1 Festival of Labour, September 19, 1794.--_Editor._.

This Deputy has said in the Convention that I intrigued with an ancient

agent of the Bureau of Foreign Affairs. My examination therefore while

he is present will give him an opportunity of proving his charge or of

convincing himself of his error. If Bourdon de l'Oise is an honest man

he will examine me, but lest he should not I subjoin the following. That

which B[ourdon] calls an intrigue was at the request of a member of the

former Committee of Salut Public, last August was a twelvemonth. I met

the member on the Boulevard. He asked me something in French which I

did not understand and we went together to the Bureau of Foreign Affairs

which was near at hand. The Agent (Otto, whom you probably knew in

America) served as interpreter, The member (it was Barere) then asked

me 1st, If I could furnish him with the plan of Constitution I had

presented to the Committee of Constitution of which I was member with

himself, because, he said, it contained several things which he

wished had been adopted: 2dly, He asked me my opinion upon sending

Commissioners to the United States of America: 3dly, If fifty or an

hundred ship loads of flour could be procured from America. As verbal

interpretation was tedious, it was agreed that I should give him my

opinion in writing, and that the Agent [Otto] should translate it, which

he did. I answered the first question by sending him the plan [of

a Constitution] which he still has. To the second, I replied that

I thought it would be proper to send Commissioners, because that in

Revolutions circumstances change so fast that it was often necessary

to send a better supply of information to an Ally than could be

communicated by writing; and that Congress had done the same thing

during the American War; and I gave him some information that the

Commissioners would find useful on their arrival. I answered the third

question by sending him a list of American exports two years before,

distinguishing the several articles by which he would see that the

supply he mentioned could be obtained. I sent him also the plan of Paul

Jones, giving it as his, for procuring salt-petre, which was to send

a squadron (it did not require a large one) to take possession of the

Island of St. Helen's, to keep the English flag flying at the port,

that the English East India ships coming from the East Indies, and that

ballast with salt-petre, might be induced to enter as usual; And that it

would be a considerable time before the English Government could know

of what had happened at St. Helen's. See here what Bourdon de l'Oise has

called an intrigue.--If it was an intrigue it was between a Committee of

Salut Public and myself, for the Agent was no more than the interpreter

and translator, and the object of the intrigue was to furnish France

with flour and salt-petre."--I suppose Bourdon had heard that the agent

and I were seen together talking English, and this was enough for _him_

to found his charge upon.(1)

You next say that "I must likewise be sensible that although I am an

American citizen that it is likewise believed there [in America] that

I am become a citizen of France, and that in consequence this latter

character has so far [illegible] the former as to weaken if not destroy

any claim you might have to interpose in my behalf." I am sorry I cannot

add any new arguments to those I have already advanced on this part of

the subject. But I cannot help asking myself, and I wish you would

ask the Committee, if it could possibly be the intention of France to

_kidnap_ citizens from America under the pretence of dubbing them

with the title of French citizens, and then, after inviting or rather

enveigling them into France, make it a pretence for detaining them? If

it was, (which I am sure it was not, tho' they now act as if it was) the

insult was to America, tho' the injury was to me, and the treachery was

to both.

1 The communications of Paine to Barere are given in my

"Life of Paine," vol. ii-i PP. 73, 87. Otto was Secretary to

the Minister of Foreign Affairs when he acted as interpreter

between Paine and Barere. There was never any charge at all

made against Paine, as the Archives of France now prove,

save that he was a "foreigner." Paine was of coarse ignorant

of the conspiracy between Morris and Deforgues which had

imprisoned him. Bourdon de l'Oise, one of the most cruel

Jacobins and Terrorists, afterwards conspired with Pichegru

to overthrow the Republic, and was with him banished (1797)

to Sinamari, South America, where he died soon after his

arrival.--_Editor._.

