You will readily acknowledge the impropriety of my entering into the question concerning the duty of the Commissioners here, to have made the communications of the treaty, which you mention. But of this you may be a.s.sured, that I shall at all times hold myself obliged to you for the communication of your sentiments upon any public affair. I am therefore sorry, that in your letter you have confined yourself to that part of the treaty, upon which I particularly requested your sentiments. And I now take the liberty to request your sentiments upon every part of the treaty, which you conceive liable to doubtful construction, or capable of producing discontent or dispute, for I have the honor to be fully of your opinion, that it is of very great importance to be upon our guard, and avoid every cause of controversy with France as much as possible. She is, and will be, in spite of the obstacles of language, of customs, religion, and government, our natural ally against Great Britain as long as she shall continue our enemy, and that will be at least as long as she shall hold a foot of ground in America, however she may disguise it, and whatever peace or truce she may make.
Your sentiments of the fishery, as a source of wealth, of commerce and naval power, are perfectly just, and therefore this object will and ought to be attended to with precision, and cherished with care.
Nevertheless, agriculture is the most essential interest of America, and even of the Ma.s.sachusetts Bay, and it is very possible to injure both, by diverting too much of the thoughts and labor of the people from the cultivation of the earth to adventures upon the sea. And this, in the opinion of some persons, has been a fault in the Ma.s.sachusetts Bay. Experience has taught us in the course of this war, that the fishery was not so essential to our welfare as it was once thought. Necessity has taught us to dig in the ground instead of fishing in the sea for our bread, and we have found that the resource did not fail us.
The fishery was a source of luxury and vanity, that did us much injury; yet this was the fault of the management, not of the fishery.
One part of our fish went to the West India Islands for rum, and mola.s.ses to be distilled into rum, which injured our health and our morals; the other part went to Spain and Portugal for gold and silver, almost the whole of which went to London, sometimes for valuable articles of clothing, but too often for lace and ribands. If, therefore, the cessation of the fishery for twenty years to come was to introduce the culture of flax and wool, which it certainly would do as far as would be necessary for the purposes of decency and comfort, if a loss of wealth should be the consequence of it, the acquisition of morals and of wisdom would perhaps make us gainers in the end.
These are vain speculations I know. The taste for rum and ribands will continue, and there are no means for the New England people to obtain them so convenient as the fishery, and therefore the first opportunity will be eagerly embraced to revive it. As a nursery of seamen, and a source of naval power, it has been, and is an object of serious importance, and perhaps indispensably necessary to the accomplishment and the preservation of our independence. I shall therefore always think it my duty to defend and secure our rights to it with all industry and zeal, and shall ever be obliged to you for your advice and co-operation.
Pardon the length of this letter, and believe me, with much esteem, your friend and servant,
JOHN ADAMS.
TO RALPH IZARD.
Pa.s.sy, October 2d, 1778.
Sir,
I have the pleasure of yours of the 28th, and agree with you in sentiment, that if the money, which has heretofore been squandered upon articles of luxury, could for the future be applied to discharge our national debt, it would be a great felicity. But is it certain that it will? Will not the national debt itself be the means, at least a temptation to continue, if not increase the luxury? It is with great pleasure that I see you mention sumptuary laws. But is there room to hope that our Legislatures will pa.s.s such laws? Or that the people have, or can be persuaded to acquire those qualities, that are necessary to execute such laws? I wish your answer may be in the affirmative, and that it may be found true in fact and experience. But much prudence and delicacy will be necessary, I think, to bring all our countrymen to this just way of thinking upon this head. There is such a charm to the human heart in elegance, it is so flattering to our self-love to be distinguished from the world in general by extraordinary degrees of splendor, in dress, in furniture, equipage, buildings, &c. and our countrymen, by their connexion with Europe, are so much infected with the habit of this taste and these pa.s.sions, that I fear it will be a work of time and difficulty, if not quite impracticable, to introduce an alteration; to which the late condition of our trade and currency, besides the great inequality of fortune, and the late enterprises introduced by privateers, are dangerous enemies.
