THE REVOLUTIONARY CAREER OF SILAS DEANE

B!
Coy Hilton James

A T338128
Submitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of
Michigan State Univereity of Agriculture and
Applied Science in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Depertnent or Bietory

1956 \K K ‘ “k

ACKNOWLFDGHENT

The author wishes to express his sincere
thsnks to Dr. Pobert Brown, under whose
inspiration, constant supervision, and
unfailing interest this investigation

was undertaken.

THE REVOLUTIONARI CAREER OP SILAB DEAN!

B!
Coy Hilton James

AN ABSTRACT
Submitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of
Michigan State university of Agriculture and
‘Applied Science in partial fulfillment of
the requdrements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of History
1956
Approved

 

JBmGB. Coy Hilton

The reputation of Silas Deane, America's first
diplomat, has been tarnished. Although he was charged
with treason and various other unsavory transactions, his
personal contribution went a long way toward determining
the outcome of the struggle for independence. All concede
him this place yet he paid a heavy price for his devotion
to the Revolutionary cause. His success aroused envy and
earned the hatred of some narrow-minded men who permitted
vindictiveness and personal Jealousies to blind a normal
sense of decency.

From the beginning of the struggle with England Deane

was a prominent figure. In the legislature of Connecticut
and the Continental Congress he stood out as a champion of
colonial rights and later accepted a mission to France with-
out hesitation. Arriving in France in July of 1776 without
friends, influence, or funds, he secured supplies which en-
abled the American forces to win the battle of Saratoga.
In December of 1776 BenJamin Franklin and Arthur Lee Joined
him in a Commission to negotiate a treaty with France. This
was accomplished Just before Deane was recalled by Congress
to report on American affairs in Europe.

Deane's recall marked a turning point in his
Revolutionary career. Instead of a report, Congress demanded
a financial accounting for which Deane was not prepared.

From France Arthur Lee accused Deans of malfeasance

p. 2 ' James, Coy Hilton

of office. In the war of words that followed Congress
postponed a final decision by discharging Deane. He re-
turned to France under the impression that an auditor
would be appointed to settle his accounts.

When Deane returned to France for the second time
his primary purpose was to re-coup his personal finances.
Unfortunately his commercial enterprises failed and Con—
gress refused to appoint an auditor to settle his accounts.
Disgusted with Congress and disappointed by French apathy,
Deane wrote a number of critical letters to America. Some
of these letters were intercepted and published in the Tory
press. At first they were assumed to be forgeries, but
Deane later admitted writing them, and his enemies charged
treason. The public accepted the charge.

when the war ended Deane went to England where he
hoped to secure capital to re-enter trade. His enemies
accused him of associating with Benedict Arnold and other
pro-British.Amerieans and held him responsible for the un—
popular commercial clauses of the Treaty of 1783. During
the years that Deane lived in England only the generosity
of his friends saved him from dire poverty and from becom—
ing an object of charity. After suffering many disappoint-
ments and worn out in body and mind, Deane decided to return
to the United States. He sailed for America in 1789 but
died some four hours out of port. The ship returned and

Deane was buried in England.

p. 3 James, Coy Hilton

Deane's death, like the last decade of his life, was
of little interest to the people of America. Today Silas
Deane sleeps in an unknown grave in England, but in 18h2
Congress admitted that a former audit was 'ex parte, erro-
neous, and a gross injustice to Silas Deane.“ Restitution
was made to his heirs, a restitution which should have
restored in some measure the reputation of Silas Deane.
This it failed to do. The present work, therefore, is an
attempt to place the career of Silas Deane in its proper
perspective. Deane undoubtedly was indiscreet at times
and made serious mistakes, but on the basis of the evidence
now available, it would not appear that he was guilty of

committing treason.

TABLE OF CCNTENTS

ACKNCWLEDGHENT

PREFACE

CHAPTERS:

I. EARLY LIFE

II. MISSION TO FRANCE

III. CCMNISEION

IV. WORK OF THE CCMKISCICN

V. RECALL

VI. DEANE AND CONGRESS

VII. SPCCND MISSION TO FRANCE

VIII. DEANE IN ENGLAND

BIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY

pp.

pp.

pp.

pp.

PD-

op.

pp.

pp-

1-22 s

23-60.

61-71.

72-125.

lPé—lbs.

lu6—18be

185—230.

