Papers of John Adams, volume 20

384 To John Adams from François D’Ivernois, 18 June 1790 D’Ivernois, François Adams, John
From François d’Ivernois
Monsieur Kensington ce 18 Juin 1790

Votre patience à lire le premier volume de l’histoire dont j’ai l’honneur de vous envoyer la suite m’autorisait suffisamment à cette liberte et je l’embrasse avec d’autant plus d’empressement qu’elle me procure l’o[cca]sion de me rappeler à l’un des hommes dont le souvenir m’est le plus précieux. J’y ai joint un double exemplaire complet afin que vous pussiez le remettre à quelque traducteur dans le cas ou vous auriez lieu de présumer, que présentant les objets les plus familiers aux Américains cet écrit vaudrait la peine d’etre traduit pour eux.1

Me voila depuis deux mois de retour d’un long voyage que vous m’avez vu commencer Monsieur, et dont la fin m’a présenté des tableaux bien plus satisfaisans que celui que nous offrit la Hollande en février 1788. Je retourne avec le fils de Ld. Eardley recommencer une nouvelle course pour la quelle dans les conjonctures actuelles de l’Europe nous aurions bien besoin de yeux aussi exercés que les votres, et je n’ai pas besoin de vous dire, je pense, avec quel plaisir je remplirais les ordres que vous voudriez me faire passer par l’adresse de Dd Chauvet Esq. Kensington square Kensington. 2

Je viens d’adresser à un tres bon littérateur Mr Berenger deLausanne vos deux volumes sur la Constitution d’amérique en l’invitant à en entreprendre la traduction, et à la tenir prete pour la seconde Législature des français—3 La non division de leur Corps Législatif qui était peut etre si nécessaire pour qu’il put édifier me parait presqu’inconciliable avec la marche nécessaire pour maintenir, et je ne serai vraiment rassuré sur la durée de la liberté française que lorsque le Corps Legislatif y sera partagé en deux factions.

J’ai l’honneur d’etre avec un profond respect / Monsieur / Votre tres humble / & tres obeissant serviteur

F d’Ivernois
TRANSLATION
Sir Kensington, 18 June 1790

Your patience in reading the first volume of the history of which I have the honor to send you the sequel encouraged me enough to take that liberty, and I embrace it with even greater alacrity as it gives me the chance to reach out again to one of the men whose memory is most precious to me. I enclosed a complete duplicate copy so that you may hand it to a given translator in case you have cause to consider that, by presenting topics most 385 familiar to Americans, this written work would be worth the trouble of translating it for them.1

It has now been two months since my return from a long voyage which you witnessed me begin, sir, and the conclusion of which presented me far more gratifying perspectives than those which Holland offered us in February 1788. I return with Lord Eardley’s son to take up a new course for which, in the present conditions in Europe, we would well need eyes as experienced as yours, and I need not tell you, I believe, with how much satisfaction I would fulfill the orders you may wish to forward to me at the address of David Chauvet Esquire Kensington square, Kensington. 2

I have just addressed your two volumes on the American constitution to a very good literary agent from Lausanne, Mr. Berenger, inviting him to undertake its translation, and to have it ready for the second French Legislative Assembly.3 The non-division of their legislative body which was perhaps so necessary for its establishment seems to be nearly irreconcilable with the necessary means to maintain it, and I will be truly reassured of lasting French liberty only when the legislative body shall be shared between two parties.

I have the honor to be, with a profound respect, sir, your most humble, and most obedient servant

F d’Ivernois

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “To John Adams Esq.” Some loss of text due to wear at the edge.

1.

A copy of d’Ivernois’ Tableau historique et politique des deux dernières révolutions de Genève, 2 vols., London, 1789, is in JA’s library at MB ( Catalogue of JA’s Library ).

2.

D’Ivernois served as a tutor to Sampson and William, the sons of Sampson Eardley, 1st Baron Eardley (1745–1824). The London home of Swiss politician David Chauvet (1738–1803), a native of Geneva, became a haven for Dutch Patriot refugees ( DNB ; Lodge, Peerage , 1848; Laurens, Papers , 8:405).

