The Question, whether we ought to exchange Copies of our respective Commissions2 with Mr Oswald, and proceed to do Business with him under his, is not only important and consequential in itself, but derives an additional Degree of Weight from the Variance subsisting between your Excellency’s Sentiments and our own on that Subject.3

The Respect due to your Excellency’s Judgment, our Confidence in the Friendship of our good and great Ally, and the Tenor of our Instructions from Congress, all conspire to urge us to lay before your Excellency a full State of the Facts and Circumstances which create our Objections to treating with Mr. Oswald under the Commission in Question—4

We flatter ourselves that in the Course of this Discussion some Light will be cast on the Subject; and it gives us Pleasure to reflect that our objections will be reviewed by a Minister possessed of Candor to acknowledge their Force on the one Hand, and of Talents to detect and discover to us, their Fallacy, on the other—

It appears to us necessary to premise, that on the 4 Day of July 1776 the Representatives of the then ^late^ thirteen United Colonies, in Congress assembled, did in the Name and by the Authority of the good People of those Colonies, and for the Reasons in that Act specified, “Solemnly publish and declare that the said united Colonies were are ^were^ and of Right ought to be free and independent States, that they were absolved from all Allegiance to the british Crown and that all political Connection between them and the State of Great Britain is ^was^, and ought to be, totally dissolved, and that as free and independent States, they had full power to levy war, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts & Things, which independent nations may ^might^ of Right do. And for the Support of that Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, they did mutually pledge to each other their Fortunes Lives, their Fortunes, and their sacred Honor.”

This Declaration was immediately ratified by legislative acts of the Different States, all of whom have ever since ^so^ uniformly abided by it, that the Authority of the King of Great Britain have has never, from that Day to this, extended over more Ground in that Country, than was ^what^ from might ^was^ from Time ^to Time^ have been covered by ^under^ the Feet of his Armies, whose Fate it shared, & with whom it marched and retreated—

The United States also bound themselves to each other by a solemn Act of Confederation & perpetual Union wherein they declare “That the Stile of the Confederacy should be The united States of America”, and by it they vested in Congress the sole and exclusive Right and Power of determining on Peace and War, of sending and recieving Embassadors, and entering into Treaties and Alliances5

Thus becoming of Right, and being in Fact independent free sovereign and independent States, their Representatives ^in Congress^ did on the 15 Day of June 1781 grant a Commission to us and three other ^certain^ ^five^ gentlemen (of whom were are to two,) to in their name, to confer, treat, and conclude, with the Embassadors Commissioners &c. vested with equal Powers, relating to the Reestablishment of Peace &c.

On the 25 July 1782 His britannick Majesty issued a Commission under the Great Seal of his Kingdom to Richard Oswald ^Esqr^, reciting—^in the Words following^ [“]That Whereas by an Act passed in the last Session of Parliament entitled “an Act to enable his Majesty to conclude a Peace or Truce with certain Colonies in North America[”], therein mentioned, it recited, “that it is essential to the Interest Welfare & Prosperity of Great Britain, and the Colonies or plantations of New Hampshire, Massachusets Bay &c. (naming the thirteen) that Peace Intercourse Trade and Commerce should be restored between them, therefore and for a full manifestation of our earnest Wish and Desire, and of that of our Parliament, to put an End to the Calamities of War, it is enacted, that it should and might be lawful for us, to treat, consult of, agree, and conclude with any Commissioner or Commissioners named or to be named by the said Colonies or Plantations, or with any Bodyies cor ^or^ Bodies corporate or politic or any Assembly or Assemblies, or Description of Men or any Person whatsoever, a Peace or Truce with the said Colonies or Plantations, or any of them, or any Part or Parts thereof, any Law, Act, or Acts of Parliament, Matter or Thing to the Contrary in any wise notwithstanding—”

The Commission then proceeds to na appoint and to authorize Mr Oswald to treat &c. in the very Words of the Act6

We do not find ourselves described in this Commission as the Persons with whom Mr Oswald is authorized to treat

Nations, particularly Corporations, and mercantile Companies and indeed every private Citizen in every Country have their Stil Stiles ^Titles, their Stiles^, their Firms and their additions by which ^are^ necessary to their being known in the Law— That is to say—the Law of Nations requires that national Acts shall give to every nation ^sovereign and nation^ its proper nam political Name, and or Stile, and ^in the same Manner as^ the municipal Law of the Land can will only take notice of Corporations, Companies and ^even^ private Citizens by their proper ^names^ and appropriated Stiles, Firms and Additions—^legal^ Descriptions

When the United States became one of the Nations of the Earth, they publishd the Stile by w or App ^or name^ by which they were to be known & called, and as on the one Hand they became subject to the Law of Nations, so on the other they have a Right to claim and enjoy its Protection & all the Priviledges it affords

Mr. Oswald’s Commission is a formal, National Act, and must be presumed no nation not de mentioned or a legally ^properly^ described in it, can consider him properly authorized to treat with them—^neither^ The United States of America ^nor commissioners appointed by them^ are not mentioned in it, and ^therefore^ we as their Servants can have no Right to treat with him—7

We are apprized that the Words Colonies ^or plantations^ of New Hap Hampshire &ca. in North America, conveys to the Reader an ^geographical^ Idea of the Country intended by the Act ^Commission^, and of the Manner in of its first Settlement, but it conveys no Idea of its Political Description ^Idea^ of it, except perhaps a very true ^false^ one, to wit, as dependent on the british Crown, and the more so as the ^for we it is to be observed that the^ Words Colonies or Plantations have constantly been used in british Acts of Parliament, to describe those Countries, while they remained subject to that Crown—and that the Act holds up that Idea in a strong point of ^light^ ^[in margin] when it declares “that it is essential to the Interest Welfare & prosperity of the Colonies or plantations of New Hampshire &ca. that Peace &c should be restored &c.—” for as independent States our Interest Welfare & prosperity were improper objects for the parliamentary Discussion & provision of Great Britain^