PREFACE

Silas Deane's revolutionary career furnishes ample
proof for those who maintain that a republic often repays
service and self—sacrifice with insratitude. In 1776,
when Deane went to France on his first mission, he was a
well—to—do colonial merchant, hishly respected and finan—
cially independent in the colony of Connecticut. The
accomplishment of his mission to France meant the differ—
ence between the success and failure of the Revolution.
This is today acknowledged by all. His success aroused
the envy and earned the hatred of some well-meaning, but
narrow-minded men, who permitted vindictiveness, perhaps
prompted by personal jealousies, to blind a normal sense
of decency. As the object of political machinations Deane
misht have been able to emerge victorious but the unfor—
tunate publication of some private letters ended any possi-
bility of victory. In these letters, written to personal
friends, Deane criticized the conduct of the war by Con—
gress, doubted the wisdom of the French Alliance, and rec-
ommended careful consideration of the English offer of re—
conciliation. When the letters first appeared in the Tory
press it was felt that the letters were forgeries. However

when Deane admitted that they were authentic he immediately

was placed under a cloud of suspicion. He was branded a

traitor by his enemies. T

DJ
’1)
O
5‘
p
“S
(”Q
m
a:
13
m

never proved but
his name was placed and has remained as a consequence un-
der a dark cloud of suspicion. The fact that he was never
indicted or tried by a court seemed to make little differ~
ence. The fact that he had rendered an invaluable service
to the Revolution was overlooked. The accus_tion of de-
sertion in itself could not be foraiven by many of his
contemporaries.

For his services to the Revolution Deane paid a heavy
Brice personally. Thourh Consress owed him a substantial
sum of money, later acknowlsdsed and paid to his heirs
Deane himself died a pauper after sufferina dire want and
poverty for many years. Silas Deane, America's first
diplomat to France, died in isnominy and disgrace. How
did this occur? What forces bore upon this complex

situation to so poorly reward a deserving public servant?

“J

CHAPTER I
EARLY LIFE

or the early part of Silas Deane's life, little is known.
He was born December 2h, 1737, in Groton, Connecticut. Hie
father, Silas Deane, was a blacksmith. He had three sons
and a daughter. Likewise little can be ascertained from
available sources of his relations with his mother and father.
His correspondence with his brothers and sister, however,
would lead one to believe that the family was closely united.
Throughout the lives of Silas, Barnabas, Simone, and Hannah
their relations were friendly. All the brothers were mer-
chants in Connecticut and highly respected by their neigh-
bors. Hannah married Josiah Buck who was also a merchant in
Connecticut. When in later life Silas passed through the
trying years of the Revolution with aspersions on his stead-
fastness Barnabas, Simone, Josiah and Hannah Buck never
doubted his loyalty. They always believed that in time he
would prove his innocence of the charges brought against
him.1

1Dictionar of American Bio a h , Allen Johnson and
Dumas HEIone, 9%., 35 voIs. (neszorE,l930),V,173-75;
New En land Historical and Genealogical Register, October,
1395 III, 353; "The Deane Papers: Correspondence Between
Bdlas Deane His Brothers and Their Business and Political

.neeociates. 1771-1795,“ Collections of the Connecticut
Historical Societ , (Hartford,I§365, XXIII.

 

Deane's education led him first into a professional
life. He was graduated from Tale in 1758. This would in-
dicate that his parents possessed sufficient resources to
aid their children and that they had some ambitions for
them. For a few years after he had been graduated Deane
taught school by day and began the study of law at night.
In 1761 he was admitted to the Connecticut bar. The same
year he entered into law practice in Iethersfield, Connect-
icut, one of the three thriving commercial river towns of
the colony.2

Deane was not destined to limit his activities to the
practice of law alone but to enter commerce also. This
was probably occasioned by his first marriage. On October 8,
1763, he married Hehitabel Webb, the widow of Joseph Tabb,

a merchant. She was five years Deane's senior, had five
children, and owned a thriving general store. Deane threw
himself into her business and soon became recognised as a
man of enterprise, vigor and good Judgement. He engaged
in the west Indian trade and before long became well known
in colonial mercantile circles. Deane's fortune prospered.
In l76h he built a "substantial'' house. To this marriage,

one child, Jesse, was born. The family correspondence

2Henry Reed Stiles, Ancient Wethersfield 2 vols.
(new York,l90h), I, ”90-95.

\

at that time reveals that Deane's family enjoyed a better
than average standard of living. Theserenity of the family
was interrupted in 1767 by the death of his wife.

In accordance with the accepted custom of early re-
marriage, Deane soon married Elizabeth Baltonstall, daughter'
of Gordon Saltonstall of Norwich. This marriage intro-
duced him into wider social and political circles. The
second Mrs. Deane died when Deane was in France on his first
mission.

