1. In his letter of 25 Aug. 1796, GW had asked for King’s help in publicizing, in a London newspaper, the Virginia High Court of Chancery’s decree of 4 June 1796, which related to the Thomas Colvill estate. In a letter of 15 Dec. 1796, written from London, King wrote GW: “I have the Honor to inclose a copy of the Gazette, containing a Publication of the Chancery Order, you sent me for that Purpose.”

“I shall forward other Copies by future Opportunities” (ALS, PHi: Etting Papers; LB, NHi: Rufus King Papers). The enclosed newspaper has not been identified, but King probably transmitted at least one issue of The London Gazette, which published the 4 June 1796 decree several times between the issues dated 29 Nov. 1796 and 21–24 Jan. 1797. On 1 Jan. 1797, Cyrus King, a half brother and private secretary to King, wrote a receipt for £14.17.0 “paid Mr Harison in advance to insert in the London Gazette, nine times at 13s.6d. each time, an Advertisement of a suit in the high Court of Chancery in Virginia” (NHi: Rufus King Papers). Rufus King sent additional copies of The London Gazette in his letters to GW of 6 Feb. and 26 April 1797 (see Papers, Retirement Series description begins W. W. Abbot et al., eds. The Papers of George Washington, Retirement Series. 4 vols. Charlottesville, Va., 1998–99. description ends 1:122–24). For more on the suit in the Virginia High Court of Chancery, see GW to Bushrod Washington, 10 Feb. 1796 (second letter) and 29 June 1796; Bushrod Washington to GW, 3 July 1796, and n.2 to that document; and GW to James Keith, 17 July 1796.

John Nicholl of Great Britain, an advocate at Doctors’ Commons, had been appointed to the five-man commission authorized under Article VII of the Jay Treaty (see Pickering to GW, 15 Oct., and n.2 to that document).

2. British diplomat James Harris, first earl of Malmesbury (1746–1820), was sent on a mission to Paris in October 1796 to negotiate a peace settlement between Britain and France and secure the restoration of the Low Countries to Austria. His mission unsuccessful and short-lived, Malmesbury was recalled in December. The Evening Mail (London) for 28–30 Dec. 1796 printed a report, dated at London on 29 Dec., about Malmesbury’s failed efforts: “The chief difficulty started by the French Government … respects the cession of the Low Countries to the Emperor, because it is that particular point in which the interest of Great Britain is principally involved. But … the Directory … shelters itself under the decrees of the Convention, which irrevocably unite these countries to the territory of the Republic.” British officials again dispatched Malmesbury to France in 1797 for further negotiations, but no agreement was reached.

3. After signing a treaty of alliance with France on 19 Aug., Spain declared war againt Great Britain on 5 Oct. (see Timothy Pickering to GW, 20 Oct., n.5).

4. Floating debt refers to “Loans for which no permanent provision was required to be made, which have been obtained for temporary purposes, with intention of paying them off within a brief period.” It is “Debt not in the form of bonds or stocks bearing regular interest” (Black’s Law Dictionary description begins Henry Campbell Black. Black’s Law Dictionary: Definitions of the Terms and Phrases of American and English Jurisprudence, Ancient and Modern. Rev. 4th ed. St. Paul, 1968. description ends , 768). In November 1796, a portion of Britain’s floating debt, which circulated in the form of both naval and exchequer bills, was funded by a stock offering. On 12 Nov. 1796, Parliament passed “An Act for granting Annuities to satisfy certain Navy, Victualling, Transport, and Exchequer Bills.” On 23 Dec., it passed a law to raise £18,000,000 “by way of Annuities” (Statutes at Large [Runnington edition] description begins Owen Ruffhead et al., eds. The Statutes at Large . . .. 14 vols. London, 1786–1800. description ends , 13:481–83). During the war with France, Britain’s national debt increased significantly due to the need to raise large amounts of money by loans to fund military and naval expenditures and to pay subsidies (see A. Andréadès, History of the Bank of England, trans. by Christabel Meredith [London, 1909] 175–81).

