James Madison Papers

Report on Foreign Dispatches, [20 March] 1782

Report on Foreign Dispatches

MS (NA: PCC, No. 25, II, 91). Written by JM. Docketed: “Report of Committee on foreign Despatches[.] Passed March 20h 1782.”

[20 March 1782]

The Committee to whom were referred the foreign despatches read in Congress on the 18th. instant1 report

That the letters from Mr. Jay & Mr. Carmichael be referred to a

1 Special Committee & that the Committee be authorised & instructed to communicate to the Superintendant of finance, such parts thereof as relate to his Department & to the committee on ritaliation such parts as relate to that Subject.2
2d. That the letters from Docr. Franklin & Mr. Adams be referred to another Committee3 & that the same in like manner communicate the proper extracts to the Superintendt. of finance, & to the Committees on Subjects to which they relate
3d. That the Protest of Capt: Ary de Neuf of the Brigantine Berkenboesh be referred to the preceeding Committee4
That the letter from Ct. de Vergennes with the Memorial from   Creditors of Capt Gillon be referred to the Delegates of S. Carolina5
That the letters of Capt. Gillon & Mr. Searle be referred to the Superindt. of finance6

1The printed journal for 18 March 1782 is a blank, but on that day Charles Thomson’s committee ledger records that JM, Samuel Osgood (Mass.), and Daniel Carroll were named a committee to report upon “sundry letters from Ministers at Versaill[es,] Madrid & Hague” (NA: PCC, No. 186, fol. 17). These dispatches were (1) Benjamin Franklin’s of 13 September and 5 November, enclosing a protest of Captain Ary de Neef (Neeff, Neif, Neuf) and Vergennes’ letter of 28 October 1781 to Franklin about the debt of 51,291 livres owed by Commodore Alexander Gillon to the mercantile house of La Marque and Fabre in Paris; (2) John Adams’ of 4, 13, 14, and 18 December; (3) William Carmichael’s of 20 December; (4) John Jay’s of 20 September and 3 October, enclosing Gillon’s letter of 28 September justifying his conduct to Jay, and Colonel James Searle’s of 26 September 1781 to Jay, accusing Gillon of misconduct (NA: PCC, No. 95, fols. 198–209; No. 185, III, 20, 21; No. 186, fols. 17–19, 22).

2The “Special Committee,” comprising JM, John Morin Scott, and Daniel Carroll (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 141, n. 1), appointed to review Jay’s negotiations with Spain, reported on 22 April 1782 (q.v.). The financial difficulties, discussed at considerable length by Jay and Carmichael in their letters mentioned above, were tersely summarized by Jay near the close of his long dispatch of 3 October 1781 to the president of Congress. “I have now,” Jay wrote, “bills to the amount of between seventy and eighty thousand dollars to pay, and no funds provided. What am I to do? Dr Franklin writes me that so far from being able to give me further aids, he does not expect to have it in his power even to pay our salaries in future.

“From the facts stated in this letter Congress will perceive that this court neither refuse nor promise to afford us further aid. Delay is their system” (Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , IV, 738–65, and especially 764; V, 61–65).

Although Jay recommended in his letter of 3 October 1781 that Congress retaliate against British captives in the United States as a possible means of compelling the enemy to stop trying to force American “distressed seamen” to enlist in the British navy by mistreating them “in English gaols,” his mention of the matter was brief and mild compared with Franklin’s bitter reflections, in his dispatch of 5 November 1781, upon the “upwards of eight hundred” of “our poor brave countrymen” who in some instances “have been in that cruel captivity now near four years” (ibid., IV, 764, 825–26). On 20 November 1781 Congress had appointed a committee on retaliation, with Daniel Carroll as chairman and Ezekiel Cornell, Samuel John Atlee (Pa.), Edmund Randolph, and Nicholas Eveleigh (S.C.) as the other members. By the date of the present report, Atlee and Randolph had been replaced on this committee by Abraham Clark and Arthur Lee (NA: PCC, No. 186, fol. 4). See also Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (4 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , III, 271–72; 322–23; 323 nn. 3, 5.

3Congress referred the letters of Adams and Franklin to William Ellery, Arthur Lee, Arthur Middleton (S.C.), Thomas McKean (Del.), and “Mr. Jones,” who was probably Noble Wymberley of Georgia, not Joseph of Virginia. This committee reported on 26 March 1782 (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 150–51).

4On 9 January 1780 the continental frigate “Alliance,” commanded by John Paul Jones, intercepted at sea the brigantine “Berkenbosch,” a Dutch merchantman commanded by Captain Ary de Neef and loaded with British goods. Jones permitted the vessel to continue on her voyage but only after obliging Neef to exchange with him the ships’ cooks and several other members of the crews. By ill chance, the “Berkenbosch” was owned by a member of an influential Dutch family which had been friendly to the American cause. After the Netherlands entered the war as a belligerent, the British captured the “Berkenbosch” in the West Indies and confiscated seven-eighths of her cargo. This misfortune appeared to aggrieve Neef less than his alleged mistreatment by Jones. According to Neef’s deposition, the cook Jones had forced on him was a prize master whose poor seamanship led to the capture of the brigantine by the British (NA: PCC, No. 167, fols. 271–81). On 26 March 1782 Congress accepted the recommendation of a committee that Neef’s protest be referred to the secretary for foreign affairs (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 150–51, and 151, n. 1). Jones’s own account of the incident, together with Neef’s admission that his cargo had been British-owned, convinced Livingston that “at first view,” Jones had acted with “sufficient justification” (Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , IV, 826; V, 313, 461–62, 478; Charles Henry Lincoln, comp., A Calendar of John Paul Jones Manuscripts in the Library of Congress [Washington, 1903], pp. 149, 163, 181; Samuel Eliot Morison, John Paul Jones: A Sailor’s Biography [Boston, 1959], pp. 269–70).

