Papers of John Adams, volume 8
Not a Line by yesterday's Post from either you or Mr. Dana; nor indeed from any Person whatever in Massachusetts.
290The Principles of Equality in the Treaty between France and us being held up as a model for future Treaties may betray Negotiators into an Error; because tho' the Equality in regard to France and America is conspicuous, yet Partiality to France compared with other Powers has been established; particularly in the XIX Art: of our incorrect copy:1 “On the contrary no Shelter or Refuge” &c.
In the XIII Article, same Copy, French and Americans shall enjoy reciprocal Rights in the respective Dominions. The banished Americans cannot be allowed this under the Title of the Subjects of the King of Gr. Br.
The respective States of our Union who have passed Laws in their sovereign, independent Capacity, will not consent to repeal them, for the Sake of readmitting into their Bosoms capital Villains.
This was hinted yesterday by Sth. Carolina and will produce an Instruction if you or we find it necessary.
If I do not accomplish to send you by Palfrey2 or Foster3 the Orders of Credit you mentioned in your last I will most assuredly see that you shall not be without them. There is no trusting to Expedition in the Remittances of Funds by our Committees, nor indeed to Expeditiousness of any Kind here though we are reduced to a few now; the Gem'men for the most part taking themselves home to warm Lodgings, while the Drudges alas must sleep but few hours under slight Coverings and alone.
I will if I have Time say more respecting the Subject of your past Letters. Affectionately
Incorrect in the sense that Arts. 11 and 12, which the United States and France had agreed to remove from the treaty, had been eliminated from the text of the treaty then in use in America. Thus, Lovell is referring to Art. 17 of the treaty as ratified (and to Art. 11, as ratified, in the following paragraph).
The congress had voted to give leave to William Palfrey of Massachusetts, pay master general of the Continental Army, so that he might visit his family (
JCC
, 15:1268).
Possibly Dr. Isaac Foster, deputy director of the Eastern Department of medical services for the Continental Army. Although Foster's headquarters were in Boston, he was in Philadelphia during the winter of 1779–1780 (Sibley-Shipton, Harvard Graduates
, 14:262–268).
You had an opportunity of seeing the commencement of this business of Jones and the Alliance, of which I enclose you the suite.1 Capt. 291Landais has been orderd from Amsterdam to Passy by Dr. Franklin where the Doctor, M. Chaumont2 and Dr. Bancroft have held a Court of Enquiry upon his conduct,3 and their report, I am told, is to be transmitted to Congress. In the mean time Jones has taken possession of the Alliance, and it is much if she ever sees America more. I make no remark upon the whole of this business. Woud to God such proceedings coud be prevented rather than punished! The Pallas belongs to a company at Nantes. The Bon Homme Richard was also private property. They both had Privateers Commissions. Yet a Ship of war of the United States was put in partnership with these Privateers and her Captain subjected to the orders of the Captain of Chaumonts Privateers.4 All this was done with the disagreement between the Captains notorious, and in spight of repeated applications from Mr. Izard, Commodore Gillon, and myself, to let her go as convoy to the supplies and Merchandise for America, and assist in protecting our Coast and Commerce from the depredations of the Enemy. The first excuse was, that she was not mannd, and this after you had written that she had a good Crew;5 the last was that the Squadron was not under his, Dr. Franklin's, direction.(a)6 These excuses are under his hand.
The fleets and Armies on both sides have retird into winter quarters. Not a word of or from D'Estaing on whose success our weal or woe so much depends. I am waiting here in great anxiety and impatience for instructions from Congress. I cannot too strongly recommend the utmost vigilance and fortitude to save our Country from the calamities with which she is threatend from a continuance of the war with the rage of open enemies on the one hand and the wickedness of pretended friends on the other.
With very great regard, I am Dear Sir Your most Obedient & very Humble Servant
(a)His words were—“Capt. Jones's Squadron is not under my direction; I only lent them the Alliance, in consequence of a request which I coud not well refuse.” Probably this request will turn out to be from the same person that requested Jones of us.7 Independent of Dr. Franklin's knowing this request to be a mere contrivance, to cover the job; it was so unjust as well as so unworthy that he coud and ought to have refusd it. He has read the Bible, and can quote it when it suits his purpose; and Nathan8 woud have furnished him with a proper answer to such a request.
The
Enclosure not found.
Leray de Chaumont, acting for the French government, served as paymaster for the specially assembled squadron commanded by Jones (Morison, John Paul Jones
, p. 192).
On Pierre Landais, see Landais to JA, 9 March, note 2 (above). When he failed to support John Paul Jones during the battle with the Serapis, Jones brought charges which led to the court of inquiry. Franklin reported to the president of the congress in a letter of 4 March 1780, in which he enclosed the minutes of the court. He wrote: “I have not presumed to condemn or acquit him, doubting as well my Judgment and my Authority” (PCC, No. 82, 1, f. 201). Minutes of the inquiry are in the Franklin Papers (
Cal. Franklin Papers, A.P.S.
, 4:496).
Lee's view that the Pallas and the Bonhomme Richard, under Jones' command, were nothing but privateers ignores the fact that the French navy outfitted and maintained the ships. See Franklin to JA, 24 April, note 1 (above).
Lee is referring to Franklin's letter of 3 May, in reply to his letter of the 2d (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev.
, 3:153–154;
Cal. Franklin Papers, A.P.S.
, 2:71). JA had written to Franklin on 29 April that “the Alliance has now a very good Crew” (above), a letter that Franklin probably did not receive before writing to Lee on 3 May.
Lee inserted the (a) to refer the reader to the postscript, but despite the quotation marks, the first of which have been supplied, no letter from Franklin to Lee containing the passage alleged by Lee to be “his Alliance to it, hoping the enterprise may be more advantageous to the common cause than her cruise could be alone” (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev.
, 3:239–240).
That is, Sartine. See Sartine to the Commissioners, 5 July 1778, vol. 6:265; and Franklin to JA, 24 April 1779 (above).
Nathan was sent by God to reprove David for his wickedness (2 Samuel, 12:1–12).