Did they mean to kidnap General Washington, Mr. Madison, and several

other Americans whom they dubbed with the same title as well as me? Let

any man look at the condition of France when I arrived in it,--invaded

by Austrians and Prussians and declared to be in danger,--and then ask

if any man who had a home and a country to go to, as I had in America,

would have come amongst them from any other motive than of assisting

them. If I could possibly have supposed them capable of treachery

I certainly would not have trusted myself in their power. Instead

therefore of your being unwilling or apprehensive of meeting the

question of French citizenship, they ought to be ashamed of advancing

it, and this will be the case unless you admit their arguments or

objections too passively. It is a case on their part fit only for

the continuations of Robespierre to set up. As to the name of French

citizen, I never considered it in any other light, so far as regarded

myself, than as a token of honorary respect. I never made them any

promise nor took any oath of allegiance or of citizenship, nor bound

myself by an act or means whatever to the performance of any thing.

I acted altogether as a friend invited among them as I supposed on

honorable terms. I did not come to join myself to a Government already

formed, but to assist in forming one _de nouveau_, which was afterwards

to be submitted to the people whether they would accept it or not, and

this any foreigner might do. And strictly speaking there are no citizens

before this is a government. They are all of the People. The Americans

were not called citizens till after Government was established, and not

even then until they had taken the oath of allegiance. This was the

case in Pennsylvania. But be this French citizenship more or less, the

Convention have swept it away by declaring me to be a foreigner, and

imprisoning me as such; and this is a short answer to all those who

affect to say or to believe that I am French Citizen. A Citizen without

Citizenship is a term non-descript.

After the two preceeding paragraphs you ask--"If it be my wish that you

should embark in this controversy (meaning that of reclaiming me)

and risque the consequences with respect to myself and the good

understanding subsisting between the two countries, or, without

relinquishing any point of right, and which might be insisted on in

case of extremities, pursue according to your best judgment and with the

light before you, the object of my liberation?"

As I believe from the apparent obstinacy of the Committees that

circumstances will grow towards the extremity you mention, unless

prevented beforehand, I will endeavour to throw into your hands all the

lights I can upon the subject.

In the first place, reclamation may mean two distinct things. All the

reclamations that are made by the sections in behalf of persons detained

as _suspect_ are made on the ground that the persons so detained are

patriots, and the reclamation is good against the charge of "suspect"

because it proves the contrary. But my situation includes another

circumstance. I am imprisoned on the charge (if it can be called one)

of being a foreigner born in England. You know that foreigner to be a

citizen of the United States of America, and that he has been such since

the 4th of July 1776, the political birthday of the United States,

and of every American citizen, for before that period all were British

subjects, and the States, then provinces, were British dominions.--Your

reclamation of me therefore as a citizen of the United States (all other

considerations apart) is good against the pretence for imprisoning me,

or that pretence is equally good against every American citizen born

in England, Ireland, Scotland, Germany, or Holland, and you know this

description of men compose a very great part of the population of the

three States of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and make also a

part of Congress, and of the State Legislatures.

Every politician ought to know, and every civilian does know, that the

Law of Treaty of Alliance, and also that of Amity and Commerce knows no

distinction of American Citizens on account of the place of their birth,

but recognizes all to be Citizens whom the Constitution and laws of the

United States of America recognize as such; and if I recollect rightly

there is an article in the Treaty of Commerce particular to this

point. The law therefore which they have here, to put all persons in

arrestation born in any of the Countries at war with France, is, when

applied to Citizens of America born in England, Ireland, Scotland,

Germany, or holland, a violation of the treaties of Alliance and of

Commerce, because it assumes to make a distinction of Citizens which

those Treaties and the Constitution of America know nothing of. This is

a subject that officially comes under your cognizance as Minister, and

it would be consistent that you expostulated with them upon the Case.

That foolish old man Vadier, who was president of the Convention and of

the Committee of Surety general when the Americans then in Paris went

to the Bar of the Convention to reclaim me, gave them for answer that

my being born in England was cause sufficient for imprisoning me. It

happened that at least half those who went up with that address were in

the same case with myself.

