Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 2 May 1809
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

					Sirs,
					Quincy, May 2, 1809.

				THE message mentioned in my last letter, was in these words:Gentlemen of the Senate,The proposition of a fresh negociation with France,
in consequence of advances made by the French government, has excited so general an attention and so much
conversation, as to have given occasion to many manifestations of the public opinion, from which it appears to
me, that a new modification of the embassy will give more
general satisfaction to the legislature and to the nation,
and perhaps better answer the purposes we have in view.
It is on this supposition, and with this expectation, that
I now nominate Oliver Ellsworth, Esq. Chief Justice of
the United States, Patrick Henry, Esq. late Governor of
Virginia, and William Vans Murray, Esq. our Minister
Resident at the Hague, to be Envoys Extraordinary and
Ministers Plenipotentiary to the French Republic, with
full powers to discuss and settle by a treaty all controversies between the United States and France. It is not intended that the two former of these gentlemen shall embark for Europe, until they shall have received from the
Executive Directory assurances signified by their Secretary of foreign relations, that they shall be received in character, that they shall enjoy all the prerogatives attached to
that character by the law of nations, and that a minister
or ministers of equal powers shall be appointed and commissioned to treat with them.
John Adams.Feb. 25, 1799.To these nominations the Senate advised and consented,
and commissions were prepared. My friend, Mr. Henry
declined, on account of his age, and Governor Davie, of
North-Carolina, was appointed in his place. During all
this transaction, no motion was made in Senate, to
pass a resolution that a mission to France was inexpedient.
With the despatches from Talleyrand before his eyes, I
believe no member of the Senate would have been willing
to record his name in favor of such a resolution, among
the yeas and nays. The deputation of Senators made no
remonstrances to me against the mission, or the diplomatic
communications on which it was founded, but only against
the missionary, Mr. Murray.
I sent an invitation to the heads of departments to assemble in my chamber, to consult upon the instructions
to be given to our envoys. They all met me accordingly,
and in several long evenings entered into a very serious
and deliberate discussion of every article that was to be
demanded and insisted on in the proposed treaty. They
were all unanimously agreed upon to my entire satisfaction,
and reduced to writing. I committed them to the secretary of state, to be reduced into proper form, to have a
fair copy made and transmitted to me, for revision, correction or signature, as there might be occasion.
The yellow fever was expected, and we wert all obliged
to fly for our lives: myself and all my family to Quincy,
and the heads of departments, with the public offices, to
Trenton.
I had repeatedly endeavored to impress upon the mind
of the secretary of state, the necessity of transmitting to
me as soon as possible, his draught of the instructions, that they might be finished and signed, and every thing
prepared for the departure of the envoys. I waited with
much concern, expecting from day to day to receive the
instructions; but no instructions appeared. At length,
instead of them, I received a letter signed by all five of
the heads of departments, earnestly entreating me to suspend the mission!
I was astonished at this unexpected, this obstinate and
persevering opposition to a measure, that appeared so clearly to me to be so essential to the peace and prosperity of
the nation, and the honor of the government, at home
and abroad. I was not a little surprised at the unanimity
of the heads of departments, for two of them had always
appeared moderate and candid in relation to this mission.
My instantaneous determination was to go to Trenton,
meet the gentlemen face to face, to confer with them
coolly on the subject, and convince them, or be convinced by them, if I could. On my way, I called upon
Chief Justice Ellsworth, at his seat in Windsor, and had
a conversation of perhaps two hours with him. He was
perfectly candid. Whatever should be the determination,
he was ready at an hour’s warning to comply. If it was
thought best to embark immediately, he was ready. If
it was judged more expedient to postpone it for a little
time, though that might subject him to a winter voyage,
that danger had no weight with him. If it was concluded
to defer it till the spring, he was willing to wait. In this
disposition I took leave of him. He gave me no intimation that he had any thought of a journey to Trenton. I
lodged at Hartford, not yet purified of the yellow fever,
and there I caught something very like it, or at least almost as bad, a most violent cold, attended with a constant
fever, which rendered me for six weeks more fit for a
chamber and bed of sickness, than for uncomfortable
journeys, or much labor of the head or hands. However,
I would not consent to be retarded on my journey, and
reached Trenton, where Mr. Hamilton had arrived a few
hours before me. Governor Davie had been there some
time. Ill as I was, I sent for the heads of departments. Four of them were there. The attorney general was
gone to Virginia. Many days were employed in conferences with them, sometimes at my own apartments, and
sometimes at their offices.
The inhabitants of Trenton had been wrought up to
a pitch of political enthusiasm that surprised me. The
universal opinion appeared to be, that the first arrivals
from Europe would bring the glorious news, that Louis
the Eighteenth was restored to the throne of France, and
reigning triumphantly at Versailles. Suwarrow, at the
head of his victorious Russian army, was to have marched
from Italy to Paris, on one side, and Prince Charles, at
the head of an Austrian army, was to have marched from
Germany to Paris on the other, and detachments from
both armies were to march down to Havre, to receive
the king, who was to be brought over by a British fleet
and escorted with flying colours to Versailles. I could
scarcely believe my own senses when I heard such reveries.—Yet the heads of departments appeared to believe them,
and urge them as decisive arguments for suspending the
embarkation of our envoys till the spring. In vain did I
urge the immense distances the two imperial armies had
to march, the great number of towns and cities in the
route of both, in positions chosen with great skill, fortified
with exquisite art, defended by vast trains of heavy ordnance, garrisoned by numerous troops of soldiers perfectly disciplined, and animated with all the obstinacy and
ardor of the revolutionary spirit. In vain did I alledge
the military maxim, which would certainly govern both
Prince Charles and Suwarrow, that is, never to leave a fortified city in the rear of your army, in possession of your enemy. That the siege of one town would consume the
whole season.—That neither the Russians nor Austrians
were probably provided with the mortars and heavy cannon necessary for sieges.—Nothing would do—Louis
XVIII. must be upon the throne of France.—Well, suppose he is, what harm will there be in embarking our envoys? They will congratulate his Majesty, and if his
Majesty cannot receive them under their credentials to the French Republic, he will be glad to see them in his
kingdom, and assure them of his royal protection till they
can write home for fresh commissions, and such shall be
ready for them at a minute’s warning. In vain did I
urge the entire change of property in France, and the
necessity the present possessors were under to defend
themselves at every sacrifice and every risque. Mr. Ellsworth had arrived in two or three days after me. I invited him and Governor Davie to dine with me alone,
that we might converse with entire freedom. At table,
Mr. Ellsworth expressed an opinion somewhat similar to
that of the heads of departments and the public opinion
of Trenton. Is it possible, Chief Justice, said I, that you
can seriously believe that the Bourbons are or will be
soon restored to the throne of France? Why, said Mr.
Ellsworth, smiling, it looks a good deal so. I should not
be afraid to stake my life upon it, that they will not be
restored in seven years, if they ever are, was my reply.
And then I entered into a long detail of my reasons for
this opinion. They would be too tedious to enumerate
here, and time has superceded the necessity of them.
The result of the conversation was, that Mr. Davie
was decidedly for embarking immediately, as he always
had been from his first arrival, and Mr. Ellsworth declared himself satisfied and willing to embark as soon as I
pleased.
Mr. Hamilton, who had been some time in town and
had visited me several times, came at last to remonstrate
against the mission to France. I received him with great
civility, as I always had done from my first knowledge of
him. I was fortunately in a very happy temper and very
good humor. He went over the whole ground of the
victories of Suwarrow and Prince Charles, and the inflexible determination of the two imperial courts, in concert
with G. Britain, to restore the house of Bourbon to
their kingdom. That there was no doubt the enterprise
was already accomplished, or at least it would be, before
the end of the campaign. That Mr. Pitt was determined
to restore the Bourbons. That the confidence of the nation in Mr. Pitt was unbounded. That the nation was
never so united, and determined to support Mr. Pitt and
his resolution to restore the monarchy of France.—His
eloquence and vehemence wrought the little man up to a
degree of heat and effervescence like that which Gen.
Knox used to describe of his conduct in the battle of Monmouth, and which General Lee used to call his paroxysms
of bravery, but which he said would never be of any service to his country. I answered him in general, as I had
answered the heads of departments and Judge Ellsworth—but to no purpose. He repeated over and over again the
unalterable resolution of Mr. Pitt and the two imperial
courts, the invincible heroism os Suwarrow and Prince
Charles, and the unbounded confidence of the British
empire in Mr. Pitt, with such agitation and violent action,
that I really pitied him, instead of being displeased. I only added, that I differed with him in opinion on every
point, and that instead of restoring the Bourbons, it
would not be long before England would make peace.
I treated him throughout with great mildness and civility;
but after he took leave, I could not help reflecting in my
own mind on the total ignorance he had betrayed of every thing in Europe, in France, England, and elsewhere.
Instead of that unbounded confidence in Mr. Pitt, I knew
that the nation had been long working up almost to a
ripeness for rebellion against Mr. Pitt, for continuing the
war. Accordingly it was not long before Mr. Pitt was
obliged to resign, peace at Amiens was made, and Napoleon acknowledged. Mr. Hamilton in his most famous
pamphlet, has hinted at this conversation, and squinted at
my simplicity for expecting peace.
Upon the whole, I directed the instructions to be prepared, the heads of departments were assembled, and the
instructions deliberately considered, paragraph by paragraph, and unanimously approved by me and by them.
Indeed there had never been any difference of opinion
among us on any article of the instructions.
The instructions were presented to the envoys, and
they requested to embark in the United States frigate as soon as possible.—For some cause or other in the state of
the ship, they landed in Spain, and went by land from
Corunna to Paris on the same route which Mr. Dana and
I had travelled twenty years before, that is, in 1780. Before their arrival, a revolution had occurred, and the
Consular government succeeded the Directory.Had Mr. Murray’s nomination been approved, he
would probably have finished the business long before,
and obtained compensation for all spoliations.