Deane's family relations seem to have been excellent.
As a husband Deane was a good provider. Letters show him
as most tender and affectionate with each of his wives. No
breath of scandal was ever to soil or stain the marital
side of his life. His relations with his children, however,
contain certain questions and omissions: certain procedures
or rather lack of procedures on his part came to be inter-
preted as deliberate intent to defraud. Another point of
view is that these seemingly questionable procedures were
simply the result of circumstances. The problem arises
from a settlement of the estate relating to his stepchildren.3
Upon his marriage to lbhitabel webb Deane had been appointed

3r§g;;; Latter; of gamue; Blgchley WebbE lzéh-lgoz,
Iorthington Chauncey Ford, ed. New Ibrk,l9 , pp. 13,

15-17 e

the legal guardian of the five Hebb children.“ Later all
these five were designated to share equally in his estate
with his own son.5 This would seem to indicate that Deane's
affection for them.was completely genuine.

with Samuel Blachley webb, his eldest stepson, a strong
bond of mutual affection and respect existed as long as Deane
lived. When young Webb entered upon a commercial enterprise
in 1773 Deane wrote him a long, warm letter full of fatherly'
advice and suggestions for conducting his business affairs
in an efficient manner.6 When Deane went to Congress in 177k
he was 'attended' by Samuel B. Webb, and after the battle
of Bunker Bill, be secured his stepson a position on washing-
ton's staff. This son later rose to the rank of a general
officer. In June of 1778 young Webb showed his reciprocal
affection by telling Barnabas Deane, his uncle: 'Hhen you
write our friend in France assure him of my warmest affection
for him, and the little boy [Jesse- the half brotheé].'7 This
mutual feeling of respect and affection never wavered through

hThe Public Records of the Colon - Connecticut :m

00 -o~r l 2 to ...__ , ~_ .ive .arles J. Hoadly,
ed. Hartford,l=87 , p. 2: .

5wobb. Family Letters, p. 259.

6Corres nde ce d Journa s f Bamue B ach e Iebb
Worthington Chauncey Ford, ed., 3 vols. New Ierk, 193 ,
I, 15.

7webb, 3551;; Lgtterg, pp. 71—72.

all the years of trouble and disgrace. Until the end, much
to the disgumt of his brothers, Samuel Blachley Webb refused
to embarrass Silas Deane by requesting a property settle-
ment of his father's estate despite the pressure from the rest
of the family.8

If Samuel B. Webb had an affectionate regard for his
stepfather, the same cannot be said of Jehn and Joseph webb
and John Simpson, the husband of Sara Webb, their sister.
As early as March of 1775, Simpson was writing Samuel B.
Webb: “I think that the conduct of Silas Deane is very ex-
traordinary and derogatory to the character he has always,
enjoyed."9 This reference is to Deane's failure to settle
the webb estate. Joseph Webb showed increasing irritation
through the years with Deane's lack of an aocouting.1°
Deane's letters evidence awareness of the active hostility
against him. More than once he expressed hurt and resent;
ment for what he felt was an unjustified and unnecessary
criticism.11 Because of his revolutionary activities Deane
failed to settle the estate prior to his first mission to
France and as he never returned to Wethersfield the estate

was never settled in his lifetime. When the family learned

8Webb, Correspgndence and qurnals, III, 1&5.

9iebb, Family Letters, p. 13
1°Ibid., pp. 289-91.

llIbid.. p. #11; Webb, Correspgndence and Jourggls, III, 28.

of his death Jehn Webb wrote: 'The scene with Silas Deane is
finished.'12 No charge was ever made that he was not a good
father, and to the end Deane wrote and spoke of the family
with great affection.

Whatever may have been Deane's later difficulties with
his stepchildren, by 1768 he had established himself in law,
in business, and in local politics. By this time he had
also become active in the local civic life of Wetherefield
and the political life of the Connecticut colony. In
Wethersfield Deane was one of the leading citizens. He en-
tered every phase of community life and consistently demon-
strated his interest in civic affairs. He was active in
and a generous contributor to the church.13 He was also in-
terested in the school and was instrumental in enlarging

the facilities and enriching the course of study.1n As

a mark of appreciation for his ability and civic leader-
ship his friends and neighbors elected him to serve as their
representative in the Colonial Assembly of Connecticut.

In fact he had become so politically minded that he had

closed out his personal mercantile accounts and retired

12Webb, Family Letters, p. #11.

lBStiles, Ancient Wethersfielg, I, 23n-35.

l},
1 Ibid., pp. 36h-66.

from active business life. His retirement was so complete
that his son-in-law later asked, “What has he done since
17689'15

When Deane entered the Genera1.Assembly in 1768 he soon
became both active and prominent in the legislative council
of the colony. Before the trouble with England claimed
Deane's entire attention, he was appointed by the Governor
of the colony to a Commission of Five to receive money 'to
be raised by lottery for erecting buoys and other monuments

on the Saybrook Bar. . . .‘16

In 177h he was appointed by
the Lower House of the General Assembly of the colony to
serve on a Joint Committee to consider a letter to the Earl
of Dartmoumh, British Secretary of State, complaining of

the 'dissension due to British aggression and the unlimited
power claimed by Parliament which.were driving the Americans*
to the border of despair.'17 This shows Deane's early con-
cern for proper treatment of the colonies. He was also a
member of a commission nominated by the Governor's Council

and approved by the General Assembly of Connecticut 'to
assist Governor Trumbull, in stating and taking proper steps

15Webb, Family Letters, p. 259.
16

Public Records of the Colgny 9f Connecticut From
October, 1222I to April, 1225, p. 9 .

