Sir,
I have just had communicated to me the copies of two letters from Mr Silas Deane, addressed to Mr President Laurens, dated Philadelphia, October the 12th, 1778, and a separate paper relative to the 11th and 12th articles in the Treaty of Commerce between His Most Christian Majesty and the United States of America;[56] in which letters, so far as respects me personally, he has asserted nearly the same groundless charges as in his letter to the public, which has been already so fully replied to, and proved to be utterly repugnant to truth. Had Mr Deane made these very extraordinary assertions only once, he might have had some shadow of excuse, though it is a very bad one, by pleading a weak memory; but a deliberate repetition of them, after an interval of time amply sufficient for recollection, shows a heart and designs of such a complexion as all good men should avoid and guard against. Mr Deane concludes with the following assertions, by way of summary of all that he had before advanced.
1st. “That Mr William Lee never had a commission for the commercial agency.” What Mr Deane may style a commission I do not know, but he knew by a letter to himself from Mr John Ross, in July, 1777, of which he knows I have a copy, that I had as sufficient authority to act in the commercial agency as Mr Thomas Morris, and that I did act in that department accordingly. But if Mr Deane knew I was not a commercial agent, how can he palliate so bold and daring an imposition on His Most Christian Majesty and his Ministers, as to represent me in that character to them, which he did do in the letter signed by him to his Excellency Count de Vergennes in February, 1778, requesting that the late Mr Thomas Morris’s papers might be put into my possession, as then being the sole commercial agent of Congress. But, indeed, we ought not to be surprised at any imposition whatever on the part of Mr Deane, since he imposed himself on the King of France, his Ministers, and the whole world, as a Commissioner of Congress, on the 20th of March, 1778, when he confesses that on the 4th of that month he received a resolution of Congress, recalling him to America. I also refer for his conviction to the letters and proceedings of the Secret Committee.
2dly. Mr Deane says, “Mr Lee’s caution was such, that he never even answered my letters to him in February or March, informing him that Mr Robert Morris had written to me, that he was appointed; nor did I hear anything from him of his intentions until he arrived at Paris the summer following, where also he acted with the greatest caution while he waited the return of his brother from Berlin.” One cannot here omit observing the studied latitude of his expressions. Mr Deane talks of his letter in February or March, and that I came to Paris in the summer following. Will Mr Deane say how many letters he wrote? I never saw or heard of but one. Will he please to say whether that one letter was dated the 1st of February, or the 31st of March? For the difference of two whole months makes a very material alteration in the consequence he means to draw from the assertion. I will answer, that his only letter is dated the 30th of March, though he acknowledges his having received a notification from Mr Robert Morris in February of my appointment, and at the same time was desired to give me information of it immediately. It has been also proved by Mr Deane’s letter to Mr Williams, on the same day, viz. March 30th, that he was plotting a contention and rivalship in this department, before it was possible for him to know my determination on the subject. Again, will Mr Deane specify what time in the summer I arrived in Paris? Because here it is left to be understood, either the first day of June, or the last day of August, which is a still greater difference than the former expression. I will assert what I can prove, that I arrived in Paris the 11th of June, and that besides receiving a letter from me himself in the month of May, he was personally told by my brother, Arthur Lee, by my desire, in the beginning of May, that I would come over as soon as possible to execute my appointment, and so far from waiting in Paris for my brother’s return from Berlin, I waited, by the express advice of Dr Franklin and Mr Deane, until the 31st of July, 1777, as their letter to me of that date will show, which was nine days after my brother’s return from Berlin to Paris.
The manner in which Mr Deane sent me the letter, informing me of my appointment, joined with what is now manifest, a formed design in him and Dr Franklin to make Mr Williams (nephew of the latter, and who now appears connected with the former in private mercantile business) commercial agent,[57] in opposition to the Secret Committee’s appointment, renders it evident that he expected either the interception of that letter or my answer would have subjected me to imprisonment and secured their plan. It is this disappointment that makes Mr Deane so outrageous against me, for not having committed so great an act of imprudence, situated as I was, as to be writing to him by the post upon such a subject. That this scheme of Mr Deane might be more effectual, notice of my appointment was circulated upon the Royal Exchange of London, before I received Mr Deane’s letter; and not long after, it was published in the newspapers in authentic letters written from Paris. Now, as Mr Deane acknowledges that he received a letter announcing my appointment, it must have been by him, that others were enabled to write and publish it to all the world, while my life, liberty, and property were at stake. It is hardly in charity to believe, that these were not the intended victims of Mr Deane’s conduct.
