Draft of Instructions to the American Minister in London, [5 February 1785]
Draft of Instructions to the American Minister in London
[Office of Foreign Affairs, 5 February 1785]
Report of Instructions for the minister of the united States at ^to^ the Court of London.
You will in a respectful but firm manner insist that the United States be put, without further Delay, into Possession of all the Posts & Territories within their Limits, which are now held against their by british Garisons.1 and You will take the earliest opportunity of transmitting the answer you may recieve to this Requisition.
You will [illegible] ^endeavor to make yourself acquainted with^ the Disposition of the british Cabinet, to join with the united States in pressing forceful measures for inducing Spain to cease opposing the free Navigation of the Mississippi, and to that End a Display of the commercial advantages which would flow to them thro’ that Channel, would probably prove a powerful Inducement.2
You will remonstrate against the Infraction of the Treaty of Peace, by the Exportation of Slaves3 & other american Property, contrary to the Stipulations on that Subject in the 4 article of it—upon this Head you will be supplied with various authentic Papers & Documents, particularly the Correspondence between General Washington & others on the one Part, & Sir Guy Carlton on the other.5
You will represent to the british ministry the Strong and necessary Tendency of their Restrictions on our Trade, to incapacitate our merchants in a certain Degree, to make Remittances to their’s6—You will so manage your Conferences with the minister on the Subject of Commerce, as to discover whether he is inclined to make a Treaty with us & on what Terms—taking Care not to enter into any Engagements without the previous approbation of Congress—
You will represent in strong Terms the Losses which many of our, & also of their merchants will sustain, if the former be unseasonably and immoderately pressed for the payment of Debts contracted before the war; and (if
compliance should appear probable) you will sollicit the Interposition & Influence of Government to p[reven]t it on this Subject you will be furnished with Papers in which it is amply discussed—7
DS, with excisions made by Congress, DNA: PCC, item 25, 2: 407–9 (EJ: 10696). Endorsed by CT: “Instructions to the Minister / to be appointed to reside at / the Court of London / Reported by Secy. for forn. Affairs / Feby. 7, 1785. Entd. / Read, passed 7 March 1785”. JJ’s undated report was sent in his letter to the President of Congress of 5 Feb. and was read in Congress on 7 Feb., 28: 45–46. See ALS, DNA: PCC, item 80, 1: 21 (EJ: 60); LbkC, , 1: 12 (EJ: 1555). LbkC of the report, dated 5 Feb., DNA: PCC, item 124, 1: 1–3 (EJ: 4891). Cs, of text as finally adopted on 7 Mar., Secret Journals, DNA: PCC, items 4, 5, 6; 28: 123; 4: 158–59. See also 2: 541, 569.
1. The nine forts occupied by the British: along the St. Lawrence River and the Great Lakes were Oswegatchie (Ogdensburg, N.Y.), Oswego, Fort Niagara, Fort Miami, Presqu’Isle (Erie, Pa.), Sandusky, Detroit, and Fort Michilimackinac, and two forts at the north end of Lake Champlain. On concerns about the western posts, see JJ to Lafayette, 19 Jan., above, to the President of Congress, 2 Sept., and to JA, 14 Oct., below; and JA to JJ, 13 May, ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 5: 413–20 (EJ: 11836); 17 June, ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 5: 507–13 (EJ: 11844); 25 Aug., ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 5: 606–19 (EJ: 11851); 21 Oct., ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 5: 673–87 (EJ: 11862); [3] Dec., C, DNA: PCC, item 84, 6: 43–67 (EJ: 11875); 6 Dec. 1785, LS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 6: 9–12; 22: 53, 75, 172, 230; 23: 288; Extracts from John Jay’s Report on Violations of the Treaty of Peace, 13 Oct. 1786, below; and 2: 630–32, 660–64, 769–75, 870–77, 937–42, 942–44. In his letter to JJ of 15 Dec. 1785, ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 6: 31–37 (EJ: 11874), JA reported the arrival in London of Mohawk chief Joseph Brant, and Henry Hamilton, Lieutenant Governor of Detroit, 1775–79, both of whom he suspected the ministry would consult about British policy concerning the posts, Indian alliances, and fortification of the Great Lakes. See also JA to JJ, 21 Jan., ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 6: 75–78; and 27 Feb, 1786, ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 6: 142–44 (EJ: 11877, 11886).
2. The U.S. claim to the right to navigate the Mississippi River source to mouth was based in part on its claim to have inherited the navigational servitude granted to Great Britain in the Treaty of Paris of 1763 by virtue of its independence from Britain and to have been granted this right explicitly in the provisional peace treaty of 30 Nov. 1782. Spain refused to acknowledge this claim. See 3: 29–32; 21: 809; 2: 157. Congress evidently thought better of asking JA to explore Britain’s willingness to back the American claim at this time.
3. “Negroes” in Art. VII of the preliminary treaty and in the instructions approved by Congress on 7 Mar. See 28: 123l; 3: 271; JJUP: 2: 435.
4. Space left blank in manuscript.
5. JJ’s letter to JA of 18 Mar. 1785, Dft, NNC (EJ: 5715); LbkC, , 30 (EJ: 2407), makes no mention of enclosing these documents. The of 18 Mar. confirms that JJ sent JA his commission, instructions, and letters of credence, and copies of the journals of Congress for the period from 4 Nov. 1782 to 1 Feb. 1785. See DNA: PCC, item 127, 1: 42–43 (EJ: 3749). JA acknowledged receipt of JJ’s letter and its enclosures on 4 May. ALS, DNA: PCC, item 84, 5: 389–92 (EJ: 11832); LbkC, DNA: PCC, item 104, 5: 218–20.
6. On the failed attempt to negotiate an Anglo-American trade treaty, see 3: 373–86. In his letter to JJ of 26 June 1785, below, JA recommended that the states give Congress unrestricted power to impose restrictions on British trade with the United States or that they should adopt uniform restrictions to compel Britain to conclude a trade agreement with the United States.
7. In his report to Congress of 13 Oct. 1786, below, JJ described this argument as “somewhat ingenious,” but an attempted infringement of a creditor’s right to sue whenever he chose.