The United States cannot be known, at least to their Commissioners, by any other than their ^present^ proper ^political^ name, for in determining whether we ought to treat with Mr. Oswald’s Commission be such as that we ought to treat with him under it, we must read it with the Eyes and decide upon it with the Judgment of american Ministers, and not of private Citizens Individuals Historians & poets may

But admitting that the Studied ambiguity of this Commission leaves every Reader at Liberty to suppose that we are or are not comprehended in it, nay supposing it to be the better Construction that we are, still in our opinion it would ill become the Dignity of Congress that It to treat under it with Mr Oswald under it

It is evident that the Design of the Commission was to avoid a if possible to describe the The United States, the Congress and their Commissioners by such circumlocutory equivocal & undeterminate Exp words and appellations as shd. with equal Propriety apply to the thirteen States as ^considered ^^either^^ as^ british Colonies & Territories, or as independent States, to the End that the King Great Britain might remain in Capacity to say that she either had ^the^ one or the other Meaning, as Circumstances & Convenience might ^in future^ Dictate—

As Congress have no Doubts of their own Independence they cannot with Propriety sanctify the Doubts of others, and therefore cannot admit the Sufficiency of or Decency of any Commission that contains them.

It being well known that Cong the United States have vested in Congress the exclusive Right to make Peace, this Commission by authorizing Mr Oswald to treat with them separately, and even with parts of them, and with any Person or persons whatsoever is offers such open and direct violence to the Honor ^& Prerogatives^ of Congress that as to be better entitled to the Censure ^calculated to excite their Resentmt^ than ^their^ acquiescence—8 Nor can we concieve it very decent in great Britain to expect that Congress shd after having so long firmly & uniformly maintained the Rights of Independence shd. now consent to divest themselves of them in order to ^[de]viate from that Character by^ negociating ^with her for^ Peace with Great Britain—we are persuaded ^or^ that they will ^would^ negociate for Peace in no ^any^ other Capacity than ^the one in which^ they have carried on War with her.—

It seems agreed on all Hands that the Commission does not acknowledge us to be independent,9 and tho the King of Great Britain consents to make it an ^the first^ Article of trea ^the proposed^ Treaty, yet as no ^neither the first nor ^^the^^ last^ Article of the Treaty can be of Validity till the Conclusion of it, it is ^can it be reasonably^ expected that we shd. consent to be viewed during all that Interval as british Subjects? there being no middle Capacity be or Character between Subjection & Independence—

neither Congress, nor their Servants, if so inclined, have a Right to suspend the Independence of the United States for a single moment, nor can the States themselves adopt such an ignominious Measure while they remember the solemn Manner in which they pledged to each other their Lives their Fortunes and their sacred Honor to support their Independence—

It gives us Pleasure to find that these Inferences and Conclusions from the general Nature and Rights of Independence stand confirmed by the express Acts and Declarations of Congress on the Subject, and in whatever view these acts may be viewed by others, they must be considered as authoritative by their Servants—

So early as the 17th. July 1776, Congress “Resolved that General Washington in refusing to recieve a Letter said to be sent by Lord Howe addressed to “George Washington Esqr.” acted with a Dignity becoming his Station, and therefore that this Congress do highly approve the same, and do direct that no Letter or message be recieved on any occasion whatever from the Enemy by the Commander in Chief, or others the Commanders of the American Army, but such as shall be directed to them in the Character they respectively Sustained”10

We concieve that the Reason of this Resolution extends with at least equal Force to civil officers, and particularly to Commissioners appointed to treat of Peace with Great Britain

On the 5 September 1776, Congress “Resolved that General Sullivan be requested to inform Lord Howe, that this Congress, being the Representatives of the free and independent States of America, cannot with Propriety send any of its Members to confer with his Lordship in their private Characters, but that ever desirous of establishing Peace on reasonable Terms, they will send a Committee of their Body to know whether he has any Authority to treat with Persons authorized by them for that Purpose in Behalf of America, and what that authority is, and to hear such Propositions as he shall think fit to make respecting the same—”11

“That the President write to General Washington and acquaint him, that it is the opinion of Congress, no Proposals for making Peace between Great Britain and the united States of America, ought to be recieved or attended to, unless the same be made in writing and addressed to the Representatives of the said States in Congress, or Persons authorised by them—and if application be made to him by any of the Commanders of the british Forces on that Subject, that he inform them, that these United States, who entered into the War only for the Defence of their Lives and Liberties, will chearfully agree to Peace on reasonable Terms, whenever such shall be proposed to them in manner aforesaid”—12

These Resolutions were passed at a Time when the United States had formed no alliances, and when a formidable and hostile Army had just arrived to invade their Country. If such therefore were their Sentiments, and such their Resolutions at so early so dangerous, and doubtful ^a^ period, of there certainly is Reason to presume that the Fortitude which influenced them has not been abated by the present Aspect of their Affairs—

On the 22 Novr. 1777 Congress “Resolved that all Proposals of a Treaty between the King of Great Britain or any of his Commissioners, and the united States inconsistent with the Independence of the said States, or with such Treaties or Alliances as may be formed under their Authority, will be rejected by Congress.”13

We cannot consider the present Proposals to treat with us a Manner so in a Character below Independence, to be consistent with it, as

Among other objections unanimously made by Congress on the 22d. April 1778 to certain Bills of the British Parliament, then about to be passed into Laws, to enable the King of Great Britain to appoint Commissioners to treat &ca—is the following—vizt:

“Because the said Bill purports that the Commissioners therein mentioned, may treat with private Individuals; a measure highly derogatory to national Honor.”14

Mr. Oswalds Commission contains a similar Clause and consequently is liable to the same Objection.