					John Adams.


Title: To John Adams from Benjamin Rush, 5 May 1809
From: Rush, Benjamin
To: Adams, John

Dear Sir,
Philadelphia May 5th. 1809.

I am much pleased with the Specimen you have given of the Use of your Wings upon a certain Subject in your last letter. Your publications in the newspapers show still further how important to the public, to posterity, and to your family honor are the words you have preserved of your political life. Your defence of the rights of our Seamen is much admired. It discovers with the Experience & wisdom of 70, the fire and eloquence of five & twenty. The place from when it was dated induced me to read it. It is many years since I have read a political essay of half its length. It inspired me with the feelings of 1774 & 1776. Happily for my interest & peace of mind, these feelings soon subsided, for were I cherish them with the just and noble principles from which they are derived, I should soon find myself; not in a foreign, but in an enemy’s Country, for our British—not monarchists—(that is too flattering a title for them) but our British Subjects—that is, the men who admit wish for the return of the jurisdiction of the British king, Lords, & Commons over our Country, and Who still consider the American Revolution as a rebellion,—these men I say outroyal in toryism the British Nation,—the British Ministry, & even the British king himself. From these men your publications receive no quarter, and they hold in a degree the balance, if not of power, certainly of fairness fashion and Character in Our City.
I enclose you the inaugural dissertation of my 3rd son James Rush who has lately graduated in medicine in our University, with credit to himself, and satisfaction to his father. His talents, and manners promise Consideration in his profession. He will sail in a few weeks for Edinh where, and in London he expects to complete his medical education, after which—it is my Wish to establish him in Philada:—I pray god to prosper our United efforts for this purpose!—
My Son Richard has taken a sudden and great Start in business. You know him. I shall only add—that he continues to be a most indefatigable Student, and in politicks,—stands upon the broad basis of the declaration of Independence.
I repeat again & again my Wish that the hasty effusions of my heart contained in my letters be not read out of your family.—
ADieu—yours—yours—yours.
Benjn: Rush.
PS: Some of your tory enemies in Boston have endeavoured to prove that your Country has cancelled the immense debt it owes to you by drafts upon the treasury of the United States. They forget that the Obligations due to patriots, heroes and Other benefactors of Mankind can never be Cancelled by Millions of Dollars, especially when that  Acknowledgment of their Services are is opposed by calumny, falsehood and persecution. The proper and the dearest compensation for the labors, an Sacrifices and Atchievements of public Spirit is the justice to Character. Every thing short of this—is nothing but Shakespear’s purse—“all trash.”—


Title: To John Adams from William Cunningham, 6 May 1809
From: Cunningham, William
To: Adams, John

Dear Sir
Fitchburg, May, 6th. 1809

I was duly favoured with yours of the 24th. ult. The species of sensibility excited by your Letters in March, are defined by the interest I take in whatever affects your repose, your happiness, and your just claims on the affection, confidence and gratitude of a Country reared under your paternal care. If it can be necessary to be more particular—they were the various and refined emotions springing, as in their native source, from the contemplation of an unexampled instance of neglected Virtue, unruffled yet not unhurt, at the remembrance of the unprovoked waywardness it had experienced.
I should receive with much pleasure, an account of all the reasons you had for giving the public your interlocutory discourse with the Representative of the Elector of Saxony. One reason is extremely obvious, and was regarded with equal grace and fitness—it was to shew, that there had not grown out of ingratitude a more numerous, nor a more flagitious, progeny then are generally, if not legitimately, produced in the heats of party; and, consequently, not a greater than you were prepared to meet and manage in their frowardness. Introduced with such a presentiment, the conclusion of your Letter to Wright and Lyman, which you have probably noticed to have incurred the accusation of whimpering, bears not the lovely weakness of a heart in the spontaneous effusion of its sorrows, but is expressed in a happy union of dignified civility and of graceful chastisement—in the point and purity of your exemplar Paul, not in the perturbed temper of Xerxes when he scourged the sea. The cause of your constructing that sentence in such a strain of touching tenderness, must cease to receive your censure—the fortunate occasion it afforded you of expressing the nationality of your affections, atones for its fault.
Confirmed, by your coincidence, in the correctness of my sentiments concerning the Federalists in general, I feel my confidence strengthened in the soundness of my knowledge of some of their late Leaders. Alexander Hamilton was their head & hope. He was the Messiah, under whose reign a political millennium was to be enjoyed. Extravagant encomiums on his talents had lifted my estimation of him to a lofty height; and I readily confess, that in some interviews I had with him in New York, the prop, to his fame, of a capacious understanding was perspicuously displayed. It is the pride of his friends that he was ambitious; but that this passion was in him  kept down to virtuous emulation, upon which alone they can exult, is not so evident. The testimony of General Washington in his favour, if not extorted, is yet not unexceptionable. Washington, like yourself, had come under the displeasure of this paragon of propriety, and a threatening of a public exposure of his mistakes, was suspended over the head of Washington like the Diomedian sword, with this difference, that it should fall, not on falsehood, but on indocility. This is a fact unknown to the public. It is unknown, except to a very few in the Nation—You, Sir, know what authority I have for the declaration. General Washington was overawed with a menace which gave you but the more resolution. Whether he or you had the higher reliance on the consciousness of right, and on strength of capacity to wield against him the cudgel, are questions which, even if they were not now passing the test of experiment, I might with more propriety postpone to posterity, than refer to your determination, or pronounce, to you, my own. Such is my opinion of the late Idol of the Federal party. If he would not, like “Moloch, vault over all impediments to seize the goal of his ambition,” his course was undeviatingly shaped towards it. At the fourth Presidential election, it was, I suspect, his intention to keep the Nation bewildered, to deceive them with directions, and to guide them by the circumvolutions of a wheel, as Tony did Marlow and Hastings on Crack-skull common. In the course of the Election canvass, General Pinkney made an excursion into this Eastern section of the Union. On his return, Hamilton accompanied him from New York to New-Jersey, where he had with him a lengthy interview. It may be presumed that a plan of proceeding was concerted. I do not derive this presumption from any suspicion of the honour of Pinkney, but it is irresitibly pressed by the unwarrantable assumptions of Hamilton on your advancement to the Presidency, and by his being offended at your very proper treatment of his officiousness. His agency had become active in the Administration of the Government. His pride was inflated with the confidence which was reposed in him, and by the submission implicitly paid, by many, to his opinions. It cannot be doubted, that having unsuccessfully aspired to the direction of the measures of which you were the appointed Head, he wished a succession to your place of a Chief (if this is not a contradiction.) who would keep his bureau at New-York. But why have I told you all this? You, to whom, without allusion, every secret was as promptly known, as were to Cicero the schemes of Cataline? I have done it to let you see, that I have not been studious of your story without acquiring some acquaintance with the arcana-credenda, so necessary to its explanation.
This, indeed, true, that not a man of the Federalists has come forward in your defence, but the inference you appear to draw from it of an indisposition in any Federalist to defend you, is too uncharitable. The fact is, there has not, till now, appeared against you any other than anomalous accusations, and they are anonymous which now appear. You admit, that the disposition towards you of the Federalists at large, is not delinquent in affection and gratitude. The disesteem which has not dared to vent itself, I have thought might be left, in the hearts which harbour it, like lead under a dung heap, to be dissolved in the heat, in the foulness and in the acidity of its covering. The Love of your Countrymen will remain forever the inconsumable abestos.
The article in the Baltimore Federal Republican is a gross and groundless calumny; but like the fly which animates corruption, it would perish in its vile work. The article is the more provoking for the features of authenticity it has gravely assumed. The assertion that the Federalists preferred Mr. Jay, is refuted by the very exact parallel between you. Surely the writer never knew, or had forgotten, that before his party had singled out Mr. Jay for your competitor, you had publickly pronounced him to be the nearest of any man to your heart.
Interwoven as are the reasons for the dismission of Pickering with other explanations, I think it probable that you will publickly reveal them, and release me from the injunction I am under. They are the great mystery. A person, ycleped General Eaton, who is the veriest popinjay I ever saw, and who affects to be in every secret, in a sophomorean speech at a meeting of the Town of Brimfield, has very confidently asserted the cause to be Pickering’s opposition to your nomination of Col. Smith for a General officer. If you can take syllabub by the page, I would recommend this redoubtable hero’s speech for a part of your next desert.
Seeing, in some other papers, a notice of your communications to the Boston Patriot, I shall send for that Paper. I am acquainted with Everett. He was from the country, and is a man of considerable acquisitions. Our wounds, like those of Philocletes, require divine skill for their remedy. There is an emanation of it in your observations on the King of England’s Proclamation. Wisdom, with some, is like gold in the hands of the gold-beaters, a very little serves to carry on their trade, and that little they beat and attenuate till it but just serves to touch the surface of the most miserable daubings—The assertion that “Britain has done us no essential injury,” is of this malleable kind of stock. But in your observations on the Impressment of our Seamen, wisdom is the share, the plate & the colter, which cut up and destroy the foul roots in the field of reason.
“What though the mast be now thrown overboard,
The cabel broke the holding anchor lost,
And half our sailors swallow’d in the flood;
yet lives our pilot still, Is’t meet that he
Should leave the helm?
Ah! what a shame! Ah! what a fault were this!”
I cannot conceal from you my apprehension, that in throwing yourself into the troubled element of dispute, you will meet with many angry surges—I have more satisfaction in communicating my conviction, that you will reach the shore without calling upon Cassius. Forming yourself upon the model of Paul, you will be crowned with his success before his Judge and Accusers.
With veneration & esteem, / I am, Dear Sir, / Yours

