To John Jay from Rufus King, 16 August 1797
From Rufus King
London Augt. 16th. 1797
Dear Sir,
I had the pleasure to receive your Letter by Mr. Flemming; that for Lord Amherst was but just in time to be delivered before his Death.—1 From the very great Reserve that every where exists concerning the negotiations in Italy and at Lisle, it is not easy to form a satisfactory opinion respecting their termination; indeed the great struggle that exists between the Directory and the two Councils, seems for sometime past to have withdrawn the public attention from those negotiations, and to have fixed it at Paris— Portugal has concluded a peace with France, and I hope that our Commissioners may likewise be able to adjust the misunderstanding between us and them. I have heard that Mr. Talleyrand, who succeeds La Croix in the office of foreign affairs, has expressed himself in a Friendly manner on the subject of American affairs.2
We must not expect with too much confidence that we shall escape a war; (and ought to prepare for a disappointment in our sincere desires to remain in Peace;) the security and the Fate of Genoa and of Venice should admonish us of our Duty; and the wisdom and many Precautions of Switzerland, which alone have hitherto preserved them, should also encourage us to meet the expences of a necessary State of defence.—
There seems to have been a satisfactory Persuasion that the preliminary articles with Austria was the Harbinger of a general Peace; and our Representatives may have compromitted the public welfare by an injudicious economy on the Subject of National Defence.— With sincere respect & attachment, I have the Honor to be, Dear Sir, Your faithful & obdt Servt.
Rufus King
P.S. I was asked confidentially by the person to whom you wrote before if I could explain the occasion of the Postscript of yr. Letter; I answered in the negative, adding that it was plain that you had changed your opinion, that you was not accustomed to do so except upon Sufficient grounds, and that your present Opinion agreed with my own— he replied that he certainly had no partiality in favor of the Character in Question, and if any fact or circumstance could be named, that wd. authorize his interference, that there would be no Objection to remove displace—3
LS, with PS in the hand of Rufus King, NNC (EJ: 06695); Tr, NNC.
1. See JJ to RK, 3 June 1797, ALS, NHi: King (EJ: 00709), introducing Pierre Fleming of New York; and JJ to Amherst, 3 June 1797, Dft, NNC (EJ: 06710).
2. On the relationship between the American commissioners to France and Talleyrand, see the editorial note “John Jay and the Response to the XYZ Affair in New York,” below.
3. See the postscript to JJ to Grenville, 4 June 1797, criticizing the conduct of John Temple, the British consul based in New York City. Dft, NNC (EJ: 08516).