Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow TO SECRETARY LIVINGSTON. - The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799)

Return to Title Page for The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

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

TO SECRETARY LIVINGSTON. - John Adams, The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799) [1853]

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. 8.

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 SECRETARY LIVINGSTON.

The Hague, 31 July, 1783.

Sir,—

The last evening, at Court in the house in the Grove, where all the foreign ministers supped, the Count Montagnini de Mirabel, the minister plenipotentiary from the King of Sardinia, took an opportunity to enter largely into conversation with me. As he and I were at a party of politics, while the greatest part of the company were at cards, for two or three hours, we ran over all the world; but nothing occurred worth repeating, except what follows.

The Count said, that his advice to congress would be, to write a circular letter to every power in Europe, as soon as the definitive treaty should be signed, and transmit with it a printed copy of the treaty. In the letter, congress should announce, that on the 4th of July, 1776, the United States had declared themselves a sovereign State, under the style and title of the United States of America; that France, on the 6th of February, 1778, had acknowledged them; that the states-general had done the same on the 10th of April, 1782; that Great Britain, on the 30th of November, 1782, had signed with them a treaty of peace, in which she had fully acknowledged their sovereignty; that Sweden had entered into a treaty with them on the 5th of February, 1783; and that Great Britain had concluded the definitive treaty under the mediation of the two empires, if that should be the fact, &c. Such a notification to all the other powers would be a regular procedure, a piece of politeness which would be very well received, and the letter would be respectfully answered by every power in the world, and these written answers would be explicit and undeniable acknowledgments of our sovereignty. It might have been proper to make this communication in form, immediately after the declaration of independence; it might have been more proper to do it after the signature of the provisional treaty; but that it was expected it would be done after the definitive treaty; that these circular letters might be transmitted to your ministers for peace, or such of them as may remain, or to any of your ministers in Europe, to be by them delivered to the ministers at the Court where they are, or transmitted any other way; that congress must be very exact in the etiquette of titles, as this was indispensable, and the letters could not be answered nor received without it; that we might have these titles at the Count de Vergennes’s office with precision, &c.

The Count then proceeded to commerce, and said, that all the cabinets of Europe had lately turned their views to commerce, so that we should be attended to and respected by all of them. He thought we should find our account in a large trade in Italy, every part of which had a constant demand for our tobacco and salt fish at least. The dominions of the King, his master, could furnish us in exchange, oranges, citrons, olives, oil, raisins, figs, anchovies, coral, lead, sulphur, alum, salt, marble of the finest quality and gayest colors, manufactures of silk, especially silk stockings twenty per cent. cheaper than France, hemp, and cordage. He said, we might have great advantages in Italy in another respect. We had it in our power to become the principal carriers for the people of Italy, who have little skill or inclination for navigation or commerce. The (cabotage) carrying trade of Italy had been carried on by the English, French, and Dutch; the English had now lost it, the French had some of it, but the Dutch the most, who made an immense profit of it; for, to his knowledge, they sold in the Baltic, and even in Holland, many Italian productions at a profit of five or six for one; that we should have the advantage of them all. By bringing our tobacco and fish to Italy, we might unload at some of their ports, take in cargoes upon freight for other ports of Italy, and thus make coasting voyages, until we had made up our cargoes for return, or we might take in cargoes on freight for Germany or the Baltic. The Dutch, he said, would be the greatest losers by this rivalry, but as long as the Italians and Americans would be honestly gainers, neither need be anxious for that; that there was a very good port in his master’s dominions, which was perfectly free, where we might go in and out at pleasure, without being subject to duties, searches, or visits.

We then made a transition to Turkey. The Count could not, for his part, blame the Emperor for wishing to open the navigation of the Danube; his kingdom of Hungary was one of the finest countries in the world; it was one of the most fertile, producing in great abundance wines of various sorts, all excellent, though Tokay was the best; grains of every sort, in great quantities, metals of all sorts,—gold, silver, copper, iron, quicksilver; yet all these blessings of nature were rendered in a manner useless by the slavery of the Danube. The Emperor was very unfortunate, in having the Danube enslaved on one side, and the Scheldt on the other; and, in this age, when the liberty of navigation and commerce was the universal cry, he did not wonder at his impatience under it. He did not think that England would meddle in the dispute, as her trade to the Levant had declined. The Dutch had some still, but France had now the greatest part of it to Smyrna, Alexandria, Aleppo, in short, to all the trading towns of Turkey in Asia, for this is what is understood by the Levant trade. France, he thought, could not venture to engage in the war in earnest, in the present state of her finances.

I have learned, since I came here, that France is desirous that this Republic should declare herself concerning this Turkish war. But she will avoid it. Unhappily, France has lost much of her influence here. Her friends fear that the odium of losing Negapatnam will fall upon them, among the people. The English and the stadtholderians are endeavoring to detach the Republic entirely from France, and to revive the ancient connections, particularly the ancient alliance offensive and defensive, in the treaty of 1674. A Mr. Shirley, at Paris, has lately proposed to M. Boers and M. Van der Pere, two agents of the Dutch East India Company, who have been a year or two at Paris, and are reputed to be in the stadtholder’s interest, that England had the best dispositions towards the Republic, and would give them ample satisfaction, if they would treat distinctly from France, and renew the ancient, cordial friendship, and proposed an interview with the Dutch ambassadors upon this subject. The agents proposed it, but Brantzen refused, to the great satisfaction of the principal republicans. Yet M. Berenger tells me, that some of the republican members begin to be afraid, and to think they shall be obliged to fall in with the English.

Upon conversing with many people in government and out of it, in Amsterdam as well as the Hague, they all complain to me of the conduct of France. They all confess that the Republic has not done so much in the war as she ought; but this is the fault of the friends of England, they say, not those of France, and the worst evils of all, that befall the latter, are the reproaches of the former, who now say insultingly, “this comes of confiding in France; we always told you that you would be cheated,” &c. France ought, they say, to have considered this, and not have imputed to the Republic the faults of her enemies, because the punishment falls wholly on her friends.

I mention these things to you, because, although we are not immediately interested in them, they may have consequences which may affect us; and, therefore, you ought to know them. I think, however, upon the whole, the Republic will stand firm, and refuse to revive the alliance, though they sacrifice Negapatnam. France wishes to win the Republic into an alliance, but feels an awkwardness about proposing it, and, indeed, I doubt whether she would now succeed; she might have succeeded heretofore. But, in plain English, sir, the Count de Vergennes has no conception of the right way of negotiating with any free people or with any assembly, aristocratical or democratical. He cannot enter into the motives which govern them; he never penetrates their real system, and never appears to comprehend their constitution. With empires and monarchs and their ministers of state he negotiates aptly enough.

I have the honor to be, &c.

John Adams.