Papers of John Adams, volume 14
e.fevr. 1783
Nos amis sont très contents de la Déclaration réitérée que je leur ai faite de votre part, &c., & vont agir en conséquence auprès de la Cour de France, compris celle d’Espagne, & auprès de vos 272Excellences. Ils me paroissent persuadés, que la mesure peut & doit réussir. Cependant, à tout événement, ils me chargent de proposer encore la question suivante, pour obtenir là-dessus une réponse, favorable s’il se peut, qui acheveroit de les mettre à l’aise, & de les tranquilliser.
“Q. Lorsque L. H. P. auront fait la proposition à la France, de signer conjointement avec l’Espagne, l’Amérique, & les Pays-Bas unis, une Convention fondée sur les principes de la Neutralité armée pour le maintien de la liberté de la Navigation;— au cas que la France & l’Espagne parussent vouloir reculer & différer une telle convention, ou S’y refuser avant la conclusion ou signature du Traité définitif;— Mr. Dana, & pendant son absence Mr. Adams, Soit seul & com̃e Ministre des Etats-Unis auprès de cette République, ou avec Mrs. ses Collegues, seroient-ils prets à signer une telle Convention provisionnelle, lorsqu’elle leur seroit proposée de la part de L. H. P., entre les Etats-Unis & les Pays-Bas unis?”
“On est persuadé ici, que sans un Traité pareil, soit entre la France, l’Espagne, les Etats-Unis & les Pays-Bas-Unis, ou, à défaut des deux premieres, au moins entre les deux dernieres Puissances, rien ne sauroit prévenir ni excuser la honte du Traité définitif pour cette République, qui n’est entrée en guerre que pour la liberté des mers, & qui en a fait une conditio sine qua non dans ses préliminaires de paix.”
Il est fort à souhaiter que l’un de ces deux arrangemens soit faisable à défaut de l’autre, parce que cela applaniroit tout d’un coup, le chemin au Traité définitif.— Il ne resteroit du moins d’autre difficulté que celle de Négapatnam & de la navigation par les Moluques, sur lesquelles je viens de lire le rapport des 17 Directeurs de la Compagnie, qui oppose les raisons les plus fortes à la cession de l’un & de l’autre.1
Mon opinion est, sauf toujours votre meilleur avis, que votre acquiescement à la demande de ces Messieurs, peut se fonder sur ces trois choses: 10. Sur la Résolution des Etats-unis du 5 Octobr 1780, com̃uniquée par vous-même à L. H. P. par Lettre du 8 Mars 1781;2 & sur ce que vous m’avez marqué, que vos pouvoirs à cet égard n’ont point été révoqués:— 20. sur ce que L. H. P. sont une des Parties de la Neutralité armée, à laquelle Mr. Dana attend qu’il plaise à une autre des Parties d’admettre les Etats-Unis:— sur ce qu’il ne s’agit, ce me semble, que de se garantir réciproquement, ce que vous avez déjà signé dans le Traité d’amitié & de Commerce conclu avec L. H. P.
Je suis avec tous les sentimens d’un vrai & grand respect, & en vous priant de les faire agréer aussi à LL. EE. Mrs. Franklin, Jay, Laurens, & Brantzen, Monsieur / De V. E. le très humble & très / obéissant serviteur
Translation
Our friends are very content with the renewed declaration that I have made to them on your part, etc., and will act accordingly with the courts of France and Spain, and with your excellencies. They seem to me convinced that the measure can and ought to succeed. But in any case, they instruct me again to ask the following question, in hopes of obtaining a favorable reply if possible, which would completely reassure them and put them at ease:
“Question. When their High Mightinesses have made their proposal to France that it sign jointly with Spain, America, and the United Netherlands an agreement based on the principles of the Armed Neutrality in order to maintain the freedom of navigation, should France and Spain seem inclined to defer such an agreement or to reject it before the conclusion or signature of the definitive treaty, would Mr. Dana (and in his absence, Mr. Adams, either acting alone or as minister of the United States to this republic, or in conjunction with his colleagues) be prepared to sign a provisional agreement of this nature between the United States and the United Netherlands when it is proposed by their High Mightinesses?