The Congress did also, on the same Day unanimously declare “that these United States cannot with Propriety, hold any Conference or Treaty with any Commissioners on the Part of Great Britain, unless they shall, as a preliminary thereto, either withdraw their Fleets and armies, or else in positive and express Terms acknowledge the Independence of the said States—”

Neither of these alternatives have as yet been complied with—15

On the 6 June 1778 the Congress ordered their President to give an answer, in the following words, to the Commissioners appointed under the british Acts of parliament before mentioned—vizt:

“My Lord

I have had the Honor to lay your Lordship’s Letter of May 27, with the Acts of the british Parliament enclosed before Congress, and I am instructed to acquaint your Lordship, that they have already expressed their Sentiments upon Bills not essentially different from those Acts, in a publication of the 22d. April last—16

Your Lordship may be assured, that when the King of Great Britain shall be seriously disposed to put an End to the unprovoked and cruel war waged against these United States, Congress will readily attend to such Terms of peace, as may consist with the Honor of independent Nations, the Interest of their Constituents, and the sacred Regard they mean to pay to Treaties—”17

The Honor of an independent Nation, would be lost by treating ^forbids their treating^ in a subordinate Capacity—

On the 17 June 1778 Congress in another Letter to the same Commissioners, unanimously join in saying18

“Nothing but an earnest Desire to spare the further Effusion of human Blood could have enduced them to read a Paper containing Expressions so disrespectful to his most christian Majesty, the good and great Ally of these States, or to consider Propositions so derogatory to the Honor of an independent Nation.”

“The acts of the british Parliament, the Commission from your Sovereign, and your Letter suppose the People of these States to be subjects of the Crown of Great Britain and are founded on an Idea of Dependence, which is utterly inadmissible—”

“I am further directed to inform your Excellencies, that Congress are inclined to Peace, notwithstanding the unjust Claims from which this War originated, and the savage manner in which it hath been conducted— They will therefore be ready to enter upon the Consideration of a Treaty of Peace and Commerce, not inconsistent with Treaties already subsisting, when the King of Great Britain shall demonstrate a sincere Disposition for that Purpose—The only solid Proof of this disposition will be an explicit Acknowledgmt of the Independence of these States, or the withdrawing his Fleets and Armies—”19

On the 11 July 1778 the british Commissioners again endeavoured to prevail upon Congress to treat with them on the humiliating Idea of Dependence— And on the 18 Day the same month, Congress came to the following Resolution—vizt.20

“Whereas Congress, in a Letter to the british Commissioners of the 17th. June last, did declare that they would be ready to enter into the Consideration of a Treaty of Peace & Commerce not inconsistent with Treaties already subsisting, when the King of Great Britain should demonstrate a sincere Disposition for that Purpose, and that the only solid proof of this Disposition would be an explicit acknowledgmt of the Independence of these States, or the withdrawing his Fleets and armies— And whereas neither of these alternatives have been complied with Therefore Resolved that no answer be given to the Letter of the 11th: Instant from the british Commissioners—”21

We find Congress still adhering to the same Resolutions & Principles and Conduct, and in pursuance of them, lately directing General Washington to refuse a Passport to Genera Sir Guy Carleton’s Request of a Passport for one of his Family to carry Dispatches from him to Congress.

The late Resolutions of the different States on that Occasion shew how exactly the Sense of the People at large corresponds with that of their Representatives in Congress on these important Points22

To our knowledge there is not a single instance in which Congress have derogated from the Practice and conduct of an independent nation. All their Commissions as well civil as military are ^& always have been^ in that Stile— They have treated with France and the States General of the United with Provinces, and those Powers have treated ^and formed^ with them on equal Footing—

What Right therefore can Britain have to demand that we should treat in a different Manner with her? or with what Propriety can we pay Marks of Respect and Reverence to our Enemies, which we never have paid to our Friends— Friends, too, who are at least equal to her in Power, and superior to her in Justice and De Consideration.

Nor can we forbear observing that the the 2d. article of our al Treaty of Alliance de with his most Christian majesty declares that “The essential and direct End of the present Treaty defensive Alliance is, to maintain effectually, the Liberty Sovereignty and Independence—absolute and unlimited of the said United States, as well in matters of Government as of Commerce—”

Hence it appears that not only the Regard due to our own Dignity, but also to the Dignity of our great ally, and the Faith of Treaties, forbids our receding in the least from the Rights of ^that^ Sovereignty & Independence the Support of which forms the direct End of our Alliance—

But altho the United States as an independent Nation can regard Great Britain in no other Light than they would any other Kingdom or State with whom they may be at War, yet we can easily percieve that Great Britain has stronger Objections to treat than other nations can have to treating us with us as independent But these Objections however strong, are more proper subjects for their Deliberations ^whom they affect^ than for ours they may affect and therefore may influence their Councils, but they cannot affect and therefore ^whom they do not respect—^ Britain may amuse herself with, and therefore be embarrassed by, Doubts of our Title to Independence, but we have not no such Doubts, and therefore cannot be perplexed or influenced by them—

Other Nations owe their origin to Causes similar to those which gave birth to ours, and it may not be useless to remark enquire how they conducted themselves under similar Circumstances—

The Tyranny of Philip the 2d. of Spain made his Subjects in the low Countries declare themselves independent—a long & cruel war insued Spain at length wished for Respose and a Truce was contemplated ^which was suspended^ by a Truce for 12 Years, and afterwards concluded by a Peace definitive Treaty of Peace—

Their History bears honorable Testimony to the wisdom & Fortitude that Nation during that Interval and we think the following Detail so is so interesting and so applicable to the Case of our Country ^in general^ and to the particularly to the Point in Question, that we cannot forbear requesting your Excellency to peruse it—

On the 26 July 178 1581 the united Provinces by a formal Act declared that Philip the second had forfeited his Right to the Sovereignty of those Provinces, who thereby became and that consequently they were independent—23

