by what authorised person or persons any answer on this
subject would be accepted ; in short a requisition of cre
dentials preparatory to a formal answer, which is so much
the more necessary on the supposition of a favourable re
ception of the first hint towards negociation.
When I last saw Mr. Alexander, about four or five days
ago, he had met with some desponding impressions, as if
PART III. OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN. 65
the ministry were indisposed to peace, and that things
would not do, 8cc. He did not tell me upon what ground
he had formed such apprehensions : however, lest he
should have imparted any such by letter to you, I will state
that point to you, because it may have infinite ill conse
quences to be too touchy on such suspicions. A prema
ture jealousy may create the very evil it suspects. The
ministry in this country are not every thing. The sense of the
people when really expressed and exerted, would be most
prevalent. Suppose then it were a proved point that every
man in the ministry were in his heart adverse to peace.
What then ! withhold all overtures ! By no means. 1
should advise the very contrary in the strongest manner.
I should say, let the overtures be made so much the more
public and explicit, by those who do wish for peace. It
is the unfortunate state of things which has hitherto bound
the cause of France to any possible treaty with America,
and which has thereby thrown a national damp upon any
actual public exertions to procure a negociation for peace
with America. I have the strongest opinion that if it
were publicly known to the people of England that a ne
gociation might be opened with America upon the terms
above specified, that all the ministry together, if they
were ill disposed to a man, would not venture to thwart
such a measure. But why should it be supposed that the
ministry to a man are ill disposed to a peace ? Suppose
them to be half and half, and the public wish and voice of
the people in favour of negociation, it is evident on which
side the balance would incline. But why should we seek
to throw a damp prematurely upon any chance ? Why pre
sume even against any individual ? I grant that it would
be a bitter trial of humility to be brought to a formal re-
VOL. ii. K
C)C) PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE PART UI<,
cognition of independence at the haughty command of
France, and I believe every part of the nation would pro
ceed to every extremity before they would submit to that.
But if that touchy point can be provided for sub silentio,
and if the proposed treaty with America may be carried on
free from controul by Fiance, let us give the cause of
peace a fair trial; at the worst we should but be where
we were if we should fail. But why should we expect to
fail when the greatest rub is removed by the liberty of en
tering separately into a treaty ? I think it a most favour
able event leading towards peace. Give us a truce with
its concomitants, and a little time so given for cooling will
have most excellent effects on both sides. Eternal peace
and conciliation may then follow. I send this to you by
the quickest dispatch, that we may bring this point to a
fair issue before the meeting of parliament. God prosper
the blessed work of peace. I am ever yours most affec
tionately, D. H.
CONCILIATORY BILL.
In the title and preamble of the bill the words provinces
of North America are used as general words, neither im
plying dependence or independence.
Clause 1. The Truce is taken from the conciliatory act
of 1778, and is indefinite as to the proposed duration of
the truce. Under this clause it might be proposed to ne-
gocia-te three points, viz. the removal of the British troop*
from the thirteen provinces of North America, and con
nectedly with this article a stipulation for the security of
the friends of the British government. The third article
might be a stipulation that the respective parties during
PART III. OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN. 6?
the continuance of the truce should not either directly or
indirectly give assistance to the enemies of each other.
Clause Q. Articles of intercourse and pacification.
Under this clause some arrangements might be settled for
establishing a free and mutual intercourse, civil and com
mercial, between Great Britain and the aforesaid provinces
of North America.
Clause^. Suspension of certain acts of parliament. By
this clause a free communication may be kept open be
tween the two countries, during the negociation for peace,
without stumbling against any claim of rights which might
draw into contest the question of dependence or indepen
dence.
Clause 4. The ratification by parliament. The object
of this clause is to consolidate peace and conciliation step
by step as the negociation may proceed, and to prevent,
as far as possible, any return of war, after the first decla
ration of a truce. By the operation of this clause a tem
porary truce may be converted into a perpetual and per
manent peace.
Clause 5. A temporary act. This clause creating a
temporary act for a specific purpose of negociation in view,
is taken from the act of 1778.
