Note 21 — THE CORRESPONDENCE OF FRANCIS DANA. (continued 2)

The French government seem to have considered the proposition of the mediating powers, by which England and the United States were to treat separately, as impracticable and inadmissible. In their answer they say,

"His Majesty thinks it his duty to say, that he has allies, with whom he has inviolable engagements; that he should betray them in abandoning the American cause; and that it would be abandoning this cause for him to negotiate a separate peace. The high mediators have seen the impossibility of such an attempt, since they have themselves perceived the impossibility of proceeding at an equal pace with the negotiation of the King and that of the United States. But even admitting, that the King could separate his affairs from those of America, that he could consent to pursue only his personal interests, and leave to the Americans the task of coming to an accommodation with their ancient metropolis; what would be the result of this conduct? It would evidently be an illusory peace, a mere creation of the brain. Indeed, if (as there is the strongest evidence) the Americans persist in refusing to return to obedience to the British Crown, the war will continue between England and her ancient Colonies, and the King will then be obliged, as he is now, to assist them." Flassan, Vol. VII. p. 319.

Again, the French government say in their answer;

"The two Imperial Courts cannot flatter themselves with the hopes of bringing their mediation to a happy issue, if they do not prevent the subterfuges and false interpretations, which either of the belligerent powers may avail themselves of to explain according to their views the preliminary propositions, which will certainly happen if they do not previously ascertain the sense of the expressions, which relate to America.

"The Court of London will elude as much, and as long as she possibly can, the direct or indirect acknowledgment of the independence of the United States, and will avail herself of the terms that are used in speaking of them, to maintain that she is not obliged to treat with her ancient Colonies as with a free and independent nation. From whence it will follow, that when the mediation is in force, and they shall be about to enter upon the negotiation, they will dispute the character in which the American Plenipotentiary shall be received. The King of England will consider him as his subject, while Congress will demand that he should be received as the representative of a free people, by means whereof the mediation will be stopped at the first outset.

"To prevent this inconvenience it should seem, that previous to any other measure, the character of the American agent ought to be determined in the most precise and positive manner, and Congress should be invited to confide its interests to the mediation. This invitation is so much the more interesting as the negotiation relative to America should go hand in hand with that of the Courts of Madrid and Versailles, and by consequence the negotiations, although separate, should commence at the same time. But who will invite the Congress to treat with England? The King (of France) cannot, since the first article excludes him from the negotiation. This task then can only be executed by the mediators themselves. All that the King can do, and that he will do with zeal and fidelity, is to invite the Americans to the peace, and to facilitate it by every means, which they believe compatible with their essential interests. But that the King may take this step with safety and the hopes of success, and with the certainty of not rendering himself suspected by the Americans, it is necessary that he should first know the determination of the mediators upon the observations now made to them, and that this determination should be such as to secure to the United States their political existence."