On the last of June 1584 the King of France sent an Embassador (le Sieur Pruneaulx) to Holland—and he in writing represented to the States assembled at Delff, that his Majesty had understood that they desired to treat with him, and that he had thought proper to tell inform them, that they should let him know on what Terms they would cast themselves into his Arms ^proposed to do it^ with many Reasons to convince induce the Provinces to come into such Treaty24

Queen Elizabeth did nearly the same thing by her Letters of the last of October 1584, which she sent to her Embassador Davidson25

The Deputies of the States soon after by their order returned thanks to the Queen & informed her that they had resolved to throw themselves into the arms of ^accept^ the King of France & to accept him for Prince of the Country, in the same Manner as Charles the 5 had been, but on Condition to retain their Rights & Priviledges—26

On the 3 Jany 16[5]85 the States despatched Deputies to make this offer to the King of France— Spain remonstrated to their being admitted to an audience, calling them Rebels &c: To this Remonstrance the King of France gave an Answer which does the highest Honor to his magnanimity

On the 13 Feb. 1585 the Deputies had an Audience of the King, and afterwards of the Queen Mother.27

On the 8 March 1585—the King declared gave for answer to the Deputies that he could not at present accept their offer nor assist them, and complained greatly of the violence done him by the Spaniards and Guises, and desired them to provide for their own Defense until such Time as he shd. be in Quiet with his own Subjects, and promised to recommend them to the Queen of England28

On the 6 June 1585 the States General resolved to transfer the Sovereignty to the Queen of England on lawful and reasonable Conditions, or to treat with her fo to take them under her protection, or to obtain some Aid and Assistance from her29

On the 9 July 17^5^85 they had an Audience of the Queen at Greenwich, and there offered to her the Sovereignty &c.

The Queen declined to accept the Sovereignty or the p undertake the perpetual protection of the United Provinces, but on the 10 Augt. 1585, she entered into a formal Treaty with them ^to afford aid &ca.^30 the 30 article of which is remarkable vizt. “le Governeur General le Chef, les Colonels Capitaines, Officiers & autres gens d’armes de sa Majesté, feront le Serment ordinaire, come aux Estats des dites Provinces, reservé l’Hommage qu’ils doivent à sa Majesté”

On the 16 Octr. 1587 the States made a Declaration to their Governor Leycester on the Subject of some Differences between them in which they say “And as by divers Acts & particularly by a certain Letter which he wrote on the 10 July to his secretary Junius (as is said) The Authority of these States is drawn into Doubt; they think it proper to make a more ample Declaration, containing a Deduction of the Right of the States which they are bound by Oath to maintain. For in Case they had not been well founded on the Sovereignty of the Provinces, they could not have deposed the King of Spain, nor have defended themselves against his power— Nor could they have been able to treat with their Majesties of France & England, nor to have transferred the Governmt. to your Excellency” &c &ca.31

“On the 3d Septr 161587 the Earl of Leycester by order of the Queen intimated to them the Propriety of Negociating for Peace, for it seems the King of Denmark had privately sounded the King of Spain on that Subject”32

The States answered “that they had never given any such Commission to the King of Denmark, nor ever thought of it—but on the Contrary, they had observed to the Earl of Leycester in the Year 1586 on his leaving Holland, & on his speaking to them abt. making peace that there was Nothing so dangerous and injurious pour son estat as to speak or treat of Peace, and that it was one of the anci old Finesses of Spain—that neither a long war, the Damages suffered, nor Force, nor the unexpected Deaths of their Chiefs had been able to withdraw them than from ^hinder ^^one step^^ their doing^ their Duty, nor make them recede one Step from that Foundation of Constancy on which they were fixed & but that seeing the honorable weapons which were left them viz. Firmness and Resolution they were sufficiently powerful to surmount their Difficulties, in the same Manner as the Virtue of the Romans had made them triumph over Carthage—”

They also reminded the Earl that under ^by^ pretext of treating of peace on a former occasion, they had lost Artois Hainault, & other Countries—that the Conferences ^Treaties^ at Gaud [Ghent] & Bruges that ^which were prior to their independence^ had cost the lives of more than one a hundred thousand persons—that Negligence & false Security was always the Consequences of such Negociations—that they should be happy to have a firm Peace, but that they would have no Confidence in the King of Spain &c.—

on the 30 October 171588 the Queen again proposed their entering into Negociations for Peace, and they again refused—33

In 1590 ^& 1591^ the Emperor proposed to the States ^endeavoured to persuade the^ united Provinces to enter into Negociations under by the Mediation of his good offices for a Reconciliation with the King of Spain—they refused— And on the 7 Ap. 1592 they gave a formal answer to the Emperor containing their Reasons for declining his Proposal—on this occasion they struck a medal representing a Spaniard offering Peace to a Zealander who points to a snake in the grass, with these words latet anguis in Herba—34

On the 16 ^6th.^ May 1594 the Archduke of Austria sent a Letter to the States on the same Subject, and recieved the like Answer accompanied with a full State of their Reasons for it—35

In the same Year the United States ^Provinces^ sent Embassadors to Denmark, & recd others from King James of Scotland and who desired them to send some persons on their Behalf to assist at the Baptism of his Son, & to renew ancient Treaties &ca—36

31 October 1596 the King of France entered into a Treaty of Alliance with the United States ^Provinces^ agt. Spain—37

On 9 August 1597 the Emperor by his Embassador then at the Hague proposed to the States to treat of Peace— They refused, allegding that they had been lawfully separated, and absolved from the Dominion of the King of Spain, and had formed Alliances with England, France, &ca.—38