Wm. Cunningham, J.


Title: To John Adams from Jared Ingersoll, Jr., 9 May 1809
From: Ingersoll, Jared, Jr.
To: Adams, John

Dear Sir
Philadelphia May 9 1809.

A Dispute existing at New–Orleans involving property to an immense amount and also very interesting questions of a legal and Constitutional nature; I thought it would probably gratify your Curiosity, to know precisely the circumstances of a Case of which you might have received an indistinct Report
I therefore have taken the Liberty to send you two Pamphlets lately printed upon the subject referring to the general Doctrine of allusions, the Constitution and Laws of the United States particularly the Laws which respects that Territory
I congratulate you upon the favorable appearances in publick matters, if Bonaparte shall have the good sense (for from his Justice I have no expectations), to recal his Decrees so far as they respect us, we shall again be a prosperous and happy people.
I am / Dear Sir / With high consideration / Your obd hum. serv

Jared Ingersoll


Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 9 May 1809
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

					Sirs,
					Quincy, May 9, 1809.

				At first I intended to encumber your paper with no
Documents but such as were absolutely necessary for my
own vindication. But as the peace with France in eighteen hundred
was not only an event of great importance in itself, but
produced demonstrations of the prejudices, passions, views,
designs and systems of parties, more perhaps than any
other; I hope you will allow me room for such other papers as may serve to throw light upon this subject. At
present it may not be very interesting, but the cause of
truth and justice may hereafter be promoted by having
the facts and evidences laid together in a series. The
future policy of the nation will not be injured by it.
Besides the communications already published from the
sovereign of the French nation, through their Minister of
foreign relations, their diplomatic organ at the Hague, and
our Minister there, another was communicated through
the same channels in these words:—Copy of a letter dated Paris, 11th Fructidor, 6 year,
(August 28, 1798,) from Mr. Talleyrand, as Minister of Exterior Relations, to Mr. Pichon, Secretary
of Legation, Hague.TRANSLATION.I see with pleasure, citizen, that the intercourse of society has procured you some political conversations with Mr. Murray. I entertain an esteem for that Minister.—Like all the men at the head of the affairs of the United
States, he has received the impressions which the British
Cabinet has known how to give, against us. He thinks
the measures of his government just and supports them:
but he possesses reason, understanding, and a true attachment to his country: he is neither French nor English:
he is ingenuously an American. I am not at all surprised
that he has appeared to you to wish sincerely for the reconciliation of the two Republics. I will therefore cheerfully answer the questions you put to me, on different
points, which appeared to you, not to be well established
in his mind. I do not see, between France and the United States any clashing of interest, any cause of jealousy.
The Americans wish to be fishermen, sailors, manufacturers, and especially husbandmen. In all these points of
view, their success is more at the expense of England than
us. Why should we be uneasy about them? They aspire to the consolidation of their national existence, and
it is to our purpose that they should succeed. In fact, we
should have decided upon very superficial views, to sustain their Independence, if the matter was to separate them
from England, merely to leave them finally insulated among themselves, on an extensive seacoast, weak rivaling,
and impoverished by each other, and torn by foreign intrigues. We know that Great Britain would soon have
put together, piece by piece those scattered shreds, and
we should have done nothing useful for ourselves, if so
miserable a chance of it, were not daily rendered more
remote.
What, therefore is the cause of the misunderstanding,
which, if France did not manifest herself more wise, would
henceforth induce a violent rupture between the two Republics? Neither incompatible interests, nor projects of
aggrandizement divide them. After all, distrust alone
has done the whole. The government of the United
States has thought, that France wanted to revolutionize it.
France has thought that the government of the United
States wanted to throw itself into the arms of England. It does not require much skill to divine, which is the Cabinet interested in the two events producing each other,
and which invisibly puts in motion all the expedients calculated to make them take effect. Let us open our eyes
on both sides. I am disposed to admit that the conduct
of the government of the United States may be explained
by other causes than those heretofore presumed. But let
it on its part, understand, that the French government,
wounded as it may be, is too wise to entertain the views
of disturbance, which the other supposes. It concerns a
Republic, founded on the system of Representation, to support and not to weaken similar establishments. The stability of this system abroad is a necessary example at home.
France in fine, has a double motive as a nation and as a
republic, not to expose to any hazard, the present existence of the United States. Therefore it never thought
of making war against them, nor exciting civil commotions
among them: and every contrary supposition is an insult
to common sense.
These fundamental principles being established, it is
natural to ask by what fatality, a good understanding was
not long since restored? It was because irritation being
mingled with distrust, neither party yielded to real conciliatory inclinations. In the United States it was supposed
that the French government was temporizing, in order to
strike the blow with greater certainty; whence resulted a
crowd of measures, more and more aggravating. In
France it was supposed that the government of the United
States, wished only the appearances of a negociation,
whence resulted a certain demand for pledges of good faith.
Let us substitute calmness for passion, confidence for
suspicions, and we shall soon agree. I used my endeavors
to enter upon a negociation in this spirit, with Mr. Gerry. My correspondence with him, until the day of his
departure, is a curious monument of advances on my
part, and of evasions on his. It is wrong to think that
I confined myself to vague protestations. Among that
series of official Letters, which will doubtless be published
at Philadelphia, I select one of the 30th Prairial, wherein you will see that I make very positive propositions, without any mixture of preliminary conditions. This letter
was followed by three notes upon the Articles to be discussed, and I intended to complete the others in this manner, if Mr. Gerry had not refused to answer thereto.
When it became necessary to abandon the idea of treating with that envoy, who thought it important only to
know how a negociation might thereafter be resumed, I
gave him the most solemn assurances concerning the reception that a new plenipotentiary would receive. It was
far from my thoughts to insinuate that the President
should send one from the United States, instead of investing with his powers some one who was in Europe; far
less that the envoy should land directly in France, instead
of announcing it in a neighboring country. I wished
merely to say that the Executive Directory was so decided
for a reconciliation, that all tampering would be superfluous, that an act of confidence in it, would excite its own.
I should be very badly understood, if there should be found
in my expressions, a restriction on the nature of the choice
which the President might make. I wished to encourage
Mr. Gerry by testimonies of regard, that his good intentions merited. Although I could not dissemble that he
wanted decision at a moment when he might have easily
adjusted every thing. It does not thence follow that I
designated him; I will even avow that I think him too
irresolute to be fit to hasten the conclusion of an affair of
this kind. The advantages that I prized in him are common to all Americans, who have not manifested a predilection for England. Can it be believed that a man who
should profess a hatred or contempt of the French Republic, or should manifest himself the advocate of royalty,
can inspire the Directory with a favorable opinion of the
dispositions of the government of the United States? I
should have disguised the truth, if I had left this matter
ambiguous: it is not to wound the Independence of that
government, to point out to a sincere friend of peace, the
shoals he ought to avoid. As to the mediation of the Batavian Republic and of
Spain, I do not know that there is any serious question
about it, and it appears to me absolutely useless. The
United States might hesitate, in the present state of things,
to refer themselves to their impartiality, and besides I see
no subject which may not be arranged directly.
I know that the distance which separates France and the
United States opens a vast field for incident, and there
have been but too many of them. But the Executive
Directory is unshaken in the conduct which may best obviate them. The excess even of provocations has deadened their effect.—The government of the United States
surrounds itself with precautions against an imaginary attack. To stretch the hand to deluded friends, is what
one republic owes to another, and I cannot doubt that
the dignity of that attitude will convince the President of
our pacific dispositions.
The two governments ought above all to be attentive
to indirect attempts to alienate them still more. Their
prudence will secure this object, and I shall cite but one
example of it. You have told Mr. Murray the truth
respecting Dr. Logan. But I perceive, that on all hands
it is attempted to produce a belief in America, that we
are negociating with him. On the 7th of this month a
very insidious paragraph was inserted in the “Bien Informé.” It is therein intimated, that guided by the citizen Thomas Paine, Dr. Logan has made application to
the Executive Directory, in the character of secret agent.
The Doctor has complained of it bitterly to me. He
has no need of justifying himself concerning a matter,
the falsity of which I know better than any body: but
he assured me that having once met Thomas Paine, at
the house of a third person, he found him so prejudiced
against the United States, and so opinionative, with respect to an influence he neither possesses among them nor
us, that he abstained from conversing any more with him.
Moreover, to cut short all misunderstanding, I engaged
Dr. Logan to postpone, till another time, the experiments
he proposes to make on agriculture, and to return home. As to Mr. Hitchborn, of Massachusetts, I was even ignorant till now that he was in Europe. A single word will
suffice for the rest.
We want nothing but justice on the part of the United
States: we ask it: we offer it to their government: it
may depend upon the candor of the Executive Directory.You will not doubt, citizen, that I approve of the communications which your zeal has caused you to seek with
Mr. Murray, since I enable you to resume them with official elucidations, &c. &c. &c.
Ch. Mau. TalleyrandThis and all the other communications from the French
minister, heretofore published in my letter to you, were
produced by my message to Congress of the 21st of June
1798, which was in these words:Gentlemen of the Senate, and
Gentlemen of the House of Representatives,While I congratulate you on the arrival of General
Marshall, one of our late envoys extraordinary to the French
republic, at a place of safety, where he is justly held in
honor, I think it my duty to communicate to you, a letter
received by him from Mr. Gerry, the only one of the
three who has not received his congé. This letter, together with another from the minister of foreign relations
to him, of the 3d of April, and his answer of the 4th,
will shew the situation in which he remains, his intentions
and prospects.
I presume, that before this time he has received fresh
instructions, a copy of which accompanies this message,
to consent to no loans, and therefore the negociation may
be considered at an end. I will never send another minister to France, without assurances that he will be received, respected and honored, as
the representative of a great, free, powerful and independent
nation.John AdamsUnited States, June 21st, 1798.In my next letter you will have the evidence of the
compliance of the French government with the conditions
and requisitions in my message to the Senate, nominating
Mr. Murray and others ministers and envoys to France.