“We are convinced here that without such a treaty, whether between France, Spain, the United States, and the Netherlands, or, failing the two former, at least between the two latter powers, nothing could avert or excuse the shame of the definitive treaty for the Netherlands, which only went to war over the freedom of the seas and which made it a conditio sine qua non in its preliminaries to peace.”
It is most desirable that one of these two solutions be feasible if the other should fail, because it would immediately smooth the path to a definitive treaty. At least then the only remaining difficulty would be Negapatam and navigation through the Moluccas. I have just read a report on this matter by the seventeen directors of the company, which argues strongly against ceding either.1
My opinion—unless, of course, as always, you have a better one—is that your acquiescence to these gentlemen's demands could be based on the following three things: 1. On the resolution made by the United States on 5 October 1780, which you yourself communicated to their High Mightinesses in a letter of 8 March 1781,2 and in which you noted that your powers in this matter have not been revoked; 2. On the fact that their High Mightinesses are one of the parties involved in the Armed Neutrality, and that Mr. Dana is waiting until it pleases one of the other parties to admit 274the United States; On the fact that it seems to me simply a matter of guaranteeing mutually what has already been signed in the treaty of friendship and trade concluded with their High Mightinesses.
I am, with all the sentiments of true and great respect, sir, and pray that you present them also to their excellencies Franklin, Jay, Laurens, and Brantsen, your excellency's very humble and very obedient servant
RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “Paris à S. Excellce. Mr. Adams, M. P. des E. U.”; endorsed: “Mr Dumas Feb. 18 / 1783 / Ansd 23.”
For the substance of the Dutch East India Company's protest against any concessions in an Anglo-Dutch treaty with regard to the East Indies, which the company claimed would result in the rapid and total ruin of its trade and be in violation of the 1782 instructions to the Dutch peace negotiators, see the Gazette d’Amsterdam of 21 Feb., and vol. 13:248.
See JA's 29 Jan. letter to Dumas, note 1, above.
e.fevr. 1783
J’ai le plaisir de pouvoir vous donner enfin de bonnes nouvelles de Mr. votre fils. Le billet suivant m’a été écrit avant hier matin par Mr. Visscher
“J’ai vu une Lettre”1 Elle est de Mr. Van Der Borgh, Envoyé de cette rep. à Stockholm, à Mr. son frere ici. “de Stockholm du 31e. Janv. dans laquelle je trouve les Lignes suivantes, qui peuvent interesser Mr. Adams:—Le jeune Adams est allé passer l’hyver à Gottembourg & à Coppenhague. Je conjecture qu’il étoit déjà parti de Stockholm avant le 19 de Janvier”2 sans quoi Mr. Van der Borg l’auroit chargé d’une Lettre pour Mr. Visscher.
16 fevr. 1783
Or com̃e Mr. D’Asp a écrit non seulement à Coppenhague, mais aussi à Elseneur & à Gothenbourg, je ne doute pas que nous n’ayions bientôt de ses nouvelles directes, & qu’il ne se mette incessam̃ent en chemin pour venir ici, ou Made. Dumas & moi nous en aurons si bon soin, que vous n’aurez plus d’inquiétude sur son sujet.3
Je vois dans un de nos papiers Hollandois, à l’Article de Paris que sans nous avertir que vous nous quitterez, on nous annonce un autre Ministre, Mr. Faulkner.4 S’il en étoit quelque chose, com̃e je n’ai pas l’honneur de le connoître, pas même de nom, ayez la bonté de m’instruire.