15 Octob. 1597 Embassadors from the King of Danemarkmarc arrived at the Hague, among other Things to dispose the States to Peace— On the 24 October the States gave them a long answer, recapitulating their Reasons for refusing to negociate,& particularly insisting on the Perfidy of the King of Spain in all former Treatys & Pacifications with them ^prior to their Inpend Dn. of Ind.^ viz. between Champigny & Aldejone in 1574—the Treaty of Breda in 1575 the Pacification at Gaud— The Pacificiation with Don John—the Negociation with the Baron de lilles— The Proposition to treat at Malines—the Conference at Louvain—the Pacification at Colougne—39

On the 2d Novr 1597 the King of France having been offered advantageous Term of peace by Spain hinted his pacific Inclinations to the States— They earnestly dissuaded him from making either peace or Truce—the King nevertheless began to treat under the Mediation of the Pope &c—40

The States sent Embassadors on to France with Instructions dated 13 Jany 1598, to dissuade the King from Peace, and to take Measures with France & ^against^ Spain for the ensuing Campaign41

On the 2 May 1598 peace was concluded between France and Spain at Vervins—

In treating of the articles of this peace, the Deputies of France declared that they would not proceed to conclude st ^it^ “unless the Queen of England and the United Provinces ^who were allied with his Christian Majy^ were ^recid &^ admitted & recieved to a ^the^ Treaty[”]—to which the Deputies of the King of Spain answered “that from the Commencement of the Conferences they had declared that they were ready and content to recieve and treat with the Deputies of the said Queen & Provinces and that they had resided long enough in that Place to give them Time to come there, if they had been so pleased— And it was concluded and agreed that if in six Months the Deputies of the said Queen and united Provinces should come with sufficient powers and declare themselves willing to treat of Peace they should there be recd., and for that purpose the Deputies of the King of Spain should be at Vervins, or at such other place as by common Consent of Parties should be agreed upon— And at the Instance of the Deputies of his christian Majesty it was further agreed that there should be a Cessation of Arms & Hostilities between His Catholic Majesty the Queen of England & the united Provinces for to be compu two months to be computed from the Day on which the said Queen and Provinces shd. inform the Archduke of Austria that they accepted the said Cessation &ca:”

On the 6 May 1598 the King of Spain conveyed the low Countries to and Burgundy to his Daughter Isabella Clara Eugenia of Austria who married Albert ^on certain Conditions the first of which was to marry Albert the 6^ the 6 Archduke of Austria—[illegible]42

On the 29 June 1598 the Queen of England by her Embassador Sir Francis Veer addressed the States on the Subject of the late Peace between France & Spain, & left it to their Choice to accede or continue the War—they resolved not to treat of Peace—43

The archduke expressed his astonishment that the Queen should assist his rebellious Subjects—on which she desired the King of France to tell him— That alliances with the States of the low Countries was not a new thing—that they had not recognized him for their Sovereign, and that tho she respected him as the Brother of the Emperor and Archduke of Austria, yet as the Lieutenant of the King of Spain she held him as an Enemy—

On the 16 Augt. 1598 the Queen of England entered into a New Convention with the united Provinces, confirming the Treaty of 1585, with certain other Stipulations—44

On the 28 Augt. 1598 the Archduke wrote ^a^ Letter to the States General, to persuade them to accept him for their Sovereign— To this Letter they resolved not to give any answer45

On the 13 Septr. 171598 Philip the 2d. King of Spain died—46

In the 1599 the Emperor again named ^commissioned^ Embassadors to sue persuade the United province to treat of peace &c— The States in their Letter of 2d Decr 1599 refuse to treat because among other Reasons “the Insolence of the Archduke and the Infanta was such that altho they knew very well that they can ^could^ claim no Right to the sd Provinces under the before mentioned Donation, or by any other Titles, yet so it ^was^ that by Placarts, and by public & notorious Libells, they and by indecent and unjust Acts which they can ^could^ never excuse, they held them for Rebels—”47

On the 7 June 1600 the States, in their Answer to another application to the Emperor say among other things that the Archduke “had treated the Inhabitant[s] barbarously, proclaiming those to be Rebels who had nothing to do with him, and that well considering all these things, they had good Reason to judge, that it would neither be consistent with their Honor nor their Interest, to acknowledge the Archduke, nor or to treat ^either^ with him or with Spain”48

On the 3 April 1603 ^1602^ the Queen of England died49—

On the accession of James the archduke immediately sent Nicholas Schossy to sound the King on the Subject of Peace, and the next Year sent Count Arembergh there for the same purpose—King James sent Rudolph Winwood to inform the States, that the Archduke had proposed to him to treat of peace but that he would do nothing till he had informed them of it, and should be informed advised of their Inclinations50

^On the 30 July 1603 the Kings of France and England concluded a Treaty of Confederation principally for the Defence of the United provinces against the King of Spain—this Treaty was secret^51

In May 1594 ^1604^ Conferences for a Tr Peace were opened at London between the Deputies of Spain & the archduke on the one Part, & those of England on the other52

The Spaniards requested the King to mediate ^a^ Peace between the Archduke & the United Provinces on reasonable and equal Terms. which the english declined ansd. that it was not did not was not their Business & that they could treat together without saying any thing of the United Provinces—53

On the 28 Aug 1594 ^1604^ Peace was concluded between Spain & England54

On the 28 Aug 1604 peace was concluded between Spain & the Archduke on the one part & England on the other55

On the last of May 1605 the States in answer to the propositions for peace made by the Emperor, Electors, Princes & States of the Empire say—“that they had been legally discharged from their Oaths to the late King of Spain, Ins according Insomuch that all impartial Kings princes and States did at present acknowledge & hold the low Countries, for a free State, qualified of Right to govern itself in form of a Republick, or to chuse another prince—”56

“That as to what they had been advized, vizt. to enter into any Treaty, contrary to the free Governt and Right which they had obtained, and which they had still enjoyed, they considered it as contrary to God, ^&^ their Honor, & their Safety”

