Wherever I am, the honor and interest of the United States shall be my great and greatest concern.
I have the honor to be, &c.
TO THE SECRETARY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
London, March 15th, 1783.
Sir,
My last is dated Paris, 9th of January. The original and three copies were, for conveyance, divided between Nantes and L’Orient. Five weeks use of the waters at Bath had so far recovered my health, as to induce me to come to London about eighteen days ago, in order to avail myself of opportunities for urging a definitive treaty between Great Britain and the United States, as well as the necessity for removing the British troops from New York. I have signified my opinion to the proper persons, that, until the latter is effected, America will not deem herself at peace. Wise and good men feel the impression, acknowledge the propriety of my observations, and while there was a government by a ministry, that point was attended to. But for some days past, the great struggle has been, who should be the persons to form a new administration. In the mean time, the momentous business in which we are concerned lies dormant, nor do I know where to apply for putting it in motion. The House of Commons had indeed introduced a bill for a “Provisional establishment, and regulation of trade and intercourse between the subjects of Great Britain and those of the United States of North America.” A printed copy was put into my hands, and my opinion asked by many members of that House. I objected generally to opening trade merely by act of Parliament, and especially to certain parts of the bill, but above all to an intercourse, until the citizens of New York shall be left in quiet and complete possession of their whole country, and all hostile troops withdrawn from the United States. That bill I am informed is annihilated and another projected. A copy of the new bill I am to receive tomorrow. I persevere in the same language; be the bill what it may, however suitable to the services of Great Britain, or speciously conducive to the mutual interests of Great Britain and America, I think there cannot be, I hope there will not be permitted on our part, any intercourse until the troops are effectually removed.
Why is not the definitive treaty concluded, and the important “Then” established, or why are not measures adopted for withdrawing the troops? Are the troops to be continued there in terrorem, to force a trade, or to compel us to measures respecting the people called loyalists? The late First Lord of the Treasury has not failed to boast of his success, in obtaining the provisional treaty without the participation or the concurrence of the Court of France, nor to talk of the happy effects which he hoped to derive from so great an advantage. I have endeavored to counteract his Lordship’s virtuous designs, by observing that, admitting the fact, which I did not admit, the consequence might be disgraceful, possibly fatal, to the American ministers, but could work no injury to the United States. This appears at present to have the effect I wished for. Had his Lordship, who I believe is very angry with us, continued in office, I know not what evils might have attended us. To his influence I ascribe the delay of the definitive treaty, and consequently of the removal of the troops.
I am not backward, upon every proper occasion, to signify my apprehensions to active members of Parliament, and to every man in government, with whom I converse upon these subjects. You will perceive, Sir, that I find some employment here; were I in France, I should be totally idle. I shall remain in London about a fortnight longer. If at the end of that time, there shall be no better prospect of a definitive treaty, I shall immediately take measures for embarkation to America.