Papers of John Adams, volume 14

To Robert R. Livingston, 18 November 1782 Adams, John Livingston, Robert R.
To Robert R. Livingston
Sir Paris November 18. 17821

The Instruction from Congress, which directs Us to pay So Strict an Attention to the French Ministry, and to follow their Advice is conceived in Terms So universall and unlimited, as to give a great deal of Anxiety to My Mind.

There is no Man more impressed with the Obligation of Obedience to Instructions. But in ordinary Cases, the Principal is so near the Deputy, as to be able to attend to the whole Progress of the Business, and to be informed of every new Fact and of every Sudden Thought. Ambassadors in Europe can Send Expresses to their Courts, and give and receive Intelligence, in a few days, with the Utmost Certainty. In Such Cases, there is no Room for Mistake, Misunderstanding or Surprize. But in our Case, it is very different. We are at an immense distance.— Dispatches are lyable to foul Play, and Vessells are Subject to accidents.— New Scenes open, the Time presses, various Nations are in Suspence and, Necessity forces Us to act.

What can We do? If a french Minister advises Us, to ceede to the Spaniards, the whole River of Missisippi, and five hundred miles of Territory to the Eastward of it are We bound by our Instruction to put our Signature to the Cession, when the English themselves are willing We should extend to the River, and enjoy our natural Right to its Navigation? If We Should be councilled to relinquish our Right to the Fishery, on the grand Bank of Newfoundland, when the British Ministry are ready by Treaty to acknowledge our Right to it, are We obliged to relinquish it? If We are advised to restore and 67compensate the Tories, are We to comply?— If We know or have Reason to believe that Things which will have Weight upon The Minds of the British Ministry, against Us upon Some Points, will be communicated to them in Some Way or other Secret or open, if We communicate it to this Court, are We bound to do it.?

I can not think, that a Construction So litteral and Severe was ever intended to be put upon it. and therefore I see no Way, of doing my Duty to Congress but to interpret the Instruction, as We do all general, Precepts and Maxims, by Such Restrictions and Limitations as Reason, Necessity and the Nature of Things demand.

It may Sometimes be known to a deputy, that an Instruction from his Principal was given upon Information of mistaken Facts. What is he to do.— When he knows, that if the Truth had been known, his Principal would have given a direct Contrary order, is he to follow that which issued upon Mistake.? When he knows, or has only good reason to believe that if his Principal were upon the Spot, and fully informed of the present State of Facts, he would give Contrary directions, is he bound by Such as were given before?

It cannot be denied that Instructions are binding, that it is a Duty to obey them, and that a departure from them cannot be justified.—

But I think it cannot be denied on the other hand, that in our peculiar Situation Cases may happen in which it will might become our Duty, to depend upon being excused, or if you will pardoned, for presuming that if Congress were upon the Spot they would judge as We do.—

I presume not to dictate, nor to advise, but I may venture to give my opinion as I do freely and with much real Concern for the Public, that it would be better if every Instruction in being were totally repealed, which enjoins upon any American Minister to follow the Advice, or ask the Advice, or even to communicate with any French or other Minister or Ambassador in the World. it is an inextricable Embarrassment every where.— Advice would not be more seldom asked, nor Communication less frequent.— it would be more freely given. a Communication of Information or a request of Council would then be recd as a Compliment and a mark of Respect. it is now considered as a Duty and a Right. Your Ministers would have more Weight and be the more respected through the World.— Congress cannot do too much to give Weight to their own Ministers, for they may depend upon it great and unjustifiable Pains are taken to prevent them from acquiring Reputation, and even to prevent an Idea taking root in any Part of Europe, that any Thing has been or 68can be done by them.— and there is nothing that humbles and depresses, nothing that shackles and confines, in Short nothing that renders totally useless all your Ministers in Europe, So much as these Positive Injunctions to consult, and communicate, with French Ministers upon all occasions, and to follow their Advice.— And I really think it would be better, to constitute the Count de Vergennes our Sole Minister, and give him full Powers to make Peace and treat with all Europe, then to continue any of Us in the service under the Instructions in being if they are to be understood in that unlimited sense which Some Persons contend for.

I hope, that nothing indecent, has escaped me upon this Occasion. if any Expressions, appear too Strong, the great importance of the Subject and the deep Impression it has made on my Mind and Heart, must be my opology.

With great Respect and Esteem I have &c

LbC (Adams Papers); internal address: “Secretary Livingston”; APM Reel 108.

1.

Congress’ dispatch books indicate that this letter was received on “14 & 15” March 1783 and it is there described as containing “Observations on the instructions of 15 June [1781],” but there is no copy among Congress’ papers (PCC, No. 185, III, f. 56).