You ask my opinion, whether the reasons in your last letter are well founded. It is observable, that the French Court were not content with the treaty proposed by Congress, which contained all, in my opinion, which is contained in the article as it now stands in the treaty of the 6th of February. What motive they had for inserting the words, "indefinite and exclusive," is left to conjecture.[39] The suspicion, that they meant more than the treaty proposed by Congress expressed, arises from a fact, which you remember, viz. that the French at the time of the last peace claimed more. I wish to know if there is any letter or memorial extant, in which such a claim is contained, or whether it was only a verbal claim made by their Amba.s.sadors. Whether any of the magazines of that time mention and discuss any such claim. If the fact is incontestible, that they made such a claim, it is possible that it may be revived under the words "indefinite and exclusive." But I hope it will not, and I hope it was not intended when these words were inserted. Yet I confess I cannot think of any other reason for inserting them. The word indefinite is not amiss, for it is a right of catching fish and drying them on land, which is a right indefinite enough. But the word exclusive is more mysterious. It cannot mean that Americans and all other nations shall be "excluded" from the same right of fishing and drying on land, between the same limits of Bonavista and Riche. It would be much easier to suppose, that the following words, "in that part only, and in no other besides that," gave rise to the word "exclusive;" that is, that right of fishing and drying within those limits, for which we have excluded ourselves from all others. I will undertake to show better reasons, or at least as good, for this sense of the word exclusive, as the most subtle interpreter of treaties can offer for the other, although I think them both untenable.
My opinion further is this, that as contemporaneous exposition is allowed by all writers on the law of nations to be the best interpreter of treaties, as well as of all other writings, and as neither the treaty of Utrecht, or the treaty of Paris in 1763, ever received such an interpretation as you are apprehensive may hereafter be contended for, and as the uninterrupted practice has been against such a construction, so I think that the treaty of Paris of the 6th of February, 1778, is not justly liable to such a construction, and that it cannot be attempted with any prospect of success. I agree with you, however, that as we are young States, and not practised in the art of negotiation, it becomes us to look into all these things with as much caution and exactness as possible, and furnish ourselves with the best historical light, and every other honest means of securing our rights.
For which reason I requested your sentiments upon this subject in writing, and continue to desire in the same way your observations on other parts of the treaty. Reduced to writing, such things remain in letters and letter books, as well as more distinctly in the memory, and the same men or other men may recur to them at future opportunities, whereas transient conversations, especially among men who have many things to do and to think of, slip away and are forgotten. I shall make use of all the prudence I can, that these letters may not come to the knowledge of improper persons, or be used to the disadvantage of our country, or to you or me in our present capacity.
I am, &c.
JOHN ADAMS.
FOOTNOTE:
[39] This alludes to a clause in the 10th Article of the Treaty of Amity and Commerce between France and the United States.
TO THE PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS.
Pa.s.sy, October 2d, 1778.
Sir,
I have the honor to enclose the latest gazettes, by which Congress will perceive, that we have no intelligence from America since the departure of the Count d"Estaing from Sandy Hook; our anxiety is very great, but we hope that a few hours will relieve it. In the midst of a war in Germany, and between France and England, there was scarcely ever a greater dearth of news in a profound peace.
Captain Mc Neil, the bearer of this, makes the most conversation, having taken and destroyed, I think, thirteen vessels in the course of his last cruise, six of which have safely arrived in France, the others, not destroyed, he sent to America. His cruise will prove a great disappointment to the enemy, having deprived them of a great quant.i.ty of naval stores, upon which they depended.
I have the honor to be, with the greatest respect, &c.
JOHN ADAMS.
COMMITTEE OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO JOHN ADAMS.
Philadelphia, October 28th, 1778.
Sir,
While we officially communicate to you the enclosed resolve, the foundation of which you cannot remain a stranger to, we must entreat you to be a.s.siduous in sending to those Commissioners who have left France, and gone to the Courts for which, they were respectively appointed, all the American intelligence, which you have greater opportunity than they of receiving from hence, particularly to Mr Izard and Mr William Lee. We do not often send more than one set of gazettes by one opportunity; and we hear of several vessels which have miscarried.