3.

Jean Pierre Bérenger (1737–1807), a Swiss politician and author, did not publish a French translation of JA’s Defence of the Const. (vol. 19:84; Franklin, Papers , 26:4).

To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 19 June 1790 Van der Kemp, François Adriaan Adams, John
From François Adriaan Van der Kemp
Sir! Kingston 19 Jun. 90.

Your Excellencÿ’s favour of March 27. I received the 17̈ apr.—and was it not for a particularity attending this Letter, I would not so soon have troubled you with these. Your Superscrbed the cover with your name, joining to it, Free— this word together with your name was erased, and in their place put none free— Is this a consequence of the new regulations of the Post-office?1

With regard to France, mÿ ideas of this People are perhaps, less favourable than those of Others, and this maÿ afford a Sufficient reason, that I entertained Some doubts and Suspicions with regard of the consistency of their new-model’d government as wel, as in 386 respect of the Blessings, which the people at large Should enjoÿ bÿ this change of measures— Love of mankind and Liberty make me wish, that Liberty maÿ prevail in everÿ part, althoug I fear that she is more and more declining in Europe— The Franch people are the last, to enjoÿ it; verÿ few of their general assemblÿ would be willing to coöperate to this view, and the Bulk of the nation would, after the first delinien is passed, join the first Power, to restore their Royal Master in his ancient despotic the Prærogatives. Your own observation, that the Defence &c must displease Violent Monarchians Aristocrates, and Demagogues, wil afford a reason, that it is not yet translated into French—and gives no great proof of the Sincerity of Some leading men together with their inferiors, to knew Such a work and be Silent— But how Sir! can this Silence Surprise Us who See american Scriblers abuse a performance, who Should eternise their obscure names, if theÿ dared to make them public—

I recommended the defence to the Baron D’averhoult, en champagne, and be impatient for his answer, which I intend to communicate to your Excellencÿ, as Soon as I receive it.2

I received, by order of the President, a Polite refusal upon mÿ petition for his intercession, as far he thought it convenient;3

It wil be pleasing to me to receive an occasion to Shew Your Excellency which what perfect esteem and considerations / I am / Sir! / Your most obedient and / Obliged Servant

Fr Advdkemp.

P.s. know your Sir, Who was at the bottom of that daring Intrigue, mentioned in your last?4 can his name be Spelled with a double T?

RC (Adams Papers).

1.

Prior to the Postal Act of 1792, it was unclear if the vice president had franking privileges, or how the entire postal system would operate. Seeking “some immediate provision by law” to govern the new entity, postmaster Ebenezer Hazard petitioned the House of Representatives on 17 July 1789. A committee comprising Elias Boudinot, Benjamin Goodhue, and Richard Bland Lee recommended on 9 Sept. that Congress regulate the U.S. Post Office. The Senate rejected the House’s subsequent resolution but passed a similar bill, which George Washington signed into law on 22 September. While the president, members of Congress, and other government officials were exempt from paying postage, the Post Office “would not permit Franks even to the V. P.,” as AA discovered ( AFC , 9:2, 95; First Fed. Cong. , 1:170–171, 719; 3:113–114, 198; U.S. Statutes at Large , 1:70, 232, 237).

2.

By 1788 Dutch Patriot Jan Anthony (Jean Antoine) D’Averhoult (1756–1792), of Utrecht, had fled to France, where he briefly presided over the National Assembly from Jan. to Aug. 1792 (Bart Boon, “Jan Anthony d’Averhoult door Louis-Léopold Boilly: de Geschiedenis achter een ongewoon portret,” Oud Holland, 111:253 [1997]; Hoefer, Nouv. biog. générale ).

3.

See Van der Kemp’s letter of 17 March 1790, and note 1, above.

4.

JA last wrote to Van der Kemp on 27 March, but for Alexander Hamilton’s electoral intrigues, see JA’s letter to Benjamin Rush of 9 June 1789, and note 2, above.