As to reclamations on the ground of Patriotism it is difficult to know

what is to be understood by Patriotism here. There is not a vice, and

scarcely a virtue, that has not as the fashion of the moment suited

been called by the name of Patriotism. The wretches who composed the

revolutionary tribunal of Nantz were the Patriots of that day and the

criminals of this. The Jacobins called themselves Patriots of the first

order, men up to the height of the circumstances, and they are now

considered as an antidote to Patriotism. But if we give to Patriotism a

fixed idea consistent with that of a Republic, it would signify a strict

adherence to the principles of Moral Justice, to the equality of civil

and political Rights, to the System of representative Government, and an

opposition to every hereditary claim to govern; and of this species

of Patriotism you know my character. But, Sir, there are men on the

Committee who have changed their Party but not their principles. Their

aim is to hold power as long as possible by preventing the establishment

of a Constitution, and these men are and will be my Enemies, and seek to

hold me in prison as long as they can. I am too good a Patriot for them.

It is not improbable that they have heard of the strange language held

by some Americans that I am not considered in America as an American

citizen, and they may also have heard say, that you had no orders

respecting me, and it is not improbable that they interpret that

language and that silence into a connivance at my imprisonment. If they

had not some ideas of this kind would they resist so long the civil

efforts you make for my liberation, or would they attach so much

importance to the imprisonment of an Individual as _to risque_ (as

you say to me) _the good understanding that exists between the two

Countries?_You also say that _it is impossible for any person to do more

than you have done without adopting the other means_, meaning that of

reclaiming me. How then can you account for the want of success after so

many efforts, and such a length of time, upwards of ten weeks, without

supposing that they fortify themselves in the interpretation I have just

mentioned? I can admit that it was not necessary to give orders, and

that it was difficult to give direct orders, for I much question if

Morris had informed Congress or the President of the whole of the case,

or had sent copies of my letters to him as I had desired him to do.

You would find the case here when you came, and you could not fully

understand it till you did come, and as Minister you would have

authority to act upon it. But as you inform me that you know what the

wishes of the President are, you will see also that his reputation is

exposed to some risque, admitting there to be ground for the supposition

I have made. It will not add to his popularity to have it believed in

America, as I am inclined to think the Committee believe here, that he

connives at my imprisonment. You say also that _it is known to everybody

that you wish my liberation_. It is, Sir, because they know your wishes

that they misinterpret the means you use. They suppose that those mild

means arise from a restriction that you cannot use others, or from a

consciousness of some defect on my part of which you are unwilling to

provoke the enquiry.

But as you ask me if it be my wish that you should embark in this

controversy and risque the consequences with respect to myself, I will

answer this part of the question by marking out precisely the part I

wish you to take. What I mean is a sort of middle line above what you

have yet gone, and not up to the full extremity of the case, which will

still lie in reserve. It is to write a letter to the Committee that

shall in the first place defeat by anticipation all the objections they

might make to a simple reclamation, and at the same time make the ground

good for that object. But, instead of sending the letter immediately, to

invite some of the Committee to your house and to make that invitation

the opportunity of shewing them the letter, expressing at the same time

a wish that you had done this, from a hope that the business might be

settled in an amicable manner without your being forced into an official

interference, that would excite the observations of the Enemies of both

Countries, and probably interrupt the harmony that subsisted between the

two republics. But as I can not convey the ideas I wish you to use by

any means so concisely or so well as to suppose myself the writer of the

letter I shall adopt this method and you will make use of such parts or

such ideas of it as you please if you approve the plan. Here follows the

supposed letter:

Citizens: When I first arrived amongst you as Minister from the United

States of America I was given to understand that the liberation of

Thomas Paine would take place without any official interference on my

part. This was the more agreeable to me as it would not only supercede

the necessity of that interference, but would leave to yourselves the

whole opportunity of doing justice to a man who as far as I have been

able to learn has suffered much cruel treatment under what you have

denominated the system of Terror. But as I find my expectations have not

been fulfilled I am under the official necessity of being more explicit

upon the subject than I have hitherto been.

