From William Gordon to John Adams, 15 September 1791
From William Gordon
St Neots Huntingdonshire Sepr 15. 1791.
Friend Adams
I had not abandoned the idea of renewing our correspondence;1 but should probably have delayed executing it, had not my indignation been roused, at the implied insult offered to the good sense of the federal government in the following news-paper (& as supposed ministerial) paragraph—
“Mr Hammond the new Consul General to the United States of America & late secretary to the embassy at Madrid, will set off in a few days for Philadelphia. His appointment is of the highest importance to this country, as he has it in commission to conclude a treaty of offensive & defensive Alliance between England & America The outlines of the treaty have been already discussed, & we learn that some very considerable commercial advantages are held out to America as the basis of it, which will in time supplant the greater part of the trade of Russia with this country.”2
European subtilty, alias stupid confidence, may say of it—latet anguis in herba—; but American penetration will see that neither latet, nor in herba belong to it, for that the snake is wholly uncovered. I read in the prints, sometime ago, that your worthy President had informed the Senate, that proposals had been officially made to the British ministry for entering into a commercial treaty with this nation on terms of reciprocity, but that they had not been attended to.3 Should the idea of an offensive & defensive alliance be in the least insinuated by the new consul general, I hope he will be told in the plainest American English, that the motto of the United States is—Peace & Commerce with all the world upon a principle of reciprocity, & that they are determined to be the dupes of no power on earth, by being drawn into an offensive & defensive alliance with the same; but that should an unexpected necessity oblige them to depart from their present resolution, the preference would be given to the French, as governed under the new constitution framed by the National Assembly—that so the insolence of the present ministry may meet with deserved rebuke.
No commercial advantages can be held out to America, that can in any degree compensate for her concluding such a proposed treaty, which will be charged like Pandora’s box with numberless evils, eventually destructive to American prosperity & liberty.
The armed neutrality, so justly proposed, & so successfully promoted by the empress of Russia, has subjected her to the rancarous hatred of numbers in & out of power, both in the army & navy, in public & private life, who are for monopolizing exclusive privileges to themselves, in defiance of the general rights of mankind. John Bull would gladly oblige every foreign mariner to d’off his hat & pay him obeisance as he passes him on the High Seas, & to submit to a general search warrant, issued from the mouth of his cannon.
The resentment of the British minister against the Czarina has been much increased by the firmness she has discovered in abiding by her own demands upon, & proposals to the Turks, & by letting him see, that she was not afraid of an armed mediation. His hauteur must also have been grievously hurt by the pointed & expressive compliment she has paid Mr Fox.4 Pitt would now retaliate by undermining her trade to Britain through the medium of American commerce, & with a view of alienating these two distant powers by making them rivals in commerce. The position of B in regard to these two powers, points out the propriety of a perfect good understanding between them, soldered by a commercial treaty grounded upon reciprocity, that so the insolent airs of John Bull may be restrained. It is hoped, that the United States will take care to have it inserted in all their treaties of commerce, that neutral bottoms shall, in time of war, give security to all goods not specified as contraband. I suspect that when this touch-stone is applied to discover the integrity of British offers, like Ithuriel’s spear it will detect the impostor.5
The minister having failed thro’ the glorious Polish Revolution, in his intended commercial treaty with that kingdom, & scheme of procuring Dantzick & Thorn for Prussia, by both of which he hoped eventually to injure & affront the empress, is now politically traversing the Atlantic with a similar view, flattering himself probably that young sovereignties, like green horns upon the turff are to be taken in by the knowing ones.6 But You, who when young in tactics got to the windward of the French helmsman, Vergennes, will undoubtedly see in an instant to the bottom of the Pit that is digging for you.
In answer to this long testimony of my attachment to the American States, I request a speedy assurance, in the strongest terms, that the Americans will enter into no offensive & defensive alliance with G B, nor into any commercial treaty, but upon the principles of reciprocity. And in making even such treaty, you should remember not to preclude yourselves from any advantages that may accrue from the flourishing state of manufactures &c which will be likely to exist within the course of a few years in France, now that they have their liberties restored & secured. I shall await with earnestness the receipt of your assurances, that I may, as soon as possible, expose the folly of attempting the seduction of the Americans, by specious promises, from attending to their true interest.
The accounts given in the public prints of the amazing number of maple trees in the back settlements, together with the excellency & quantity of the sugar to be easily obtained from their juice, lead me to wish, that methods may be pursued, not only for supplying the American consumption, but that of Germany, without injuring posterity by a needless waste of the trees.7
How far an Office, under the sanction of Congress, for loaning to new settlers, up on mortgages at 5 or 6 per ct, with a view to assist them in their improvements, would be for the benefit of the states, by promoting agriculture & population, would submit to your judgment, as being upon the spot, & capable of knowing all circumstances.
