Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow JAMES LOVELL TO JOHN ADAMS. (Confidential.) - The Works of John Adams, vol. 9 (Letters and State Papers 1799-1811)

Return to Title Page for The Works of John Adams, vol. 9 (Letters and State Papers 1799-1811)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

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

JAMES LOVELL TO JOHN ADAMS. (Confidential.) - John Adams, The Works of John Adams, vol. 9 (Letters and State Papers 1799-1811) [1854]

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. 9.

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.


JAMES LOVELL TO JOHN ADAMS.

(Confidential.)

Philadelphia, 13 June, 1779.

I shall not look through the notes in my almanac to see whether I have written to you twenty-two or twenty-four times. I shall go upon the easier task of acknowledging all those I have had from you, namely: 6th December, 1778, received 16th February, 1779, answered the 17th. 26th September, 1778, received 4th March, 1779, answered 28th April.

Three months ago Mr. G.1 communicated to us that Spain was mediating, and that we ought to take speedy, decisive measures for peace. London Gazettes told us the first part; and it appears strange that neither Dr. F., Mr. L., nor you have hinted this matter to us lately, if you did not avow it authoritatively. We have some wise men here, who are sure they could fish out all the court secrets. In the various attempts to pull down A. L. to make way for some one to go from hence “who knows all the present circumstances of America, and therefore could negotiate properly,” your want of ability to give us information such as we wish for, or fancy can be had, is said to spring from the suspicions of the French Court respecting one of you; and something like an attempt to dictate to us a choice has been seen here. An extract of a letter from the Count de V. has been quoted, “Je crains Monsieur A. L. et ses entours,” and we are tempted to think that therefore the communication before-mentioned came through Mr. G. But this is different from what was once the conduct; for Mr. Deane tells us that he was directed to tell Dr. F. what he did not choose to tell Mr. Lee, or, as he wishes to have it believed, which he was forbidden to tell him. I am persuaded1 Dr. F. would not readily disgust the French Court in such a point. If there is any seriousness in the business, I suppose the Court stood upon the punctilio of not having the compliment of a minister plenipotentiary returned at that time. Mr. Lee’s enemies have produced nothing but innuendoes to procure his removal, while they dare not deny his integrity and abilities in our service. Mr. D. says, the Lees are not fit for transactions with a “gallant” nation. But doubtless those men who want his place would be very gallant indeed on certain points in negotiation. The eastern States are charged with wanting what they have no right to, and what is of “no interest to the southern States.” Plenty are these local sentiments lately; and R. H. Lee with H. Laurens are squinted at as two monsters on the other side of Susquehannah, who pursue points in which the southern States have no interest. Would France or England reason that way on the fishery? I expect, however, that we shall coalesce in a few days upon what may be ultimata ready for some future day of pacification, when Britain shall be restored to her senses. She is quite wild and foolish yet, in my opinion.

You will be scarcely able by our motley journals to understand what we are about. Why did I vote for your name to be inserted, April 20th, page 10? A majority against me had before resolved that the names should be added; that Dr. Franklin’s should be inserted; but did not proceed by yeas and nays, therefore I was entrapped. Not having my nay appear on Dr. Franklin, could I say nay to Deane, the causa malorum? And as it was not mutual suspicions, &c., I could not exclude you, who was suspected and stigmatized in the report of the committee, though more to the disgrace of Mr. Izard than yourself, if there was any disgrace in the circumstance of his imagining that your connection with the “eaters and distillers of molasses”1 had warped your judgment against the interest of other parts of the continent. Mr. Izard has good testimony to his many estimable qualities, but his best friends say he is irascible even when he has not a fit of the gout, as he unfortunately had when he was writing of Dr. Franklin, and probably, too, when he made his strictures upon your opinion of the 11th and 12th articles.2

Every appearance is that you will not be passed over without honorable notice, when the report receives its finishing discussion. My own settled opinion of you leads me the more readily to think there is no plot concealed under the professions in your favor, which have fallen from men lately, whose general conduct is of a kind to make me cry,

Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.3

. . . . . . . . . . .

I firmly believe that your friend Lincoln has got complete success over the southern enemy. He will receive permission to return hither just in the hours of glory, so that he may attend to his wound, which was greatly irritated by his expedition to Carolina. This night is the fourteenth since we first had the news of his victory, via New Providence. Confirmation is come from several quarters, but still we have not an express.1 Tucker has sent in a twenty-four gun ship this afternoon, which did not fire a shot at him before striking. It is at the capes with the Confederacy, one of the finest frigates in any service, as is said by voyagers.

I wish you every happiness, being, &c.

J. Lovell.

[1 ]Gérard, the French minister.

[1 ]In what purports to be a duplicate of this letter, Mr. Lovell makes many variations. The following occurs here:

“I am persuaded Dr. Franklin would not readily blab any matter to Mr. Lee which the Court might confidentially tell him. But it may be said the Doctor was perhaps at that period only on a par with Mr. Lee and you, so that he could not officially convey the news of a negotiation from France to us, without consulting Mr. Lee. It has been attempted to persuade us that Spain is disgusted with Mr. Lee. If more than innuendoes had been addressed, we should have made a new appointment perhaps; though it is a very delicate matter.”

[1 ]See vol. iii. p. 48, note.

[2 ]The version of the duplicate is more to the point. Mr. L. says:

“A majority against me had resolved, 1st, that the names should be added; 2dly, that Dr. Franklin’s should be inserted; but did not proceed by yeas and nays; therefore I was entrapped. Not having my nay to show in the first, I was forced to go through uniformly. It being as true that suspicions and animosities had been minuted by the committee respecting you as respecting the rest; for the report did not say mutual suspicions, &c. It was calculated to open the door for several new elections.”

[3 ]The 4th article, reported by the committee of thirteen, upon which the question arose, is in the following words:

“That suspicions and animosities have arisen among the said commissioners, which may be highly prejudicial to the honor and interest of the United States.”

Mr. Duane moved that the names of the commissioners be added, taking the sense of the House on each name to be added, which motion prevailed.

Dr. Franklin’s name was inserted without yeas and nays. The names of all the other commissioners were inserted by large majorities, excepting Mr. Adams’s. In his case the friends of Arthur Lee appear to have voted to include him, whilst his opponents took the other side, thus acting on both sides, contrary to the prevailing affinities in Congress. This explains Mr. Lovell’s allusions.

[1 ]Confirmation never came.