P. S. January 8, 1 782.
Since writing this letter I have seen
Mr. Alexander, and shall see him from time to time to
communicate with him. I do not suppose I shall have an
answer from Lord North till the preliminary points are so
settled as to enable him to give an answer in form. Mi
nistry might undoubtedly give a short negative if they
thought proper, but 1 do not expect that. You may be
<&- PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE PART III.
assured that I have and shall continue to enforce every ar
gument iu the most conciliatory manner to induce a nego-
ciation. I am very sorry for Mr. A. s confinement on
his own account, and on that of his friends, and because
probably in the future state of this business, his personal
exertions may be very serviceable in the cause of peace.
Every assistance and every exertion of mine will always be
most heartily devoted to that cause. I have nothing far
ther to add, either upon my own reflections or from my
subsequent conversations with Mr. A. to what I have
stated in the foregoing letter. If we once make a good
beginning upon the plan there stated, I should hope that
such a negociation, founded on such principles, would pro
mise fair to produce every salutary and pacific consequence
in the event.
,,-v-
[Answer to the foregoing.}
To D. HARTLEY, ESQ. M. P.
DEAR SIR, Passy, January 15, 1782.
I received a few days since your favour
of the 2d instant, in which you tell me, that Mr. Alexan
der had informed you " America was disposed to enter
into a separate treaty with Great Britain." 1 am per-
jmaded that your strong desire for peace has misled you,
and occasioned your greatly misunderstanding Mr. Alex
ander, as I think it scarce possible he should have asserted
a thing so utterly void of foundation. I remember that
you have, as you say, often urged this on former occasions,
and that it always gave me more disgust than my friend
ship for you permitted me to express. But since you
have now gone so far as to carry such a proposition to
PART III. OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN. 69
Lord North, as arising from us, it is necessary that I
should be explicit with you, and tell you plainly, that I
never had such an idea, and I believe there is not a man in
America, a few English Tories excepted, that would not
spurn at the thought of deserting a noble and generous
friend for the sake of a truce with an unjust and cruel ene
my. 1 have again read over your Conciliatory Bill, with
the manuscript propositions that accompany it ; and ura
concerned to find that one cannot give vent to a simple
wish for peace, a mere sentiment of humanity, without
having it interpreted as a disposition to submit to any base
conditions that may be offered us rather than continue the
war : for, on no other supposition could you propose to us
a truce of ten years, during which we are to engage not to
assist France while you continue the war with her. A
truce too wherein nothing is to be mentioned that may
weaken your pretensions to dominion over us, which you
may therefore resume at the end of the term or at plea
sure ; when we have so covered ourselves with infamy by
our treachery to our first friend, as that no other nation
can ever after be disposed to assist us, how cruelly soever
you might think fit to treat us. Believe me, my dear
friend, America has too much understanding and is too
sensible of the value of the world s good opinion to forfeit
it all by such perfidy. The Congress will never instruct
their Commissioners to obtain a peace on such ignominious
terms ; and though there can be but few things in which
I should venture to disobey their orders, yet if it were
possible for them to give me such an order as this, 1 should
certainly refuse to act, 1 should instantly renounce their
commission and banish myself for ever from so infamous
a country.
7O PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE PART III.
We are a little ambitious too of your esteem ; and as I
think we have acquired some share of it, by our manner of
making war with you, I trust we shall not hazard the loss
of it by consenting meanly to a dishonourable peace.
Lord North was wise in demanding of you some autho
rized persons. He justly thought it too improbable to be
relied on, so as to lay it before the privy council. You can
now inform him that the whole has been a mistake, and that
no such proposition as that of a separate peace has been,
is, or is ever likely to be made by me, and I believe by no
other authorized person whatever in behalf of America.
You may farther, if you please, inform his Lordship, that
Mr, Adams, Mr. Lain ens, Mr. Jay and myself, have long
since been empowered by a special commission to treat of
peace, whenever a negociation shall be opened for that
purpose : but it must always be understood that this is to
be in conj unction with our allies, conformably to the so
lemn treaties made with them.
