Papers of John Adams, volume 9
1780-05-28
When a great Minister, of an ancient
Lord George Germaine, in the debate in the house of Commons, on the Sixth
In the Phrase “good and honourable Terms for great Britain,” there may be some
Whether the Americans ever will agree to Such Terms, or not, being a question con
his Error. There are certain ed
Juries, in America, were formerly, another organ, by which the Sentiments
But it is said, that the Paper money, embarrasses Congress. What then? Does
His Lordship talks about the Misery, of the People, in America. Let him look at home and then Say, where is Misery—11 where the hideous Prospect of an internal civil War, is added to a War with all the World? The Truth is that Agriculture and Manuf
America and great Britain too will see more of the Effects the World
But I have been too long. His Lordship betrays such21 Misinformation of Facts;
I have the Honour to be, with great Regard, sir, your most obedient and most humble servant
Mercure de France (see notes 1, 17, and 18). Substantive differences between the Letterbook and recipient's copies are described in the notes.
In his brief reply of 31 May (Adams Papers), Genet thanked JA for his letter, as well as for the newspapers enclosed with it, and stated that he believed that Vergennes would want to see the letter printed in the Mercure de France. The letter, except for the greeting, date line, and closing, was translated and printed as part of the “Journal Politique de Bruxelles” in the Mercure of 17 June (p. 116–125). JA copied the text of the letter as it appeared in the Mercure into Lb/JA/12 (Adams Papers, Microfilms, Reel 100), between his letters to the president of Congress of 29 June (No. 88, below) and 6 July (No. 89, calendared, below). For other printings of JA's analysis of Germain's speech, in Great Britain and the United States, see JA's first letter of 2 June to the president of Congress (No. 77, calendared, below) and Edmund Jenings' letter of 9 July, and note 2 (below).
The preceding four words do not appear in the Letterbook.
Lord George Germain's speech formed part of the debate over Gen. Henry Seymour Conway's motion for reconciliation that occurred on 5 May and was reported in the London newspapers of the 6th. For Conway's motion and JA's analysis of it, see his letter to Edmé Jacques Genet of 17 May (above). JA's source for this quotation has not been identified, but the account of the speech given here is very close to that in the
Parliamentary Reg.
, 17:661. Like his reply to Conway's speech, JA's response to Germain shows the impact of his reading of Thomas Pownall's Memorial, Most Humbly Addressed to the Sovereigns of Europe (A Translation of Thomas Pownall's Memorial, 19 April –
In the Letterbook the preceding four words were interlined.
In the Letterbook the preceding five words were interlined to replace “for Shelter.”
The Letterbook reads “increase that misery ten fold, and make it perpetual.”
The passage in the Letterbook from the previous comma reads “We shall believe.”
In the Letterbook the next two words were “one Sigh.”
In the Letterbook the preceding eight words were interlined.
In the Letterbook the preceding five words do not appear. “Scales” is supplied from JA's letter of 2 June to the president of Congress (No. 77, calendared, below). In the Mercure this was translated as “balance du pouvoir.”
In the Letterbook the remainder of this sentence was interlined.
In the Letterbook this sentence begins “Is every necessary and Convenience of Life.”
In the Letterbook “hurt” was inserted to replace “almost ruined.”
In the Letterbook there follows a canceled passage: “Has not France in her Turn received benefits from this alliance with Europe.”
In the Letterbook this question was interlined, and the remainder of the paragraph is crowded into the available space indicating that it may have been an afterthought.
In the Letterbook “Utility” is followed by “to all the allies.”
This paragraph does not appear in the Letterbook. In the recipient's copy it begins at the bottom of the fourth page and continues at the top of the fifth. Some portions of words were lost due to damage to the left and right margins of page four; the missing material has been restored here through consideration of the context of the word, except in the case of “Mercure. Damage at the top of page five resulted in the loss of a considerable amount of material. The text of this paragraph as printed has been reconstructed by consulting the French translation in the Mercure, but because it is a translation the reconstruction can be only conjectural and thus the French text provided in note 18 should be consulted. It should also be noted that in the reconstruction, allowance has been made for the space available in the manuscript to accommodate the reconstructed text. The reconstruction should also be compared with the text of corresponding paragraphs, the third and fourth from the end, that is provided with the calendar of JA's letter of 2 June to the president of Congress (No. 77, calendared, below). A comparison of the two versions seems to indicate that when JA composed the letter to Congress he used the Letterbook copy of the Genet letter and thus at this point was forced to draft the paragraph anew.