17;p;g,, p. 1&0.

to preserve the claims of this colony to said Western Lands."18

This commission was empowered to assert Connecticut's claims
to certain lands along the Susquehanna River. In the werk of
this commission Deane earned the respect and commendation of
Governor Trumbull in "collecting and preparing all exhibits
and documents necessary to pursue and prosecute the claim and
title.'19 For such faithful and meritorious service Deane
was soon to be promoted to the national political scene.20
When the trouble with England emerged as the dominant
issue of colonial politics, Deane early proved himself an

ardent sympathizer with the growing resentment of the col-
onies against the British laws restricting the develop-

ment of American commerce. When the nonimportation agree-
ments were violated by the merchants of Newport. Connecticut
merchants declared a nonintercourse agreement against them.
Deane acted as the Connecticut clerk and as such signed
their Circular Letter of February 10, 1771.31 Again his zeal
for the colonial cause was revealed when the residents of
,Wethersfield passed a resolution of sympathy for Boston be-
cause of the suffering caused by the closing of the Port of

18mg... P. 161.
19

Ibid,, p. 217.
O
2 Ibid.. p. 219.

21Stiles, Ancient Wethersfield, I, #90.

Boston in retaliation for the Boston Tea Party. A committee
was appointed to receive contributions and forward them to
Boston. The name of Silas Deane was the first on the list.22
Deane was likewise Secretary of the Connecticut Committee of
Correspondence and, because of his energy and willingness,
was selected to represent the General Assembly of Connecticut
at the Continental Congress of 1774 with Judge Roger Sherman
and Colonel Eliphalet Dyer.23

When Deane first left Wethersfield for Congress on
August 22, 177b, he was thirty-four years old. He enjoyed
a wide acquaintance with the leading men of his own colony
and in the neighboring colonies. A large number of the prin-
cipal citizens of the town escorted him to Hiddletown on
his departure. At New Haven, Deans and his party were Joined
by Colonel Dyer and at Fairfield by Judge shaman.”

At Philadelphia, Deane was anxious to meet and Judge
the temper and caliber of his fellow delegates to Congress.
The first night he dined with some delegates from Boston

and two from South Carolina--many, like himself, gentlemen

22"Correspondence of Silas Deane, Delegate to the
First and Second Congress at Philadelphia,‘I C21%ectigng 9f

the Connecticut Histgricgl Society (Hartford, 1 79 ,
11,135-3.

23American Archives Peter Force, ed., hth ser.,

6 vols. (Washington, 133 -18h6), I, 895.

24

John Adams, The W rks f J'hn d s Charles Francis
Adams, ed., 10 vols. (Boston, 1350-33§, E1, 145.

10

in the mercantile business. “The glass had circulated Just
long enough to raise the spirits of everyone to that nice
point which is Just above disguise or suspicion,‘I Deane
wrote. 'Of consequence I saw that it was an excellent op-
portunity to know their real situation.'25 Deane was pleased
with the delegates from.Virginia and the other southern states.
”They appear,' he confided to his wife, ”like men of impor-
tance- sociable, sensible, and spirited men.‘ As a patriot
he spoke of the 'prospects of unanimity,’ as a statesman he
recognized the 'arduous task before us,I and as a politician
he noted: 'The more I converse in the city the more I see
and lament the virulence of party.‘ So it was with open eyes
that Deane prophesied the future greatness of Congress and
publicly declared himself a secessionist. As a nationalist
Deane recognized the supreme authority of Congress in the
affairs of the united Colonies. He declared: "The Congress
is the greatest and most important assembly ever held in
America. . . . All America is entrusted to it and depends
upon it. . . . The resolutions of Congress shall be the laws
of the Medea and the Persians."26 If Deane proved a poor
prophet he, at least, placed himself on record as a strong
advocate of the union.

25cc necticut Hist ric Co lecti n II. 145-

2altdmund C. Burnett, The Continental Congress
(New York, 1991), p. 2“.