					John Adams.


Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 9 May 1809
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

					Quincy, May 9, 1809.

				Mr. Hamilton, in his famous pamphlet, page 23,
says, “the conduct pursued bore sufficient marks of courage and elevation to raise the national character to an exalted height throughout Europe.”“Much it is to be deplored that we should have been
precipitated from this proud eminence, without necessity,
without temptation.”
It is the habitual practice of our parties, to affirm or
deny, as they find it to their purpose, the honor or the
disgrace that is produced in Europe by our measures.
But neither party know any thing about the matter.
The truth is, that our affairs are much less spoken or
thought of, in Europe, than we imagine. In all parts
of Europe, but especially in France and England,
they are constantly misrepresented and misunderstood.
Most of all in England. I will venture to say, that
Mr. Hamilton wrote entirely at random, and without
a glimmering of genuine information, when he mentioned
both the exaltation and precipitation of our national character. To appeal to the courtiers or cabinet, or to the diplomatic corps in Europe, would be idle; because none
of them will ever read Hamilton’s pamphlet or those papers. But I would not hesitate to submit the whole subject to any of them. I shall take another course. Chief
Justice Ellsworth is no more. I can no longer appeal to
him. If I could, I would say no more than the truth,
but it would be more than I shall now say; and I aver
that his representation to me was the direct reverse of
Hamilton’s dogmatical assertions. Governor Davie still lives, and to him I appeal with confidence. He declared
to me, that to judge of the conduct of the American
government, both in their naval and other preparations
for war, and in their political and diplomatic negociations
upon that occasion, a man must go to Europe, where it
was considered as the greatest demonstration of genius,
firmness and wisdom. If I represent the Governor’s expressions in stronger terms than those he used, I request
him to correct them.
In England, I know the Anti-Jacobin Journal abused
us, and so did Macdonald, Cobbett, Smith, and every
Briton in Europe and America, who wished us at war
with France and in alliance with England. But even in
England all the sober part of the nation applauded us, and
that to such a degree, that it soon became the popular cry,
“We must imitate the United States of America, change
our ministers, and make peace.” Accordingly they did
soon change their ministers and make peace at Amiens.
Mr. Liston, whose character I respect, had run through
a long course of diplomatic experience in various courts and countries in Europe, from a secretary of legation and
charge des affaires to the grade of minister plenipotentiary,
and thence to that of ambassador at Constantinople, was
probably a better judge than Mr. Hamilton, who had no
experience at all in any diplomatic station, and who, I
dare to say, had read very little on the subject of diplomatic functions, and still less of the history of embassies
or of the printed despatches of ambassadors. Mr. Liston,
if any body, knew what would procure honor to a nation
or government, and what disgrace: what would raise the dignity, or what depress it: what was triumph,
and what humiliation. Now I affirm, that the first time Mr. Liston saw me after he had been informed of the communications of the
French Directory, through Talleyrand, Mr. Pichon and
Mr. Murray, he said to me these words—“To what humiliations will not these Frenchmen stoop, to appease you? I
am very sorry for it: I own, I did hope they would have
gone to war with you.” I smiled, but made no answer. I
wanted no proof of the sincerity of this declaration. I doubted not the sincerity of his wish, more than I did that
of Mr. Canning and his associates in the Anti-Jacobin,
who, upon receiving the news of Mr. Murray’s nomination, proclaimed that jacobinism was triumphant and carrying all before it in America. They could not, or would
not, distinguish between jacobinism and neutrality. Every
thing with them was jacobinism, except a war with France
and an alliance with Great Britain. They all panted for
a war between the United States and France as sincerely,
though not so ardently, as Alexander Hamilton.
There were not wanting insinuations and instigations
to me, to confer with Mr. Liston on the subject of
an alliance with Great Britain. And Mr L. himself repeatedly suggested to me. in very modest and
delicate terms, however, his readiness to enter into any
explanations on that head. I always waved it with as
easy a politeness as I could. But my system was determined, and had been so for more than twenty years, that
is, to enter into no alliance with any power in Europe. In case of war with England, I would not enter into any
alliance with France. In case of war with France, I
would not form any alliance with England. We want
no alliance: we are equal to all our own necessary wars.
“Non tali auxilio, nec defensoribus istis, tempus eget.” We might aid and be aided by a power at war with our
enemy, and might concert operations from time to time;
but I would take no engagement that should tie up our
hands from making peace whenever we pleased. Had
the war with France continued, I might have been drawn
by the force of public opinion, or the influence of the
legislature, into an alliance with England; but it would
have been against my own judgment and inclination.
Let me conclude this letter with an anecdote. Dr.
Franklin told me, that before his return to America from
England, in 1775, he was in company, I believe at Lord
Spencer’s, with a number of English noblemen, when the
conversation turned upon fables, those of Æsop, La Fontaine, Gay, Moore, &c. &c. &c. Some of the company
observed that he thought the subject was exhausted. He did not believe that any man could now find an animal,
beast, bird, or fish, that he could work into a new fable
with any success; and the whole company appeared to
applaud the idea, except Franklin, who was silent. The
gentlemen insisted on his opinion. He said, with submission to their lordships, he believed the subject was inexhaustible, and that many new and instructive fables might
be made out of such materials. Can you think of
one at present? If your lordship will furnish me a pen,
ink and paper, I believe I can furnish your lordship with
one in a few minutes. The paper was brought, and he
sat down and wrote:—
Once upon a time, an eagle scaling round a farmer’s
barn, and espying a hare, darted down upon him like a
sun beam, seized him in his claws, and re-mounted with
him in the air. He soon found that he had a creature
of more courage and strength than a hare, for which,
notwithstanding the keenness of his eye-sight, he had
mistaken a cat. The snarling and scrambling of the prey
was very inconvenient, and what was worse, she had disengaged herself from his talons, grasped his body with
her four limbs, so as to stop his breath, and seized fast
hold of his throat with her teeth. Pray, said the eagle,
let go your hold and I will release you. Very fine, said
the cat, I have no fancy to fall from this height and be
crushed to death. You have taken me up, and you shall
stoop and let me down. The eagle thought it necessary
to stoop accordingly. The moral was so applicable to
England and America, that the fable was allowed to be
original and highly applauded.
Let Hamilton say what he will, the French Directory
found it convenient to stoop and set us down on our
honest ground of neutrality and impartiality, as the English did eagle formerly, and now does a second time.

					John Adams.