You will have heard of the riots at Birmingham, & of the sufferings of Dr Priestley & others.8 If dissenters do not meet with better treatment & support from government, I augur that in a few years, should the French constitution be well rooted, numbers will emigrate with their families across the channel; while the length of the passage & the danger hinders their crossing the Atlantic.
Monr Fayette has approved himself the genuine follower of the American Patriot under whom he served; & will continue, I trust, to deserve & enjoy the confidence of all his honest countrymen.9
Besides a particular commission to tender our hearty respects to the President & his lady, & your lady, your own family among whom are included Mr & Mrs Smith & one or more children, I give you a general one to remember me to all my friends in & out of congress, whenever I may happen to be the subject of conversation.
Many things in this letter ought not to be known in G B to have been written by me, for there are many worthy characters, who confine their regards for social liberty to their own country, & are no more than mere patriots, instead of citizens of the world, embracing all mankind as their brethren, & praying for universal happiness. The head of the letter informs you how to direct to Your sincere Friend & / very humble servant
William Gordon
I am fearful that somewhat painful has taken place in regard to my friend Hazard, having had no line from him since he was on the point of removing from New York to Philadelphia.10
RC (Adams Papers); endorsed: “Doctor William Gordon / Huntingdon Shire Sept 1791.”
1. Gordon last wrote to JA on 4 Oct. 1785 (vol. 17:494–497).
2. George Hammond (1763–1853), of Kirk Ella, England, Oxford 1784, was the British minister plenipotentiary to the United States from 1791 to 1795. He arrived in New York on 18 Oct. 1791. Hammond was instructed to act as a consul general until an American counterpart to Great Britain was named. He presented his credentials to George Washington on 11 Nov., two days after the Senate confirmed Thomas Pinckney’s appointment as the U.S. minister to Great Britain. Hammond was authorized to negotiate an Anglo-American commercial treaty, so long as he did not concede that “free ships make free goods.” The London St. James’s Chronicle, 1–3 Sept., and the London Public Advertiser, 5 Sept., reported that Hammond’s mission was to form a military alliance between the two nations. JA first met Hammond in 1783 and found him to be “a plain honest Man” (vol. 17:234–235; ; , 9:234; , 4:65).
3. In a 14 Feb. 1791 message that London newspapers reprinted three months later, Washington informed Congress that his efforts to formulate an Anglo-American commercial treaty failed due to a lack of British interest (, 7:346–347; London Lloyd’s Evening Post, 2–4 May; London Diary, 4 May; London Oracle, 6 May).
4. Under the 1790 Convention of Reichenbach, Austria agreed to restore its territorial gains to the Ottoman Empire, but the Russian refusal to surrender Ochakov kept the second Russo-Turkish War alive, minus an Austrian ally. British prime minister William Pitt supported presenting Catherine II, empress of Russia, with an ultimatum for a peace favorable to the Ottoman Empire, buttressed by a fleet of 40 British ships in the Baltic Sea and a dozen ships of the line in the Black Sea, to aid a Prussian invasion by land. George III, along with Pitt’s major political opponent Charles James Fox, disapproved, forcing Pitt to abandon the plan (, 8:293–295).
5. Milton, Paradise Lost, Book 4, lines 810–813.
6. With Ottoman aid in place, Prussia sought to gain Danzig and Thorn (now Toruń) from Poland in exchange for Galicia, which Austria would then surrender to Poland. Despite the Anglo-Prussian-Dutch defensive system of the Triple Alliance, Great Britain refused to go to war unless Prussia was attacked. When Frederick William II, king of Prussia, accepted the Convention of Reichenbach, he agreed to Austria’s territorial forfeits to the Ottoman Empire (, 8:292, 293).
7. Reports of the potential of American maple sugar to compete with West Indian cane sugar appeared in British newspapers such as the London Evening Mail, 18–21 Feb. 1791, and London World, 11 August.
8. Joseph Priestley drew sharp criticism for his ardent efforts to repeal the Test and Corporation Acts, endorse the radicalism of the French Revolution, and spread Unitarian doctrine. A mob invaded and destroyed his home, library, and meetinghouse in July. British and U.S. newspapers reported on the riot, and Priestley denounced the attack in an open letter to Birmingham inhabitants in the London Diary, 21 July. Priestley claimed that the protesters were “misled” regarding his political leanings, adding: “In this business we are the sheep, and you the wolves. We will preserve our character, and hope you will change yours.” For Priestley’s account of the riot and its effects, see his 20 Dec. 1792 letter, below (, p. 274; London Evening Mail, 18–20 July 1791; Boston Columbian Centinel, 21 Sept.; Philadelphia Federal Gazette, 21 Sept.; New York Daily Advertiser, 23 Sept.).
9. For the Marquis de Lafayette’s political fortunes, see John Bondfield’s 28 Aug. 1792 letter, and note 3, below.