that France wishes, from interested views, to monopolise the
fisheries; or, at least to exclude all other competitors but Great
Britain. Those, who have attended to the disinterested conduct of
France during the war, oppose to this sentiment the honor and good
faith of their ally, the little interest that he can have in excluding
a people from a right, which would not interfere with his, since
France does little more than supply herself; and the New England
fishery, for the most part, only supplies the continent and islands of
America. They see the care with which France has endeavored to
cultivate a good understanding between that Kingdom and these States,
and they are persuaded so inconsiderable an object will not be put in
competition with the harmony, which ought to subsist between them, or
administer food to those unworthy jealousies. And so much does this
sentiment prevail in Congress, that their prospects have not induced
them to alter your instructions; more particularly as they have
received through the Minister of France assurances, that his Majesty
was pleased with the proof Congress had given him of their confidence,
and that he would in no event make any sacrifices of their essential
interests, which necessity should not compel him to do; that he had no
reason to apprehend from the events of the war, that such necessity
would exist. These events have become so much more favorable since the
date of the letter, which contained these assurances, that Congress
persuade themselves his Majesty will not be driven to make sacrifices
equally painful to him and injurious to us; but that, as we owe our
success in war to his magnanimity and generosity, we may be equally
indebted to his justice and firmness for an honorable peace.
It is not improbable, that Great Britain will endeavor to make some
stipulations in favor of their American partisans, who have been
banished the country, or whose property has been forfeited. You will
doubtless be sensible of the inconvenience and danger, to which their
return will subject us, and the injustice of restoring to them what
they have so justly forfeited; while no compensation is made to us
for the loss of property, and the calamities they have occasioned.
There can be little doubt, that every society may rightfully banish
from among them those, who aim at its subversion, and forfeit the
property, which they can only be entitled to by the laws, and under
the protection of the society, which they attempt to destroy. Without
troubling you, therefore, on the point of right, I will just mention a
few of the consequences that would result from a stipulation in their
favor.
In the first place, it will excite general dissatisfaction and
tumults. They are considered here as the authors of the war. Those who
have lost relations and friends by it, those who have been insulted by
them while starving in prisons and prison-ships, those who have been
robbed and plundered, or who have had their houses burned and their
families ill treated by them, will, in despite of all law, or
treaties, avenge themselves, if the real or supposed authors of these
calamities ever put themselves in their power; nor will the government
be able to prevent what the feeling of the body of the people will
justify.
Should they be permitted to reside among us, they will neglect no
means to injure and subvert our constitution and government, and to
sow divisions among us in order to pave the way for the introduction
of the old system. They will be dangerous partisans of the enemy,
equally unfriendly to France and to us, and will show themselves such
upon every occasion. To restore their property in many instances is
now become impossible. It has been sold from hand to hand; the money
arising from it has been sunk by depreciation in the public treasury.
To raise the value by taxes, or to wrest the lands from the hands of
the proprietors, is equally unjust and impossible. Many of the very
people, who would demand the restitution, have grown rich by the spoil
and plunder of this country. Many others, who were beggars at the
beginning of this war, owe their present affluence to the same cause.
So that at least the account between the two nations should be
liquidated, before any claim can be set up by the aggressors. How far
it will be possible to obtain a compensation for the injuries wantonly
done by the enemy, you will be best able to judge; be assured that it
is anxiously desired.
Give me leave to mention to you the necessity of stipulating for the
safe delivery of all records, and other papers of a public and private
nature, which the enemy have possessed themselves of; particularly of
the records of New York, which Mr Tryon sent to England; and the
private papers of many gentlemen of the law in different parts of the
continent, by which the rights of individuals may be materially
affected.
Thus, Sir, I have touched upon the principal points, that America
wishes to attain in the peace, which must end this bloody war. Perhaps
in so doing I have given both you and myself unnecessary trouble,
since I have urged nothing but what your own knowledge of the country,
and that of the other gentlemen in the commission, would have
suggested to you. However, conceiving that circumstances might render
it necessary for you to declare, that you spoke nothing more than the
prevailing sentiments of your Court, this letter will serve to vouch
for the assertion.
