The Connecticut courant, and the weekly intelligencer — Hartford [Conn.], 1778-09-29 00:00:00, page 2

°' commons ;hj p.efenfed their address in anfwei to
the speech ; nor Joes this address contain any thing
repugnant to the other ; nor can it be denied; that
these add.cffes are always mere echoes to the speech,
and that the three flow from the Ministers.
Ilias, at one view, we have the public and jo;nt
sense of the Ministers, King. Lords and Commons of
Great Britain. • It is Efficient here to observe, that
Lnfe was a " perseverance ' in military coercion
--^ot a change to" conciliatory propofitions."^
sh s " public intimation" " given to the British
Parliament, and confquently to the whole world in
November last," of the public measures to be pursu
ed, perhaps may not be that public intimation, to
which your Excellencies will patiently attend while
I endeavour to difeover the intimation you mean ;
aid whether it was in its nature such as irso facto
made a mere nullity of the declaration from the
throne couched by the Ministers and approved by
the Houses of Parliament.
O.i the 17th of February la", Lord North made a
decisive speech in the House of Commons. This
flares whac he said in November relative to terms
that might be offered to America ; and it is probable
this may be the public intimation to which your
Excellencies allude. This speech strikes my atten
tion, because it not only dates what Lord North said
on the zoth of November, but it demonstrates his
conduct and the reasons for it, frem that time to the
I7th of February.
It was on this memorable day that Lord North
declared himfelf in the fallowing manner. " At
the opening of tie present sessions, on the firft day
during the debate upon the address to his Ma efty, I
told the House, that in my opinion terms might be
made with the Colonies short of unconditional sub
mission, 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 absolutely Sufficient. Thus it undeniably
appears, that on the 20th day of November Lord
North, speaking upon another fubje&, en passant,
threwouta mere Speculative " proposition," '' the
concilatoky propositions on the part of Great
Britain," to which you so anxiously point ! Already
it appears lighter than a straw ; you catch at it,
but it is not capable of supporting you. Place this
in one scale the public PERSEVERING DECLARATI
ON of the Ministers and the King on the fame day,
approved by the Houses of Parliament on the two
following days, inthe other fcale---fu Spend the ba
lance Of what weight is your public intimation ?
vox et Praeteria nihil. Was it possible such
a public intimation affixed the counfe's 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
•victory. I said this, thinking that the vi&ory gain
ed by Sr William Howe was more decisive than
it really was ; and ignorant of the disaster which
had fallen on General Burgoyne's army."
It appears then, terms might be offered in the
moment of vi&ory. and that on the 20th day of
November Lord North thought the moment then
existed. The question is, what use did he make of
that moment ? Did he intimate that we wouldoffer
generous terms of conciliation ? No ! Even terms
short of unconditional submission ? No ! He only
threw out a mere Speculative idea, the truth cf which
no man could deny : But in this fancied moment of
viftory. under his auspices, the speech from
the throne made a ' declaration," and the Houses
of Parliament applauded the '' declaration of per
severance in the measures then pursuing," to coerce
America to an unconditional submission : And large
fuppliei in men and money were immediately vo'ed.
It is true his Lordship very ingenicufly intimated,
en passant, when on another Subject, in what
manner the moment of victory might be used; but
at the fame time he took care, that the Ministry
should demonstrate, and the whole legislature
Should declare, in what manner they were RESOLVED
to USE it -to redouble the blows upon the party
supposed to be then triggering under a late victory.
Lord North continued,
6 When the news es that melancholy event ar
rived, I was struck that the time of proposing terms
was past ; and that the firft point to be dene was
the raising of new levies anda new force."-- The
point with me at present is, to ascertain a moment
in v-hich his Lotdfhip thought " the time of propof
mg terms was past."