5See n. 1, above. Alexander Gillon (1741–1794), a merchant shipowner of Charleston and a prominent South Carolina patriot on the eve of the Revolution, was commodore of the navy of his state from February 1778 until the close of the war. Between late 1778, when he reached France to purchase military supplies and frigates for South Carolina, and 28 May 1782, when he finally arrived in the port of Philadelphia, he amply demonstrated, by his many adventures and misadventures, his bravery and resourcefulness, as well as his penchant for becoming embroiled with civil authorities.

Thanks to the exploits mentioned in the last paragraph of n. 6, below, Gillon returned to South Carolina a hero. After the war he was a delegate in several sessions of the state legislature, a commissioner for “erecting the new town of Columbia,” a member of the convention which ratified the Federal Constitution, and a representative in the Third Congress of the United States.

6While in Paris on his special mission for Congress, Lieutenant Colonel John Laurens of South Carolina persuaded Franklin to aid Gillon with an advance of £10,000 sterling (Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , V, 514). Thus the commodore was enabled to charter and rename as the “South Carolina,” a 44-gun frigate which the Chevalier (later Prince) de Luxembourg had leased from the French government. Gillon’s failure to abide by the terms of his agreements with his crew and with the Chevalier would lead to litigation, prolonged even until 1855 (D. E. Huger Smith, “The Luxembourg Claims,” South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine, X [1909], 92–115).

In Paris and Amsterdam, at a cost far exceeding the money promised by Franklin, Gillon purchased more military supplies than could be stowed in the hold of his frigate. Thereupon, without Franklin’s knowledge, Gillon chartered two smaller ships to accommodate the surplus. In August 1781, beset by debts and unable to fulfill his contract with the owners of the merchantmen, Gillon left their vessels at the dock in Amsterdam and put out to sea from that port in the “South Carolina” (NA: PCC, No. 82, II, fols. 61–69; Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , IV, 705, 781, 827–28, 836–38; V, 8–10, 37). Unable to reach Gillon and realizing that to repudiate his business transactions would still further injure the already shaky credit of the United States, Franklin assumed the unwelcome task, with the help of John Adams, then at The Hague, and Thomas Barclay, consul of the United States, of effecting settlements with Gillon’s creditors (ibid., IV, 835, 857; V, 46–48, 54, 159–60, 190, 218–19, 231, 278, 296, 510, 726; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXIII, 591, 702–6). John Laurens’ secretary, William Jackson, shared in many of Gillon’s transactions in the Netherlands. See Motion on Laurens’ Mission, 12 July 1782, editorial note.

Although the troops of South Carolina greatly needed the supplies aboard the frigate, Gillon cruised in European waters for some six weeks after leaving Amsterdam, endeavoring to capture enemy cargo vessels. Among his passengers were Jackson and James Searle (1730–1797), who was anxious to return home from his unsuccessful mission to France and the Netherlands in quest of loans and military supplies for Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania Archives description begins Samuel Hazard et al., eds., Pennsylvania Archives (9 ser.; 138 vols.; Philadelphia and Harrisburg, 1852–1949). description ends , 1st ser., IX, 311, 519–20, 564, 589–95). A prominent merchant-shipowner of Philadelphia, Searle had been a lieutenant colonel of militia, a manager of the United States lottery (1776–1778), a member of the Navy Board in 1778, and a delegate in Congress from 1778 to 1780 (Mildred E. Lombard, “James Searle: Radical Business Man of the Revolution,” Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, LIX [1935], 284–94).

Late in September 1781, when a shortage of food and water obliged the “South Carolina” to drop anchor at Corunna, Spain, Searle and Jackson left the frigate. By then they were much at odds with Gillon, and all three recorded their grievances in letters addressed to John Jay at Madrid (n. 1, above; Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , IV, 765, 769–70, 835–38; V, 340–41). Although these protests are now missing, they most probably were “the letters” referred by Congress to Morris upon the recommendation of JM’s committee. A lengthy defense of Gillon’s conduct with relation to Jackson and Searle appeared in the Pennsylvania Packet, 25 July 1782.

When Gillon sailed from Corunna, he left behind him a budget of problems for Jay and Carmichael to solve, including bills unpaid, Searle and Jackson marooned, and a controversy with Spanish authorities over the recruitment of alleged deserters from the Spanish army for the crew of the “South Carolina” (Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , V, 66, 338–40). Upon reaching the Caribbean, Gillon captured “five rich Jamaica ships” and brought them into Havana harbor on 13 January 1782. Easily persuaded by the captain general of Cuba, Don Juan Manuel de Cagigal, to lead an expedition of fifty-nine Spanish and American vessels against the British garrison at New Providence, Gillon and Spanish troops effected a bloodless conquest of the Bahama Islands on 8 May 1782 (ibid., V, 219, 298; Pennsylvania Packet, 11 April and 2 June 1782; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 378 n.; NA: PCC, No. 72, fols. 139, 143–50). Thereafter, accompanied by “a part of the Havana fleet,” the “South Carolina” proceeded to Philadelphia (JM to Randolph, 29 May 1782; Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , V, 463; Pennsylvania Packet, 30 May 1782; D. E. Huger Smith, “Commodore Alexander Gillon and the Frigate South Carolina,” South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine, IX [1908], 189–219).

Index Entries