11

During the interlude between the meetings of the Con-
tinental Congress of 177k and 1775, Deane showed himself
busily occupied with forwarding the revolutionary cause. To
Ebenezer Watson, editor of the Courant, he publicly stated
his attitude regarding independence: 'There is no alterna-
tive except submit or prepare to resist even unto blood.'27
Before the re-assembling of the Congress in 1775 Deane added
to his reputation as a revolutionist. He not only signed a
promissory note to help pay the cost of the expedition a-
gainst Ticonderoga but shared in the stragetic plans for the
expedition.28 The attempt and capture of Ticonderoga was
not an act of bravado but a cold and calculated military
move. It was fortunate because it was the captured cannon
from Ticonderoga that later forced the British to evacuate
Boston. For his share in this success Silas Deane deserved
well of his country-men. For a time he was nicknamed for
the fort whose capture he had helped plan and underwrite.29
Between sessions of the Continental Congress, Deane also
wrote an agreement which was signed by one hundred young
men who volunteered for the ”Lexington Alarm“ of 1775.

27Webb, Correspgndence and Journals. 1, 30-32.
28The Public Records of the State of Connecticut,

From October 3 t februar 1 5, Charles J. Hoadly,
ed. (firtford, 1E9“, p. 29?.

29annecticgt Historicgl Collections, II, 266.

12

In this they pledged their services and also pledged to
refrain from drunkenness, gaming and profanity.30

Deane retained the affection and respect of his constit-
uents. This is shown by his re-slection to the General As-
sembly and his continued re-appointment as a Justice of the
Peace in Wethersfield.31 Such were the feelings of his fellow
townsmen in 1776 even though later he was to fall a victim
of local politics in the state legislature.

When the Second Continental Congress met, Deane became
activelyengaged in the committee work of the Congress. The
lines of division between revolutionists and loyalists were
more sharply drawn than in the previous session. The de-
termination to resist the mother country and her policies
was by no means unanimous. Some members of the Congress de-
bated with themselves, but Deane demonstrated his attitude
by his committee work rather than by words on the floor of
the Congress. With George Washington, Colonel Philip
Schuyler of New York, and others he was appointed to con-
sider means of procuring military supplies for the col-
onies,32 and together with Washington to estimate the cost of
equipping an army.33 He helped formulate the rules of the

BOStiles, lnclent Wethersfield, I, #95; Connecticut
Histgrical Collectiqgg, II, 215.

31Public Records of Connecticut, 1776-1778, pp. no.223.

 

32Journals of the Continental Congress, Worthington
Chauncey Ford, ed., 35 vols. (Washington,*l905-37), II, 6?.

331b1d., P. 102.

 

13

navy and on October 15, 1775, selected and purchased the first
vessel for the newly created navy.3u On September 18, 1775,

he was appointed a member of the Committee of Secrecy to pur—
35

chase arms and ammunition in Europe. With George Washing-

ton again he served on still another committee to draft rules
and regulations for the army.36 With John Adams and Benjamin
Franklin he was appointed to make an inquiry, during the next
recess of Congress, about virgin lead and leaden ore, and

37

the best means of refining this mineral. As a member of

the Committee of Nine, he was appointed to consider the im—
portation of 500 tons of powder and saltpetre and sulphur,
no brass cannon, 20,000 musket locks, and 10,000 stands of
38

He was also appointed to a committee to con-
39

good arms.
sider the means of supplying the army with provisions.
These assignments certainly attest to willingness to serve
and his prominence in congressional affairs at this time.
Wercantile experience gave Deane the background for-
definite opinions regarding the commercial policies intro—

3";_t_>lg., III, 020.
35M” p. I#70.
36%, II, 122.
37;;;g,. p. 23h.
38;p;g,, III, #71.
39lplg,. pp. 257-58

1h

duced for discussion in Congress. When the “State of Trade'
was debated Deans declared, 'We must have trade; I think we
ought to apply abroad; we must have powder and goods: we

ho Such words meant

can't keep our people easy without it.I
that he favored opening American ports to foreign ships.
This had not been permitted under the English Navigation
Acts, and his statement that 'we ought to apply abroad“
could only mean that foreign aid should be sought.

In a letter to his wife Deane summed up his own atti-
tude in regard to his activities in Congress: '. . . This
morning, Colonel Schuyler and I rode as far as the falls
at Schuylkill; our ride was to consult a plan we are form-
ing for another bold stroke like that of Ticonderoga (which
is become my nickname at times). People here, members of
Congress and others, have unhappily thought as a schemer;
this has brought me rather more than my share of business in
a committee way . . s . I find however, that he that has
least to do in public affairs stand the fairest chance of
happiness.'h1 Deane assured his wife: "We meet at nine and
sit until three, which leaves us little time for other act-
ivities."“2 This would assume his complete engrossment with

the affairs at hand.

"°;bid., p. #92.
“1'rhe Deane Papers,“ Collections of the New York
Historical Society, 5 vols. (New York, 1536:1390}, I, 61.

nzggnnegticut Historical Cgllectiggg, II, 255.312.