You have, my dear friend, a strong desire to promote
peace, and it is a most laudable and virtuous desire. Per
mit me then to wish that you would, in order to succeed
as a mediator, avoid such invidious expressions as may
have an effect in preventing your purpose. You tell me
that no stipulation for our independence must be in the
treaty, because you "verily believe (so deep is the jea
lousy between England and Fiance) that England would
light for a straw to the last man and the last shilling, ra
ther than be dictated to by France." And again, that,
" the nation would proceed to every extremity rather than
be brought to a formal recognition of independence at the
haughty command of France." My dear Sir, if every^
proposition of terms for peace that may be made by one
PART III. OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN. 71
of the parties at war is to be called and considered by the
other as dictating, and a haughty command, and for that
reason rejected with a resolution of fighting to the last
man rather than agree to it, you see that in such case no
treaty of peace is possible. In fact we began the war for
independence on your government, which we found tyran
nical, and this before France had any thing to do with our
affairs ; the article in our treaty whereby the " two parties
engage that neither of them shall conclude either truce or
peace with Great Britain without the formal consent of
the other first obtained; and mutually engage not to lay
down their arms until the independence of the United
States shall have been formally or tacitly assured by the
treaty or treaties that shall terminate the war," w r as an
article inserted at our instance, being in our favour. And
you see by the article itself, that your great difficulty may
be easily got over, as a formal acknowledgment of our
independence is not made necessary. But we hope by
God s help to enjoy it, and I suppose we shall fight for
it as long as we are able. I do not make any remarks on
the other propositions, because I think that unless they
were made by authority, the discussion of them is unne
cessary and may be inconvenient. The supposition of our
being disposed to make a separate peace, I could not be
silent upon, as it materially affected our reputation an$
essential interests. If I have been a little warm on that
offensive point, reflect on your repeatedly urging it, and
endeavour to excuse me. Whatever may be the fate of
our poor countries, let you and I die as we have lived, in
peace with each other. Assuredly I continue with great
and sincere esteem, my dear friend, yours most affec
tionately, B. FRANKLIN.
72 PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE PART II
r fin?**
FROM D. HARTLEY, ESQ. M.P. TO DR. FRANKLIN.
MY DEAR SIR, London, Jan. 24, 1782.
I received yours of the 15th instant, this
day. I must take the earliest opportunity of setting you
right in one mistake, which runs through your whole let
ter, and which to you, under that mistake, must be a
very delicate point. You seem to apprehend that America
has been stated in the proposition to Lord North, as " dis
posed to enter into a separate treaty with Great Britain j"
but you omit the condition ; viz. in the words immediately
following, " arid that their allies were disposed to consent
to it" There cannot possibly be any supposition of
treachery to allies, in any proposition to which they may
consent. A separate treaty with the consent of the allies
of America, was the proposition communicated to me by
Mr. Alexander, and which I laid before the minister, and
which 1 reported back again to Mr. Alexander, in writing,
when I shewed him the paper entitled "Conciliatory
Propositions/ which I took care to reduce to writ
ing, with a view of avoiding mistakes : therefore 1
have not misunderstood Mr. Alexander. I have since
seen Mr. A. many times, and he has always stated one
and the same proposition, viz. that America was disposed
to enter into a separate treaty because their allies were dis
posed to consent that they should. Therefore there can
not exist a suspicion of treachery. It occurred to me
once whilst I was writing, to bar against that miscon
struction : but, having specified the consent of the allies
of America, in the same sentence, I could not conceive
such a misconstruction to have been possible. You have
PART IU. OP BENJAMIN FRANKLIN. 73
mistaken another point greatly. You say, " a truce for
ten years." There is not in the bill any such disposition
or thought ; on the contrary, it is specified in the en
closed paper, that it is kept indefinite, for the sole pur
pose of avoiding the suspicion which you have suggested.