About the End of Feby 1607 there came from Brussels to Holland, as Deputy from the Archduke, the Commissary General of the Minor Brothers, whose ^Father^ had formerly been well acquainted with the prince of orange—57

He came to learn the Reasons which had prevented the Propositions of the Sieur Horst from being succesful—and and having foun ^for^ some Days been ^after speaking often^ in private with prince Maurice, he came to the Hague, where he also had an audience of prince Maurice To whom he said, that it was not the Intention of his Highness either to better or to lessen his Title Right, by any Treaty of Truce, but to Treat with the States, in the State in which they were— And on being given to understand that the Archduke must acknowledge the State for a free State before they would enter into any Treaty, he undertook to bring the Archduke to consent to it, in order to avoid the further Effusion of Blood—on the 9th. May he went in prince Maurice’s Boat to Antwerp, and returned 17 March to The Hague, and did so much that both parties finally agreed to come to some mutual Treaty agreable to the Conditions of the following Writing Declaration—

“The Archdukes have found it proper to make the following offer Declaration offer & Presentation to the States General of the united Provinces of the low Countries—”“That the Archdukes having nothing more at Heart than to see the low Countries, and the Inhabitants thereof, delivered from the miseries of War, declare by these Presents, and with mature Deliberation, that they are content to treat with the States General of the united Provinces, in Quality, and as holding them for free Countries, Provinces and States, to which their Highnesses have no pretentions ^pretend nothing^, either by way of perpetual peace, or Truce, or Cessation of Arms for 12. 15. or 20 Years; at the Election of the said States, & on reasonable Conditions—” then follow certain Propositions for a Truce &c.—and afterwards a Condition

“That the States agree to the aforesaid provisionel Truce in Eight Days after the Delivery of these Presents, and shall make a Declaration thereof to their Highnesses be in writing, before the first of September next ensuing, touching the principal treaty ^aforesaid^ of the said Truce or Cessation of Arms, with the Time & place which they may have chosen— Done at Brussells under the Signatures and the Seal of their Highnesses, the 13 March 1607—”

To this Declaration and offer the States answered “That the States General in Quality of, and as free States Countries & provinces over which their Highnesses have nothing to pretend, and ^being^ equally desirous of Nothing more than to bestow ^consent^ to a christian honorable and sure Issue ^to^ and Deliverance from the Miseries of this War—after mature Deliberation and with the advice of his Excellency, and of the Council of State have accepted the said Declaration of the Archdukes to hold ^regard^ the united Provinces as free Countries, to which their Highnesses have nothing to pretend, and also, a Truce for 8 months &c. &c. their Highnesses further promising to obtain and deliver to the said States general within three Months next ensuing, the accession ^agreement^ of the King of Spain touching the Treaty, under all the necessary Renunciations & obligations, as ^well^ general as special”—

On the last of June 1607 the King of Spain ratified the Truce, but omitted an acknowledgment of their Independence58

The States General on the 9 & 11 of Augt. “declared this Ratifications to be imperfect both in Matter & substance & in Fo Form”

The Archduke promised to procure a more compleat one—

On the 18 Septr. 1607 the King of Spain made a new Ratification containing the Acknowledgmt in Question, but declaring the w that the whole ^sd. Ratification^ should be void unless the Peace or Truce in Contemplation shd. take place—59

To this Condition the States made strong Objections.

On the 2d. November 1781607 the States answered made various Remarks on the Ratification— They absolutely refused to accept & protested against the Condition off contained in it, but offered to proceed if the on the Footing of the Declaration ^if^ and Promises of the Archduke if within ten Days after recg that ansr he shd send Deputies to the Hague fully authorized &c and would expressly promise not to propose any thing either on his part or that of the King, which shd. be ^and provided the States should be firmly assured that nothing would be proposed either on the part of the Archduke or of the King^ contrary to the same, or prejudicial to the State or government of the united provinces, and provided also that the archduke did send his Deputies to the Hague fully authorized &c. within Ten Days after the Reciept of that answer60

On the 10 November the States general adjourned to take the Sense ^of their^ Constituents on the Subject of the Ratification, and to agreed to meet again the 10 December—61

On the 24 Decr. 1607 they wrote to the Archduke that under the protest & Declaration contained in their answer of 2d. Novr. they were content to enter into Conferences with his Deputies at The Hague & proprosed to prolong the Truce for six or ^a Month^ or six weeks

On the 7 Jany the answer of the Archdukes arrived in which he calls the States “tres chers & bons amis”—he informs them ^observed^ that he had learnd from their Letter of the 24 Decr. the Resolution they had taken “to enter into Conferences with his Deputies about Peace, & in the mean Time to prolong the Truce for a month or six weeks—”62

“That as to the first point he had appointed for the said Conferences the same persons whom he had before employed ^and that they should set out the 15 Jany:^ and that as to the Truce, he was content to prolong it for six Weeks”

On the 6th. Feby 1608 the Deputies of the States & those of the Archduke held ^had^ their first meeting to exhibit their respective Credentials— The Deputies of the Archduke produced two, one from him & the other from the King of Spain—63

On the 8 Feby 1608 the Deputies of both Parties had their second Meeting—those of the States demand asked the others if they were fully instructed (enchargés) to acknowledge the united Provinces for to be free Provinces & Countries, and to treat with them in that Capacity—to which they explicitly (Rondement) answered Yes—the dutch Deputies thereupon asked, why then the Archduke retained the arms & name of the said Provinces?—they then replied “that ^it^ ought not to seem strange, for that the King of Spain retained the Title of the King of Jerusalem,—the King of France, that of King of Navarre—& the King of England retained the arms & Title of France—”

On the 11 Feb. 1608—they met again— The Deputies of the States presented to the others an Article which they had drawn up, by which they showed declared “Provinces were declared to be free and that the King of Spain and the Archdukes relinquished all their Pretensions to the Sovereignty of the said Provinces &c—as well for themselves as for their Successors and Heirs, with the Name & Arms”64

The others recd. the Article & took time to consider of it—on which the Meeting was adjourned—

They nevertheless complained to immediately despatched a Courier with a Copy of it, to Brussells and recd. an answer on the 13th—they complained however to the Embassadors of France & great Britain &c. of the States being so precise in that article.