15

There is ample evidence that a certain amount of sec-
tional and group interest existed in Congress, but seeming—
ly Deans failed to arouse the resentment of any member or
members of Congress, with the possible exception of Samuel
Adams who later was to recall that he had always been susé
picious of Deane.’43 However, Deane soon did fail for re-
election for Congress by the General Assembly of Connecticut.
The reason for this failure is not clear, but Governor
Trumbull, in a letter to Deane, attributed it to the malice
and envy of freeman. “We have a strange people here as
well as elsewhere,I he wrote, 'who say, 'It is dangeroum to
trust so great a power as you.now have for a long time in the
hands of one set of men, lest they grow too self-important,
and [cause] a great deal of mischief in the end."M

Deane was hurt by the news that he had not been return-
ed to Congress. He felt that his recall was a censure on
his conduct and considered returning to Connecticut and de-
manding a public 1nvestigation.n5 But this he never did.

To his wife he expressed no bitterness, regret, or self-
pity but perhaps a tinge of self-righteousness. 'Hy prin-
ciples are (the eye of God knows them, and the most envious
eye of man or the bitterest tongue of slander cannot find

u38amue1 Adams, The Writing; of Samuel Adams, Harry A.
Cushing, ed., h vols.‘TNew York, 1905;B77-I77_3§7

“Mr-k HistorichCollectlcnaL I, 86—88.

uSConnecticut Histgrical Collections, II, 339-h0.

16

anything in my political conduct to contradict them) to sac-
rifice all lesser considerations to the service of the whole,
and in this tempestuous season to throw cheerfully overboard
private fortune, private emolument, even my life--if the ship,
with the Jewel of liberty, may be safe. This being my line
of conduct, I have calmness of mind which more than balances

my external troubles, of which I have not a few.”6

If action
speaks louder than words Deane placed the colonial cause a-
bove self-interest, for in spite of his failure to be re-
elected he continued to serve.

One of the last acts of the Naval Committee of the Sec-
ond Continental Congress was to direct Deane to go at once to
New York, buy a ship to carry twenty nine-pounders, and a
sloop of ten guns, fit them out and send them through the
sound to New London for seamen and arms. Deane reported to
his wife that 'Colonsl Dyer pleaded, scolded, fretted, even
threatened me to set out for home with him,“ but Deane de-
cided to remain and help with the naval preparation. Having
selected his “line of conduct'I he was determined to follow
it.“7

When Richard Henry Lee of Virginia introduced his famous
resolution for independence of June 6, 1776, three avenues

of resistance procedures were presented to the Congress. A1-

béIbid.. PP. 289—90.
u7Ib1des PP. 349—50.

17

though all were interrelated, each could be pursued independ-
ently. He recommended working toward independence, foreign
aid and alliances, and the opening of ports to foreign (non-
British) commerce.“8
The decision to seek foreign aid was agonizing for the
colonists. The decision to declare for independence had been
disruptive to their inherent loyalty. This further step
seemed equally so. Some thought it would destroy all hope
for reconcilation with the mother country, others thought it
disgraceful, and a small minority felt it unnecessary. It
took time and debate to make the decision to appoint a com-
mittee of five 'for the sole purpose of corresponding with
our friends in Great Britain, Ireland, and other parts of
the world."49
A significant feature of this committee was its power
to act on its own initiative. The only restriction was that
the committee should lay its correspondence before Congress
when so directed. Without stipulating any restraints Con-
gress pledged itself to pay the committee's expenses. This
included the payment of any agents that the committee might
find it useful to employ. A sum of money was placed at the
<disposa1 of the committee. Its members were BenJamin Franklin,

BenJamin Harrison, Thomas Johnson, John Dickinson, and John

“BJournals of Congress, V, #25.
“91bid,

18

J'ay.5o Two months later Robert Horris was added. Called
first the Committee of Correspondence, the word “secret“

was soon added and it was designated the Committee of Secret
Correspondence until April 17, 1777, when Congress resolved
that “for the future, it be styled the Committee For Foreign
Affairs.“ This was actually the beginning of the Department
of State.

To probe sentiment abroad and obtain other information
useful in the coming struggle, the Committee of Secret Cor-
respondence took a significant step toward foreign aid on
December 13, 1775. It then made a specific request to Arthur
Lee in London to learn the disposition of foreign powers to-
ward the Americans. At the same time it warned him that
“great circumspection and impenetrable secrecy“ were essen-
tial.51

The country to which Congress naturally looked for help
was trance, the established rival of Great Britian. Through

5°The first committee created by Congress, with broadly
defined authority, was the Secret Committee. On July 5, 1776
it was renamed the Committee of Commerce. It had powers to
let contracts for the importation of powder and munitions,
and on October 6, 1776, was impowered to export produce in
payment for its purchases. The membership of the two com-

mittees, the Committee of Commerce and the Secret Committee
of Correspondence, was almost identical and some confusion

resulted. Stour h, Gerald, BenJamin Franklin and America;
Egreign Pollly. Chicago, 195 , pp. 11 27.