From this point the remainder of the translated paragraph in the Mercure reads “où le Congrès est pareillement élu tous les ans par les assemblées et peut étre révoqué par elles au premier moment, aucun corps peut-il s'emparer d'un pouvoir quelconque qui lui soit conféré par cette malice? Dira-t-on que le Congrès se soutient par l'armée Continentale. Mais, selon the Lord G., cette armée est si foible qu'il lui est impossible de se mesurer avec l'armée Britannique. Que deviendroitelle donc si la majeure partie de la malice, qui n'est autre chose que la Peuple, se joignoit á l'armée Britannique? Mais, sans cette réunion, la malice suffit seule pour écraser l'armée Continentale. D'ailleurs cette armée n'occupe que quelques espaces de terreins très-bornés 358
image
dans deux ou trois états pour cerner l'armée Britannique dans les points qu'elle y occupe, et pour protéger les vaisseaux de guerre Américains, et il lui est impossible d'avoir la moindre influence sur neuf ou dix grands Etats qui n'ont pas dans leur territoire une seule compagnie de l'armée Continentale.”
In the Letterbook this sentence ends as follows: “by Law and the Constitution?”
The remainder of this paragraph does not appear in the Letterbook. Instead JA wrote “But I have been too long—it is tedious to expose Things that are so plain. So many Views of such a subject present themselves, that it is difficult to be concise.”
In the Letterbook this was followed by “a total.”
The Letterbook copy ends at this point.
1780-05-28
Paris, 28 May 1780. LbC in John Thaxter's hand (Adams Papers). Although a letter from John Adams of 28 May was read in Congress on 11 Sept. (
JCC
, 18:817), no letter of that date is in the PCC. Notations on the Letterbook copies of Adams' letters of 1 and 5 June (Nos. 75 and 80, calendared, below) indicate, however, that the original and a duplicate were sent off on 1 and 23 June respectively.
This letter included a digest of British newspaper reports concerning the appointment of Adm. Francis Geary to command the Channel fleet, the long delayed departure of Adm. Graves' and Como. Walsingham's squadrons for America, the reported dispatch from Havana of a Franco-Spanish fleet for an attack on Pensacola, the situation of the French and Spanish fleets in the West Indies, and the uncertain state of Rodney's health. John Adams devoted the most space, however, to an extract from a letter by the Russian ambassador at Istanbul to his counterpart at The Hague. The Russian diplomat refuted rumors of an impending Russo-Turkish war, emphasizing instead that Russo-Turkish relations had rarely been better and that Ottoman policy clearly favored the interests of the European neutrals.
JCC
, 18:817), no letter of that date is in the PCC. Notations on the Letterbook copies of Adams' letters of 1 and 5 June (Nos. 75 and 80, calendared, below) indicate, however, that the original and a duplicate were sent off on 1 and 23 June respectively.
1780-05-28
Bordea
I am honord with your favor of the 14th. my last of the 20th. handed you the inteligence then at hand since which we are without any Arrivals.
France and Spain appear to Aim at a desicive Blow in the West Indies so formidable a fleet never appeard in them Seas
| Monr. De Guichen strong of | 24 | ships |
| Solano | 12 | |
| from Ferol | 8 | |
| from Cadiz | 5 | |
| Bougainville | 5 | |
| De Ternay to the Norwd | 7 | |
| 61 | Line |
Sixty one Ships of the line upwards Twenty five Thousand Land Forces all the Force Britain can unite cannot make head against the Combind Allied Force wherever they unitedly attempt an Attack.1 Holland appears in earnest. Russia has made a New Treaty with this Kingdom.2 Was the entire extinction of Britain as a Kingdom premeditated the Confederacy could not appear more permanent. Congress draws on Holland and Spain as also on France, some Capital reform must be in agitation in the American Finances provided they take no Step to state
Bondfield's information was based on rumors and the unfounded assumption that France and Spain would undertake combined operations in the West Indies in 1780. The figure given for Guichen's fleet is approximately equal to the number of ships he took into the Battle of Martinique in April, but Bondfield fails to mention the four ships of the line under La Motte-Picquet that were also in the West Indies (vol. 8:337, 360). The force given for Don Josef Solano is correct, but he remained at Havana and no additional vessels from Cádiz or El Ferrol were sent (Mackesy, War for America
, p. 333–334). Como. Louis-Antoine de Bougainville commanded a ship of the line under Estaing in 1779 and would command a squadron under Grasse in 1781, but he had presumably returned to France with Estaing and in 1780 was not in the West Indies (W. M. James, The British Navy in
Adversity, London, 1926, p. 435, 445). Ternay's fleet remained to the “Northward” (i.e. in and around Newport, R.I.) and took no part in West Indian operations in 1780. In any event, at no time during the war did the British navy in the West Indies encounter the fleet of sixtyone ships of the line contemplated by Bondfield. As to the troop strength in the West Indies, by the date of this letter France had 36 battalions or approximately 20,000 men in the West Indies so that the addition of the Spanish troops brought the allied total to over 30,000. The British army in the West Indies reached its highest level for the entire war in Sept. 1780 at 11,153 troops. The ravages of disease, however, meant that the actual number of effectives (those fit for service) was always considerably less than the official totals, which are also misleading since the troops were scattered among the various islands (Dull, French Navy and Amer.
Independence
, p. 377; Mackesy, War for America
, p. 334, 525).
Russia, as a neutral, had not signed a new treaty with France. Bondfield may be referring to the French approval of the terms of Russia's declaration of an armed neutrality insofar as it operated against British interests.