John Jay Papers
Documents filtered by: Author="Jay, John"
sorted by: date (descending)
Permanent link for this document:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jay/01-04-02-0190

Report on a Note from Pieter J. van Berckel, 23 August 1786

Report on a Note from Pieter J. van Berckel

Office for foreign Affairs 23d. Augt. 1786

The Secretary of the United States for the Department of foreign Affairs to whom was referred a Note from the Minister Plenipotentiary of the United Netherlands—1

Reports

That the said Note contains the following Paragraph Vizt.

“That on the 23d. Instant the Secretary for foreign Affairs transmitted to him a Resolution of Congress dated the 17th. May 1786, concerning a Request of the dutch Creditors of Messrs. De La Lande & Fynje, contained in his Note of the 9th. February 1786.2 On examining that Resolution the Underwritten immediately perceived, that some of the Expressions he used, had been misunderstood, and taken (if he may be allowed to say so) in a Sense altogether contrary to his Ideas. But in particular it appears, that the Paragraph in which he requests Congress “to take Measures that all Seizure of Merchandizes, Effects or Credits belonging to the aforesaid Messrs. De la Lande & Fynje, on the Part of any other dutch Subject than those who are directly furnished with Powers from Messrs. De la Lande & Fynje, or of the above mentioned Assignees who are joined with them, be prevented, or, should there be any ^already^ made, that they be without Effect, and that these pretended Creditors, be sent back to Holland where they “belong”—has been construed to mean, that he desired that Congress itself would prevent all Seizure—very far from that, he takes the Liberty to observe that so soon as Justice is done to the Underwritten by believing that he is sufficiently informed to know that Congress must be governed by the Confederation, and can exercise no other Powers than such as are delegated to them, it will thence immediately follow that he could never have requested that they should violate the Constitution or act contrary to a fundamental Law, of which the States so justly require the most rigorous Observance. It is therefore quite in another Sense that he ought to be understood, and when he requests Congress “to take Measures” he would signify nothing further than that being persuaded of the Wisdom of Congress he relied entirely on their Judgment for the Choice of the Means that were in their Power, and which were the most convenient to his obtaining the Effect of his Request, without prescribing any himself, being persuaded that it would not be proper for him even to determine the Measure.”—

Whatever may be the natural and true Construction and Import of the Minister’s former Note seems now to be out of Question; for as he best understands the Sense he meant to convey, the request contained in that Note should now be understood in the Sense in which he now explains it.—

The present Question therefore is whether it would be proper for Congress to recommend to the States or such of them whose Laws may now be incompatible with it, to pass Acts in Compliance with that Request, and for the Purpose mentioned in it.—

Your Secretary considers all Matters of this kind as appertaining to the State Jurisdictions and therefore that it would not be proper for Congress to endeavour to influence their Deliberations on them, especially where the Provision in Question is limited to a particular Case, and not extended to every Case of the like kind—Besides it appears to your Secretary that such Influence should very rarely be interposed, and perhaps never but on Occasions of general and national Importance.—

He therefore thinks the Minister should be informed that the Separation which our Constitutions have made between the fœderal and State Governments renders it improper for the former to interfere in Matters proper only to the latter, or endeavour to influence the Conduct of the latter in any cases other than such as may be of general and national Importance. That therefore Congress, altho exceedingly desirous to show every Mark of Friendship & Attention to their good Friends the United Netherlands find themselves restrained by the Delicacy due to the individual States from recommending to them any particular Measure relative to a Matter appertaining only to their Cognizance and Jurisdiction, and not comprehending any Objects of general and national Concern; but ^that^ as the Minister of a foreign Nation cannot with Propriety treat or negociate Business with any of the confederated States but by Means of and thro’ Congress they will direct Copies of his Notes and of their Resolutions on them to be transmitted to the several States, and recommend the same to their early Consideration and Decision—and further to transmit to Congress without Delay whatever Determination they may thereupon make, to the End that the same may be regularly communicated to their High Mightinesses.—All which is submitted to the Wisdom of Congress3

John Jay

DS, DNA: PCC, item 81, 2: 169–72, 174 (EJ: 3908). Endorsed: “… entd & read 23 Aug. 1786 / respecting the property of / De La Lande & Finje—/ Note of true relation. transmitted / to the Office ff Affrs, Novr. 6th 1787”. LbkCs, DNA: Domestic Letters description begins Domestic Letters of the Department of State, 1784–1906, RG59, item 120, National Archives (M40). Accessed on Fold3.com. description ends , 2: 249–53 (EJ: 4581); NNC, JJ Lbk. 3.