The truce may be for 20, or 50, or 100 years, (in my
opinion the longer the better). But in any case, what
1 mean now to state is the indefinite term in the bill. The
articles of intercourse are only proposed for ten years cer
tain, just to strew the way with inviting and conciliatory
facilities., in the hope that a little time given Jor cooling
would confirm a perpetual peace. If i were permitted to
be the mediator I should certainly propose the truce for
20 years : but if no more than ten years could be obtained,
1 would certainly not refuse such a ground of pacification
and treaty. I refer you to several of my letters two or
three years ago, for the justification of my sentiments on
that head. Another point : look at all my letters since
1778, and see if 1 have at any time suggested any breach
of treaty or of honour: on the contrary, I think a faithless
nation, if exterminated, would not deserve the pity of
mankind. I speak of all that / know in the treaty between
America and France, and what I think reasonable upon
the case itself. If America is farther bound than we know
of, they must abide by it. I speak to the apparent and
public foundation of the treaty, article second with the
provision of tacitly from article eight . and now i refer
you to my letter to you, as long ago as April 10, 1779 "
" If beyond this essential and directed end, and upon
grounds totally unconnected with that alliance, not upor
motives of magnanimity for the relief of an innocent peo~
pie, but from distinct and unconnected motives of private
74 PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE PART III.
European sentiments, America should be dragged into the
consequence of a general European war, she may apply
to France the apostrophe of the poet, speaking in the
person of Helen to Paris " non hoc pollicitus tua." You
see therefore that our sentiments have been uniform, and
as I think reasonable, because I still remain in those senti
ments. Suppose for instance (and you call it the case of
a straw if you please) that Great Britain and France should
continue the war for ten years, on the point of a com
missary at Dunkirk, aye or no : would it be reasonable
or a casus f&deru, that America should be precluded
from a separate treaty for ten years, and therefore involved
in the consequential war, after the essential and direct
ends of the treaty of February 6, 1778, were accomplish
ed ? As far as my judgment goes, upon the knowledge of
such facts as are public, I should think it was neither rea
sonable nor a casus faderis. This is the breviate of the
argument, in which there is no thought or suggestion of
any breach of faith or honour. I did conclude that France
was disposed to give their consent, because Mr. Alexander
informed me so, and because I thought it reasonable that
France should consent, and reasonable that America should
enjoy the benefit of that consent. I transmitted it to Lord
North as a proposition temperate and pacific on the part
of America, and consented to by their allies, and on no
other ground did I transmit or propose it. All that your
letter tells me, is, " that America will not break it with
her allies, and that her commissioners will not entertain
such a thought ;" but give me leave to add, that they, as
honest men, cannot disdain such a thought, more than 1
do, every honest man ought to disdain the office, or the
thought of proposing a breach of faith to them. I have
PART III. OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN. 75
often told you, that such an office or such a thought shall
never be mine. But you have not told me that France
would not be disposed to consent to a separate treaty of
peace, for that ally whose peace was the original declared
object of the alliance. In the case supposed, viz. of cer
tain supposed or real punctilios between two proud and
belligerent nations, which might possibly involve America,
for years, in a war totally unconnected with the objects of
the alliance. Besides, if any rubs should occur in the
road to a general peace, France is too proud a nation to
say, that beyond the policy of contributing to the separa
tion of America from Great Britain in any contest of rival-
ship, they cannot meet their rivals in war, without the
assistance of America. I cannot conceive that the minister
of a great belligerent nation could entertain such a thought,
as affecting their own sense of honor, or be so unreason
able to their allies, as to withhold consent to their peace,
when the essential and direct ends of the alliance were
satisfied. Observe, I do not contend against a general
peace : on the contrary, T mean to recommend the most
prudent means for producing it. But, as an anxious lover
of peace, I feel terrors which dismay me, and I consider
the dangers which may obstruct a general peace, arising
from the pride and prejudices of nations, which are not
to be controiiled in their heat by arguments of reason or
philosophy. Can any man in reason and philosdphy tell
me, why any two nations in the world are called natural
enemies, as if it were the ordinance of God and nature. I
fear it is* too deeply engraved in the passions of man, and
for that reason I would elude and evade the contest with
such passions. I would strew the road to peace with
flowers, and not with thorns. Haughty, and dictating,
76 PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE PART III.
arid commands arc no words of mine ; I abhor them, and
I fear them. I would elude their force by gentle means,
and step by step. In article eight, there are the follow
ing words : u By the treaty or treaties that shall terminate
the war." Let us have one treaty begun, and I think the
rest would follow. I fear when contending passions are
raised lest we should lose all by grasping at too much.