275Je suis avec grand respect, / Monsieur votre très-humble / & très obeissant serviteur
Ayez la bonté Monsieur de cacheter & faire rendre l’incluse à Mr. De Lynde.5
P. S.6 Ma Lettre étoit fermée, & alloit partir, lorsque Mr. Pe. Alexe. Boué,7 Négociant de Hambourg, s’est présenté pour la seconde fois depuis 15 jours, avec une Lettre de change tirée par Mr. Charles Harras sur Votre Excellence, a l’ordre de Mr. Lagau Consul de France à Hambourg, de 50 Ducats, en date du 24 Décembre; & une Lettre de Mr. Lagau pour V. E. que voici. Il gardera celle de Change jusqu’à ce que vous m’honoriez de vos ordres pour que je la lui paie, ou pour la renvoyer, faute de paiement, à Mr. Lagau, sans protest pourtant.8
Translation
I have the pleasure of finally being able to give you good news of your son. The following note was written to me the day before yesterday by Mr. Visscher:
“I have seen a letter”1—it is from Mr. Van der Borch, the republic's envoy to Stockholm, to his brother here—“from Stockholm on 31 January. It contains the following lines, which may be of interest to Mr. Adams: ‘Young Adams went to spend the winter in Göteborg and Copenhagen.’ I would surmise he had already left Stockholm before 19 January,”2 or Mr. Van der Borch would have given him a letter for Mr. Visscher.
16 February 1783
Now, since Mr. Asp has written not only to Copenhagen but also to Elsinore and Göteborg, I have no doubt that we shall soon have direct news of him and that he shall set off instantly for The Hague. Madame Dumas and I shall take such good care of him that you need have no further worries on his count.3
I see in one of our Dutch papers a report from Paris announcing another minister, Mr. Faulkner.4 No one has warned us you would be leaving. If indeed this is true, since I have not the honor of knowing the gentleman, even by name, do please inform me of it.
I am with great respect, sir, your very humble and very obedient servant
Please be so kind, sir, as to seal and pass on the enclosed letter to Mr. De Lynden.5
P.S.6 My letter was already closed and about to leave when Mr. Pierre Alexandre Boué,7 a merchant from Hamburg, came to see me for the 276second time in fifteen days, with a bill of exchange dated 24 December for fifty ducats drawn by Mr. Charles Harras on your excellency, to the order of Mr. Lagau, French consul at Hamburg, as well as a letter for your excellency from Mr. Lagau, which I enclose. Mr. Boué will keep the letter of exchange until you favor me with orders to pay him or send it back without payment to Mr. Lagau without protest.8
RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “Paris à Son Excellence Mr. Adams, Mine. Plenipo: des E. U.”
These and the following quotation marks are supplied. The words between them are an interjection written by Dumas in the left margin and marked for insertion at this point.
The words from this point to the end of the paragraph are an interjection written by Dumas in the left margin and marked for insertion at this point.
Coincidentally, on 18 Feb. JA received a letter from JQA dated 1 Feb. at Göteborg, the first he had received from him since his departure from St. Petersburg. JQA wrote that he had been delayed by bad weather, which made travel difficult, and had not written previously because he was uncertain whether JA was at Paris or The Hague. JA replied that “you cannot imagine, the Anxiety I have felt on your Account, nor the Pleasure just received from your Letter,” a sentiment echoed in his Diary entry for 18 Feb. (
AFC
, 5:86–87, 97; JA, D&A
, 3:108).
The Dutch newspaper in which Dumas saw this item has not been identified, but the same report appeared in the London Chronicle of 22–25 Feb. and the Courier de l’Europe of 25 February. The account in the Chronicle, dated 9 Feb. at Paris, reads, “M. Falkner, it is said, will go to reside in Holland in quality of Ambassador,” adding that “Dr. Franklin will return to America to form a code of laws, agreeable to his promise.”
For Dumas’ letter to Baron de Lynden van Blitterswyck, see Nationaal Archief: Dumas Papers, Microfilm, Reel 2, f. 501.
The postscript was written on a separate piece of paper.
Dumas wrote Boué's first and middle names in the left margin.
Boué probably gave Dumas Lagau's letter of 14 Feb., above. For JA's directions regarding the Harras affair, see his reply of 23 Feb., below.