Should the Floridas be ceded to Spain, as there is nothing Congress
have more at heart than to maintain that friendly intercourse with
them, which this revolution has happily begun, it will be essential to
fix their limits precisely, for which purpose the instructions to Mr
Adams will serve as your directions.
Affairs here are in the same state that they were when I last wrote,
except that the enemy in South Carolina have called in all their
outposts, and shut themselves up in Charleston, where they will be
closely invested when General St Clair joins, which must have happened
about the last of December. The brilliant expedition to St Eustatia
does the highest honor to the Marquis de Bouillé and the French
nation. I flatter myself that it will be of singular use to Mr Adam's
negotiations.
I have the honor to be, dear Sir, &c. &c.
ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON.
* * * * *
TO DAVID HARTLEY.
Passy, January 15th, 1782.
Dear Sir,
I received a few days since your favor of the 2d instant, in which you
tell me, that Mr Alexander had informed you, "America was disposed to
enter into a separate treaty with Great Britain." I am persuaded, that
your strong desire for peace has misled you, and occasioned your
greatly misunderstanding Mr Alexander; as I think it scarce possible
he should have asserted a thing _so utterly void of foundation_. I
remember that you have, as you say, often urged this on former
occasions, and that it always gave me more disgust than my friendship
for you permitted me to express. But since you have now gone so far
as to carry such a proposition to Lord North, as arising from us, it
is necessary that I should be explicit with you, and tell you plainly,
that I never had such an idea, and I believe there is not a man in
America, a few _English tories_ excepted, that would not spurn at the
thought of deserting a noble and generous friend, for the sake of a
truce with an unjust and cruel enemy.
I have again read over your Conciliatory Bill, with the manuscript
propositions that accompany it, and am concerned to find, that one
cannot give vent to a simple wish for peace, a mere sentiment of
humanity, without having it interpreted as _a disposition to submit to
any base conditions_ that may be offered us, rather than continue the
war; for, on no other supposition could you propose to us a truce of
ten years, during which we are to engage not to assist France, while
you continue the war with her. A truce too, wherein nothing is to be
mentioned that may weaken your pretensions to dominion over us, which
you may therefore resume at the end of the term, or at pleasure; when
we should have so covered ourselves with infamy, by our treachery to
our first friend, as that no other nation can ever after be disposed
to assist us, however cruelly you might think fit to treat us. Believe
me, my dear friend, America has too much understanding, and is too
sensible of the value of the world's good opinion, to forfeit it all
by such perfidy. The Congress will never instruct their Commissioners
to obtain a peace on such ignominious terms; and though there can be
but few things in which I should venture to disobey their orders, yet,
if it were possible for them to give me such an order as this, I
should certainly refuse to act; I should instantly renounce their
commission, and banish myself forever from so infamous a country.
We are a little ambitious too of your esteem; and as I think we have
acquired some share of it, by our manner of making war with you, I
trust we shall not hazard the loss of it, by consenting meanly to a
dishonorable peace.
Lord North was wise in demanding of you some authorised acknowledgment
of the proposition from authorised persons. He justly thought it too
improbable to be relied on, so as to lay it before the Privy Council.
You can now inform him, that the whole has been a mistake, and that no
such proposition as that of a separate peace has been, is, or is ever
likely to be made by me; and I believe by no other authorised person
whatever in behalf of America. You may further, if you please, inform
his Lordship, that Mr Adams, Mr Laurens, Mr Jay, and myself, have long
since been empowered, by a special commission, to treat of peace
whenever a negotiation shall be opened for that purpose; but it must
always be understood, that this is to be in conjunction with our
allies, conformably to the solemn treaties made with them.
