The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution Volume VIII Part 45

1st. Because it would be to propose to the United States, in effect, to strike off near seven years of their existence, as free, sovereign, and independent States.

2dly. Because their compliance with it would amount to a confession on their part, that they owed their existence, as a free nation, to the acknowledgment of their independence by the King of Great Britain.

3dly. Because it would go to annul all their acts of sovereignty prior to that period, and among others, the important ones of their treaties with his Most Christian Majesty, and with the United Provinces of the Low Countries, as well as their commissions granted to their Ministers at the Court of Madrid, and other Courts, and such treaties as they have already made, or shall make in virtue thereof.

4thly. Because it would be repugnant to a resolution contained in their declaration of independence, viz. "that as free and sovereign States, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things, which independent States may of right do."

The United States have been induced to const.i.tute this mission thus early, solely from the laudable views abovementioned. It is singularly unfortunate then, that the very circ.u.mstance, which they intended as a mark of particular respect and consideration for her Imperial Majesty's person and government, should be turned against them, and have an operation to defeat the design of it.

Besides, it is to be observed, that the King of Great Britain has by his Commissioner, consented to treat with the Commissioners of the United States, whose powers had date long before he had acknowledged their independence, and without requiring them to produce new ones bearing date since that time. Which is a strong and necessary implication, that he did not consider that acknowledgment as conferring their sovereignty upon them, but, on the contrary, they were a complete sovereign power before, and had a full right to name their Ministers as such, to treat with him of a peace. He cannot, therefore, consider it as a violation of the laws of neutrality, if any neutral power should consider them in the same light, and receive their Minister, whose letters of credence bear date prior to his acknowledgment of their independence.

_Answer._

III. "Besides, no Minister has been received at the Court of London from America yet, and her Imperial Majesty could not consistently receive a Minister from America, before that Court had done it."

_Reply._

There seems not to be any objections against the immediate reception of a Minister from the United States at the Court of London, which might not be made with equal force against the reception of Ministers from any of the other late belligerent powers, and as they have already mutually sent and received Ministers, it is highly probable there are, in fact, no such objections existing. The omission, therefore, must be attributed to the only apparent cause, viz. the great distance of the two countries, which alone would render the appearance of a Minister from the United States at the Court of London impossible. Unless it should be supposed that Court is averse to forming any intimate connexions with the United States, the contrary of which seems to be the case, from the generous, liberal, and wise policy they have in contemplation respecting them.

But if it should be laid down as a principle, that the powers of Europe could not consistently receive a Minister from the United States till one had been received at the Court of London, it might have serious consequences upon the exercise of the right of sovereignty, and the most important interests, not only of the United States, but of such of the powers of Europe, as have not already received a Minister from them. For it would oblige them, whether they chose to do it or not, if they wished to form connexions with those powers, to send a Minister to the Court of London, as a step necessarily preparatory to that end. And when they had done this, it would be in the power of that Court, by refusing to receive him, to render their design abortive, and thus to prevent all friendly and beneficial intercourse between those powers and the United States, which cannot be formed and maintained but by the instrumentality of public Ministers.

If then it is clear, that the United States are not at all concerned in the present mediation, that their provisional treaty has become absolute, and that their definitive treaty may be concluded at any time, and without waiting for the conclusion of the definitive treaty under the mediation; that their independence has been unconditionally acknowledged by the King of Great Britain, as a preliminary to any negotiation; that it is irrevocable in its nature; and if the observations made upon the other objections are well founded, it is confidently hoped from that justice and impartiality, which have ever formed so distinguished a part of her Imperial Majesty's character, that it will be thought, all obstacles to the immediate reception of a Minister from the United States are removed.

FRANCIS DANA.

_St Petersburg, May 8th, 1783._

TO ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON.

St Petersburg, May 9th, 1783.

Sir,

Having very little doubt that this letter will be opened at the post office, I do but enclose a copy of the Memorial spoken of in my last, which I sent yesterday to the Vice Chancellor, and of my letter accompanying it. They will not, I presume, detain the letter merely to give themselves the trouble of copying or translating papers, the original of which is in the hands of the princ.i.p.al Minister. I have only to apologise to you for the slovenly appearance of this copy, with its interlineations and obliterations. I have not time to make a fair copy for this day's post, and though but a few days might be lost here by waiting for the next post, yet an opportunity might be lost for a long time by it, of forwarding it from some port in France.

I have the honor to be, &c.

FRANCIS DANA.

TO ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON.

St Petersburg, May 9th, 1783.

Sir,

By this day's post I have sent you, by the way of France, a copy of the Memorial, which I yesterday delivered to the Vice Chancellor. In that I have expressly declared, that I could not reply to the answer I had received from instructions, and desired that it might be considered as containing my private sentiments only upon the subject.

This I thought it advisable to do, not only because it was the strict truth, but that Congress might be more at liberty, if they should judge it expedient, to disavow the whole. A reply I deemed absolutely necessary for me to make, to endeavor to show that the objections, which had been made to my immediate reception were invalid in themselves. Whether I have succeeded in the design, is for others to judge. It is to be observed, however, that I have thought myself under the necessity of omitting to urge some very obvious and forcible reasons, from an apprehension, that from the extreme sensibility of her Imperial Majesty, they would give offence, which I was determined to avoid as far as possible, without sacrificing the honor of the United States.

