Page images
PDF
EPUB

1782]

PERSEVERANCE IN THE WAR.

123

to La Perouse's anger at the escape of the ships with their The season was too advanced to attempt any

rich cargoes.*
further similar exploit.

It could not but be plain to de Vergennes that there was every disposition on the part of Great Britain to conclude a peace on liberal conditions with the United States, and that there was no desire to make important concessions to France. A proposal had been made to revert to the conditions of the peace of Paris of 1763. There was much in that treaty offensive to the French, and the resolution had been formed by them, not only to get rid of all that was held to be onerous, but to obtain greater concessions in every direction. For this reason the greatest efforts of the war were made in 1782. No exertions were spared to re-take Gibraltar; the ships and troops of France and Spain were massed to effect the conquest. The fact of the noble defence and the failure of the attempt are too well known to need comment. Minorca was also vigorously attacked, and surrendered. There is everything to shew that it was the determination of France to continue the war, and that if the United States looked for her co-operation to assure peace, such expectation could only miscarry.

It was doubtless with a conviction of this state of feeling

*One of these vessels, bound for fort Churchill, was met at sea, and a frigate was sent in pursuit. The captain, Christopher, judging by the steering of the French frigate on his course, that the captain knew nothing of the coast, as night came on furled his sails as if about to anchor. The French captain conceiving that it was dangerous to proceed immediately anchored. The English vessel, re-setting her sails, was soon out of sight. La Perouse, angry at the escape, burned fort Churchill in retaliation. He then proceeded to Nelson river where he anchored. A ship was at fort Nelson, Hayes' river, the captain, Fowler, seeing three large ships at anchor in Nelson river and auguring no good from their appearance, put out to sea in the night. La Perouse sent a fast sailing frigate after her. Fowler, finding that he was being outsailed by the frigate, tacked and made for the south in the hope of enticing the French ship into shallow water, but the French captain, fearing shipwreck, would not follow him, so Fowler escaped. La Perouse contented himself with burning York factory, and then returned to Europe. The third vessel also reached Moose factory in safety, whence she returned to England. ["Narrative of a Voyage to Hudson's Bay in H.M.S. 'Rosamond,'" by Lieut. Edward Chappell, R. N., 1817, pp. 147-151.]

that Franklin made overtures towards a peace. In the journal of negotiations kept by him from the 21st of March to the 1st of July, he assigns his letter to Shelburne as the first step in the negotiations. There had, however, been a correspondence on the subject between himself and David Hartley, who subsequently signed the treaty as the representative of Great Britain. The remarks of Franklin were submitted to North, and Hartley's replies suggest that the propositions contained in his letters were formulated after conversations held with the minister.

In March, 1781, Franklin had written to congress stating that from ill health he was desirous of resigning, and in the following August congress had refused to accept the resignation. Franklin had previously complained of the great amount of consular business thrown upon him, consequently, in November, Palfrey, who had been paymaster general, was sent to Paris as consul. The ship must have foundered, for no tidings were ever obtained of her. As no steps were taken for another nomination, Franklin again sent in his resignation. He must have felt that it could not be accepted he was continued in his position, and Thomas Barclay was sent to Paris as consul to relieve him from much of the routine duty.

Franklin had maintained an irregular correspondence with Hartley, then a member of parliament, who had become known as an opponent of the war and a strong advocate for the abolition of negro slavery. In May, 1781, he had applied to Franklin for a passport to proceed to France to discuss the terms on which peace might be attained. The request had been refused by de Vergennes, unless Hartley came authorised to treat. In December a Mr. Alexander was

* [David Hartley was the son by his first marriage of the elder David Hartley, author of several philosophical and quasi religious works. The memory of both father and son, it may be said, are alone preserved in our literature by the father having furnished the prænomen to the unfortunate Hartley Coleridge, whose higher reputation has given it status. The second David Hartley was born in 1732 and died in 1813. He may be adduced as an example of what may be accomplished by disciplined, studious mediocrity.]

1782]

FRANKLIN'S LETTER.

125

making a trip to London and wrote to Franklin* that as he would be asked regarding the disposition towards peace, he wished to be informed if the view he had taken was correct that "you (the United States) seek only your independence, and that this country (France), were that secured, will be moderate in other matters." Franklin's reply was, "I think the language you mention very proper to be held, as it is truth."