Congress must and will speedily determine upon the general arrangement of their foreign affairs. This is become, so far as regards you, peculiarly necessary, upon a new commission being sent to Dr Franklin.
In the meantime we hope you will exercise your whole extensive abilities on the subject of our finances. The Doctor will communicate to you our situation in that regard.
To the gazettes, and to conversation with the Marquis de Lafayette, we must refer you for what relates to our enemies, and close with our most cordial wishes for your happiness.
Your affectionate friends,
R. H. LEE, JAMES LOVELL.
TO THE PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS.
Pa.s.sy, December 3d, 1778.
Sir,
I have the honor to enclose to Congress the latest newspapers. As they contain the speech at the opening of Parliament, and some of the debates in both Houses, upon the addresses in answer to it, they are of very great importance. I learn by some newspapers and private letters, that an opinion has been prevalent in America, that the enemy intended to withdraw from the United States; and considering the cruel devastations of the war, and the unfortunate situation of our finances, nothing would give me so much joy, as to see reasons to concur in that opinion, and to furnish Congress with intelligence in support of it. But I am sorry to say the reverse is too apparent. We may call it obstinacy or blindness, if we will, but such is the state of parties in England, so deep would be the disgrace, and perhaps so great the personal danger to those who have commenced and prosecuted this war, that they cannot but persevere in it at every hazard, and nothing is clearer in my mind, than that they never will quit the United States until they are either driven or starved out of them. I hope, therefore, Congress will excuse me for suggesting, that there is but one course for us to take, which is to concert every measure, and exert every nerve, for the total destruction of the British power within the United States.
I have the honor to be, &c.
JOHN ADAMS.
TO ELBRIDGE GERRY.
Pa.s.sy, December 5th, 1778.
Dear Sir,
It is necessary that you should be minutely informed of the minutest and most secret springs of action here, if it is possible. Yet the danger is so great of our letters being taken, and getting into English newspapers, that it is very discouraging to a free correspondence. I will, however, take all the precaution in my power to have the letters sunk, but if all these fail, and my letters become public, the world must take them as they find them, and I hope they will do more good upon the whole than harm.
This Court and nation appear to me, to be well convinced of the utility to their interests of the American alliance. But notwithstanding this, they appear to me to have too much diffidence of us, too much diffidence of the people of America, and too much reserve towards the Commissioners here. I am not satisfied in the cause of this. Whether they think, that the obstacles of language, religion, laws, customs and manners, are obstacles in the way of a perfect friendship, which cannot be removed, and therefore that they shall lose our connexion as soon as Britain comes to her senses; or whether they are embarra.s.sed by the conduct of Spain, and are acting in this reserved manner, and with an appearance of irresolution in hopes of her coming in; or whether they have any prejudices against the personal characters of the Commissioners, and are loth to be unreserved with them, for fear they shall communicate either indiscreetly or by design anything to the English, or to anybody here, who might convey it to England; or whether all these motives together have a share in it, I know not. Thus much is certain, that ever since I have been here, I have never seen any disposition in any Minister of State to talk with any of the Commissioners, either upon intelligence from Spain or England, upon the designs or negotiations of either, or any other Court in Europe, or upon the conduct of the war by sea or land, or upon their own plans or designs of policy or war. If this reserve was ever thrown off to any one, I should think, that putting it on to others had some personal motive. But it is exactly equal and alike to all three.
Each Commissioner here, before I came, had his own set of friends, admirers, and dependents, both among the French and Americans. Two households united in some degree against one, very unjustly, I fear, and very impolitically. But this set the friends of the two to injuring the third in conversation, and they cannot forbear to do it, to this day. This dissension, I suspect, has made the Ministry cautious, lest in the course of altercations, improper use should be made of free communications. For my own part, however odd you may think it in me to say it, I have no friends, much less dependents, here, and am determined to have none, for I am convinced, that compet.i.tions among these have done the evil; but I am determined, if I am continued here, to have free communication with the Ministry upon these subjects and to search them to the bottom. The Ministry are candid men and sensible, and I am sure, that some eclairciss.e.m.e.nts would do good.