Title: To John Adams from Joseph Ward, 10 May 1809
From: Ward, Joseph
To: Adams, John

Most Respected Sir
Boston May 10th, 1809

Your Letter of the 15th April I have had the honor to receive; and have read it over and over again with great pleasure. I cannot let go the pleasing hope, that future historians may record with truth & impartiality, the glorious deeds of our revolutionary Patriots, whose preeminent merit in founding our Nation, and framing our System of Government,  entitles them to the gratitude and is a bright & commanding example for all ages to come. If they shall not have wisdom & virtue enough to record the illustrious deeds of the founders of this rising empire—they must be morally dead while they animally live. Ever pride, should stimulate them to render illustrious & preeminently wise in the view of the world the founders of their national greatness. It will in some degree reflect honor upon themselves. He that does not feel a pride in the great men his Country has produced, is “lower than unborn.”—
“The lying documents” which party spirit produces, and which crowd into our newspapers, will I trust go down to oblivion with the scum of all scurvy times; while in the records of the Revolution and the great Actors will be found. If newspapers of the present & past times are to be the guide of future historians, they must live to the age of Methuselah, to read them. But guided by commonsense, they may go to the authentic records of the Revolution, & the formation and early administration of the federal government, for information; equally disregarding the partial pamphlets newspapers & Mrs Warren’s history.
I observed the illiberal false and rascally publication of Sparticus. Knowing the assertions were false, I wrote some remarks upon them, & sent the same to the editors of the Gazette for publication; but it seems my remarks did not relish—& were not given to the public. The like fate happened to some remarks I sent to the Centinel, upon the silly “Notes” upon your Letter in answer to the Letter from the Gentlemen at Northampton. My remarks were very mild rebukes, but too true, for the taste of calumniators, and therefore were not published; they concluded with these words, “Is this the cale by which the revolutionary Patriots are to receive their reward? If the weight of years and long continued energies, should impair the lustre of a mind whose meridian beams animated our whole Country, and lighted the road to the Independence—shall we deny all consolation but that we cannot withold, “the Paradise of a good Conscience.”—“The ungrateful thought chills the warm blood in every generous heart”—Although these remarks were not published, I have reason to believe they had some effect to prevent a repetition of mean & base publications. The Facts, you were pleased to communicate in your Letter, are sufficient to silence forever all the attempts that have been or that may be made to lessen the merit of the first named Ambassador in the great event of the treaty for Peace. They are I trust so recorded that no time can obliterate them, and therefore calumny must be extinguished by their light.
Many of those important facts, You were pleased to communicate to me many years since, at Philadela, and which I have (without naming the high authority from whom I received them) upon all proper occasions mentioned in company, and asserted their truth, & importance—which no one disputed, but generally heard them detailed with the same pleasure that I felt in doing justice to preeminent merit. The great and highly interesting and dangerous “project of a Congress at Vienna,” is new to me, and I believe it is known to very few. It is in every view highly important, and I hope in the proper time, of which You alone must determine, that a full exposition of it may be laid before the Nation. It is not only due to Merit, but may serve as a light & a guard to our Statesmen in future negotiations. Although this great event was unknown by me, yet I have long known enough of the great events of the Revolution, to impress my mind with a belief that no man now walks the world whose merit in promoting the interest & Independence of this Country, will equals his who was the first projector of the articles of the treaty for Peace. Many great and good men displayed eminent talents and patriotism, “but one star differeth from another star in glory.”—I feel great pleasure in recounting the excellent characters that adorned the Revolution, but some were called to more important stations and endowed with talents for a higher sphere than others. Providence assigned to you, Sir, the most interest interesting diplomatic station; the Independence Liberty and Safety of our Country was in a great degree suspended upon your wisdom and firmness—had you sunk under the weight, our hopes of freedom and Independence might have been blasted after all our expense of blood & treasure. I have endeavoured to impress this idea on many minds, and have not been always unsuccessful. The noise & nonsense of parties for many years have clouded the public mind, but there are honest & enlightened men scattered over our Country who read and reflect, and I hope in time the light may prevail. The recent publications bearing Your Signature, are more generally read & more generally approved, by all parties, than any political publications for many years. I think they will be very beneficial by correcting the public mind. Truths coming from one party, are little attended to by the other. Evidence accompanies Your writings, that they are uninfluenced by party views, and therefore they are generally read with out prejudice. Your reasoning upon “the British claim of right to search American ships,” has put that subject to rest—and, in my view, annihilated every shadow as well as substance of the pretended arguments in support of it. Minds capable of weighing facts & reasons, can I think never hereafter entertain a doubt upon the subject. I always embraced Your doctrine in this case, but never before saw it supported with such clearness & force. Even prejudiced Englishmen, must feel the weight & energy of your political Artillery. To use a sailors phrase, your shot hull’d their ship and went through from side to side. I trust that no one will attempt a refutation, it would be like attacking a ship of the Line with a birch canoo.
The recent overtures of the British Govt. to adjust all matters in dispute with this Country, afford a hope of accommodation. If conducted with mutual moderation & wisdom, I please myself with a belief that harmony may be established upon a more permanent basis than ever. I wish President Madison, might take counsel of his last predecessor but One—in his negotiations. If he is a wise man, I think he will. I never thought so ill of Mr Jefferson’s administration, as some did, but I could not help thinking that he committed many errors which You would have guarded him from had he asked, and followed, your counsel.
That You, Sir, may long live to benefit your Country, and enjoy its prosperity, and its gratitude for public Services—is the wish of many, but with more sincere ardour by none than by / Sir / your very humble Servt
Joseph Ward


Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 10 May 1809
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

               Sirs,
               Quincy, May 10th, 1809.

            On the 6th of March a letter was written by the Secretary of State by my order, in the following words, to
Mr. Murray:Philadelphia, March 6, 1799.
Sir,I enclose a commission constituting you, in conjunction
with the Chief Justice Elsworth and Patrick Henry, Esq.
of Virginia, Envoys Extraordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary to the French Republic.—By the President’s
direction, I enclose for your information, copies of his
Messages to the Senate of the 18th and 28th of March;
(it should have been the 18th and 25th of February) by
the latter of which you will see the motives inducing the
nomination of a Commission for the purpose of negociating with France, instead of resting the business wholly
with you. This will doubtless be agreeable, by relieving
you from the weight of a sole responsibility in an affair of
such magnitude.
It is the President’s desire, that you by letter to the
French Minister of foreign relations, inform him “that
Oliver Elsworth, Chief Justice of the United States,
Patrick Henry, late Governor of Virginia, and yourself
 are appointed Envoys Extraordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary of the United States to the French Republic, with full powers to discuss and settle by a Treaty, all controversies between the United States and France.”—But, “that the two former will not embark for Europe
until they shall have received from the Executive Directory direct and unequivocal assurances, signified by their Secretary of foreign relations, that the Envoys
shall be received in character, to an audience of the
Directory, and that they shall enjoy all the prerogatives
attached to that character by the law of nations, and
that a Minister or Ministers of equal powers shall be
appointed and commissioned to treat with them.”
The answer you shall receive to your letter, you will
be pleased to transmit to this office.
You will also be pleased to understand it to be the President’s opinion, that no more indirect and inofficial Communications, written or verbal, should be held with any
persons whatever, Agents on behalf of France, on the subjects of difference between the United States and the
French Republic. If the French government really desire a settlement of the existing differences, it must take
the course pointed out: unless the Executive Directory
should prefer sending a Minister Plenipotentiary to the
United States. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, / sir, your obedient servant,
Timothy Pickering.Wm. Vans Murray, Esq.
Minister of the U. States
at the Hague.
Mr. Murray obeyed these instructions by a letter in
these words:—The Hague, 5th May, 1799.Citizen Minister,
It is with the greatest pleasure that I hasten to fulfil the
instructions, which I have just had the honor to receive
from the government of the United States of America,
by informing you that the President has appointed Oliver Elsworth, Chief Justice of the United States, Patrick
Henry, late Governor of Virginia, and William Vans Murray, Minister resident of the United States at the Hague,
to be Envoys Extraordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary
of the United States to the French Republic, with full
powers to discuss and settle by a Treaty, all controversies
between the United States and France; but that the two
former, Mr. Elsworth and Mr. Henry will not embark
for Europe until they shall have received from the Executive Directory, direct and unequivocal assurances, signified by their Minister of foreign relations, that the Envoys
shall be received in character to an audience of the Directory, and that they shall enjoy all the prerogatives attached to that character by the law of nations, and that a
Minister or Ministers of equal powers shall be appointed
and commissioned to treat with them.I request you, Citizen Minister, to lay this subject before your government, and as the distance is so great,
and the obstacles so numerous in an Atlantic voyage, that
you will favor me, as speedily as possible, with the answer
which is to lead to such happy and important consequences.
Accept, Citizen Minister, the assurances of my perfect
high esteem.
(Signed) Wm. V. Murray.
To the Citizen Talleyrand,Minister
of the Exterior Relations of the French
Republic, &c. &c. Paris.
When Mr. Murray received the answer of the French
Minister, he inclosed it, with the following letter from
himself, to the Secretary of State:—The Hague, 7th of May, 1799.
Dear Sir,
On the 4th inst, late in the evening, I had the honor
to receive your No. 22, containing the commission of envoys.
On the fifth I addressed, precisely, agreeably to your
instructions, as I conceived, the inclosed letter to Mr.
Talleyrand, the minister of exterior relations. You will perceive, sir, that I did not think myself at liberty to go,
not only not out of the commas, but beyond them. In
one word alone I deviated, in the word minister, instead
of secretary of foreign relations. No direct nor indirect
and inofficial communications, written or verbal, will be
held by me with the French agents on American affairs.
I accept the appointment which it has pleased the President to clothe me with, under a grateful sense of the
high honor conferred upon me, so unexpectedly, by this
mark of his confidence. I may be allowed to say, that
though I was deeply sensible of the honor conferred by
the first nomination, and shall always, I hope, retain a
most grateful recollection of it; yet, sir, the new modification of that nomination gave me great pleasure, always
conceiving as I thought I did, that any negociation with
France would be full of anxieties and political perils to
the Envoys that should be employed by our government.
I had no wishes to be engaged in it, and no expectation
that I should be: To have a share in it was by me unsought: You will excuse this declaration, because I was
instrumental in certain preliminary steps relative to the
advances of France which produced the basis of the appointment.
I sent the original of the inclosed to Mr. Talleyrand, by
post; another, a copy, to Maj. Montflorence, to be handed to him; a third to a Mr. Griffith for Maj. M. in case
the other failed, to be opened by Mr. G. if Maj. M. should
have been out of Paris, and directed Mr. G. to follow
the instructions which he would find in the letter to Maj.
M. which were to deliver the inclosed to Mr. Talleyrand,
and take his letter in answer for me, and send it to me.
As soon as I have the answer of the Directory, I shall
have the honor of transmitting copies to you, sir, by different ways.
I am, with the greatest respect, and sincere esteem, dear
sir, faithfully your most obedient servant,
William V. Murray.
The Hon. Timothy Pickering,
Esq. Sec’ry of State, of the U.
States of America.Paris, 23d Floreal, (12th May 1799)
7th. year of the French Republic, one
and indivisible.
                            The Minister of Exterior Relations,