5. In response to the threat of a French invasion of Britain in 1796 (see n.6 below), King George III recommended military preparations. As a result, on 11 Nov., Parliament passed the “Act for providing an Augmentation to the Militia … for the Defence of these Kingdoms,” two acts (one for England and Wales and the other for Scotland) “for raising a certain Number of Men … for the Service of His Majesty’s Army and Navy,” and a law “to raise a provisional Force of Cavalry … for the Defence of these Kingdoms.” The militia law specified the number of men to be raised in the counties of England and Scotland (Statutes at Large [Runnington edition] description begins Owen Ruffhead et al., eds. The Statutes at Large . . .. 14 vols. London, 1786–1800. description ends , 13:426–79). These acts were passed following recommendations made in mid-October by Prime Minister William Pitt for “a supplmental levy of 60,000 men to be engrafted on the old Militia.” The levy’s objective was to provide “a formidable and effectual force ready to be called out on any sudden or serious emergency” (Oracle, and Public Advertiser [London], 19 Oct. 1796).

6. In the summer and fall of 1796, British officials feared a French invasion of England or Ireland (see n.5 above). The Oracle, and Public Advertiser (London) for 7 Sept. 1796 published the following announcement: “Government has certainly some reason to think that the French meditate a descent—for a formal invasion is out of the question—wither in Great Britain or Ireland. A return is therefore making out … of the number of men capable of bearing arms. When the enemy is apprised of the preparations, they must be convinced of the impracticability of an attempt.” Similar preparations took place in Ireland (see Bell’s Weekly Messenger [London], 11 Sept. 1796). This apprehension of a French incursion into Britain became a reality in December 1796, when French forces unsuccessfully attempted an invasion of Ireland (see Edward Newenham to GW, 15 Feb. 1797, and n.5 to that document).

7. King may refer to French efforts to influence and ultimately repossess certain territories in North America, such as Canada, through the dispatch of emissaries to those regions, the supply of arms, and other methods. In a letter to Robert Prescott, lieutenant-governor of Lower Canada and soon the commander of British forces in North America (as of 15 Dec. 1796), written from Philadelphia on 28 Nov. 1796, Robert Liston, the British minister to the United States, wrote that “French Agents in this Country appear to have suggested … the necessity of obtaining a predominant influence over the United States by means of Threats and Compulsion.” According to Liston, French minister Pierre-Auguste Adet sought to achieve this end through the repossession of Louisiana “joined with … Canada.” Liston claimed that “there is no doubt that a Person nearly connected with” Adet “is lately returned from a tour of several months through Canada, where … members of the Democratick Party say he met with considerable success in perverting the minds of the People.” Liston also received news that “three Deputies from the French Inhabitants of that Province [Canada] are already on their way to Europe with a view to make proposals” to the French government. According to Liston, the individual connected with Adet was a man named “Arrison,” who went by the name of “Burns” (Brymner, Report on Canadian Archives, 1891 description begins Douglas Brymner. Report on Canadian Archives … 1891 (Being an Appendix to Report of the Minister of Agriculture.). Ottawa, 1892. description ends , 62–63). In a January 1797 dispatch, Liston provided intelligence of both a French plan to invade Canada later that year with a 12,000- to 15,000-man force, and an insurrection involving French Canadians that had been instigated by Adet’s agents. In a letter to Liston of 8 April 1797, Lord Grenville, British secretary of state for foreign affairs, confirmed the intelligence but was confident that the French designs “upon Canada” would be thwarted “by the measures of precaution taken within the province” and by the capture of the ship carrying the brother of Ethan Allen. Ira Allen had traveled to France in 1796 to purchase arms for French Canadians in an effort to support a democratic revolution in British Canada (Mayo, Instructions to British Ministers description begins Bernard Mayo, ed. Instructions to the British Ministers to the United States, 1791–1812. Washington, D.C., 1941. In Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1936, vol. 3. description ends , 131–32). False rumors about Spain’s plans to cede Louisiana and the Floridas to France also created fears of French control of Canada. Furthermore, Adet’s connection, Georges-Henri-Victor Collot, had been sent on a scouting mission to the Ohio and Mississippi valleys earlier in 1796 in order to obtain information about the western posts and to expand French territorial control and influence (see Richard Kidder Meade to GW, 21 Dec., and n.7).

For the British evacuation of Detroit and other western posts in the summer of 1796, see GW to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, 7 Dec., and n.6 to that document.

8. King refers to the 1794 Jay Treaty between Britain and the United States and to the 1795 U.S.-Spanish Treaty of San Lorenzo (see Miller, Treaties description begins Hunter Miller, ed. Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America. Vol. 2, 1776-1818. Washington, D.C., 1931. description ends , 245–74, 318–45).