The New-Jersey gazette — Burlington [N.J.], 1778-09-23 00:00:00, page 2

sentiments" from those in the declaration of Con
gress: He is certainly mistaken, for I have heard
every individual Member declare, he considered him
as no longer an enemy to corruption. As to his contra
diction of himfelf, I need only contrast these two ideas
in his declaration —“ The said George Johnftone for
himfelf fays, that he is far from considering the said
resolution of Congress as offensive to him, that he ra
ther receives it as a mark of dißindton :" However,
"he reserves to himfelf the liberty of publishing, if
he shall judge proper, a juftification of his conduct
against the aspersions thrown on bis character." This
unoffended, yet afperfed gentleman, who confiders a
resolution which afperfes bis character, '' as a mark
of dfinction," draughted his declaration ad populum,
and with them I will leave it, that I may proceed
to shew a proper refped to your Excellencies per
'formance.
Why do you tell the world, you " were authoriz
ed to refore peace, to preserve the value and promote
the credit of the paper circulation, to give fatisfadjon
and security for ever on the fubjed of military esta
blishments, and to extend every freedom to trade ?"
Your Excellencies sent to the Congress copies of the
instruments by which you were, and by which only
you are authorized. They were published, and the
world have not yet forgot, that they only allow you
to btal, not to determine upon any of those particu
lars. Nay, you are expressly prohibited, and it is
declared your proceedings on those points shall not
be of any validity unless ratified by the British Par
liament. Need I think, that every word you deliver
is accurately weighed, and critically examined ; and
that consequential ideas naturally follow?
And do you really think you have " offered every
thing that is, or can be proposed by the French al
liance ?" I am apt to fafped that your Excellencies
are inclined to pleasantry. Pardon me if I introduce
a serious idea: 1 will be Short; nay, I wf.l use but
a Single word. Independence! This is proposed
by die siliance with France : This is not to be found
in your offers.
As you are astonished at one circumstance, I may
be permitted to express a little furprize at another;
it is at your assertion that France " has ever Shewn
itfelf an enemy to a/7 civil and religious liberty." I
cannot suppose you are unread in the histories of
France, of Germany, and of the Low Countries,
especially for the eighty years preceding the peace of
Westphalia; and it is painful even to remark, that
there is an alternative. The civil and religious liber
ties of Germany and of the Seven United Provinces
found in the power of France a friend and a guaran
tee ; and the fame power is now a friend and a gua
rantee to the civil and religious liberty of America.
On the other hand, the power of England has been,
and now is an enemy to civil and religious liberty.
W: nets your penal laws against Roman CathoFicks,
ana the rejected petitions of Dissenters. Witness the
reigns of Charles the Second and his successor. Wit
ness the present reign in Britain ; the Stamp ad, the
Quebec bill, the cotemporary and subsequent out
rages of laws and arms, respecting America. Your
Excellencies ought to have looked at home, before
you ventured to cast your eyes and censures abroad.
It is a favourite point with you, and you conflant
1, press to have it established, that the offers of France
" were made only in consequence of the plan of ac
commo tation previously concerted in Great-Britain."
And to prove this, you aver, firft, " that public in
timation of the conciliatory propositions on the part
of Great-Britain was given to the British Parliament,
and consequently to the whole world, in the month
of November last." Secondly, “ that the prelimina
ries of a French treaty, did not bear earlier date than
the 16th of December." We will examine the sub
ject. The terms in which the firft point is couched,
give an idea, that the intimation was pointed and
public, descriptive of the propositions, and that they
were important in their nature. I with your Excel
lencies had condefeended to give us the terms in
which the intimation was expressed, and the autho
rity expressing them : Because from these lights, we
might have Seen, whether the propositions were, or
if yon priafe, the intimation was, offufficient weight
toaffed, change and.give a ton to the measures of the
court of France. The evidence was in your hands,
you have not thought proper to lay it before us, and
.no doub + , üb^ve reasons for the fupprelfion. How
ever , a • ir y object is truth, I will endeavour to fup
piy the evidence that you have withheld.