To Mr. Wm. Vans Murray, Minister resident of the
                            U. States at the Hague.

I augur too well, sir, from the eagerness you display, in
fulfilling the instructions of your government, not to hasten to answer the letter I received from you, dated the
15th of this month.
The Executive Directory being informed of the nomination of Mr.Oliver Elsworth, of Mr. Patrick Henry, and
of yourself, as Envoys Extraordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary of the United States to the French Republic,
to discuss and terminate all differences which subsist between the two countries, sees with pleasure, that its perseverance in pacific sentiments has kept open the way to an
approaching reconciliation. It has a long time ago manifested its intentions with respect to this subject. Be pleased to transmit to your Colleagues, and accept yourself,
the frank and explicit assurance, that it will receive the
Envoys of the United States, in the official character
with which they are invested: that they shall enjoy all the
prerogatives which are attached to it by the law of nations, and that one or more Ministers shall be authorised to
treat with them.
It was certainly unnecessary to suffer so many months
to elapse for the mere confirmation of what I have already
declared to Mr. Gerry, and which, after his departure, I
caused to be declared to you at the Hague. I sincerely
regret that your two colleagues await this answer at such
a distance. As to you, sir, whom it will reach in a few
days, and who understand so well the value of time, when
the restoration of harmony between two republics which
every thing invites to friendship, is in question, be assured
that as soon as you can take in hand the object of your
mission, I shall have the honor immediately to send you
passports. Accept, sir, the assurances of my very sincere consideration.
(Signed) Ch. Mau. Talleyrand.
The foregoing documents were not published till they
were communicated to Congress with my Message of December 5th, 1799. The Messages to the Senate nominating the Minister and the Envoys were never published
till now, as I remember. I may be, however, mistaken.
These papers were not published till the mischief was done
that they might have prevented, and innumerable prejudices and errors propagated all over the nation.
I have omitted two facts which ought to have been inserted in a former letter:
I. One is, that one of the Heads of Department at Trenton was more diffident than the rest. He said he was
far from being sanguine. He had signed the letter to me,
urging a postponement of the mission, because he did not
like to be singular; but he wished me to decide the
question according to my own judgment and sentiments.
He also shewed me a letter from the Attorney-General in
Virginia, saying that the people expected that the envoys
should proceed, and would be disappointed if they did not.
II. Another fact is that I transiently asked one of the
Heads of Department, whether Elsworth and Hamilton
came all the way from Windsor and Newark to Trenton,
to convince me that I ought to suspend the mission?

               John Adams.


Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 12 May 1809
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

Draughts of a letter to the Boston Patriot touching the pamphlet of Alexander Hamilton, which was not published, nor suitable for publication after the death of the latter. 1809.To the Printers of the Boston Patriot
That no Man may be at a loss to find the Pamphlet So often quoted, it is intituled.SirsQuincy May 12, 1809.

In a A Letter from Alexander Hamilton concerning the Public Conduct and Character of John Adams Esq. President of the United States printed at New York for John Lang, by George F. Hopkins, 1800. Copy right Secured; the Subject of the Negotiation with France in that year is considered. In the twenty fourth page it is Said that “The Session which ensued the Promulgation of the Dispatches of our Commissioners was about to commence. This was the Session of 1798. Mr Adams arrived at Philadelphia. The Tone of his Mind Seemed to have been raised.”
Let me ask a candid Public, how did Mr Hamilton know any Thing about the Tone of Mr Adams’s Mind either before, or at that Conference? He had never conversed with Mr Adams before, nor was he present at that Conference. Had he a Spy in the Cabinet who transmitted to him from day to day, the Confidential Communications between the President and heads of Departments? If there existed Such a Spy, why might he not communicate these Conferences to Mr Liston or the Marquis Yrujo, as well as to Mr Hamilton. He had as clear a Right. I believe that all the Privy Councils in the World are under an oath of Secrecy but ours, and ours ought to be. But as they are and not their own honor, and Sense of Propriety, ought with them to be obligations as Sacred as an Oath.
The Truth is, I had arrived at Philadelphia from a long Journey very much fatigued, and as no time was to be lost I sent for the heads of Departments to consult in the Evening upon the Points to be inserted in the Speech, to Congress, who were Soon to meet. Mr Hamilton Says “It was Suggested to him, Mr Adams, that it might be expedient to insert in the Speech, A Sentiment of this import that after the repeatedly rejected Advances of this Country, its Dignity required that it Should be left with France in future to make the first overture; that if desirous of reconciliation, She Should evince the Disposition by Sending a Minister to this Government; he would be received with the respect due to his Character, and treated with in the frankness of a Sincere desire of Accommodation.” “The Suggestion was received in a manner both indignant and intemperate.” I demand again how came Mr Hamilton by this Information? Had he a Spy in the Cabinet? If he had, I own I had rather that any Court in Europe Should have had a Spy there, for they could have done no harm by any true Information they could have obtained there: whereas Hamilton has been able to do, a great deal of Mischief by the pretended Information he has published.
It is very true that I thought this Proposition intended to close the Avenues to peace and ensure a War with France. For I did believe that Some of the heads of Departments, were confident in their own Minds that France would not Send a Minister here. From the Intimate Intercourse between Hamilton and Some of the heads of Departments as appears by this Pamphlet I now appeal to every impartial Man whether there is not reason to Suspect and believe that Hamilton himself had furnished this Machine to his Correspondent in the Cabinet, for the very purpose of ensuring a War and enabling him to mount his Hobby Horse the Command of the Army.
Hamilton Says “The Suggestion was received in a manner both indignant and intemperate” This is false. It is true it was urged with So much Obstinacy perseverance and Indecency, not to Say Intemperance, that at last I declared I would not adopt it, in clear and Strong terms.
Hamilton Says, “Mr Adams declared as a Sentiment he had adopted on mature Reflection: That if France Should Send a Minister here tomorrow, he would order him back the day after.”
Here I ask again, where, how and from whom did he get this Information? Was it from his Spy in the Cabinet? or was it the Fabrication of his own “Sublimated, excentric and intemperate Imagination? In either case it is an entire Misrepresentation. I Said that when in my Retirement at Quincy the Idea of the French government Sending a Minister here had first occurred to me my first thought was that I would Send him back the next day after his arrival as a retaliation for their Sending ours back, and because as the Affront offered to us had been at Paris publickly in the face of all Europe, the Atonement ought to be upon the Same Theatre: and because as the French Government had publicly and officially declared that they would receive no Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States untill the President had made Apologies for his Speeches and Answers to Addresses, they ought be made to retract and take back that rash Declaration on the Same Spot where it had been made. They might Send a Minister here consistently with that offensive declaration. This was my first thought: but upon a moment mature Reflection, I Saw this would not be justifiable. For to retaliate one breach of Principle by another Breach of Principle was neither the Morality nor the Policy that had been inculcated upon me by me Education.—Our Principle was that the Right of Embassy was Sacred. I would therefore Sacredly respect it, if they Sent a Minister here. But that I would not foreclose myself, from Sending a Minister to France, if I Saw an Opening for it consistent with our honor: In Short that I would leave both Doors and all Doors wide open for Negotiation. All this refutation came from myself, not from the heads of Departments.
All that he Says in this place and the beginning of the next page is false. My Mind never underwent any Alteration at all, after I left Quincy. I inserted no declaration in my Speech that I would not Send a Minister to France, nor any declaration that if France would give assurances of receiving a Minister from this Country I would Send one. Nothing like that Dclaration was ever made, except in my Message to Congress of the 21. of June 1798 in these Words “I will never Send another Minister to France, without assurances, that he will be received respected and honored, as the Representative of a great, free, powerful and independent Nation.” This Declaration finally procured the Peace.
Both the Doors of Negotiation were left open. The French might Send a Minister here without Conditions; We might Send one to France, though We did not expressly promise that We would, upon Conditions of a Certainty that he would be received. What Conduct did the French government hold in Consequence of this declaration? They retracted their Solemn official Declaration that they would receive no Minister Plenipotentiary in future from the United States without Apologies from the President for his Speeches and Answers to Addresses: They withdrew and expressly disavowed all Claims of Loans and Douceurs, which had been Set up, in a very high Tone, they even gave Encouragement, I might Say they promised to make Provision for compensation for Spoliations: They promised to receive our Ministers and they did receive them And made Peace with them. A Peace that compleatly accomplished the predominant Wish of my heart, for five and twenty Years before, which was to place our Relations with France and with England upon a Footing of Equality and Impartiality, that We might be able to preserve in future an Everlasting Neutrality in all the Wars of Europe. I See now with Great Pleasure that England professes to adopt this our Principle, of Impartiality, and I hope that France will Soon adopt it too. The two Powers ought to See that it is the only Principle We can adopt with Safety to ourselves or Justice to them.
Yet Hamilton calls this a “pernicious Declaration.” Pernicious it was to his Views of Ambition and Domination. It extinguished his hopes of being at the head of a victorious Army of fifty thousand Men, without which he used to Say he had no Idea of having a head upon his Shoulders for four Years longer.
Thus it is when Self Sufficient Ignorance, impertinently obtrudes itself into Offices and Departments in which it has no Right nor colour nor pretence to interfere. Thus it is when unprincipled Ambition undertakes to Sacrifice all Characters and the Peace of Nations to its private Interest.