On the 13th. Feby 1608 in the afternoon, assem ^they^ ^the Deputies^ again assembled, & those of the Archduke consented to the article as it was drawn up, with Reserve nevertheless, that in Case all the other points should be agreed upon, they hoped the States would do something for the King of Spain ^& the Archduke^ respecting the Indies, &ca. and in the Course of

On the 15 Feby they again met—they agreed on the Points of amnesty & oblivion, a but on treating of reciprocal free Trade ^& navigation^ to each others ports & Countries, the Deputies of the Archduke declared, that they did not mean to comprehend in that free Trade, the Navigation to the Indies & all the fortresses there, but on the Contrary that all the Subjects of these Countries should forthwith desist therefrom— The dutch Deputies opposed this strongly & firmly saying, “that it would prejudice the Liberty of the Provinces, and the free use of the Sea where and therefore that they were not authorized to quit it ^relinquish^ it—the others continued firm in their Demand, and after long Debates the Depu meeting Deputies separated—”65

On the 19. 23. & 27 Feby Feby ^& 4 March^ 1608— The Deputies met, but, except debating, did nothing—both parties continuing firm, & resolved not to cede any thing66

The Deputies of Spain, finding they could do nothing ^not^ carry the Point as to the Indies, declared at Length, that they would consult together on a Proposition to make a Truce for some Years respecting that navigation—and that they were ready to go on to the other Points & try to agree upon some of them—

On the 7 March they exchanged Heads of articles, for Consideration—

On the 11 & 12 March they again met & had fruitless debates about a free Navigation to the Indies, &c: The Marqs. Spinola proposed that the Subject shd be divided, and that two sets of Propositions & should shd. be prepared, one for the navigation in Europe, & the other for the Indies

On the 17 March they again met & the dutch deputies offered to the others two ^sets^ Propositions as had been proposed who they recd. them for Consideration but after Debate, they declared that they could not agree to them, without and that they must make a furt Journey to Spain for further Instructions—for this Reason the Truce was prolonged to the End of May—67

The Truce was continued from Time to Time, & sundry fruitless meetings held—but on

On the 20 Augt. 1608, the Deputies assembled—the Spanish ones declared that “they had lately recd. full Instructions on the several points in Question vizt.—that the King & Archdukes were content to quit the Sovereignty of the united provinces, but that he required two Points to be yielded by the States by way of Compensation—viz the Reestablishment of the roman Catholic Religion in every place in ^the^ provinces, and that they shd. immediately desist from all navigation either ^both^ to the East and to the west Indies”68

The dutch Deputies reported this to the States General—

on the 25 Augt. the States General gave ^made^ a long and spirited answ Declaration on the Subject of this Report, Resolving [now?] to break off the Treaty ^against negociating any longer^ and they ordered their D a Copy of it to be delivered to the Spanish Deputies69

On the 27 Augt. 1608 all the Embassadors ^of France & England &c.^ came to the States general & endeavoured to prevail upon them to agree to a long Truce

The States 30 Augt. the States expressed their Readiness to agree to a long Truce w provided the adverse party “wd agree so absolutely acknowledge them for free Countries as that it should not be questioned after the Expiration of the Truce, but that ^otherwise^ they could not listen to a Truce—”

On the 3d September the Spanish Deputies said they had no power to Instructions p to treat of Truce in acknowledging the pr united provinces to be absolutely free, & permitting the Navigation to the Indies, but that they wd. ^had^ sent the proposition to Brussels & hoped in order to have further Instructions—

on the 7 September they recd. an answer from Brussels, and they declared that they had no Instruction to agree to a long Truce with the States, on Condition to acknowledge them for to be States absolutely free, and [illegible] without comprehending the Reestablishment of the roman Religion, and the loss Relinquishment of all Navigation to the Indies—but that the Archdukes wd. send the proposition to Spain from whence he might expect an Answer by the End of Septr.—

They then proposed either to wait for the answer of Spain, or continue the present Truce for seven Years, observing that it had been made with an express Declaration to hold the United provinces for free Countries—and that as to the Trade to the Indies the Archduke wd. promise to get it ratified by the King of Spain for that Space of Time—70

The States refused ^unanimously^ rejected this new proposition but gave them further ^the^ Time they had demanded for the Answer of Spain—

On the 24^28^ Sep. the spanish Deputies applied to the Embassadors of France &c. to ask ten Days more from the States— The Embassadors agreed to do it in the name of the Deputies, but they declined it—

On the last of September they took their Leave—71

The States General became possessed by accident of the Instructions given to those ^Spinola & the other^ Deputies—they were signed by the Archdukes and dated at Brussels the 6 Jany 1608

They are insist ^were^ thereby instructed to insist on the free Exercise of the roman Catholic Religion

as to Independence the Instructions say

“Quant au faict de la Liberté, puis que vous scavez ce que nous avons accordé en cela; ne faictes pas de Difficulté de le mettre comme Ils le demandent, sans rien faire ou dire au contraire qui leur peust donner occasion de penser que nous veuillons revoquer la Declaration touchant ceste Liberté, laquelle nous leur avous faict faire; ains que nostre Resolution est de l’accomptir en tous poinets”72

They were These Instructions also directed them to insist, that the States should ^renounce &^ entirely & absolutely desist from the Trade of the East & West Indies, & should agree to punish those who should ^might^ undertake such Voyages,—&c. &c. &c.

