To James Madison from George W. Erving, 25 July 1806 (Abstract)
From George W. Erving, 25 July 1806 (Abstract)
§ From George W Erving. 25 July 1806, Madrid. No. 9. “I wrote you last on the 13th. Inst. & on the 22 nd. had the honor to receive your letter of May 1st.1
“Pursuant to your instructions of November 1st. 1805,2 I have scrupulously avoided conferring with the Members of this Government upon any of the subjects of the late negotiation, & when I left Madrid in February, gave conformable instructions to Mr. Young: these I afterwards confirmed in a letter from Lisbon, of which a copy is inclosed,3 & I have the satisfaction to assure you that this Gentleman has also carefully observed your injunctions.
“I have written to Mr. Cevallos respecting the matter of the Minerva mentioned in yours, but as the Court is on the point of departure for St. Ildefonso shall not receive his answer probably in time to forward it by this conveyance.
“The opinion which I gave in my last that the complaints of this Government respecting the affairs of the Marquis d’Yrujo, Miranda, & Casa-Calvo, were principally intended to obstruct or retard such negotiations for the adjustment of our differences as may be carried on at Paris, seems to be strengthened by a further note which I have received from Mr. Cevallos on these topics, copies of this & of my reply to it of the 22nd. Inst. are herewith transmitted.4 The opinion is also confirmed by other circumstances, if the information which I have received is to be relied on; and I understand distinctly that the necessary powers are not yet sent to Prince Masserano.
“Since my last, the appearances of a rupture between this Country and Portugal have increased: the plan for filling up their Regiments is in a course of immediate execution; and preparations are also making at Bayonne for assembling a french force in that quarter. It is said that a french Marshall de Camp has been dispatched on a private mission to this Court; this is Perignon, formerly Ambassador here: the ostensible object of his journey is some reclamations relating to his own affairs.
“Mr. Yznardy writes from Cadiz that there are 13. Ships of the line & two frigates at that port quite ready for sea: 3. french & 3. Spanish ships under the command of Vice Admiral Gourdon are on the point of sailing.
“In my last interview with Mr. Cevallos, he gave me encouragement to expect that the Quarantine regulations should be placed on as favorable a footing as he could possibly give them, & promised me a precise answer to the representation made on this subject, as soon as is consistent with its importance & the information & advice connected with it, which it is necessary that he should receive.
“The complaints from the Ports are confined wholly to the hardships of Quarantine: I do not hear of any new captures or other grievances.”
Adds in a postscript: “No measure has yet been taken here, as was expected, against the trade of Russia; this forbearance is probably owing to the hopes of accommodation between that Power & France; or it may be that the object is too insignificant by much the greater part of that trade being now carried on under Grecian Colors.”
RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, DD, Spain, vol. 10). RC 2 pp.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Erving; marked “(Duplicate).” For enclosures, see nn. 3–4.
3. The enclosed extract of Erving’s 4 Mar. 1806 letter to Moses Young (3 pp.) stated that Young was to say nothing to the Spanish government regarding “great principles & questions,” and to keep other communications to the minimum necessary. In accord with this line of conduct, Erving wrote, he had declined to convey William Kirkpatrick’s complaint about the port commandant’s interference with Kirkpatrick’s consular duties at Malaga (see Kirkpatrick to JM, 1 July 1806). Erving summarized the regulation in question as communicated to him by Pedro Cevallos in a letter received immediately before Erving’s departure from Madrid, stated that he could see nothing to object to in it, and asked Young to acknowledge the receipt of the letter, inform Cevallos that U.S. consuls would be notified of the regulation, and send a copy of Cevallos’s letter to Kirkpatrick.
4. Cevallos’s 18 July 1806 letter to Erving (2 pp.; in Spanish) informed him that since the Spanish government had not received a satisfactory statement of the reasons why Carlos Martinez de Yrujo had been asked to leave the United States, the king had decided to demand one, along with an explanation of the U.S. government’s response to Francisco de Miranda’s expedition. It strained credulity to suppose, Cevallos wrote, that American officials could not have stopped the expedition before or even after it left New York; furthermore, Spain would have been much more satisfied if the United States had sent a warship to capture the traitors and bring them back to face punishment, rather than conducting an ostentatious and useless trial of the Leander’s owner. Erving’s 22 July 1806 reply (4 pp.; docketed by Wagner) declined to state additional reasons for Yrujo’s dismissal, reminded Cevallos of the explanations already given on that matter, discussed in detail the circumstances that enabled Miranda to conceal his plans from the U.S. government, and defended the ensuing legal proceedings as a means “to discover & punish the guilt which you denounce.”