. But no overtures have followed; for I have no right to consider as coming from the minister, certain questions which were, very soon after, proposed to me by an individual. It sufficiently accounts for these questions, that that individual had written a memorial on the subject, for the consideration of the minister, and might wish to know what we would be willing to do. The idea that I should answer suchquestions to him, is equally unaccountable, whether we suppose them originating with himself, or coming from the minister. In fact, I must suppose them to be his own; and I transmit them, only that Congress may see what one Frenchman, at least, thinks on the subject. If we can obtain from Great Britain reasonable conditions of commerce, (which, in my idea, must forever include an admission into her islands,) the freest ground between these two nations would seem to be the best. But if we can obtain no equal terms from her, perhaps Congress might think it prudent, as Holland has done, to connect us unequivocally with France. Holland has purchased the protection of France. The price she pays, isaid in time of war. It is interesting for us to purchase a free commerce with the French islands. But whether it is best to pay for it, byaids in war, or by privileges in commerce, or not to purchase it at all, is the question.