Alexander was the bearer of a letter to Hartley in acknowledgment of a plan of Hartley to secure buildings against fire. Franklin, in writing his acknowledgment, had said, "What are the lives of a few idle haunters of play houses, compared with the many thousands of men and honest industrious families butchered and destroyed by this devilish Oh, that we could find some happy invention. to stop the spreading of the flames and put an end to so horrid a conflagration." Hartley replied on the 2nd of December that he heartily joined in the wish to stop the "devilish war," and that the communication received from Alexander had revived the hopes of peace.

war.

Hartley proceeded to say that Alexander had told him. that late events (the surrender of Cornwallis) would make no difference in the opinion expressed, that America was disposed to enter into a separate treaty, and that her allies would consent to this course. Hartley added that the unfortunate union of America and France had for the last three years turned aside the wish of the people of England for peace. † "I verily believe," he added, "so deep is the jealousy between England and France, that this country would fight for a straw to the last man and the last shilling, rather than be dictated to by France. I therefore consider this to be the greatest rub out of the way." With these views, through the earl of Guildford, lord North's father, Hartley placed himself in relation with lord North. He drew up a paper, which he called "Conciliatory Propositions," to which *[15th December, 1781. Franklin, Vol. IX., p. 111.] [Franklin's works, IX., p. 119.]

he obtained Alexander's concurrence, and it was placed by him in the minister's hands. Lord North asked who was authorised to treat, for it was necessary, before submitting any proposition to the council, to know that it came from responsible and authorised parties. These facts were communicated to Franklin, who answered,* that the desire of America to enter into a separate peace was entirely devoid of foundation; and after stating that America spurned the thought of deserting a noble and generous friend, he requested Hartley to inform lord North that “the whole has been a mistake." He gave the names of the commissioners appointed to open negotiations for peace, "it must be understood, in conjunction with our allies." Some other letters followed. On the 20th of March lord North resigned.

In March Franklin met lord Cholmondeley at Passy. It is difficult to discern by Franklin's account under what circumstances; but Cholmondeley's note, given by Franklin in his journal, suggests that it was written owing to some previous communication. Franklin availed himself of the opportunity to write a few words to lord Shelburne, in which he spoke of his personal respect for his "talents and virtues," and congratulated him on the good disposition shewn to America in the votes of the house of commons, with the hope they would tend to a general peace. Rockingham's administration, of which Shelburne was a member, had then been formed. Shelburne acknowledged the letter, adding, nineteen years ago he had discussed with Franklin the means of promoting the happiness of mankind, a subject “much more agreeable to my nature than the best concerted plans for spreading misery and devastation." He had therefore sent over Mr. Oswald, with whom he had had a longer acquaintance than with Franklin. He had consulted "some of our common friends;" this might mean the members of the cabinet, or it might not. He had thought Oswald a fit man to send, and full credit could be given to him.

Mr. Richard Oswald, thus selected by Shelburne as a [15th January, 1782. Franklin's works, p. 141.]

1782]

RICHARD OSWALD.

127

negotiator, was a Scotch merchant in London. During the seven years' war he had been an army contractor, and had subsequently acted as commissary general to the duke of Brunswick. He had made a large fortune in the war, and had purchased the estate of Auchencruise in Ayrshire. By his marriage he had obtained large estates in the American provinces and the West Indies. In 1777 he had visited Paris and had become known both to de Vergennes and Franklin. He had been introduced to Shelburne by Adam Smith, whose "Wealth of Nations" had been published in 1776. Shelburne had been one of the first to recognise the force of the argument of this work, and as Oswald also held these views, it was a recommendation to Shelburne's notice. He must have been well advanced in life, for Laurens writes that he had known him for thirty years. He was the bearer of a letter from Laurens, then a prisoner on parole in London.* The introduction must have been suggestive of Oswald's simplicity of character, and Franklin, of all people in the world, was the one to profit by the information.

Franklin received Oswald with kindness. He explained that his negotiations could only be carried on in connection with those of France, and that he himself must await the arrival of the other commissioners. He, however, introduced Oswald to de Vergennes. Although Franklin declared himself to be without authority to act alone, he discussed the situation with Oswald, and quickly gauged the character of lord Shelburne's negotiator. He expressed the desire for a real reconciliation, and, in order that it should be attained, he was of opinion that reparation should be made to the United States for the injuries done to the towns by the British and their Indian allies. Franklin affected great

* One passage of the letter was as follows: "Some people in this country who have too long indulged themselves in abasing everything American, have been pleased to circulate the opinion that Dr. Franklin is a very cunning man; in answer to which, I have remarked to Mr. Oswald, "Dr. Franklin knows very well how to manage a cunning man, but when the Doctor converses with men of candour, there is no man more candid than himself." [Franklin's works, IX., p. 240.]

« PreviousContinue »