51The Revolutionary Diplomatic Corres ondence f the
United States, Francis Wharton, ed., 6'vo1s. (Washington,

1889), II, 63.

 

 

19

a Frenchman, named Bonvouloir, “a traveler out of curiosity“
who strongly denied any official status, the Committee learn-
ed that the French government would probably not put any ob-
stacles in their way if they desired to obtain in France
supplies of which the colonies were in so urgent need.52
Early in January of 1776 two Frenchmen, Peney and Pliarne,
after having approached General Washington, appeared in
Philadelphia and entered into negotiations with the Committee
to supply munitions of war and other goods, hinting that the
French government would not be opposed to such commercial

activities.53

The Committee of Secret Correspondence and
the Secret Committee both felt that the time had come to
approach France directly and to see if supplies could be
obtained.

The man selected by the Committee of Secret Correspond-
ence for this delicate task was Silas Deane, “lame duck“ from
Connecticut. Why he was selected may be deduced from the
fact that he had worked with the members of this committee
on many other committee assignments, and they felt that he
knew the needs of the country and especially those of the
army and the navy. As he was available and willing to go,
this fact may also have entered into the decision to select

52Jbsephine F. Pancheco, French_lgents In America,

Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. university of Chicago,1950.
53Burnett, The Continental Congress, p. 192.

20

him. Deane immediately accepted the commission. This does
not necessarily mean that he was unaware of the difficulties
he faced and the sacrifices he must make. His wife was in
poor health, his son, Jesse, was at a tender age, and Deane
had been away from home for a long time. In a letter to his
wife he admitted that he knew he was needed at home: “I can
but feel for the pain I must give you by this adventure, but
on all occasions you.will have this satisfaction, that let
what will happen, you have in every situation discharged your
duty as one of the best partners and wives, while on my part,
by a peculiar fatality attending me from my first entrance
into public life, I have ever been involved in one scheme and
adventure after another, so as to keep my mind in constant
agitation and my attention fixed on other objects than my own
immediate interests.'5h

By the terms of his agreement with the second committee,
the Commerce Committee, Deane was authorized to export from
France certain articles suitable for the Indians. He was
given specific instructions as to the variety and quality
of merchandise he was to but. 'He was also to receive a clear
commission of five percent on the original cost of such re;
mittances in Europe. The United Colonies were to bear the
full cost, including insurance, and the risk of capture at

sea. The agreement was signed by the entire committee.55

suConnecticgt Higtorlpal Collections, II, 362.

55New York Hlstorical Collections, I, 116.

21

At the same time he was commissioned by the Secret Com-
mittee of Correspondence to “go to France, there to transact
such business, commercial and political, as we have committed
to his care, in behalf and by authority of the Congress of
the Thirteen United Colonies.“56 Such were the terms of
Deane's contracts.

Before leaving, Deane obtained from the committees
58

contracts, instructions,57 letters of introduction, and
a “Character Testimonial“ which was signed by all the mem-
bers in town exCept Bartlett of New Hampshire, the Adamses
and Ward.“59 It seems that this would refute definitely any
suggestions by his enemies that he had slipped out of the
country without the knowledge of Congress. Deane wrote his
wife: “And now, by Dear, are not the ways of providence dark
and inscrutable to us shortsighted mortals. Surely they are.
My enemies thou't to triumph over me and bring me down, yet
all they did has been turned to the opening a door for the
greatest and most extensive usefulness, if I succeed; but

if I fail,--why then the Cause I am engaged in, and the im-
portant part I have undertaken, will justify my adventuring.“6°

561b1d., p. 119

57Wharton, Diplgmatic Correspondence, II, 78.
58New York Historical Collections, 1, 127.
59Ccnnecticut Historical Collections, II, 360.

6°Ibid., p. 363.

22

By order of the President of the Continental Congress
he was assigned an official guard of twenty trOOpers under
a proper officer to escort him to the Capes-«his point of
departure.61 Such was the civic and political background of
Silas Deane, merchant of Connecticut, and his entrance upon
the scene of international politics and the beginning of his

great contribution to the Revolution.

61Force, American Archives, hth ser., V, 77b.

CHAPTFR II
MISSION TO FRAKCE: AGENT OF THE COMMITTEE

Deane's mission to France falls into two parts. Dur-
ing the first phase, from July, 1776, until December, 1776,
Deane was the sole representative of the Committee of Secret
Correspondence and served both as a diplomatic and a com-
mercial agent. Later, from December of 1776 until his re-
call, Deane, Franklin, and Arthur Lee formed a commission
authorized by Congress with a Joint responsibility to negoti-
ate an alliance with France.