Permit me, in the first place, to observe that as it is impossible for

me to suppose that it could have been the intention of France to seduce

any citizens of America from their allegiance to their proper country

by offering them the title of French citizen, so must I be compelled to

believe, that the title of French citizen conferred on Thomas Paine was

intended only as a mark of honorary respect towards a man who had

so eminently distinguished himself in defence of liberty, and on no

occasion more so than in promoting and defending your own revolution.

For a proof of this I refer you to his two works entitled _Rights of

Man_. Those works have procured to him an addition of esteem in America,

and I am sorry they have been so ill rewarded in France. But be this

title of French Citizen more or less, it is now entirely swept away by

the vote of the Convention which declares him to be a foreigner, and

which supercedes the vote of the Assembly that conferred that title upon

him, consequently upon the case superceded with it.

In consequence of this vote of the Convention declaring him to be a

foreigner the former Committees have imprisoned him. It is therefore

become my official duty to declare to you that the foreigner thus

imprisoned is a citizen of the United States of America as fully, as

legally, as constitutionally as myself, and that he is moreover one of

the principal founders of the American Republic.

I have been informed of a law or decree of the Convention which

subjects foreigners born in any of the countries at war with France

to arrestation and imprisonment. This law when applied to citizens of

America born in England is an infraction of the Treaty of Alliance and

of Amity and Commerce, which knows no distinction of American citizens

on account of the place of their birth, but recognizes all to be

citizens whom the Constitution and laws of America recognize as such.

The circumstances under which America has been peopled requires this

guard on her Treaties, because the mass of her citizens are composed not

of natives only but also of the natives of almost all the countries

of Europe who have sought an asylum there from the persecutions they

experienced in their own countries. After this intimation you will

without doubt see the propriety of modelling that law to the principles

of the Treaty, because the law of Treaty in cases where it applies is

the governing law to both parties alike, and it cannot be infracted

without hazarding the existence of the Treaty.

Of the Patriotism of Thomas Paine I can speak fully, if we agree to give

to patriotism a fixed idea consistent with that of a republic. It would

then signify a strict adherence to Moral Justice, to the equality of

civil and political rights, to the system of representative government,

and an opposition to all hereditary claims to govern. Admitting

patriotism to consist in these principles, I know of no man who has gone

beyond Thomas Paine in promulgating and defending them, and that for

almost twenty years past.

I have now spoken to you on the principal matters concerned in the case

of Thomas Paine. The title of French citizen which you had enforced upon

him, you have since taken away by declaring him to be a foreigner, and

consequently this part of the subject ceases of itself. I have declared

to you that this foreigner is a citizen of the United States of America,

and have assured you of his patriotism.

I cannot help at the same time repeating to you my wish that his

liberation had taken place without my being obliged to go thus far into

the subject, because it is the mutual interest of both republics to

avoid as much as possible all subjects of controversy, especially those

from which no possible good can flow. I still hope that you will save me

the unpleasant task of proceeding any farther by sending me an order

for his liberation, which the injured state of his health absolutely

requires. I shall be happy to receive such an order from you and

happy in presenting it to him, for to the welfare of Thomas Paine the

Americans are not and cannot be indifferent.

This is the sort of letter I wish you to write, for I have no idea that

you will succeed by any measures that can, by any kind of construction,

be interpreted into a want of confidence or an apprehension of

consequences. It is themselves that ought to be apprehensive of

consequences if any are to be apprehended. They, I mean the Committees,

are not certain that the Convention or the nation would support them

in forcing any question to extremity that might interrupt the good

understanding subsisting between the two countries; and I know of no

question [so likely] to do this as that which involves the rights and

liberty of a citizen.

You will please to observe that I have put the case of French

citizenship in a point of view that ought not only to preclude, but to

make them ashamed to advance any thing upon this subject; and this is

better than to have to answer their counter-reclamation afterwards.

