1. TP to JJ (private), 23 Jan. 1797, above.

2. JJ refers to the letter that TP directed to Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, the newly appointed minister to France, of 16 Jan. 1797, a copy of which was among the documents GW sent Congress with his address of 19 Jan. 1797 on relations with France. TP’s letter was published in the Gazette of the United States (Philadelphia) on 21 Jan. 1797, and subsequently in many other newspapers, as well as in pamphlet form. See TP to JJ (private), 23 Jan. 1797, note 2, above.

3. Adet’s “indiscreet note” refers to either Pierre Auguste Adet (1767–1848), the French minister, to TP, of 27 Oct. 1796, or, more likely, his longer note to TP of 15 Nov. 1796. While the 1796 presidential election was in progress, Adet sent a notice to the secretary of state on 27 Oct. announcing that France in accordance with its decree of July 1796 intended to treat neutral nations in the same way as they allowed other nations [i.e., Great Britain] to treat them; it would disregard the provision of the treaty of commerce with the United States of 1778 that “free ships make free goods” and would now seize American ships along with those of other neutral nations that were carrying British property.

When GW learned of Adet’s letter and publication, he wrote AH on 2 Nov. for advice on how to respond to Adet. He asked AH to show his letter to JJ— “As I have a very high opinion of Mr. Jay’s judgment, candour, honor and discretion (Tho’ I am not in the habit of writing so freely to him as to you)”— and to let him have their joint opinion.

AH replied on 4 Nov. that he had sent GW’s note to JJ and conferred with him “last night” (3 Nov.), stating that “Mr. Jay & myself are both agreed also, that no immediate publication of the reply which may be given ought to be made—for this would be like joining in an appeal to the Public—would countenance & imitate the irregularity & would not be dignified— nor is it necessary for any present purpose of the Government. Mr. Jay inclined to think that the reply ought to go through Mr. Pinckney to the Directory with only a short note to Adet acknowleging the reception of his paper & informing him that this mode will be taken. I am not yet satisfied that this course will be the best. We are both to consider further and confer. You will shortly be informed of the result.“ AH and JJ also recommended responding to the disrespect Adet had shown the government in publishing his letter by receiving Adet at his levies with “a dignified reserve, holding an exact medium between offensive coldness and cordiality. The point is a nice one to be hit, but no one will know better how to do it than the President.”

In the interim GW wrote AH on 3 Nov. that, in response to information from TP on the state of public opinion, it was considered necessary to make an immediate response and that he would see its publication in newspapers of that date (Aurora and Claypoole’s American Daily Advertiser, both of Philadelphia).

TP’s letter, dated 1 Nov., asserted that the Franco-American treaty confirmed the policy that “free ships should make free goods,” and therefore that France had no right to seize neutral American vessels trading with the British. TP also noted that the British had issued no new orders regarding the seizure of American ships carrying French goods, but that such seizures were within the law of nations. He concluded by chiding Adet for making his original note public, arguing that “it was properly addressed to its government, to which alone pertained the right of communicating it in such time and manner, as it should think fit to the citizens of the United States.”

Adet briefly replied on 3 Nov., and then published in the Aurora (Philadelphia), and subsequently other newspapers, a long note dated 15 Nov. announcing that the Directory had ordered him to suspend his diplomatic functions and reiterating French complaints against the Jay Treaty and alleged neutrality violations since 1793, particularly cases regarding privateers and prizes. A note printed in the Aurora following Adet’s letter insinuated that a Federalist victory could bring about a war with France. See the Aurora for 31 Oct., and 5 and 15 Nov. 1796.

Federalists then contended that Adet’s purpose was to embarrass GW and the Federalists and influence the election in favor of TJ. They argued that Adet sought to terrorize the United States into electing TJ, and that, like Genet before him, Adet was trying to appeal to the people against the authority of GW and his government. They criticized France for interfering in American political affairs and seeking to manage its government as they had done to such other client states as Switzerland, Holland, and the Italian states. AH continued to disapprove of TP’s publication of his response to Adet and criticized him as showing too much “warmth” and “sharpness” to be effective. Under the pseudonym “Americanus,” AH published his own answer to Adet in December 1796, and again recommended sending a letter addressed to Pinckney countering Adet’s charges. TP completed that letter on 16 Jan. 1797. See ASP: FR, 1: 559–88; AH to Oliver Wolcott Jr., 1, 9 and 22 Nov. 1796, PAH description begins Harold C. Syrett et al., eds., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (27 vols.; New York, 1961–87) description ends , 20: 361–66, 378–80, 411–14; GW to AH, 2, 3 and 21 Nov. 1796, PAH description begins Harold C. Syrett et al., eds., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (27 vols.; New York, 1961–87) description ends , 20: 362–66, 366–67, 409–11; AH to GW, 4, 5, 11, and 19 Nov. 1796, PAH description begins Harold C. Syrett et al., eds., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (27 vols.; New York, 1961–87) description ends , 20: 272–73, 374–75, 389–90, 408–9; Wolcott to AH, 17 Nov. 1796, PAH description begins Harold C. Syrett et al., eds., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (27 vols.; New York, 1961–87) description ends , 20: 398–400; “The Answer,” signed “Americanus,” Minerva (New York), 8 Dec. 1796; PAH description begins Harold C. Syrett et al., eds., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (27 vols.; New York, 1961–87) description ends , 20: 421–34; JM to TJ, 5 Dec. 1796, PTJ description begins Julian T. Boyd, Charles T. Cullen et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (43 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950–) description ends , 29: 215.

For other examples of Federalist responses to Adet’s writings, see “Brutus,” Gazette of the United States (Philadelphia), 3 Nov. 1796; “The Times, No. XVI,” Minerva (New York), 8 Nov. 1796; “The People’s Answer,” Connecticut Courant (Hartford), 14 Nov. 1796; William Willcocks, Minerva (New York), 3, 5 and 26 Dec. 1796, and Weekly Advertiser (Reading), 7 Jan. 1797. For the French refusal to receive Pinckney, and the further decline in Franco-American Relations, see the editorial note “John Jay and the Response to the XYZ Affair in New York,” below.

4. Conversation not identified. Possibly a reference to JJ’s notes on a Conference with Floridablanca of 23 Sept. 1780, enclosed in JJ to the President of Congress, 6 Nov. 1780; JJSP description begins Elizabeth M. Nuxoll et al., eds., The Selected Papers of John Jay (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 2010–) description ends , 2: 265–75, esp. 268–69. JJ’s encoded conversation with Montmorin as French ambassador to Spain, described in JJ to RRL, 28 Apr. 1782, JJSP description begins Elizabeth M. Nuxoll et al., eds., The Selected Papers of John Jay (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 2010–) description ends , 2: 761, is probably not the conversation referred to, since Montmorin had died in 1792.