John Adams.


Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 17 May 1809
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

					Sirs,
					Quincy, May 17, 1809.

Another of my crimes, according to my great accuser, page 28, was nominating Mr. Murray, without
previous consultation with any of my ministers. To this
charge I shall say but little at present.
In England the first magistrate is responsible for nothing; his ministers for every thing: Here according to
the practice, if not the constitution, the ministers are responsible for nothing; the president for every thing. He
is made to answer, before the people, not only for every
thing done by his ministers, but even for all the acts of
the Legislature: Witness the Alien and Sedition Laws.
In all great and essential measures, he is bound by his
honor and his conscience, by his oath to the constitution,
as well as his responsibility to the public opinion of the
nation, to act his own mature and unbiassed judgment,
tho’ unfortunately, it may be in direct contradiction
to the advice of all his ministers. This was my situation
in more than one instance. It had been so in the nomination of Mr. Gerry; It was afterwards so in the pardon
of Fries. Two measures that I recollect with infinite
satisfaction, and which will console me in my last hour. In the case now in question I perfectly knew the sentiments of all my ministers. I knew every argument
they could alledge, and moreover, I knew the secret motives that governed them, better than they did themselves.
I knew them then, and I know them now: Believe it or
disbelieve it who will, at the present time: hereafter the
world will be convinced of it.
I knew that if I called the Heads of Departments together, and asked their advice, three of them would very
laconically protest against the measure. The other two
would be loath to dissent from their brethren, and would
more modestly and mildly concur with them. The consequence would be, that the whole would be instantaneously communicated to A, B, C, D, E, F, &c. in the Senate, and G, H, I, &c. in the House of Representatives;
the public and the presses would have it at once, and a clamor raised and a prejudice propagated against the
measure, that would probably excite the Senate to put
their negative on the whole plan. If I had called the
Heads of Departments together, and asked their advice, I
knew from past experience, that their answers would have
been flat negatives. If I had asked their reasons, they
would be such arguments as Hamilton has recorded, for
he, it seems, was their recording secretary. 1. The etiquette which required, according to them, that France
should send a minister to us. 2. That a negotiation with
France would give offence to Great-Britain and to Russia,
and probably involve us in war with these powers. I
had twenty times answered these arguments, by saying
that there was no such etiquette. It was true that in antient and more barbarous times, when nations had been
inflamed by long wars, and the people wrought up to a
degree of fury, on both sides, so as to excite apprehensions
that ambassadors would be insulted or massacred by the
populace, or even imprisoned as in Turkey, sovereigns
had insisted that ambassadors should be exchanged and
that one should be held as a hostage for the other. It had
even been insisted that a French ambassador should embark at Calais, at the same hour that an English ambassador embarked at Dover. But these times were passed.
Nations sent ambassadors now as they pleased. Franklin
and his associates had been sent to France; Mr. Jay had
been sent to Spain; I had been sent to Holland; Mr.
Izzard had been commissioned to Tuscany; Mr. W. Lee,
to Vienna and Berlin, without any stipulation for sending
ministers in return. We had a minister in London three
years, without any minister from England in return. We
have had a minister at Berlin, without any from Prussia.
As to the offence that would be taken by Great Britain,
I asked, shall we propose any thing to France, or agree
to any thing inconsistent with our treaties and pledged
faith with England? Certainly not. What right has
England, then, to be offended? Have we not as clear a
right to make peace as she has? We are at war with
France, at least in part. If Britain should make peace
with France, what right have we to complain, provided
she stipulates nothing inconsistent with her treaty with us?
As to Russia, what has she to do with us, or we with
her? I had confidence enough in the assurances given,
firmly to believe that our envoys would be received and
respected. Candidates enough were ready to run the
risque, and Hamilton himself would have been very proud
to have been one of them, if he had not been Commander
in Chief of the Army.
I will acknowledge that when the terror of the power and
anger of Great Britain have been held up to me, in a manner that appears, to me, to be base and servile, I sometimes
was provoked to say, that in a just cause, when the essential character and interests of the United States should be
wronged by Great Britain, I shall hold her power in total
contempt. It may be said, for it has been said, that this
was imprudent, and that I was fretted. Let it be said by
whom it will, I now repeat the same sentiment, after
the coolest reflection of ten years.
On the other hand, by making the nomination on my
own authority, I believed that the heads of departments
would have some discretion, and although I knew that
the British faction would excite a clamor, and that some
of the Senators, Representatives, and heads of departments would make no exertions to discountenance it, if
they did not secretly or openly encourage it: yet I was
so perfectly convinced of the national sense, and that the
Senate felt it so strongly, that they would not dare to
negative it, even if the majority had disliked it, which I
very well knew they did not. I thought a clamor after
the fact, would be much less dangerous than a clamor
before it. And so it proved in experience. A clamor
there was, as I always knew there would be, and Alexander Hamilton had a principal under-hand in exciting it.
It is well known that there are continued interviews
between the members of the Senate and the members of
the House, and the heads of departments. Eternal solicitations for nominations to office, are made in this manner. There is not an executive measure, that members  	of Congress are not almost constantly employed in pumping from the heads of departments. There is not a
legislative measure that the heads of departments do not
intermeddle in. It really deserves consideration whether
it would not be better that heads of departments should
be members of the legislature. There they would be
confronted in all things. Now all is secrecy and darkness. Washington, I know, was nearly as much vexed
and tortured by these things as I was, and resigned his
office to get rid of them. And so would I have done,
with great joy, if I could have been sure of a successor
whose sentiments were as conformable to mine, as he
knew mine were to his.

					John Adams.


Title: To John Adams from James Martin, 24 May 1809
From: Martin, James
To: Adams, John

Sir
Boston May 24. 1809

The sight of your Venerable and Respectable Name in the papers on a subject so interesting to every one as a proof of the purity and penetration of your political principles has induced me to take the liberty of mentioning to you a Matter in which I am personally interested—I was indebted to you in paris during you Mission there in 1783 for many Acts of Kindness and Hospitality—I had a Claim to your Countenance there from your Exertions for my Mothers family many years before in Boston I was myself introduced to the Bar of the Court of Commonpleas in Suffolk upon your Motion and remember in leaving paris to have written you a Line of Gratitude for your Kindness to me there—There is a possibility that trivial and unimportant as such a note must have been to you in your Momentuous Concerns you may have preserved it—Will you have the goodness to inform me if Such a Trifle may remain in your possession and accept again an Expression of the Respect and Esteem with which I have the Honour to be / Your most Obedt. Servt.
James MartinIf you favour me with a Line please to send it to Mr Shaw for me


Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 26 May 1809
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

					Sirs,
					Quincy, May 26, 1809.