The late sessions of the British Parliament began on
the zoth day of November last. On the 21st, your
House of Lords presented their address to your fo
vcrcign : n answer to his speech. In that they fay,
“ we cannot b it applaud your Majesty's unwearied
vigii ice and wisdom in recommending to us, to
prepare at all events, for such further operations as
the contingences of the war, and the obstinacy of the
rebels may render expedient." “We thankfully re
ceive your Majesty's declaration of perseverance in the
measures now pursuing, for there-establishment of
a just and constitutional subordination through the
ft eral parts of your Majesty's dominions." On the
22d of November your House of Commons also pre
sented their address in answer to the speech; nor
docs this address contain any thing repugnant to the
other ; nor can it be denied, that these addresses are
always mere echoes to the speech, and that the three
flow from tbe Miniflers. Thus, at one view, we have
the public and joint sense of the Ministers, King,
Lords agd Commons of Great-Britain. It is fuffici
It was on this memorable day that Lord North de
clared himfelf in the following manner: “At the
opening of the present sessions, on the firft day during
the debate upon the address to his Majesty, I told
the House, that in my opinion terms might be made
with the Colonies short of unconditional submission,
and that the time of making them was the moment
of victory." Here Lord North himfelf gives evidence
of what he had said, and it must be deemed abfolutc
ly fufficient. Thus it undeniably appears, that on
the 20th day of November Lord North, speaking upon
another fubjed, en paffant, threw out a mere Ipecu
lative " proposition," the truth of which was felf evi
dent : Terms might be made in the moment of vic
tory. His Lordfllip did not intimate, that he would
offer terms, nay, that he intended to do so. And is
this mere Speculative proposition " the conciliator,
propositions on the part of Great-Britain," to which
you so anxiously point! Already it appears lighter
than a Jtraw ; you catcb at it, but it is not capable
of supporting you. Place this in one scale—the pub
lic persevering declaration of the Ministers and the
King on the fame day, approved by the Houses of
Parliament on the two following days, in the other
fcale —suspend the balance —Of what weight is your
public intimation '---vox et preeteria nibil. Was it
possible such a public intimation affeded the councils
of France, and changed their very nature ! It is too
extravagant to be supposed. But let us attend to the
speech.
" The time of making them was the moment of vic
tory. I said this, thinking that the victory gained by
Sir William Howe, was more decisive than it really
was ; and ignorant of the difaftci which had fallen
on General Burgoyne's army."
It appears then, terms might be offered in the mo
ment of victory, and that on the 20th day of Novem
ber Lord North thought the moment then existed.
The question is, what use did he make of that mo
ment ? Did he intimate that he would offer generous
terms of conciliation? No! Even terms short of un
conditional submission ? No! He only threw out a
mere speculative idea, the truth of which no man
could deny : But in this fancied moment of vidory,
under bis auspices, the speech from the throne made
a " declaration,", and the Iloufes of Parliament ap
plauded the " declaration of perseverance in the mea
sures then pursuing," to coerce America to an un
conditional submission: And large supplies in men
and money were immediately voted. It is true his
Lordfllip very ingeniously intimated, en paffant, when
on another fubjed, in what manner the moment of
victory might be used; but at the lame time he took
care, that the Miniliry Jbould demonfrate, and the
whole legislature should declare, in what manner they
were refolded to use it —to redouble the blows upon
the party supposed to be then daggering under a late
victory.
Lord North contirued,
" When the news cf that melancholy event arrived,
I was struck that the time of proposing terms was
past ; and that the firft point to be done was the rais
ing of new levies anda new force."—-The point with
me at present is, to rfeertain a moment in which his
Lordship thought " the time of proposing terms was
past."
It is notorious, flat on the fourth of December
Lord George Germrine was obliged, for the firft
time, to inform the louse of Commons, (who were
stunned at t) that be had received private accounts
of that event, which! may call a glorious one : And
I will therefore lay t down, that on that day Lord
North was of opinio), " the time of proposing terms
was past." Thus w: find, that from the firft day of
the sessions in Novenber to the fourth of December,
a perseverance in coecive measures, new levies, and
a new force, were he declared objects of the Bri
tish Government. Do not your Excellencies think
it reasonable to concude, that his Lordship continu
ed in the fame fentments mid measures for ten or
twelve days? The contrary is not to be supposed.
This allowance, thei, brings us to the 16th of De
cember, the day whn the offers of France were for
mally made to the zmerican Commissioners in Paris :
A point of time whin every public intimation that
could be given of a perseverance in measures of co
ercion on the partof Great-Britain, actually and
dearly lifted.
ent here to observe, that sense was a " perfaerance"
in military coercion—not a change to " conciliatory
propositions."
This " public intimation" “ given to the British
Parliament, and consequently to the whole world in
November last," of the public measures to be purfu
^d, perhaps may not be that public intimation, to
which your Excellencies allude ? Well, I am not tired
in my research after truth, I will make another at
tempt. I hope your Excellencies will patiently at
tend, while 1 endeavour to discover the intimation
you mean; and whether it was in its nature such,
as ipso facto made a mere nullity of the declaration
from the throne, couched by the Ministers, and ap
proved by the Houses of Parliament.
On the 17th of February last, Lord North made a
decisive speech in the Hcufe of Commons. This Rates
what he said in November relative to terms that might
be offered to America; and it is probably this may
be the public intimation to which your Excellencies
allude. This speech fcrikes my attention, because it
not only Rates what Lord North said on the 20th of
November, but it deinonftrates his conduct and the
reasons for it, from that time to the 17th of February.