1Note enclosed in P.J. van Berckel to JJ, 29 May 1786, LS, DNA: PCC, item 99, 255, 259–60, 263–65, 268–71 (EJ: 773); LbkC, DNA: Domestic Letters description begins Domestic Letters of the Department of State, 1784–1906, RG59, item 120, National Archives (M40). Accessed on Fold3.com. description ends , 2: 350–57 (EJ: 1970). JJ forwarded the note and cover letter in his letter to the President of Congress of 30 May, LS, DNA: item 80, 2: 369 (EJ: 226); LbkC, DNA: Domestic Letters description begins Domestic Letters of the Department of State, 1784–1906, RG59, item 120, National Archives (M40). Accessed on Fold3.com. description ends , 2: 357 (EJ: 1971). The note was referred back to JJ to report on 31 May. See OFA Journal description begins Daily Journals, Office of Foreign Affairs, 1784–1790, 2 vols., Papers of the Continental Congress, RG 360, item 127, National Archives (M247). Accessed Fold3.com. description ends , 23, 29, 30, 31 May 1786 (EJ: 3763); 23 Aug. 1786 (EJ: 3766). In this paragraph quotation marks are employed as they appear in the manuscript.

2Van Berckel’s note, in French, of 9 Feb. 1786, asked that the firm’s Dutch creditors be prevented from seizing their effects in the United States, LS, DNA: PCC, item 88, 17–20 (EJ: 3659); see also Van Berckel to JJ, 9 Feb. 1786 (2 letters), transcripts with translations, DNA: Domestic Letters description begins Domestic Letters of the Department of State, 1784–1906, RG59, item 120, National Archives (M40). Accessed on Fold3.com. description ends , 2: 91, 92–102 (EJ: 1868, 1871); and JJ to Van Berckel, 9 Feb. 1786, LbkC, DNA: Domestic Letters description begins Domestic Letters of the Department of State, 1784–1906, RG59, item 120, National Archives (M40). Accessed on Fold3.com. description ends , 2: 91 (EJ: 1869); DC, description begins William A. Weaver, ed., Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States of America, from the Signing of the Definitive Treaty of Peace, 10th September, 1783, to the Adoption of the Constitution, March 4, 1789 (7 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1833–34) description ends 6: 475. On 15 Feb., JJ forwarded the note to Congress along with a letter of 12 Sept. 1785 from Thomas Barclay (not found) also reporting the bankruptcy. JJ’s report of 28 Feb. 1786, with a translation of Van Berckel’s note, DS, DNA: PCC, item 81, 2: 43–47 (EJ: 3887), was read in Congress on 1 Mar., and the resolution JJ proposed therein adopted on 17 May. The resolution read as follows: “Resolved, that the Congress are not authorized by their Constitution to suspend or check the operation of any Laws of any of their States, in Cases where the same are consistant with the general and acknowledged Laws of Nations, and with the Confederation, and with Treaties made under it. That therefore Congress however desirous to attend to the Wishes of their High Mightinesses cannot interpose to prevent the Seizures in Question in any of the States whose Laws authorize them.” See 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 30: 285–86; DC, description begins William A. Weaver, ed., Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States of America, from the Signing of the Definitive Treaty of Peace, 10th September, 1783, to the Adoption of the Constitution, March 4, 1789 (7 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1833–34) description ends 6: 484–85. JJ forwarded the resolution to Van Berckel in his letter of 23 May 1786, LbkC, DNA: Domestic Letters description begins Domestic Letters of the Department of State, 1784–1906, RG59, item 120, National Archives (M40). Accessed on Fold3.com. description ends , 2: 320–21 (EJ: 1959); Dft, NNC (EJ: 5814). On the firm’s financial difficulties, see the editorial note “The Bankruptcy of de la Lande & Fynje,” above.

3The above report was read in Congress on 24 Aug. 1786. 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 31: 562n.

Index Entries