				In pamphlet, page 27, it is said that the great alteration
in public opinion had put it completely in the power of
our executive to control the machinations of any future
public agent, of France. Therefore Philadelphia was a
safer scene of negotiation than Paris.
Mr. Hamilton’s erroneous conceptions of the public
opinion may be excused by the considerations that he was
not a native of the United States; that he was born and bred in the West Indies, till he went to Scotland, for education, where he spent his time in a seminary of learning,
till seventeen years of age; after which no man ever perfectly acquired a national character; then entered a college at Newyork, from whence he issued into the army
as an aid de camp. In these situations he could scarcely
acquire the opinions, feelings, or principles of the American people. His error may be excused by the further
consideration, that his time was chiefly spent in his pleasures, in his electioneering visits, conferences and correspondences, in propagating prejudices against every man
whom he thought his superior in the public estimation;
and in composing ambitious reports upon finance, while
the real business of the treasury was done by Duer, by Woolcot, and even, for some time and in part, by Tenche
Coxe.
His observation that “France will never be without secret agents,” is true: and it is equally true that England
will always have secret agents and emissaries too, “That
her partizans among our own citizens, can much better
promote her cause than any agents she can send, is also
true:” but it is at least equally true of the partizans of
Great Britain. We have seen, in the foregoing papers,
glaring and atrocious instances of the exertions of her
public agents, secret emissaries and partizans among our
citizens. But none have yet been mentioned that bear
any comparison, in point of guilt and arrogance, with
those of all kinds that have been exhibited within the last
two or three years. My worthy fellow-citizens! Our form of government,
inestimable as it is, exposes us more than any other to the
insidious intrigues and pestilented influence of foreign nations. Nothing but our inflexible neutrality can preserve
us. The public negotiations and secret intrigues of the
English and the French have been employed, for centuries, in every court and country of Europe. Look back
to the history of Spain, Holland, Germany, Russia, Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Italy, and Turkey, for the last
hundred years. How many revolutions have been caused!  How many emperors and kings have fallen victims to the
alternate triumphs of parties excited by Englishmen or
Frenchmen? And can we expect to escape the vigilant
attention of politicians so experienced, so keen sighted,
and so rich? If we convince them that our attachment
to neutrality is unchangeable, they will let us alone: but
as long as a hope remains, in either power, of seducing
us to engage in war on his side and against his enemy,
we shall be torn and convulsed by their manœuvres.
Never was there a grosser mistake of public opinion
than that of Mr. Hamilton. The great alteration in public opinion had not then, nor has it yet, taken place. The
French republic still existed: The French people were
still considered as struggling for liberty, amidst all their
internal revolutions, their conflicts of parties, and their
bloody wars against the coalitions of European powers.
Monarchy, empire, had not been suggested. Bonaparte
had appeared only as a soldier; had acted on the public
stage in no civil or political employment. A sense of
gratitude, for services rendered us in our revolution, by
far more sincere and ardent than reason or justice could
warrant, still remained on the minds, not only of our
republicans, but of great numbers of our soundest federalists. Did Mr. Hamilton recollect the state of our presses?
Recollect the names and popular eloquence of the editors
of the opposition papers?—That scoffing, scorning wit,
and that caustic malignity of soul which appeared so remarkably in all the writings of Thomas Paine and Callender, which to the disgrace of human nature, never fails
to command attention and applause? The members of
the Senate and House, who were decided against the administration, their continual intercourse & communications with French emissaries? The hideous clamor against
the alien law, and sedition law, both considered as levelled
entirely against the French and their friends, and the
surrender according to the British treaty, of the Irish murderer Nash, imposed upon the public for Jonathan Robbins? Did he recollect the insurrection in Pennsylvania.
The universal and perpetual inflammatory publications against the land tax, stamp tax, coach tax, excise law,
and eight per cent loa? Did he never see nor hear of
the circular letters of members of Congress from the middle and southern states? Did he know nothing of the biting sarcasms, the burning rage against himself and his
own army? Did he know nothing of a kind of journal
that was published of every irregular act of any officer or
soldier, of every military punishment that was inflicted,
under the appellation of the Cannibal’s Progress? Did he
see nothing of the French cockades ostentatiously exhibited against the American cockades?
Had a French minister been seen here with his suite,
he would have been instantly informed of every source
and symptom of discontent. Almost every Frenchman
upon the continent, and they were then numerous in all
the states, would have been employed in criminating the American government, in applauding the condescension of
the French Directory, and the friendly, conciliating disposition of the French nation. Nothing could have been
kept secret. the popular clamor for peace on any terms
would have been very difficult, if not impossible, to resist.
The multitude in Philadelphia, as it was, were almost as
ripe to pull me out of my house as they had been to dethrone Washington in the time of Genet. Even the night
of the fast day, the streets were crouded with multitudinous assemblies of the people, especially that before my
door, and kept in order only, as many people thought,
by a military patrol, ordered, I believe, by the Governor
of Pennsylvania.
In these circumstances, it was my opinion, and it is so
still, it was infinitely better to conduct the negociation at
Paris than in Philadelphia. But if this was and is an error, it was certainly not of such consequence as Hamilton
thought fit to represent it. If it was an error, I humbly
conceive it would have better become Mr. Hamilton to
have been silent, than to endeavor to make it unpopular—since the step was taken and irrevocable, when he wrote.
But the real truth is, he was in hopes, as well as Mr.
Liston, that the French government would neither send a minister here nor receive one there—in short, that they
would have gone to war with us. If we had waited for
a minister here, much time would have been lost: our
little naval force under Talbot, Truxton, Decatur, Little,
&c. was doing wonders in protecting our commerce, and
in fighting and capturing French ships of war. Some of
our citizens were not wanting in irritating expressions of
exultation and triumph, particularly in parading a French
national ship that had been captured by Decatur up the
Delaware, in sight of all the citizens of Philadelphia,
with the French national colors reversed under our American flag. Hamilton hoped that such provocations
would produce an irreconcileable breach and a declaration
of war. He was disappointed and lost the command of
his army. Hinc illæ Lacrimæ!
There were other circumstances of more serious and
solid importance, indicative of public opinion, which Mr.
Hamilton, if he had been a vigilant and sagacious statesman, could not have overlooked. The venerable patriarchs, Pendleton and Wythe, of Virginia, openly declaimed for peace; the former came out in print with his
name, protesting against a war with our sister republic of
France. General Heath came out with an address to the
public in Massachusetts, declaring that every man he met
was decidedly for peace. When the election was coming
on, the legislature of Massachusetts dare not trust the people, either at large or in districts, to choose electors, but
assumed that office to themselves. In New-York, the
great interest and vast bodies of people, who are supposed
to follow or direct the two great families of Clintons and
Livingstons, aided by all the address and dexterity of
Aaron Burr, was decidedly for peace with France. In
Pennsylvania, Governor M’Kean, with his majority of
thirty thousand votes, or in other words, at the head of
the two vast bodies of Germans and Irish, reinforced by
great numbers of English Presbyterians, Quakers and Anabaptists, were decidedly against a war with France.
After enumerating all these symptoms of the popular
bias, it would be frivolous to enlarge upon the conversations of which I was informed at taverns and insurance
offices, threatening violence to the President by pulling
him out of his chair, upon the French cockades that were
every where paraded before my eyes, in opposition to the
black cockade, or upon the declarations and oaths, which
I know were made by no small numbers, that if we went
to war with France, and the French should come here,
they would join them against the federalists and the English. These things I recollect with grief, because they do
no honor to our country: but I must say they disgrace
it no more than many more solemn actions and declarations of the opposite party against France, and in favor of
England, have done within the last twelve months.
In these circumstances, it was the height of folly to say
as Hamilton says, that it would have been safer to negotiate at Philadelphia than at Paris. As to our ambassador’s
being overawed in Paris, by any finesse of politicians, or
triumphs of the French arms: We must take care to send
men who are equal to such trials. The French have not,
as yet, gained any great and unjust advantages of us by
all their policy. Our envoys were precisely instructed.
Every article was prescribed that was to be insisted on as
an ultimatum. In a treaty they could not depart from a
punctilio. A convention they might make, as they did,
at their own risque. But the President and Senate were
under no obligation to ratify it. Had it betrayed a single
point of essential honor or interest, I would have sent it
back, as Mr. Jefferson did the treaty with England, without laying it before the Senate. If I had been doubtful,
the Senate would have decided.Where, then, was the danger of this negotiation? No
where but in the disturbed imagination of Alexander
Hamilton. To me only it was dangerous. To me, as
a public man, it was fatal, and that only because Alexander Hamilton, was pleased to wield it as a poisoned weapon,
with the express purpose of destroying. Though I owe
him no thanks for this, I most heartily rejoice in it, because it has given me eight years, incomparably the happiest of my life: whereas, had I been chosen president again, I am certain I could not have lived another year.
It was utterly impossible that I could have lived through
one year more of such labors and cares as were studiously
and maliciously accumulated upon me, by the French faction and the British faction; the former aided by the republicans, and the latter by Alexander Hamilton, and
his satellites.

					John Adams.