Adams Family Correspondence, volume 11
th1796
Mr Van Persyn the bearer of this; is a Dutch gentleman the brother in law of Mr Jean Luzac by whom he has been recommended to me He proposes to settle in this Country and to lay out his Capital in a farm Mr Luzac and my brother Thomas have requested my advice and assistance for him. He has also letters for you.1
We are exceedingly anxious to know what will be the result of the disposition of The House of Representatives Our Merchants are alarmed at the present appearances business is at a stand There are to be meetings this evening of the Merchants and underwriters to consult for the Common good.2 Flour fell on Saturday from twenty five to twenty shillings such are the blessed effects of Southern dishonesty. What would be the consequence should The Representatives refuse to appropriate? An idea is entertained by some people here that The treaty may be carried into effect by individual subscription I beleive that idea is falacious Nor do I see how the difficulty is to be surmounted. Our Legislature adjourned last week to meet again in November to Chuse Electors and I dare say 257 everything will go on smoothly. The last session has been remarkably harmonious and the majority will be greater the next election.3
My last accounts from My brothers are not later than the 30th of December they were then in good health.
I am Sir your affectionate son
sAdams
RC (Adams Papers).
Govert Jan van Persijn was probably carrying two 11 Dec. 1795 letters to JA, one from C. W. F. Dumas and one from Jean Luzac (both Adams Papers). Van Persijn spent a few days with JA in Philadelphia in late May or early June 1796, but it is unclear if he delivered any other letters to JA, who received this letter by post on 19 April.
The meeting of the merchants and traders of New York City took place on 19 April. The group resolved to present an address to the House of Representatives on the execution of the Jay Treaty and to correspond with other New York counties and American trading towns on the issue. According to the New York meeting, the treaty was “a point of the greatest consequence to this young and rising country—affording a prospect of durable peace; and of an uninterrupted progress … which will enable us to defy the enmity of foreign powers, without those immense sacrifices which war in our present situation, must inevitably produce.” In a 24 April letter to Rufus King, Alexander Hamilton noted that the address “went yesterday by express. It had more than 3200 signers. … Nothing can more clearly demonstrate our unanimity & I feel no doubt of equal or greater unanimity throughout the state” (New York Journal, 22 April; Hamilton, Papers, 20:136).
The New York legislative session ended on 11 April and would reconvene on 1 Nov. with a Federalist majority in both houses after substantial gains were made during the spring 1796 elections (N.Y. Senate, Jour., 19th sess., 1796, p. 110, Evans, No. 30871; 20th sess., 1796–1797, p. 3, Evans, No. 32554; Young, Democratic Republicans, p. 465–466). For the apportionment resulting from the 1795 state census, see vol. 10:474.