A website from the Massachusetts Historical Society; founded 1791.
close

Browsing: Papers of John Adams, Volume 7



Search for a response to this letter.

C. W. F. Dumas to Benjamin Franklin: A Translation

Docno: PJA07d288

Author: Dumas, Charles William Frederic
Recipient: Franklin, Benjamin
Recipient: Lee, Arthur
Recipient: JA
Recipient: First Joint Commission at Paris
Date: 1779-01-19

[salute] Gentlemen

My last was of the 16–18 of this month. Contrary to our expectations and to our great surprise, nothing happened today at the Assembly of Holland. There were no deliberations, only the reading of the Ambassador's latest memorandum. Today I have had five meetings with the Ambassador, and as many with our friend (once at the edge of town where he was dining). To the Ambassador I wrote the following note: “Tomorrow there will be work for the Admiralties of Holland. I have this from a very good source and surmise that this is the reason for today's inaction and will produce a new preliminary advisory. I will return this evening to Your Excellency knows where.” On the 15th I had written him the following: “One expects and is persuaded that His Excellency will disclose nothing concerning the secret—the four month's delay—confided from yesterday's deliberations1 because, since the resolution {p. 365} has not yet been adopted, he would be asked: Who told you so? Moreover, the reason for the delay in responding to the memorandum is sufficient to have no need to unburden oneself, &c.” All the other details of my messages would be as tedious to read as to write. Amsterdam's two pensionaries, having on the 16th rendered their town an account of the Ambassador's official visit, have received its response and tomorrow morning will present it officially to the Ambassador. He awaits only the final resolution of the States of Holland, which will be adopted the day after tomorrow, in order to send it by an express to his Court.
This morning, on behalf of their town, Amsterdam's two pensionaries went to the Ambassador to pay their respects and state that the town of Amsterdam hopes that His Majesty would be kind enough not to deprive the other towns of the confederation of the favors which he is willing to retain for it. They had already gone to the Grand Pensionary to inform him of their démarche. Instead of the bitter looks and altercations for which they had prepared themselves, when at the Assembly of States and elsewhere today, they were pleasantly surprised to be treated everywhere with much respect. The representatives of the other towns, notably Rotterdam, seek Amsterdam's intercession on their towns' behalf. <Mr> Some Rotterdam merchants have gone so far as to beg the protection of the gentlemen of Amsterdam, who, with reason, sent them to their own magistrates. For his part, the Ambassador this morning informed the Grand Pensionary orally and then, at his request, by letter that the King had chosen 26 January to promulgate his new regulation, if by then he had not received a response such as he had requested. The Ambassador and our friend are at present having a secret conference arranged by me. I await tomorrow with the greatest impatience. To our friend I expressed my hope that, once we have brought this important affair to a satisfactory conclusion, we will be able to resume our old project; he agreed.
Nothing has yet been done. The Admiralty's advisory, proposed today to the States of Holland, contradicts itself. In fact, they are rescinding their famous resolution of 18 November with regard to the limitation of convoys (from which they would then exclude ships timbers), but would suspend the pending resolution concerning the extension of these convoys until such time as they would have assigned their crews. This is only playing for time. It is like the Hydra of Lerna, whose heads keep growing back to replace those chopped off, for everything else had been agreed upon. Yesterday there were only disputes and recriminations to which the gentlemen from Amsterdam responded with as much moderation and decency as firmness. Everything has been delayed <today> until tomorrow and if the matter should be decided by a plurality, Amsterdam will protest again. I have made the rounds all day and finished by arranging another meeting tonight. At 3 P.M. the Grand Facteur sent {p. 366} me the following note: “When the Assembly adjourns, Mr. Dumas will kindly go to the place that he knows well and report back to me on what he has learned.” I anticipated his wishes, and was just leaving there when I ran into his messenger.
Again nothing has been done in the Assembly of Holland. The Grand Pensionary proposed a solution to which Amsterdam could not agree because some of its terms seemed specious and subject to differing interpretations by the Courts of London and France. The essential point is this: the resolution for the extension of the convoys would be suspended until the 26th, when the Admiralty would assign crews and ships. But to one of the powers this extension would indicate only the strength of the convoy and to the other only the suspension of the carrying of ships timbers. Consequently, Haarlem's representatives have proposed some amendments.2 If everyone agrees, a unanimous resolution, which might satisfy France, could be adopted tomorrow. When our friend recounted these ambiguities, I amused him greatly by comparing the situation to that of cats who always land on their feet. He found it very appropriate.
Again indecision. All the towns agree, however, with Amsterdam on the plan proposed by Haarlem. But an important personage, with a majority of the nobles, still disputes its terms. Meanwhile, today a messenger was sent to Paris to secure, if possible, a final delay of one week out of consideration for Amsterdam, which strongly interceded. It remains to be seen whether this messenger will be able to get there by the 26th. What is certain is that, if they do not take the correct course here during that week, on the 4th of next month the new regulation will be promulgated in France without further delay.
I am sending this letter, as I did the preceding, under cover of a friend from Rotterdam, where it will be taken and posted. I do this to confuse the curious gossipers. I am, with very great respect, gentlemen, your very humble and very obedient servant
[signed] D
Today Amsterdam declared that it would remain firm and resolute, permitting itself to be neither coerced nor deceived. A very strong statement.
RC PPAmP: Franklin Papers; addressed: “à Leurs Excellences Messieurs les Plénipotentiaires des Etats-Unis de l'Amerique à Passy”; docketed by William Temple Franklin: “Dumas Jan 19. 79.”
 