January 25. I have just seen Mr. Alexander, and have
talked the matter over with him. I send you a copy of
his sentiments upon it, which, for the sake of avoiding
farther mistakes, he committed to paper, and which, I
think, justify me in saying that I understood from him,
that France was disposed to give their consent, as he e x-
plained it to me, and as I explained it to the minister.
He did not say, nor did I understand him to say, that he
was authorized by the French ministry, or by any one
else, to declare that France had bound herself to consent,
or that any such requisition had been made to her ; but
that it was his opinion that France would consent, and
that I might proceed upon that presumption, so far as to
recommend overtures of negociation. Accordingly the
phrase of my letter to you, is, that he explained to me,
that their allies were disposed to consent. You see what
his opinion is on this day ; and as you hare not told me
that France will not consent, the reasonable probability
which still remains with me, for the hopes of opening an
amicable treaty, remains as it did. I could not delay saying
thus, by the very first mail, upon a point equally delicate
to me, as well as to yourself. My dear friend, I beg of
you not to think, either that you can be considered as
capable of entertaining, or that I should be capable of
suggesting, any unworthy or dishonorable propositions. If
PART III. OF BENJAMIN FRAJNKLIN. 77
there has been any misunderstanding, it is now cleared
up : and the ground for negotiation remains open as be-
fore. I therefore still entertain my hopes, I am ever
your affectionate, D. H.
Explanatory letter of Mr. ALEXANDER to Mr. HART
LEY, referred to in the preceding.
DEAR SIR,
As I had not the opportunity of seeing your
correspondence at the time, I was unable to prevent the
misunderstanding that seems to have arisen. There is no
proposition of which I am more convinced, than that,
(C Nothing can be done without the concurrence of allies."
But, as the chief obstruction towards an accommodation
seemed to me to lie in the personal character of some who
have great weight in this matter, and as the object of the
\rar (the independence of America) seems, in the opinion
of ail men, to be secured, my own opinion was and still
is, that there was so much wisdom and moderation where
prejudice prevents us from seeing it, that, provided the
ends of the war are accomplished to the satisfaction of all
parties, they will be very ready to let us out of it, in the
most gentle manner, by consenting equally that the busi
ness shall go on in one, two, or three separate deeds, as
shall be most palatable here : and to doubt that our friends
are desirous of finishing the contest, with the approbation
of their allies, is to doubt their understanding. 1 am,
with the greatest esteem, yours, &c.
W. ALEXANDER,
Londox, Jan. 2-5, 1782.
-
78 PRIVATE CORBESPONDKNOK PART III.
r ;;;.: : i$ <>VX/
FROM DAVID HARTLEY, ESQ. M. P. TO
DR. FRANKLIN.
M Y D E A R FR i E N D, London, Feb . 1 , 1 7 82.
I write to you one line by this mail only to
tell you that I have seen the minister since 1 last wrote to
you, and that he never did entertain the idea one moment
of any propositions being thrown out on your part in the
least degree inconsistent with the strictest honour and faith
to the allies. I had no occasion to guard against or to
explain any such thought, having at all times conveyed
the contrary to him in the most explicit tenns. I transmit
this to you for your full satisfaction. We have had much
conversation on the subject of peace, which you may be
sure I have most zealously endeavoured to enforce. /
should not do him justice if I did not add that I believe
his wishes are for peace, and that he gives the most serious
attention to every argument, and to the suggestion of
every practicable means on that subject. I have stated
many things for his consideration, and for consultation
with others, after which I shall see him again. I heartily
wish the result may be favourable to the prospect of peace.
I am ever, your affectionate, D. HARTLEY.
To DAVID HARTLEY, ESQ. M.P.
DEAR SIR, Passy, Feb. 16, 178*2.
I received your favour of the 24th past,
You have taken pains to rectify a mistake of mine relating