What the effect of this Memorial will be, it is impossible to say. I have no sanguine hopes from it. If it should not effect a change of resolution upon the matter, I still think I ought to leave this empire, without waiting here at least six months longer, to learn certainly whether Congress would consent to revoke my present letter of credence, and to grant me a new one bearing date since the acknowledgment of the independence of the United States by the King of Great Britain, of which I have not the least expectation. But if they should be inclined even to do this, would it not be more eligible for me to return, when they would have an opportunity to get rid of the matter without any revocation of letters of credence, by nominating another Minister after I had quitted the empire. If I might offer my opinion upon this subject, I do not think the advantage of a Minister at this Court will compensate for the expense of it.

Of all the causes, which might occasion this answer of her Imperial Majesty, I can think of none which is likely to have more influence in the case, than the second matter pointed out in my letter of April 17th, as having happened since my communication was made. It will be wondered, perhaps, how that could have such an effect, and it may be supposed it would have a direct contrary one. I supposed quite otherwise when I mentioned it, and I feared the consequence of it when it was known here. This is to be accounted for only, from particular local knowledge of what kind of influence governs here. I shall lose this day's post, if I do not immediately close this letter.

I have the honor to be, &c.

FRANCIS DANA.

TO ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON.

St Petersburg, May 13th, 1783.

Sir,

I did myself the honor to forward to you, by the last post, of the 9th instant, by the way of France, a copy of the Memorial I presented the day before to the Vice Chancellor, and of my letter accompanying the same. By this day's post, I send you a second copy of them through the same channel, and a third, by the way of Holland. I wrote you a separate letter on the day of the last post, not thinking it advisable to trust it with the packet. For the same reason, I send those by today's post unaccompanied with any letter to you.

I have before given it as my opinion, that if this answer of her Imperial Majesty should be persisted in, it will not wound the honor or dignity of the United States in the sentiment of any Sovereign of Europe. I am more and more confirmed in this opinion, as I reflect upon the objections, which have been raised against the immediate reception of a Minister from the United States. They appear to me to be totally unsupported by any principles of sound policy, or of the laws of nations. So far from its being thought, that the communication has been precipitated, I believe it is rather a matter of wonder, why it was so long delayed. Every one will see, that the course of events had most certainly prepared the way for it, judging upon any fixed principles. The other neutral powers were accordingly inviting the United States to enter into political connexions with them; and none of them have really a stronger interest to do so than this empire. The account alluded to in my letter of the 25th of April, as having been transmitted to me by Mr Adams, is as follows. (Extract of a Letter from William Lee, February 18th, 1783.) "I am advised, from very good authority, that the Emperor is desirous of entering into a treaty of commerce with the United States of America, on terms of equality and mutual advantage. Therefore, shall be much obliged to you for informing me, if there is any person _in Europe_ authorised by Congress to enter into such a treaty with her Imperial Majesty," &c.

Is it probable, after such an inquiry, that that ill.u.s.trious Sovereign, if any of your Ministers in Europe had communicated such powers, would have made either of the objections, which have been raised here? The motives, which have given occasion to so singular a determination on the part of her Imperial Majesty, will be known. I can speak very generally only upon this subject while I remain here. I must again, therefore, beseech Congress to suspend forming any judgment upon this matter.

I propose to wait a reasonable time for an answer to my Memorial. If none should be given, or the former one should be persisted in, I shall then set off for Stockholm, from whence I will write to you more freely, first taking another step, which appears to me advisable, I mean, to communicate what has pa.s.sed at this Court, to the foreign Ministers, to prevent misrepresentations to the prejudice of the United States. The truth I think can do them none.

I am in hopes of receiving an answer to the Memorial in a few days, and will transmit you an account of it immediately. In the meantime, I am preparing to quit this city in case it should not be such as we have a right to expect from the uniform conduct of the United States respecting her Imperial Majesty.

I have the honor to be, &c.

FRANCIS DANA.

TO JOHN ADAMS.

St Petersburg, May 15th, 1783.

Sir,

You will see, with astonishment, I dare say, the objections that have been raised against my immediate reception at this Court. I must acquaint you, that the first has taken place since I made my communication; the courier having arrived here with the proposals three days after, viz. on the 27th of February. However, I think it far from being a solid objection. The second is of so extraordinary a nature, that it is impossible, in my opinion, that the United States can ever comply with it. If they should incline to do it, it shall never be done upon my request. I would perish before I would propose it to them. If they have not lost all sense of their own dignity, and I believe they have not, they would sooner resolve never to send a Minister to this Court during the life of the present Sovereign. I have said all upon that point that I thought it prudent to say in my Memorial; but you will at once perceive, I must have suppressed some very forcible arguments merely to avoid giving offence. It is not my business to embroil matters between the two countries; quite otherwise.

With this view, I have openly disavowed all instructions relative to the subject, and expressly desired that my reply may be considered as containing my private sentiments only. This leaves Congress at full liberty to avow or disavow whatever they think proper. They may sacrifice my reputation and character, if they judge the interests of our country require it, but I will never sacrifice the dignity of the United States, by seeming, for a moment, to give into a proposition, which I conceive would be an eternal disgrace to them. For this reason, I have resolved, after waiting a reasonable time for an answer to my Memorial, if none should be given, or the first be persisted in, to return with all speed to America. Which again will be the means of leaving Congress more at liberty to act, by affording them an occasion of sending another Minister here, if they should incline to do it, without being under the necessity of revoking my letter of credence and granting me another, bearing date since the acknowledgment of our independence by the King of Great Britain. I spare all reflections upon this system, if it can be called one, of politics; and shall not attempt to account for it at this time.

I have the honor to be, &c.

FRANCIS DANA.