It is notorious, that on the fourth of December
Lord George Germaine was obliged for the firft
time, to inform the House of Commons (who were
funned at it) that he had received private accounts
of that event, which I may call a glorious one:
And I will therefore lay it down, that on that day
Lord North w^ s of opinion, " the time of proposing
terms was past." Thus we find that fiom the firft
day of the sessions in November to the fourth of De
cember, a perseverance in coercive measures, new
levies and a new force, were the declared objects
of the British Government. Du not your Excellen
cies think it reasonable to conclude, that his Lord
ihip continued in the fame sentiments and measures
for ten or twelve days ? The contrary is not to be
supposed. This allowance, then, brings us to the
i6th of December, the day when the offers of France
were former y made to the American Commissioners
in Paris : A point of time when every public inti
mation that could be given of a perseverance in
measures of coercion on the part of Great Britain,
actually and clearly existed.
You are pleased to fay " the propefitions to be
made were occasionally a fubje& of djfcufficn 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 of
fers. thought it expedient to new model and enlarge
her prcpcfals."
From hence these eonclufions result : That on the
20th of January the propositions were yet " tobe
made That previous to that day they were not
made, nor discussed, nor the liberal aud exten
sive nature of them known to France. Yet we
have found that the offers of France were made on
the 16th of December proceeding ! Bu% fay you,
' the concessions then made by France on rhe one
hand were so uN-fatisfadory, and the conditions re
quired by America on the other so exceptionable,
that the Commissioners of Congress did not think
proper to proceed, until they should be specially au
thorifed." We will candidly confider every thing
you offer.
About the end of the year 1776 Congress made
out the terms of the treaties they were desirous of
forming with France ; and also ini rations to their
Commissioners, materially to relax if necessary, in
many important points from those terms : And the
Commissioners received these terms and inftruaions
long before they had occafien to make use of them.
On the 16th of December last, when your conci
liatory propositions according to your own shewing,
were neither made nor difeuffed, and consequently
their "liberal "and ex:enfive nature" not known to
France, Monsieur Gerard, by order of his Most
Christian Majesty, thus declared himfelf to our Com
missioners. " That his Most Christian Ma,efly was
determined to acknowledge our independence, and
make a treaty with us ofamity and commerce. That
in this treaty no advantage would be taken of our
present situation, to obtain terms from us which o
therwise would not be convenient for us to agree to;
his Majesty desiring that the treaty once made should
be durable, and our amity subsist forever, which
could not be expelled ifeach nation did not find its
interest in the continuance as well as in the com
mencement of it.
Having thus from the records stated the authorities
of the Commissioners on the one hand, ancf"the con
cessions as you are pleased to term them, "then made
by France" on the other; allow me to ask whether
these terms by France on the 16th ofDecember last,
could possibly be deemed' unsatisfactory"? And
whether it is pcffible to suppose that the Coram ffion
ers, having early in the year 1777 received infiruAi
ons, by which they Mere " specially authorized,"
in case of neceffuy, to agree to unequal term c , "did
not think proper to proceed" to agree to the terms of
France on the 16th of December following, which
were perfectly equal? The faffs are, they had no
ocafien to wait for any special authority- they did
not wait -the treaties were abf®lutely made epon
the satisfactory principles declared on the 16th
es December, What then becomes of your asserti
on, that in the interval between the 20th of Janua
ry and the 17th of February, eleven days after the
treaties were adually signed, “ France being in
formed of the liberal and extensive nature of the in
tended offers, thought it expedient to new model
and enlarge her proposals."
I cannot avoid preferring to your attention ano
ther point of evidence against your favourite pofiti
on, " That public intimation of the conciliatory
propositions on the part of Great-Britain was given
to the British Parliament, and consequently to the
whole world, in themonth of November last," And
the point is this-- On the sth of February lal Go
vernor Johnftone, in the House of Commons, wrote
a letter to a gentleman in Pennsylvania, and I have
seen the original, in which is this paragraph : " I
have had a hint, 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 reunion : nevertheless, as I learn some prelimi
furies have lately gone from France, I think it can
not be deemed unfriendly to either country, do give
you notice of this intended proposition, that you
may in prudence do nothing Lately with a foreign
power."