Either the Citizenship was intended as a token of honorary respect, or

it was in-tended to deprive America of a citizen or to seduce him from

his allegiance to his proper country. If it was intended as an honour

they must act consistently with the principle of honour. But if they

make a pretence for detaining me, they convict themselves of the act

of seduction. Had America singled out any particular French citizen,

complimented him with the title of Citizen of America, which he without

suspecting any fraudulent intention might accept, and then after having

invited or rather inveigled him into America made his acceptance of

that Title a pretence for seducing or forcing him from his allegiance to

France, would not France have just cause to be offended at America? And

ought not America to have the same right to be offended at France? And

will the Committees take upon themselves to answer for the dishonour

they bring upon the National Character of their Country? If these

arguments are stated beforehand they will prevent the Committees going

into the subject of French Citizenship. They must be ashamed of it.

But after all the case comes to this, that this French Citizenship

appertains no longer to me because the Convention, as I have already

said, have swept it away by declaring me to be foreigner, and it is not

in the power of the Committees to reverse it. But if I am to be citizen

and foreigner, and citizen again, just when and how and for any purpose

they please, they take the Government of America into their own hands

and make her only a Cypher in their system.

Though these ideas have been long with me they have been more

particularly matured by reading your last Communication, and I have

many reasons to wish you had opened that Communication sooner. I am best

acquainted with the persons you have to deal with and the circumstances

of my own case. If you chuse to adopt the letter as it is, I send you a

translation for the sake of expediting the business. I have endeavoured

to conceive your own manner of expression as well as I could, and the

civility of language you would use, but the matter of the letter is

essential to me.

If you chuse to confer with some of the members of the Committee at

your own house on the subject of the letter it may render the sending it

unnecessary; but in either case I must request and press you not to give

away to evasion and delay, and that you will fix positively with them

that they shall give you an answer in three or four days whether they

will liberate me on the representation you have made in the letter, or

whether you must be forced to go further into the subject. The state of

my health will not admit of delay, and besides the tortured state of

my mind wears me down. If they talk of bringing me to trial (and I well

know there is no accusation against me and that they can bring none)

I certainly summons you as an Evidence to my Character. This you may

mention to them either as what I intend to do or what you intend to do

voluntarily for me.

I am anxious that you undertake this business without losing time,

because if I am not liberated in the course of this decade, I intend, if

in case the seventy-one detained deputies are liberated, to follow the

same track that they have done, and publish my own case myself.(1)

I cannot rest any longer in this state of miserable suspense, be the

consequences what they may.

Thomas Paine.

1 Those deputies, imprisoned for having protested against

the overthrow of the Girondin government, May 31,1793, when

the Convention was invaded and overawed by the armed

communes of Paris. These deputies were liberated and

recalled to the Convention, December 8, 1794. Paine was

invited to resume his seat the day before, by a special act

of the Convention, after an eloquent speech by Thibaudeau.--

_Editor._.

Dear Sir: I need not mention to you the happiness I received from the

information you sent me by Mr. Beresford. I easily guess the persons

you have conversed with on the subject of my liberation--but matters

and even promises that pass in conversation are not quite so strictly

attended to here as in the Country you come from. I am not, my Dear Sir,

impatient from any thing in my disposition, but the state of my health

requires liberty and a better air; and besides this, the rules of the

prison do not permit me, though I have all the indulgences the Concierge

can give, to procure the things necessary to my recovery, which is

slow as to strength. I have a tolerable appetite but the allowance of

provision is scanty. We are not allowed a knife to cut our victuals

with, nor a razor to shave; but they have lately allowed some barbers

that are here to shave. The room where I am lodged is a ground floor

level with the earth in the garden and floored with brick, and is so

wet after every rain that I cannot guard against taking colds that

continually cheat my recovery. If you could, without interfering with or

deranging the mode proposed for my liberation, inform the Committee that

the state of my health requires liberty and air, it would be good ground

to hasten my liberation. The length of my imprisonment is also a reason,

for I am now almost the oldest inhabitant of this uncomfortable mansion,

and I see twenty, thirty and sometimes forty persons a day put in

liberty who have not been so long confined as myself. Their liberation

is a happiness to me; but I feel sometimes, a little mortification

that I am thus left behind. I leave it entirely to you to arrange this

matter. The messenger waits. Your's affectionately,

The Writings Of Thomas Paine, Volume III. 1791-1804 · 第 114 / 189 题