3dly. Mr. Deane says, “So far was he (meaning me) from ever executing, or publicly attempting to execute that agency, until after the news of General Burgoyne’s defeat had arrived in France, that he did nothing that ever I heard of, which could have prevented his returning to the exercise of his Aldermanship in London.”
If anything could astonish me, that comes from Mr Deane, surely here is abundant matter for astonishment. He had just before, from under his own hand, on the very same paper, acknowledged my having attempted to exercise that appointment, in the joint letter from Mr Thomas Morris and myself as commercial agents to himself and Dr Franklin, in August, 1777, which he calls severe, but which I aver is a very civil one, and that it does not contain a single harsh or offensive expression. He acknowledges, also, the conference I had with all the Commissioners in France in October, on the subject of the commercial business, when Mr Izard was present. He knew, also, that I had received a cargo publicly at Nantes, belonging to Congress, by the Abigail, Captain Jenne, which vessel was loaded again by me, and despatched back for America in three weeks, while other American vessels, of no greater size or importance, were detained at Nantes from two to three months. He knew, also, or ought to have known, that I had written a letter addressed to all the Commissioners, Dr Franklin, Mr Deane, and Mr Arthur Lee, on the 10th of November, 1777, which was delivered to Dr Franklin as eldest Commissioner the same day, wherein I requested a copy of the treaties, that had been proposed to the Courts of France and Spain, agreeably to my instructions from Congress, that I might not, as a Commissioner of Congress, propose anything repugnant thereto to the Courts of Vienna and Berlin. After these things, and a continued series of operations in the public service, (all of which Mr Deane was acquainted with) from the time I was permitted to act by himself and Dr Franklin, until the 4th of December, when the news of General Burgoyne’s defeat arrived at Paris, with what face could Mr Deane make such an assertion as he has done? Most of these things also being of public notoriety, and capable of being proved by a multitude of witnesses, can any one suppose Mr Deane so totally ignorant of the laws of England, as to imagine he could think I might return “to the exercise of my Aldermanship in London,” without being a madman desirous of hanging myself?
This gentleman attempts to excuse himself and Dr Franklin, for not answering the joint letter of Mr Morris and myself to them, by laying the blame on Mr Arthur Lee, not a syllable of which was mentioned at the conference I had in October, 1777, at Passy with the Commissioners, when Mr Izard was present, and which Mr Lee has answered himself; but he omits to say why my several letters from Nantes, as commercial agent on public business to the Commissioners, were not answered, and of which I not only complained at the conference but since. In order to invalidate what Mr Izard has written, he totally mistakes the purport of the letter, in which Mr Izard complains of Dr Franklin’s and Mr Deane’s refusing to write. This letter, as desired by me, was a general one to all captains and others, informing them that I was a Commercial Agent of the Secret Committee of Congress, and that in consequence, they ought to follow my directions and orders in all matters relative to the commercial business of the Committee.
So far from my proposing the suspension of Mr Morris, I never thought that the Commissioners had the least shadow of authority to do it. It is certain, that Mr Deane not only proposed the suspension of Mr Morris at this conference, but at several other times. As a confirmation of this assertion, I beg leave to give the following extract of Mr Deane’s letter to me, dated, “Passy, December 18th, 1777. My advice before your appointment (as was well known) was to supersede Mr Morris, and appoint another until the pleasure of Congress should be known; I was always of the same opinion after your appointment, that you ought to conduct the business alone; these are well known to have been my uniform sentiments.”
Mr Deane labors much to throw an odium on me, as wishing to monopolise to myself the places both of honor and profit. Probably, from the weakness of his memory he forgot, that in the commencement of his address to the public, he states, that before September, 1776, he “had the honor to be the Commercial and Political Agent of America in Europe.” He also forgets, that the first cause of any difference between us was his usurping the exercise of the Commercial Agency, to which Mr Morris and myself were appointed by the Secret Committee, while he was not only one of the Commissioners to the Court of Versailles particularly, but generally authorised to treat with every power in Europe; the influence and patronage of which very expensive commission, he was perpetually endeavoring to retain entirely to himself. He also seems to be ignorant of what I suppose is known to most people in Philadelphia, that his “venerable friend,” as he calls him, Dr Franklin, is at this moment not only sole Minister Plenipotentiary to the Court of Versailles, but also in fact sole superintending Commercial Agent in all Europe.