Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow TO COUNT DE VERGENNES. - The Works of John Adams, vol. 7 (Letters and State Papers 1777-1782)

Return to Title Page for The Works of John Adams, vol. 7 (Letters and State Papers 1777-1782)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Topic: The American Revolution and Constitution

TO COUNT DE VERGENNES. - John Adams, The Works of John Adams, vol. 7 (Letters and State Papers 1777-1782) [1852]

Edition used:

The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States: with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations, by his Grandson Charles Francis Adams (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1856). 10 volumes. Vol. 7.

Part of: The Works of John Adams, 10 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


TO COUNT DE VERGENNES.

Sir,

Since my letter of the 19th, another point has occurred to me, upon which it seems necessary that I should say something to your Excellency before my departure for Holland, which will be on Monday morning.

An idea has, I perceive, been suggested of the several States of America choosing agents separately to attend the congress at Vienna, in order to make peace with Great Britain, so that there would be thirteen instead of one. The constitution of the United States, or their confederation, which has been solemnly adopted and ratified by each of them, has been officially and authentically notified to their Majesties, the Kings of France and Spain, and to their High Mightinesses, the states-general of the United Provinces of the Low Countries, and communicated to all the other Courts and nations of the world, as far as all the gazettes of Europe are able to spread it; so that it is now as well and universally known as any constitution of government in Europe. By this constitution, all power and authority of negotiating with foreign powers is expressly delegated to the United States in congress assembled. It would, therefore, be a public disrespect and contempt offered to the constitution of the nation, if any power should make any application whatever to the governors or legislature of the separate States. In this respect the American constitution is very different from the Batavian. If the two Imperial Courts should address their articles to the States separately, no governor or president of any one of those commonwealths could even communicate it to the legislature; no president of a senate could lay it before the body over which he presides; no speaker of a house of representatives could read it to the house. It would be an error and a misdemeanor in any of these officers to receive and communicate any such letter. All that he could do, would be, after breaking the seal and reading it, to send it back. He could not even legally transmit it to congress. If such an application, therefore, should be made and sent back, it would consume much time to no purpose, and perhaps have other worse effects.

There is no method for the Courts of Europe to convey any thing to the people of America but through the congress of the United States, nor any way of negotiating with them but by means of that body. I must, therefore, entreat your Excellency, that the idea of summoning ministers from thirteen States may not be countenanced at all.

I know very well, that if each State had in the confederation reserved to itself a right of negotiating with foreign powers, and such an application should have been made to them separately upon this occasion, they would all of them separately refer it to congress, because the people universally know and are well agreed, that all connections with foreign countries must, in their circumstances, be made under one direction. But all these things were very maturely considered in framing the confederation, by which the people of each State have taken away from themselves even the right of deliberating and debating upon these affairs, unless they should be referred to them by congress for their advice, or unless they should think proper to instruct their delegates in congress of their own accord.

This matter may not appear to your Excellency in so important a light as it does to me, and the thought of such an application to the United States may not have been seriously entertained; but as it has been mentioned, although only in a way of transient speculation, I thought I could not excuse myself from saying something upon it, because I know it would be considered in so unfavorable a light in America, that I am persuaded congress would think themselves bound to remonstrate against it in the most solemn manner.1

I have the honor to be. &c. &c.

John Adams.

[1 ]The answer to the articles relative to America, proposed by the two Imperial Courts, and the letters to the Count de Vergennes, I have the satisfaction to believe, defeated the profound and magnificent project of a congress at Vienna, for the purpose of chicaning the United States out of their independence.

It moreover established the principle, that American ministers plenipotentiary were not to appear without their public titles and characters, nor to negotiate but with their equals, after an exchange of full powers.

The correspondences of the cabinets of Madrid, London, Vienna, and St. Petersburg, relative to this negotiation, are impenetrable secrets; and those of Versailles would have been equally so to this hour, if my friend, Mr. Dana, had not been in Russia.

(The letters of the Marquis de Verac, of the 2d and 12th September, to Mr. Dana, here alluded to, as explaining the views of the French cabinet, are to be found imperfectly translated in the Diplomatic Correspondence of the Revolution, vol. viii. pp. 291-304. So striking is the coincidence of thought and tone between Mr. Adams’s answer, and the answers of the Court of France afterwards given to the mediators, that for facility of comparison the latter are placed in the Appendix A to this volume.)

Mr. Adams further says:—

The letters of the Marquis de Verac to Mr. Dana are so perfectly concordant, paragraph by paragraph, and almost word for word, with the conversations of the Duke de la Vauguyon with me at the Hague many months before, that I have no doubt both were dictated at Versailles by the Count de Vergennes and his confidential secretary, M. de Rayneval. It is to be regretted that these conversations were not reduced to writing at the time. But the Duke endeavored to avoid a written correspondence on the subject, and I had very powerful reasons for not forcing him to it. I will not venture to say, that the advice to both was not wise. I leave it to the judgment of more learned and experienced statesmen. I did not see or feel the force of it at the time, and ventured to proceed in opposition to it. And my temerity was rewarded with success, and even beyond my own expectations.

Letters to the Boston Patriot, 1809.