On the Departure of the spanish Deputies the Embassadors of France & England Great Britain endeavoured, to prevail upon the States General to listen to a Truce & proposed to their Consideration certain Articles which they had prepared. The States after much Deliberation, agreed to enter into further Negociations on that Subject—73

On the 25 March 1609 the Deputies of both parties met at Antwerp, and on the 9 April following a Truce ^for 12 Years^ was concluded upon—74

It was forthwith ratified by the States & the Archdukes, & published on the 14 April75

On the 7 July 1609 ^at Segovia^ the King of Spain explicitly and without reserve ratified this Truce vizt.

“La Majèsté ayant veu le contenu de cest Escrit de Treve & Capitulation, que ces chers & bien aymés freres les Archducs Albert & Isabelle Clare Eugene luy a envoyé touchant la Treve accordée au Nom de sa Majesté, par sa procuration, & par celle de leurs alteses pour eux mesmes [illegible] avec les Estats Generaux des Provinces Unies des pays bas & l’ayant bien meurement consideré, declare qu’il loue, approuve, confirme & ratifee la susdite Treve entant coque que ce faict luy touche &c—”76

The first article of this Truce was in the Words following

“Prémierement les susdits Seigneurs Archeducs declarent, tant en leur nom, qu’en Nom du susdit Roy qu’ils sont contents de traicter avec les susdits Sieurs Estats generaux des provinces uniés, en Qualité & comme les tenant pour Pays, Provinces & Estats libre, sur lesquels ils n’ont rien a pretendre, & de faire une Trefve avec eux au Nom & selon les Qualités susdites, comme ils font par la presente, & ce aux Conditions cy apres descriptes & declarées—”77

On the 30 Jany 1648 a Treaty of Peace was concluded between Spain & the United Provinces

The full powers or Commission given by the King of Spain to his plenipotentiaries for making this Peace, were dated near two Years before—viz. 7 June 1646—and they shew clearly that he negociated with those Provinces as with independent States, on that occasion—

The Tenor of this Commission is very different from that of Mr. Oswald— The following is an Extract from it—

“Toutes les Puissances qui sont interesées en cette Guerre, ayant d’un commun Accord choisi la Ville de Munster pour y tenir le Congrez & les Negociations de la dite Paix; nous avons jugé a propos de nommer des Plenipotentiaires pour y traicter avec les Estats des Provinces libres des Païs bas unis, ou avec leurs Embassadeurs & plenipotentiaires, autoriser & deputer pour cet Effet. &c.”78

From this Detail it appears manifest that the Dutch ever after their Declaration of Independence in July 1581, uniformly treated with the Neighbouring Nations on an equal Footing; and also that they constantly and firmly refused to negociate, either for Truce or Peace, with Spain, until she consented to treat ^and actually^ with them in like Manner

We forbear engaging your Excellency’s Time and Attention by the application of these Facts & Conclusions, to the Case of our Country—we are persuaded that the Similarity between the two, will not escape your Descernment, and that we shall not be thought singular in our opinion, that the Example of the united Provinces merits ^at least in these Respects^ the Imitation as well as the Approbation of the united States of America—

But Sir we not only think it inconsistent with the Dignity of Am the United States to treat with Britain in the humiliating Manner proposed but also that it wd. be repugnant to their Interest

The Respect of other Nations is undoubtedly of of Importance to America, but Sir if she ceases to respect herself, how can she expect to be respected by others?

America has taken & published noble and manly Resolutions respecting the ^to^ Support of their ^her^ Independence, [and would it be for her to grant?] ^at every Hazard— She has hitherto^ done it, and would it be for their ^her^ Interest to treat with those [illegible]to regard those as their superiors those who they have every other place they ^to quit the ground for which she has lost so much of her Blood merely to accommodate herself to the high blown pride of an Enemy?—^ Sir! the very Proposition carries with it Insult, and therefore bears strong marks of Insincerity.

But suppose that the united States should descend from their present Ground of Equality, in order to treat with Mr Oswald, and that our Negociations should be fruitless. In what an awkward Situation should we then be? We should find ourselves betrayed by our too great Pliancy, and our too great Desire of Peace, to the Ridicule of our Enemies, the Contempt of other Nations and the Censure of our own Minds— What a page would this make in History!

As to Mr. Oswalds offer to make an acknowledgmt of our Independence the first Article of our Treaty and your Excellency’s Remark that it is sufficient and that we are not to expect the Effect before the Cause—permit us to observe that by the Effect ^cause^ we unders suppose is intended the Treaty, and by the Effect, an acknowledgmnt of our Independence—

We are sorry to differ from your Excellency, but really Sir! we cannot consider an acknowledgmt of our Independence as a Subject to be treated about; for while we feel ourselves to be independent in Fact and know ourselves to be so of Right we can see but one Cause from whence an acknowledgmt. of it can flow as an Effect vizt. the Existence & Truth of the fact— This Cause has long existed and still exists and therefore we have a Right to expect that G. Britain ^will treat with us^ as being what we are, and not as what we are not. To treat about this Matter would be to suppose that our Independence was incomplete until they pronounced it to be complete— But we hold it to be complete already, and that as it never did, so that it never will or must depend in the least Degree, on their will and pleasure.

To us there appears to be a wide Distinction between their acknowledging the United States to be independent, and their renouncing their pretended tho’ troublesome Claims—the former, being a preexisting Fact, cannot depend upon, & there^fore^ is not a proper Subject for a Treaty; but to renounce or not to renounce a Claim, whether good or bad, depends on the will and Pleas of him who makes & prosecutes it; and therefore like other Matters of Interest & Convenience is a proper Subject for Bargains & agreements between those who trouble their Neighbours with such Claims, & their Neighbours who are too troubled by them, & who for peace Sake, may chuse to continue the Law Suit unless their future Quiet is secured by a Quit Claim—