1. See the entry for 14 Jan. in Dumas' letter to the Commissioners of the 12th (above).
 
2. Haarlem's support for Amsterdam's position was significant. It indicated that France's policy of seeking to force the towns and thus the provincial states of Holland to support its demand for unlimited convoys was succeeding. In pursuit of that goal France agreed to delay the publication and execution of the new regulations until 8 Feb., as requested by the {p. 367} States General and noted by Dumas in his entry for 23 Jan. When the postponement produced no results the regulations were published, but their execution was again delayed, this time until 1 March. In the meantime, as a reward for its support of unlimited convoys and to increase the pressure on the other towns, Haarlem was excluded from the effect of the regulations, as Amsterdam had been previously (Edler, Dutch Republic and the American Revolution , p. 120–123).

Arthur Lee to Benjamin Franklin and John Adams

Docno: PJA07d289

Author: Lee, Arthur
Recipient: Franklin, Benjamin
Recipient: JA
Date: 1779-01-20

[salute] Gentlemen

My fever not being yet sufficiently removd to permit me to come to you; I write to you to submit the absolute necessity there is of informing the Minister without delay of the State of our Finances and that the Supply we have askd is immediately necessary. It is possible they may wait for such information before they put the intention we are told they have of supplying us in execution. We wrote them we shoud pay the Bills drawn by order of Congress as long as our funds lasted; and they will naturally expect to be advisd, when these are so nearly exhausted, as to demand a farther supply.2
I have the honor to be with great respect Gentlemen Yr. most Obedt. Humble Servt.
[signed] Arthur Lee
RC PPAmP: Franklin Papers; docketed by William Temple Franklin: “Hon. A. Lee Jan 20. 1770.”
 
1. This date can be read as either the 20th or the 26th. It seems likely, however, that William Temple Franklin would have docketed the letter soon after it arrived. Moreover, Lee's letter to Benjamin Franklin and JA of the 22d (below) indicates that he was already ill on the 20th. On the other hand, if the letter was of the 26th, it probably resulted from a conversation on that date between Lee and Abbé Raimondo Niccoli, secretary of the legation from Tuscany. According to Lee's journal for the 26th, the minister advised “representing the condition of the United States as desperate, unless France would exert herself, especially in furnishing money” (R. H. Lee, Arthur Lee , 1:407).
 
2. The Commissioners had written to Vergennes on 7 Dec. (above) concerning additional loans from the French government. No letter by the three Commissioners in response to this request by Lee has been found, and no further money was received from France until June, when a payment of 250,000 livres was made (Foreign Ledgers, Public Agents in Europe, 1776–1787, DNA:RG 39 [Microfilm], f. 107).