Having thus from the records Rated the authori
ties ofthe Commissioners on the one hand, and " the
concessions," as you are pleased to term them, “ then
made/by France" on the other, allow me to aik
whether these terms by France on the 16th of De
cember last, could possibly be deemed " unfatisfac
tory ?" And whether it is possible to suppose that the
Commissioners, having early in the year 1777 receiv
ed inftruttions, by which they were " specially au
thorized, in case of necessity, to agree to unequal terras,
" did not think proper to proceed" to agree to the
terms of France on the 16th of December following,
which were perfectly equal ? The farts are, they had
no occasion to wait for any special authority---they
did not wait---the treaties were absolutely made up
on the fatisfactor, principles declared on the 16th of
December. What then becomes of your assertion,
that in the interval between the 20th of January and
the 17th of February, eleven days after tbe treaties were
actually figged, " France being informed of the liberal
and extensive nature of the intended offers, thought
it expedient to new model and enlarge her proposals."
I cannot avoid presenting to your attention ano
ther point of evidence against your favourite position,
" that public intimation of the conciliatory proposi
tions on the part of Great-Britain was given to the
British Parliament, and consequently to the whole
world, in the month of November last." And the
point is this —On tbe sth of February last Governor
Johnftone, in the House of Commons, wrote a letter to
a gentleman in Pennsylvania, and I have seen the ori
ginal, in which is this paragraph. " I have had a
bint, and have good reason to believe, a proposition
will be made to Parliament in four or five days by
Administration that may be a ground of re-union : I
really do not know the particulars ; neverthelcß. - 1
learn some preliminaries have lately gonefr : <^ncc,
I think it cannot be deemed unfriew
country to give you notice of this inrr^ ...
on, that you may in prudenced ^y ^n
a foreign power."
Hence your Excellenc' nun admit, that your
public intimation of th: : /uhudory propositions on
the part of Great-Brit^ 1 given to the British Parli
ament, and confeqv re in the whole world, in
November, was not 1: c an intimation as to Rrike
the attention even of. veinor Johnftone, a member
of that Parliament, and then present. And that it
was not till the sth of February, the day before the
signing the treaty of Paris, that he had even a hint
and good reason to believe, that a conciliatory pro
position was to be made to America —a period when
he even bad not any knowledge of the particulars of
it. The time of his receiving the hint is to be abso
lutely presumed from the place in which the letter
was wrote and the date it bore : and I will just add,
it is violently to be presumed, the proposition to be
made, was to answer the fame end for which the let
ter was expressly wrote —" that we might in pru
dence do nothing hastily with a foreign power."
Incontrovertable as these dates, fads and argu
ments Rand, I will not press their combined force
upon your Excellencies: Your sensibility is too great,
and your feelings are to much awake, not to be fuf
ficiently affeded without my doing so. lam not an
ungenerous adversary, and to demonstrate this, I will
for a moment admit your assertion, " that public in-
You are pleased to fay " the propositions to ba
made were occasionally a fubjeft of difeuffion in Par
liament during the whole interval between the 20th
of January and the 17th of February; during which
interval, and not before, France being informed of
the liberal and extensive nature of the intended offers,
thought it expedient to new model and enlarge her
proposals."
From hence these conclusions result: That on the
20th of January the propositions were ,et " to be
made :" That previous to that day they were not
made, nor dijeuffed, nor the liberal and extensive na
ture of them known to France. Yet we have found
that the offers of France were made on the 16th of
December preceding! But, fay you, " the concessi
ons then made by France on the one hand were so
unfatisfactory, and the conditions required by Ame
rica on the other so exceptionable, that the Com
missioners of Congress did not think proper to pro
ceed, until they should be specially authorifed." We
will candidly confider every thing you offer.
About the end of the year 1776 Congress made opt
the terms of the treaties they were delirous of form
ing with France ; and also inftruftions to their Com
missioners, materially to relax, if necessary, in many
important points from those terms: And the Com
missioners received these terms and inßrudions long
before they had occasion to make use of them.
On the 16th of December last, when your conci
liatory proposition, according to your own shewing,
were neither made nor difeuffed, and consequently
their " liberal and extensive nature" not known to
France, Menlieur Gerard, by order of his Molt Christ
tian Majesty, thus declared himfelf to our Commil
fioners. " That his MoR Christian Majesty was de
termined to acknowledge our independence, and
make a treaty with us of amity and commerce. That
in this treaty no advantage would be taken of oup
present fitnation, to obtain terms from us which other
wise would not be convenient for us to agree to; his
Majesty desiring that the treaty once made should be
durable, and our amity subsist for-ever, which could
not be expected if each nation did not find its inte
rest in the continuance as well as in the commence
ment of it."