It was in our opinion both necessary and justifiable to keep this article secret. The negociations between Spain, France and Britain were then in full vigor, and embarrassed by a variety of clashing demands. The publication of this article would have irritated Spain, and retarded, if not have prevented, her coming to an agreement with Britain. Had we mentioned it to the French minister, he must have not only informed Spain of it, but also been obliged to act a part respecting it that would probably have been disagreeable to America; and he certainly has reason to rejoice that our silence saved him that delicate and disagreeable task. This was an article in which France had not the smallest interest, nor is there any thing in her treaty with us, that restrains us from making what bargain we pleased with Britain about those or any other lands, without rendering account of such transaction to her or any other power whatever. The same observation applies with still greater force to Spain, and neither justice nor honor forbid us to dispose, as we pleased of our own lands, without her knowledge or consent. Spain at that very time extended her pretensions and claims of dominion not only over the tract in question, but over the vast region lying between the Floridas and Lake Superior; and this court was also at that very time soothing and nursing of those pretensions by a proposed conciliatory line for splitting the difference. Suppose therefore we had offered this tract to Spain in case she retained the Floridas, should we even have had thanks for it? or would it have abated the chagrin she experienced from being disap pointed in her extravagant and improper designs on that whole country?—we think not. We perfectly concur with you in sentiment, Sir, " that honesty is the best policy," but until it be shewn that we have trespassed on the rights of any man or body of men, you must excuse our thinking that this remark, as applied to our proceedings, was unnecessary. Should any explanations either with France or Spain become necessary on this subject; we hope and expect to meet with no embarrassments. We shall neither amuse them nor perplex ourselves with ostensible and flimsy excuses, but tell them plainly that as it was not our duty to give them the information; we considered ourselves at liberty to withold it; and we shall remind the French minister that he has more reason to be pleased than displeased with our silence. Since we have assumed a place in the political system of the world, let us move like a primary and not like a secondary planet. We are persuaded, Sir, that your remarks on these subjects resulted from real opinion, and were made with candor and sincerity. The best men will view objects of this kind in different lights even when standing on the same ground, and it is not to be wondered at that we who are on the spot and have the whole transaction under our eyes should see many parts of it in a stronger point of light, than persons at a distance, who can only view it through the dull medium of representation. It would give us great pain if any thing we have written or now write respecting this court, should be construed to impeach the friendship of the king and nation for us. We also believe that the minister is so far our friend, and is disposed so far to do us good offices as may correspond with and be dictated by his system of policy for promoting the power, riches and glory of France. God forbid that we should ever sacrifice our faith, our gratitude or our honour to any considerations of convenience; and may he also forbid that we should ever be unmindful of the dignity and independent spirit which should always characterise a free and generous people. We shall immediately propose an article to be inserted in the definitive treaty for postponing the payment of British debts for the time mentioned by Congress. There are no doubt certain ambiguities in our articles, but it is not to be wondered at when it is considered how exceedingly averse Britain was to expressions which explicitly wounded the Tories; and how disinclined we were to use any that should amount to absolute stipulations in their favour. The words for restoring the property of real British subjects, were well understood and explained between us not to mean or comprehend American refugees. Mr. Oswald and Mr. Fitzherbert know this to have been the case, and will readily confess and admit it. This mode of expression was preferred by them as a more delicate mode of excluding those refugees, and of making a proper distinction between them and the subjects of Britain whose only particular interest in America consisted in holding lands or property there. The 6th article, viz, where it declares that no future confiscations shall be made, &c. ought to have fixed the time with greater accuracy. We think the most fair and true construction is, that it relates to the date of the cessation of hostilities: That is the time when peace in fact took place, in consequence of prior unformal though binding contracts to terminate the war. We consider the definitive treaties as only giving the dress of form to those contracts and not as constituting the obligation of them. Had the cessation of hostilities been the effect of a truce, and consequently not more than a temporary suspension of war, another construction would have been the true one. We are officially assured by Mr. Hartley that positive orders for the evacuation of New York have been dispatched, and that no avoidable delay will retard that event. Had we proposed to fix a time for it, the British commissioner would have contended that it should be a time posterior to the date of the definitive treaty, and that would have been probably more disadvantageous to us than as that article now stands. We are surprized to hear that any doubts have arisen in America respecting the time when the cessation of hostilities took place there. It most certainly took place at the expiration of one month after the date of that declaration in all parts of the world, whether land or sea, that lay north of the latitude of the Canaries. The ships afterwards taken from us in the more northerly latitudes ought to be reclaimed and given up. We shall apply to Mr. Hartley on this subject, and also on that of the transportation of negroes from New York, contrary to the words and intention of the provisional articles. We have the honor to be, &c. J. ADAMS. B. FRANKLIN, J. JAY. H. LAURENS. 1 EXTRACT OF A LETTER TO R. R. LIVINGSTON, Esq. "You have complained sometimes with reason of not hearing often from your foreign ministers; we have had cause to make the same complaints; six full months having intervened between the latest date of your preceding letters and the receipt of those per Captain Barney. During all this time we were ignorant of the reception of the provisional treaty, and the sentiments of Congress upon it, which if we had received sooner might have forwarded the proceedings on the definitive treaty, and perhaps brought it to a conclusion at a time more favourable than the present. But these occasional interruptions of correspondence are the inevitable consequences of a state of war, and of such remote situations. Barney had a short passage, and arrived some days before Colonel Ogden, who also brought dispatches from you; all of which are come safe to hand. We the Commissioners have in our joint capacity written a letter to you, which you will receive with this." I shall now answer yours of March 26, May 9, and May 31. It gave me great pleasure to learn by the first, that the news of the peace diffused general satisfaction. I will not now take upon me to justify the apparent reserve respecting this Court at the signature, which you disapprove. We have touched upon it in our general letter. I do not sce, however, that they have much reason to complain of that transaction. Nothing was stipulated to their prejudice, and none of the stipulations were to have force See the preceding letter, p. 405, |