You have, my dear friend, a strong desire to promote peace, and it is
a most laudable and virtuous desire. Permit me then to wish, that you
would, in order to succeed as a mediator, avoid such invidious
expressions as may have an effect in preventing your purpose. You tell
me that no stipulation for our independence must be in the treaty,
because you "verily believe, so deep is the jealousy between England
and France, that England would fight for a straw, to the last man and
the last shilling, rather than be _dictated to_ by France." And again,
that, "the nation would proceed to every extremity, rather than be
brought to a formal recognition of independence at the _haughty
command_ of France." My dear Sir, if every proposition of terms for
peace, that may be made by one of the parties at war, is to be called
and considered by the other as _dictating_, and a _haughty command_,
and for that reason rejected, with a resolution of fighting to the
last man rather than agree to it, you see that in such case no treaty
of peace is possible.
In fact we began the war for independence on your government, which we
found tyrannical, and this before France had anything to do with our
affairs; the article in our treaty whereby the "two parties engage,
that neither of them shall conclude either truce or peace with Great
Britain, without the formal consent of the other first obtained; and
mutually engage, not to lay down their arms until the independence of
the United States shall have been formally or _tacitly_ assured, by
the treaty or treaties, that shall terminate the war," was an article
inserted at our instance, being in our favor. And you see, by the
article itself, that your great difficulty may be easily got over, as
a formal acknowledgment of our independence is not made necessary. But
we hope by God's help to enjoy it; and I suppose we shall fight for it
as long as we are able.
I do not make any remarks upon the other propositions, because I think
that unless they were made by authority, the discussion of them is
unnecessary and may be inconvenient. The supposition of our being
disposed to make a separate peace I could not be silent upon, as it
materially affected our reputation and its essential interests. If I
have been a little warm on that offensive point, reflect on your
repeatedly urging it, and endeavor to excuse me.
Whatever may be the fate of our poor countries, let you and me die as
we have lived, in peace with each other.
Assuredly I continue, with great and sincere esteem, my dear friend,
yours most affectionately,
B. FRANKLIN.
* * * * *
TO THE COUNT DE VERGENNES.
Passy, January 18th, 1782.
Sir,
I received the letter your Excellency did me the honor of writing to
me this day enclosing a Memorial,[28] which relates to the interests
of some subjects of the Emperor, residing at Ostend, who allege that a
ship of theirs has been taken by an American privateer, and carried
into Boston, on pretence that the property was English, &c. I shall
immediately transmit the Memorial to Congress, as desired. But there
being Courts of Admiralty established in each of the United States, I
conceive, that the regular steps to be taken by the complainants would
be an application for justice to those Courts by some person on the
spot, duly authorised by them as their agents, and in case the
judgment of the Court is not satisfactory, that then they appeal to
the Congress, which cannot well take cognisance of such matters in the
first instance.
[28] See this Memorial in Franklin's Works, Vol. V p. 122
The merchants of Ostend may possibly not have as yet correspondents
established in all the States, but any merchant of credit in the
country would transact such business on receiving their request, with
the proper power of attorney; or if His Imperial Majesty should think
fit to appoint a Consul General to reside in those States, such an
officer might at all times assist his compatriots with his counsels
and protection, in any affairs that they might have in that country. I
am the more particular in mentioning this to your Excellency, because
I apprehend these cases may hereafter be frequent, and if the
complaints are to be addressed to you and me, we are likely to have a
great deal of trouble, as I am informed that it is become a daily
practice for outward bound English ships to put into Ostend, make a
formal pretended sale of ship and cargo to a merchant of the place,
who furnishes imperial papers for the voyage under his own name, and
receives a certain sum per cent for the operation.
This is said to be a branch of great profit to the Flemish merchants,
and that a very great number of English ships are now at sea with such
papers, and I suspect even from their own manner of stating the
transaction, that the ship and cargo reclaimed by the complainants are
of that kind. This seems to me an abuse of the neutrality, as these
fictitious profits are added to the advantage of real carriage for the
belligerent nations, they make it too much the interest of neutral
neighbors to foment wars and obstruct peace, that such profits may
continue. And if it is to be understood as a settled point, that such
papers are to protect English property, the fitters out of privateers
from France, Spain, Holland, and America, will in another year be all
ruined, for they will find none but Flemish ships upon the ocean.
With the greatest respect, &c.
B. FRANKLIN.
* * * * *
ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON TO B. FRANKLIN.
Philadelphia, January 23d, 1782.
