1. Pickering enclosed dispatches, numbered 87 through 89, that John Quincy Adams, the U.S. minister to the Netherlands, had written him. Adams’s dispatch number 87 to Pickering, written on 16 Nov. 1796 from The Hague, reads in part: “I understand that Mr [James] Monroe has received his recal. General [Charles Cotesworth] Pinckney has not yet arrived. Mr [Pierre-Auguste] Adet also has probably his recal before this time. It was sent out more than two months ago, as you have doubtless been informed ere this from France. A successor is not yet appointed. Various motives may be conjectured as the occasion of a measure which implies a coolness of disposition, which will not probably last any great length of time, and which may perhaps not be spontaneous in the minds of the Directory. The character of the french Minister for foreign affairs [Charles Delacroix] is probably known to you. His conduct upon an occasion which has been a subject of particular observation in Europe, and his avowed preference of the minority in the American House of Representatives discovers his purposes and what is to be expected from him. The policy of the French Government may be unfavorable to all neutral nations, but it may be safely concluded that they do not wish to be at positive variance with the United States, and will return to their customary civility after they shall discover the issue of their present experiment.” Adams then gave intelligence on political and military affairs in Europe, citing both the retreat from Germany of the French Army of the Rhine and Moselle, and Spain’s declaration of war against Great Britain. He again resumed a description of affairs in France: “The French Directory have in a long message to the legislative Councils proposed the necessity of restraining laws upon the press. They declare that all the Journalists are continually slandering and vilifying the Government.” Adams noted that on 10 Nov., the “Committee for drawing up the constitution [for the Batavian Republic], made their report to the National assembly. It is in general one and indivisible in name, and federal in effect. The Provinces, are to be changed into Departments, but are to retain the management of their respective finances. The legislative power is in two branches. The executive in a council of State composed of seven members” (DNA: RG 59, Despatches from U.S. Ministers to the Netherlands).

In his dispatch number 88, written on 13 Dec. 1796 from The Hague, Adams acknowledged Pickering’s letter to him of 28 Sept. 1796. Pickering’s letter had discussed overtures made by Roger Gerard Van Polanen, the minister of the Netherlands (Batavian Republic) to the United States, to begin negotiations for a new treaty between the two nations. Pickering’s 28 Sept. letter to Adams reads: “the President is unprepared to direct any definitive negociations … besides that doubts exist of his power to authorize them by a minister not appointed … for that special purpose. The President however, thought it very proper to have manifested to the Republic of the United Netherlands, the disposition of the United States to enter on such negociations when the undoubted powers of our Government should authorize the measure. In the meantime it will be very desirable to learn what changes and ameliorations in the existing [1782] treaty are contemplated by the Dutch Government. you will … confer with the proper officers of that Government on the subject, and as far as may be, mature the plan of a treaty, to be submitted to the President as the ground on which he may propose to the Senate the appointment of a minister with full powers to complete the negociation” (DNA: RG 59, Diplomatic and Consular Instructions).

With his dispatch number 88, Adams enclosed a copy of the summary French translation of Pickering’s 28 Sept. letter, which Adams had presented to the Dutch “Committee of external relations.” Adams further commented on the 28 Sept. letter: “I have not hitherto received any answer to it, but when I stated the substance of its contents to … the Secretary of the [Dutch] Committee [of external relations], he assured me that he had no doubt but they would be received with great satisfaction by the Committee and by the national assembly. He observed at the same time, that the subject had been mentioned by Mr Van Polanen in his last dispatches. That the present Government here meant to pursue a very different course from that which preceeded it, and which had been devoted altogether to England; that the present object is to secure and improve by arrangements mutually advantageous, the friendship and harmony with other powers, and that the proposal made by Mr Van Polanen originated in this disposition” (DNA: RG 59, Despatches from U.S. Ministers to the Netherlands).

Adams’s dispatch number 89, written on 14 Dec. 1796 from The Hague, informed Pickering that the Dutch committee of external relations had expressed “satisfaction in being assured of the disposition of the American Government to enter into new arrangements, advantageous to the commercial interests of the two Republics.” Adams advised Pickering that Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, the new U.S. minister to France, “arrived at Bordeaux after a passage of 50 days.” Broaching the subject of his recent appointment to replace David Humphreys as U.S. minister to Portugal, Adams wrote: “By a letter which I have from Coll Humphreys … I think it most probable, that you will not think proper to order my removal before the ensuing Summer, and I beg leave to suggest that I think the public interest will best be served if the person who may be appointed to take my place here [William Vans Murray] should come before my departure.” Adams recommended the same procedure for all foreign ministers, arguing that it would facilitate “the new comer to the affairs of his mission, and to the means of conducting them; and … that it tends to preserve the good will of the government to which the Minister is sent” (DNA: RG 59, Despatches from U.S. Ministers to the Netherlands).

2. The letter to Pickering from David Humphreys, the U.S. minister at Portugal, has not been identified.