From Robert R. Livingston, 18 November 1782 Livingston, Robert R. Adams, John
From Robert R. Livingston
No: 13 Sir— Philadelphia, 18th: Novr. 17821

Since my Letter of the 6th, Congress have been pleased to appoint Mr Jefferson, one of their Ministers plenipotentiary for negociating peace— I have not yet received an answer to my Letter informing him of this event, tho’ I have some reason to believe he will accept the appointment—2 I believe I mentioned to you that Congress had refused to accept Mr Laurens's resignation— Many members have since seen with great pain the petition published in the parlimentary debates as his— I Sincerely wish that it may appear to be a forgery since the language it Speaks does not consist with the dignified character he holds— He has since informed Congress that he purposes to return to England & come out to this Country by the way of New York I hope the determination of Congress will reach him before he leaves France, as it will have an awkward appearance to send to England for an American Minister3

All the contracts we have received of you have been sent back with the ratifications endorsed— some of them have I hope reached 69you—before this, so that the last hand may be put to the important business of the Loan

So much has been said of Captain Asgyl, upon whom, as you have been informed, the lot fell when it was determined to avenge the death of Captain Huddy, that I should let you know the issue of this business, which you may in part collect from the enclosed resolve— Tho’ you may be ignorant of the reasons which induced Congress to pass it, & again render abortive their determination to punish the unexampled cruelty of the Enemy— Mrs Asgyl, the mother of this unfortunate young man, had Sufficient influence at the Court of France to obtain its interposition in his favor. A Letter was written on the subject by Count de Vergennes to General Washington, enclosing one from Mrs Asgyl to the Count, which was extremely pathetic— The Minister of France had orders from his master to support this application, it was thought adviseable that this should not be formally done— But that the discharge of Asgyl should be grounded upon the reasons expressed in the preamble of the resolution— Congress the more readily acquiesced in this measure, as there is ground to hope from the late conduct of the enemy that they have determined to adopt a more civilized mode of carrying on the war in future—4 They have called off the Savages, & a large number of prisoners have been returned on parole from Canada—

We have yet no certain account of the evacuation of Charles Town, tho’ we know that the first division of the Troops & a considerable number of inhabitants Sailed the 19th: ulto: as it is said, for Augustine— It is probably evacuated by this time.

It would give me pleasure to receive from you an accurate account of the differences which have arisen between the Court of Denmark & the United Provinces, & the effects they may probably produce— We are imperfectly acquainted with facts here, and still less with the politicks of the Northern Courts; you will sometimes extend your observations to them—5 I confide too much in the wisdom of the States general, to believe that they will omit every honorable means to prevent an accession of strength to Great Britain at this Critical moment.

I have the honor to be, Sir / With great respect & esteem / Your most obedt: humble servant

Robt R Livingston

RC and enclosures (Adams Papers); internal address: “Honble: John Adams—”; endorsed by John Thaxter: “No. 13. / Mr. Secy. Livingston / 18th. Novr: 1782.” Dupl (MHi:John Adams, Embassy MSS). Tripl (Adams Papers).

70 1.

JA replied to this letter and that of 6 Nov. on 23 Jan. 1783, below.

2.

Livingston enclosed a copy of Congress’ 12 Nov. resolution renewing Thomas Jefferson's 15 July 1781 appointment and commission as a member of the joint peace commission ( JCC , 23:720–721). Livingston informed Jefferson of Congress’ action in a letter of 13 Nov., to which Jefferson replied accepting the appointment, on the 26th. By 14 Feb. 1783, however, news from Europe led Congress to ask Jefferson to delay his departure and on 1 April to inform him that his mission was no longer necessary. Jefferson's European mission remained in abeyance until 7 May 1784, when Congress named him to join JA and Benjamin Franklin in the joint commission to negotiate commercial treaties in Europe. He ultimately sailed from Boston on 5 July and reached Paris on 6 Aug. (Jefferson, Papers , 6:202, 206; 7:363–364; JCC , 24:132, 226; 26:356).

3.

Livingston had not specifically mentioned Congress’ refusal of Laurens’ resignation on 17 Sept. in any of his previous letters. In his letter of 15 Sept., however, he had enclosed a copy of Congress’ 17 Sept. resolution requiring the four peace commissioners in Europe to participate in the peace negotiations (vol. 13:465–468). For the controversy over Laurens’ resignation, stemming largely from concerns over Edmund Burke's Dec. 1781 petition to Parliament on his behalf, see same, p. 509–510.

4.

For the plight of Capt. Charles Asgill, who had been selected for execution in retaliation for the murder of an American prisoner, Capt. Josiah Huddy, by a loyalist officer, Capt. Richard Lippincott, see same, p. 85. Livingston enclosed copies of Congress’ resolutions of 7 Nov., freeing Asgill, and 8 Nov., requiring George Washington to demand that the British commander, Gen. Sir Guy Carleton, take decisive action with regard to Huddy's murder ( JCC , 23:715, 716–717). For the 18 July letter from Lady Asgill to the Comte de Vergennes on her son's behalf and Vergennes’ letter to Washington of 29 July requesting Asgill's release on humanitarian grounds and as a favor to the French Crown, see Wharton, Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev. , 5:634–636.

5.

For JA's comments on the dispute between Denmark and the Netherlands as well as the Armed Neutrality, see his reply of 23 Jan., below.