Dear Sir,
An express just going to the Chesapeake, gives me an opportunity of
sending by the Hermione, a resolution passed yesterday. My letters by
this conveyance are so long, that they leave me nothing to add, unless
it be, that we have just received letters from Mr Deane, (copies are
enclosed) which confirm the authenticity of those published in his
name by Mr Rivington, mentioned in my former letters. In one of those
publications he expressly advises a return to the government of Great
Britain; and, as this could not be effected through Congress, that it
should be done by committees, which the people should choose for that
express purpose. These, of which I now send you copies, were delivered
here by the person to whom Mr Deane gave them, so that there can be no
doubt of their authenticity.
We have nothing new except what you will learn from the papers
herewith transmitted. As I doubt not you are upon the most
confidential terms with the Marquis de Lafayette, I could wish him to
see my last letter. You will observe, that I have omitted (for
reasons, that you will easily conceive) to make use of the arguments,
which may be derived from the 11th and 12th articles of our treaty
with France. The Commissioners will exercise their own discretion in
applying them, when a negotiation shall be opened.
We were much surprised at not receiving a single line by the frigate,
which lately arrived at the Chesapeake, from any one of our foreign
Ministers. It is upwards of three months since we have had a letter
of intelligence from Europe. Congress complains of these neglects,
(for such they consider them) and I flatter myself, that in future, as
a channel is now open through this office for a regular
correspondence, this cause of complaint will be removed, and that
letters and papers will be lodged with our consuls to go by every
conveyance.
Be persuaded, Sir, that I shall omit no opportunity to give you every
information, which may contribute to your private amusements or the
public benefit.
I have the honor to be, &c.
ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON.
_P. S._ I have this moment received resolutions from Congress, (copies
of which I enclose), which serve to show their sense of the importance
of the fisheries and their western extent, and add new weight to the
arguments which I had the honor to urge. You will be pleased to
transmit copies of them to Mr Jay and Mr Adams.
* * * * *
DAVID HARTLEY TO B. FRANKLIN.
London, January 24th, 1782.
My Dear Sir,
I received yours of the 15th instant this day. I must take the
earliest opportunity of setting you right in one mistake, which runs
through your whole letter, and which to you, under that mistake, must
be a very delicate point. You seem to apprehend that America has been
stated in the proposition to Lord North, as "disposed to enter into a
separate treaty with Great Britain;" but you meet the condition, viz.
in the words immediately following, "_and that their allies were
disposed to consent to it_." There cannot possibly be any supposition
of treachery to allies, in any proposition to which they may
_consent_. A separate treaty, with the _consent_ of the allies of
America, was the proposition communicated to me by Mr Alexander, and
which I laid before the Minister, and which I reported back again to
Mr Alexander in writing, when I showed him the paper entitled
"Conciliatory Propositions," which I took care to reduce to writing,
with a view of avoiding mistakes; therefore, I have not
_misunderstood_ Mr Alexander. I have since seen Mr A. many times, and
he has always stated one and the same proposition, viz. that America
was disposed to enter into a separate treaty, because their _allies
were disposed to consent that they should_; therefore there cannot
exist a suspicion of treachery. It occurred to me once while I was
writing, to bar against that misconstruction, but having specified the
_consent of the allies of America_ in the same sentence, I could not
conceive such a misconstruction to have been possible.
You have mistaken another point greatly. You say, "a truce for _ten_
years." There is not in the bill any such disposition or thought; on
the contrary, it is specified in the enclosed paper that it is kept
_indefinite_, for the sole purpose of avoiding the suspicion which you
have suggested. The truce may be for twenty, or fifty, or one hundred
years; in my opinion the longer the better. But in any case, what I
mean now to state is the _indefinite_ term in the bill. The articles
of intercourse are only proposed for ten years certain, just to strew
the way with inviting and conciliatory facilities, in the hope that _a
little time given for cooling_ would confirm a perpetual peace. If I
were permitted to be the mediator, I should certainly propose the
truce for twenty years; but if no more than ten years could be
obtained, I would certainly not refuse such a ground of pacification
and treaty. I refer you to several of my letters two or three years
ago, for the justification of my sentiments on that head.
