1. Marginal note: “* see Page (265.)” referring to Barbé-Marbois to Vergennes of 13 Mar. 1782, opposing the American claim to the fisheries, DNA: PCC, item 110, 2: 265–66b; copy of translation, MHi: Adams (EJ: 6407); Giunta, Emerging Nation description begins Mary A. Giunta et al., eds., The Emerging Nation: A Documentary History of the Foreign Relations of the United States under the Articles of Confederation, 1780–1789 (3 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1996) description ends , 1: 313–16.

2. A copy of Barbé-Marbois’s encoded letter had been intercepted by the British. On its authenticity and authorship, see Bemis, Diplomacy of the Am. Rev. description begins Samuel Flagg Bemis, The Diplomacy of the American Revolution (Indianapolis, Ind., 1965) description ends , 220; Peacemakers description begins Richard B. Morris, The Peacemakers: The Great Powers and American Independence (New York, 1965) description ends , 325; and Weber, U.S. Codes and Ciphers description begins Ralph E. Weber, United States Diplomatic Codes and Ciphers, 1775–1938 (Chicago, 1979) description ends , 85–86. Ridley, who saw the letter on 16 Sept., six days after JJ received it, remarked that BF “affects not to see the drift” of it and believed that Barbé-Marbois’s views had not been encouraged by Vergennes. See “Ridley’s Diary,” description begins Herbert E. Klingelhofer, ed., “Matthew Ridley’s Diary during the Peace Negotiations of 1782,” WMQ 20 (1963): 95–133 description ends 107–8.

3. A reference to the controversial instructions of Congress to its peace commissioners of 15 June 1781, JJSP, 2 description begins Elizabeth M. Nuxoll et al., eds., The Selected Papers of John Jay, Volume 2, 1780–82 (Charlottesville, Va., 2012) description ends : 469–71, which obliged the American commissioners to “undertake nothing in the Negotiations for Peace or Truce” without France’s “Knowledge and Concurrence; and ultimately to govern yourselves by their Advice and Opinion.”

4. See JJ to Vergennes, c. 11 Sept. 1782, above.

5. See JJ to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, 17 Nov. 1782, below.

6. The passage of time did not change BF’s mind about French intentions. In a letter written to RRL on 22 July 1783, he commented: “with respect to myself, neither the Letter from M. Marbois handed to us thro’ the British negociators, (a suspicious channel) nor the conversations respecting the fishery, the boundaries, royalists, &ca, recommending moderation in our demands, are of weight sufficient in my mind to fix an opinion that this court wished to restrain us in obtaining any degree of advantage we could prevail on our enemies to accord, since those discourses are fairly resolvable by supposing a very natural apprehension that we, relying too much on the ability of France to continue the war in our favor and supply us constantly with money, might insist on more advantages than the English would be willing to grant, and thereby lose the opportunity of making peace so necessary to all our friends.” RDC description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1889) description ends , 6: 581. See also his letter to Samuel Cooper of 26 Dec. 1782, PBF description begins William B. Willcox et al., eds., The Papers of Benjamin Franklin (40 vols. to date; New Haven, Conn., 1959–) description ends , 38: 503–4. For BF’s position on the need to alter Oswald’s commission, see the editorial note “John Jay Proposes Altering Richard Oswald’s Commission” on pp. 109–10.

Henry Laurens also believed the commissioners had “done wrong” in violating their instructions to confide in the French, and considered Barbé-Marbois’s letter suspect. JA, however, agreed with JJ. See RDC description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1889) description ends , 6: 581; and PJA description begins Robert J. Taylor, Gregg L. Lint, et al., eds., Papers of John Adams (16 vols. to date; Cambridge, Mass., 1977–) description ends , 14: 140–42, 348, 492–96.

7. In his reply to JJ of 4 Jan. 1783, below, RRL expressed alarm that only a duplicate copy of this letter had arrived and that it was not encoded. JJ had enclosed it and its enclosure in his letter of 13 Oct. 1782, carried by the Danaé, on which see John Jay’s Diary of the Peacemaking, 12–29 Oct. 1782, below.

The dispatches reached Congress on 23 Dec., and were read the next day. Madison reported that the present letter “expressed great jealousy of the French Govt.,” and “produced much indignation agst. the author of the intercepted letter [Barbé-Marbois] and visible emotions in some agst. France.” He excused France on grounds that her “situation . . . is & has been extremely perplexing,” and “required her to favor Spain,” whom she had drawn into the war, “at least to a certain degree, at the expence of America.” If America were wise, he concluded, she would see that she was “with respect to her great interests, more in danger of being seduced by Britain than sacrificed by France.”

Concerns about American obligations to France and about JJ’s attitude toward it were amplified on the arrival of the preliminary articles and dispatches detailing how they had been negotiated. See the editorial notes “Tensions between Allies over the Peace Negotiations” and “Congress Debates the Commissioners’ Conduct” on pp. 300–302, 334–40; JCC description begins Worthington C. Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1904–37) description ends , 23: 870–74; PJM description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, Robert A. Rutland et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison, Congressional Series (17 vols.; Chicago and Charlottesville, Va., 1962–91) description ends , 5: 436–39, 441–50, 466–69.