Papers of John Adams, volume 18

To John Adams from John Jay, 19 August 1786 Jay, John Adams, John

From John Jay

Dr. Sir New York. 19th: August 1786

I wrote to you on the 7th: of last Month, and also on the 18th: of this enclosing some Papers respecting an american Vessel seized at Barbadoes by a british Man of War.1 I have been honored with yours of 16th. 25th. and 28th. May and 6th. June last, which with the Papers accompanying them were immediately laid before Congress.—

The Situation in which the Want of an adequate Representation had for many Months placed Congress, put it out of their Power to decide on several of my Reports, some of which were founded on your Letters. These Delays oblige me to leave those Letters unanswered, and to leave you without Instructions on Points on which I think you should be furnished with the Sentiments of Congress.—

We daily expect to receive the Treaty with Portugal. {I have advised that new commissons be Issued to you and Mr. Jefferson.}2

You will herewith receive the late Requisition of Congress, their Ordinance for the Indian Department and several other printed Papers.3 A Vessel for London has just touched here, and given me an Opportunity of writing you these few Lines. I am mortified to write you such Letters, but that must be the Case, until Congress enable me to write more particularly and satisfactorily. You want Answers to many Questions, and tho’ I am not at a Loss to form a Judgement of what they should be, yet my private Sentiments and those of Congress may not coincide.—

With great and sincere Esteem and Regard, I am, Dr Sir, / Your most obedient Servt.

John Jay— 429

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “Hoñble John Adams Esquire / Minister Plenipoy. of the U.S. / at the Court of London”; endorsed: “Mr Jay 19. August / recd. 12. October 1786.”

In his 7 July letter (Adams Papers), Jay noted that he had received and sent to Congress the commissioners’ 25 April letter and its enclosures, above, and WSS’s 11 April letter ( Dipl. Corr., 1783–1789 , 3:22), with which were enclosed Paul R. Randall’s 17 Feb. letter to JA , above, and John Lamb’s 16 Feb. letter, for which see note 1 to Randall’s letter. Jay also mentioned his 6 June letter to JA , above, and asked JA to forward a letter to Richard Hanson Harrison at Cádiz. He did not, however, mention enclosing any documents regarding the case of the brig Jane and Elizabeth, for which see his 18 Aug. letter, and notes, above.

The decoded passage, in WSS’s hand, was written below Jay’s signature. Jay had proposed that the joint commission be renewed in an 11 May report to Congress, but no action was taken ( JCC , 30:261–262).

The enclosures have not been found, but for Congress’ 2 Aug. requisition from the states and its 7 Aug. “Ordinance for the Regulation of Indian Affairs,” see JCC , 31:459–465, 490–493.

To John Adams from Charles Storer, 19 August 1786 Storer, Charles Adams, John

From Charles Storer

Dear sir, Boston. 19th. August. 1786.

Excuse me if I only enclose letters to your family—1 I have not wherewithal to gratify you in the News way, as our brightest prospects are but gloomy—and I know you have enough to vex you where you are— I mentioned to Mrs: Adams a County Convention forming here in the County of Bristol— They have called upon almost every other County to join them— Worcester however has given them a positive denial & utterly disapproves their Conduct— This I hope will have weight—2

In my last I troubled you with particulars respecting our Eastern boundaries— All here depend upon your opinion on the subject—and I hope you will not be of the opinion with our Lt: Governor, who says—“pho! pho! don’t let us make any disturbance— let us give up this disputed Country— It is not worth quarrelling about”— This tract of Country, however, is from 15. to 20. miles on the Bay of Passamaquoddy, and stretching it to the sources of the two disputed Rivers includes some hundreds of miles— You will judge if this should be given up so tamely—3

I have the pleasure to inform you of your family’s being in usual health— Your Son Thomas is to be examined at Cambridge the next week—4 John & Charles have been […] resident there—

If I can get any Newspapers will enclose them to you—and have only to add that I am with great esteem & respect, dr: sir, / Yr: much oblig’d / humle: servt:

Chas: Storer. 430

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “John Adams Esquire.”; endorsed by WSS: “August 19. 1786. / Charles Storer—” Some loss of text where the seal was removed.

These letters cannot be positively identified because there were apparently no replies, but they presumably included Storer’s letters to AA2 of 8 Aug. and to AA of 15 Aug. ( AFC , 7:311–312, 321–322).

Storer’s 15 Aug. letter to AA reported the calling of county conventions to seek redress for numerous outstanding grievances. There Storer expressed considerably more anxiety over the outcome of such assemblies than he did in his letter to JA. “The devil I am afraid,” Storer wrote, “has got in among us, and I dread his soon throwing us into a state of anarchy and confusion.” Storer’s comments are important because when his letters arrived in mid-October—possibly with the newspapers mentioned in this letter’s final paragraph—they constituted the first news received by the Adamses about the unrest that evolved into Shays’ Rebellion.

That Storer’s letters arrived in mid-October is indicated by a passage in AA’s Dft of her 15 Oct. letter to her sister Elizabeth Smith Shaw that was left out of the letter as sent (same, 7:374–375). AA wrote that “those who read our publick papers, more particularly some of the instructions to the Representitives and the county conventions will be led to think that our Liberty is become licentiousness. Publick principal and publick ends cannot be promoted by these illegal assemblies.”

Significantly, she did not refer to Storer’s reference in his letter to her that the protesters hoped to “shut up the Courts of Common Pleas.” The closing of the courts would have been even more disturbing to AA and JA than the calling of the conventions, but the first court closing occurred on 24 Aug. at Northampton, Mass., and thus would not have been mentioned in any newspapers received with Storer’s 19 Aug. letter. There are no extant replies by either JA or AA to Storer’s letters. Indeed, neither of them wrote to anyone about the disorders in Massachusetts until late November, after AA saw an account of the Hampshire convention in a London newspaper (same, 7:395), and JA received letters from Rufus King of 3 Oct., below, and John Jay of 4 Oct. (Adams Papers). For the progress of the revolt see the letters, none of which reached London until early 1787, from Storer of 16 and 26 Sept. 1786, Richard Cranch of 3 Oct., and James Warren of 22 Oct., all below.

For Storer’s interest in lands along the Passamaquoddy Bay in Maine, see his 21 July letter, above.

TBA and Rev. John Shaw, his uncle and tutor, journeyed to Cambridge on 21 August. He was examined on the morning of the 22d and admitted to Harvard that day (JQA, Diary , 2:81).