Hence your Excellencies must admit, that your
public intimation of the conciliatory prepofittens on
the part of G,eat Britain, given to tee Brit.fh Par
liament, and consequently to the whole world, in
November, was not ^ public an intimation as to
hrike the attention even of Governor Johnflene, a
member of that Parliament, and then present. And
that it was not till the sth of February, the day be
fore the figging of the treaty cf Paris, that he had
even a hint and good reafen to believe, that a con
ciliatory propefitien was to be made to America- -
a period when he even had not any knowledge of
the particulars cf it. The time of his receiving the
hint is to be absolutely 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 wh.ch the letter was expressly wrote '' that
we mightin prudence do nothing hastily with a fo
reign power."
Incontrovertable as these dates,fa&s and arguments
hand, I will not press their combined ferce upon
ycur Excellencies ; Your sensibility is too greats
and your feelings are too much awake, not to be (ef
ficiently affected without my doing so. lam not
an ungenerous adversary, and to demonflrate this, I
will for a moment admit your assertion, “ that pub
lic intimation of the conciliatory propositions on
the part of Great Britain, was given to the British
Parliament inthe month cf November laft.''And
the nature of them noy becomes a matter of impor
tant enquiry.
Lord North has told us the propositions were on
ly ' short of unconditional fubmfhen :" Theterms
you offer are only fherc of Independence ; and ycur
Excellencies are sensible there is a vast difference
between the two points : Will you excuse me if I
ask the cause of ij ? You hesitate;- I will therefore
endeavour to resolve rhe question.
The British Administration, at the adjournment
of the Parliament for the Christmas holidays were
moving heavunowd earth for " the rawing of new
levies and a new force," 'ftruck that the tine of
proposing terms was past." The Parliament met
again on the 2©th of January ; the Administration
was then " struck that the timeof popofing terms
was" returned, for Franco had offered her terms on
the 16th of December preceding. Conciliatory
propositions were now occasionally, for the firft
time, difeuffed in Parliament, though not even then
made. Well, the treaty cf Paris was signed on the
6th of February ; the time for proposing the British
terms now pressed; on the 17th of the fame
month, Lord North " formally stated" them; and
as soon as possible afterwards, you on the part .of
Great Britain offered terms only short of Indepen
dence, and immediately after, on the 11th of July,
you offered " to enlarge" those terras. In a word^
the Courts of France and Great Britain were fit down
to a game of chefs. On the 20th of November the
game was to be carried on by Gieat Britain on this
principle, ^perfeverance in coercive meafu e " : By
France the principle was a decisive stroke. Bri
tain declared her principle -France d d not. Up
on these principles France male the firft move: She
moved equal terms on the ^th of December. Be
fore Britain could have advice cf this, she was en
gaged at the Christmas feaft; but that being ended
on the 20th of January, knowing the fiep Frarce
had made, she was ' struck" she must abandon her
principle of perseverance, and she immediately
moved the discussion of conciliatory propositi
ons. France upon her principle cf a decisive
stroke, on the 6th of February moved, the trea
ty OF Parts. Britain soon heard of this, and on
the 1 7th of the fame menth she moved, the for
mal state of conciliatory propositions. The game
of chefs can be as easily played when the players are
at a distance as when they are p efent; the Whole
difference in the two cases, consists in the space of
time necessary for playing the game. Already
France seems to have reduced Britain to a state of
consideration, whether she must give up the
game as too desperate to be recovered. From this
plain figure it is demonstrated, that the motions cf
France caused the vast difference between terms but
short of unconditional submission and terms only
short of Independence.
Governor Johnftone in his declaration ofthe 26th
of August, .is pleased to reproach Congress fur ally
ing with France "after all theirjuft claims are grant
ed." Your Excellencies ordered the trapfm ffion of
this reproach : You are thereby parties in making
it : And therefore, I am juftified in taking some no
tice of it to you.