Another point; look at all my letters since 1778, and see if I have at
any time suggested any breach of treaty or of honor; on the contrary,
I think a faithless nation, if exterminated, would not deserve the
pity of mankind. I speak of all I know in the treaty between America
and France, and what I think reasonable upon the case itself. If
America is further bound than we know of, they must abide by it. I
speak to the apparent and public foundation of the treaty, article
second, with the provision of _tacitly_, from article eighth; and now
I refer you to my letter to you, as long ago as April 10th, 1779; "If
beyond this essential and directed end, and upon grounds totally
unconnected with that alliance, not upon motives of magnanimity _for
the relief of an innocent people_, but from distinct and unconnected
motives of private European sentiments, America should be dragged into
the consequence of a general European war, she may apply to France the
apostrophe of the poet, speaking in the person of Helen to Paris, _non
hoc pollicitus tuæ_." You see, therefore, that our sentiments have
been uniform, and as I think, reasonable, because I still remain in
those sentiments.
Suppose, for instance, (and you may call it the case of a straw if you
please) that Great Britain and France should continue the war for ten
years, on the point of a commissary at Dunkirk, aye or no;--would it
be _reasonable_, or a _casus foederis_, that America should be
precluded from a separate treaty for ten years, and therefore
involved in the consequential war, after the _essential and direct
ends_ of the treaty of February 6th, 1778, were accomplished? As far
as my judgment goes, upon the knowledge of such facts as are public, I
should think it was neither _reasonable_ nor a _casus foederis_. This
is the breviate of the argument, in which there is no thought or
suggestion of any breach of faith or honor. I did conclude that France
was disposed to give their _consent_, because Mr Alexander informed me
so, and because I thought it reasonable that France should consent,
and reasonable that America should enjoy the benefit of that consent.
I transmitted it to Lord North, as a proposition temperate and pacific
on the part of America, and consented to by their allies, and on no
other ground did I transmit or propose it. All that your letter tells
me, is, "that America will not break with her allies, and that her
Commissioners will not entertain such a thought;" but give me leave to
add, that they, as honest men, cannot disdain such a thought more than
I do; every honest man ought to disdain the office, or the thought of
proposing a breach of faith to them. I have often told you, that such
an office or such a thought shall never be mine.
But you have not told me that France would not be disposed to consent
to a separate treaty of peace, for that ally whose peace was the
original declared object of the alliance, in the case supposed, viz.
of certain supposed or real punctillios between two proud and
belligerent nations, which might possibly involve America for years in
a war totally unconnected with the objects of the alliance. Besides,
if any rubs should occur in the road to a general peace, France is too
proud a nation to say, that beyond the _policy_ of contributing to the
separation of America from Great Britain in any contest of rivalship,
they cannot meet their rivals in war, without the assistance of
America. I cannot conceive that the Minister of a great belligerent
nation could entertain such a thought, as affecting their own sense of
honor, or be so unreasonable to their allies, as to withhold consent
to their peace, when _the essential and direct ends_ of the alliance
were satisfied. Observe, I do not contend against a general peace; on
the contrary, I mean to recommend the most prudent means for producing
it. But, as an anxious lover of peace, I feel terrors which dismay me,
and I consider the dangers which may obstruct a general peace, arising
from the pride and prejudices of nations, which are not to be
controlled in their heat by arguments of reason or philosophy.
Can any man in reason and philosophy tell me, why any two nations in
the world are called natural enemies, as if it were the ordinance of
God and nature? I fear it is too deeply engraved in the passions of
man, and for that reason I would elude and evade the contest with such
passions. I would strew the road to peace with flowers, and not with
thorns. _Haughty_, and _dictating_, and _commands_, are no words of
mine; I abhor them, and I fear them. I would elude their force by
gentle means, and step by step. In article eighth, there are the
following words; "By the treaty or treaties that shall terminate the
war." Let us have one treaty begun, and I think the rest would follow.
I fear when contending passions are raised, lest we should lose all by
grasping at too much.