John Gilbank to the Commissioners

Docno: PJA07d290

Author: Gilbank, John
Recipient: Franklin, Benjamin
Recipient: Lee, Arthur
Recipient: JA
Recipient: First Joint Commission at Paris
Date: 1779-01-21

[salute] Honble. Gentlemen

Last Tuesday Week Mr. Dobrie informed me of an Additional mortification I had received by your refusing to accept my Bill, adding at same time that you informed him You had wrote to me; Since which time I have, without Effect, been waiting for your letter.1 It is to be lamented that such a Fatality should attend your Correspondence as to {p. 368} subject your Answers to miscarriage or some other Cause whereby they in general are prevented from reaching the hands of the persons they are addressed to.
I can't however forbear to remind you that without being supplied I cannot go and how to procure such Supply but from you I don't know. There is one method yet by which I may raise the money I want and to which no Scantiness of Funds on your part can be put in Opposition—That is—to indorse a Bill drawn by me upon the president of Congress; No reason, I think can be urged for a refusal of this proposition, As it is every days practice in every nation, And it is well known to you that Ambassadors of every Country never hesitate to indorse their officers Bills.
If this mode, a most disadvantageous one to me, shou'd meet your refusal also, I am afraid it will be attributed in general to an absolute resolution in you not to regard the protection or care what becomes of any officer in the Service of the United States2 (Except some particulars who have received better Treatment.)
No Blame, or at most a little inattention, can be imputed to the honble. the Congress in not having given direct Orders for your proceeding in such Cases, As they certainly look upon it as part of your duty of Course, to give the necessary protection and supply to every one who has the honour to bear a Commission in the Service of America. And I am certain when they shall know that you have omitted it they will give you positive instructions on that head.
Tho' they may not all of them, as some Gentleman may have, laboured for fifteen or twenty years past to bring about this revolution, Yet I dare venture to say they know the interest of their Country too well to neglect any means for the protection of any of its subjects or suffer any one to be treated with Contempt who has a right to require their Assistance. At least I may venture to assure myself they wou'd politely have answered every decent and respectful letter which they received, And which I can't with Justice avoid observing You have most cruelly neglected.
Whatever may be your Determination I hope you will favour me with an answer and shall be glad if it may be any means of taking away the discontent which I am sorry to observe too generally prevails here.
If you shoud imagine that I take too great a Liberty in complaining to you of neglect and inattention—I beg leave to observe that 'tis the privilege and right of every one who thinks himself injured by any one who for the present may be out of the reach (tho' perhaps not always) of other resentment; and that an easy way is open to prevent like Complaints in future.
{p. 369}
I have the honour to be with due respect Honble. Gentlemen Your most obedt. and hble. Servant
[signed] Jno. Gilbank
RC PPAmP: Franklin Papers; addressed: “The Honourable Benjamin Franklin, Arthur Lee and Jno. Adams, Esqrs. Commissioners deputed from the United States of North America at Paissy near Paris”; docketed by William Temple Franklin: “Gilbank 26 Janr. 1779”; and twice in another hand: “Answerd Janr 2<5>6. 1779” and “Gilbank ansr 26 Janr. 1779.”
 
1. The only letter from the Commissioners to Gilbank that has been found previous to this date is that of 10 Nov. 1778, in reply to a letter of 6 Oct. that has not been found (see Gilbank to the Commissioners, 4 Nov. and note 1, above). No letter to Peter Frederick Dobrée concerning Gilbank has been found, but since Dobrée was J. D. Schweighauser's son-in-law, the letter was probably that of 4 Jan. from the Commissioners to Schweighauser (above).
 
2. In their one-sentence reply of 26 Jan. (LbC, Adams Papers), the Commissioners declared: “We assure you that we cannot indorse your bills, as you propose.”
Cite web page as: Founding Families: Digital Editions of the Papers of the Winthrops and the Adamses, ed.C. James Taylor. Boston: Massachusetts Historical Society, 2007.
http://www.masshist.org/ff/