Deane's instructions were contained in a letter from
the Secret Committee of Correspondence of Harch 3, 1776.. He
then sailed for France in March of 1776 going first to the
Bermudas and entering the Continent by the way of Spain.
This was to reduce the danger of being captured by an English
man-of-war. He made his way over the Pyrenees, visited
several French cities and arrived in Paris in July. He was
to pose as a merchant buying goods for the Indian trade.

He was also, if possible, to secure supplies from the French
government and to promote an alliance. In addition he was
to defend the colonies against all 'calumnics,“ contact
C.U.F. Dumas, a colonial agent in Holland, arrange a meeting
with Dr. Edward Bancroft of London, and correspond with Mr.

Arthur Lee, an agent of the colonies in London.1

1Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 78-79.

2h

Deane entered upon his mission with caution and some
embarrassment. He did not know the language or the customs
of the land and, especially, was he ignorant of the etiquette
of the trench Court. For a 'merchant from Connecticut“ to
be received by the French Ministers was more than he dared
expect. In fact, he was warned in his instructions that the
French Court might not like it to be publicly known that any
agent of the colonies was in the country. Monsieur 1e Boy,
at the Louwre, and Monsieur Barbeu du Bourg, he was told,

”will introduce you to the friends of America."2

Deane's arrival in Paris introduced him into a new
mode of life. Be at first stayed in a very ordinary hotel
and attempted to make himself inconspicuous by frequently
changing his lodging place. His manner and mode of living
were dictated partly by his limited finances. Throughout
the first phase of his mission Deane was never free from
financial worries. Ample evidence of this is to be found
in both his private correspondence and official reports to
the Committee of Secret Correspondence. On August 18, 1776,
Deane wrote the Committee of Secret Correspondence: ''1 mumt
again remind you of my situation here. The bills designed
for my use are protested, and expenses rising fast in
consequence of the business on my hands, which I may on no

account neglect, and a small douceur, though I have been

2Ibid., II, 79.

sparing in that way, is sometimes of the utmost importance.
The ouantity of stores to be shipped will amount to a large
sum; the very charge of them will be great, for which I am
the only responsible person."3 To C.W.F. Dumas, the colonial
agent in Holland, he depicted himself " . . . as a private
gentleman; as such I am in Paris, and that character I shall
keep, unless obliged to alter it. Parade and pomp have no
charms in the eyes of a patriot, or even a man of common
sense; but at the same time, I can never submit to the chang-
ing of my name, unless I am convinced that so humiliating a
step will promote the service of my country."u
Deane was warned and was very conscious of being
surrounded by British agents, and he knew every word uttered
would be reported in most unpleasant lisht to the French
Ministers. "My arrival here, my name, my lodging, and many
other particulars have been reported to the British adminis-
tration . . . the city swarms with Englishmen, and as money
purchases everything in this country, I have had, and still
have, a most difficult task to avoid their machinations.
Not a coffee-house or theater or other place or public
diversion but swarms with their emissaries . . . "5 To

prevent any embarrassing incidents Deane determined to avoid

31hid., II, 12a.
“Ibid., p. 128.
51hid., p. 123.

26

meeting any English-speaking people in public. This caused
Beaumarchais to remark: I'If M. Deane does not open his
mouth before the English speaking people helmeets, he must
be the most silent man in Paris for I defy him to say six
consecumive words in hench.‘6

In Paris Deane was warmly received. After his arrival
he lost no time in presenting his letter of introduction to
I. du Bourg, an influential scientist and friend of Benjamin
Franklin. I. du Bourg, upon Deane's insistence, arranged
an interview for him with H. de Vergennes, Minister of
Foreign Affairs. The interview was secret and was coup
ducted through an interpreter. For two hours Vergennes
sought to learn about the colonies and Deane sought to learn
the possibilities of French aid and how the contemplated
American Declaration of Independence would be received in
Europe. Vergennes was careful to point out that any
official aid given by France could disturb friendly rela-
tions with England. But at the same time he assured Deane
that as a private citizen he was free to carry on any kind
of commerce in the kingdom. Vergennes also remarked that
the French army had recently adopted a number of new
weapons and that the old models still remained in the arse-
nals. Deane was told that he should consider himself under

fiwwmmw

chiv of Euro -1 Benjamin Frankl n Stevens,

ed., vols. London, 1 9O , #889.

27

the protection of the French Court, and, though he would
not be officially recognized, he could always reach H. de
Vergennes through M. Gerard, head of the political section
of the French Foreign Office. As the interview ended Ver-
gennes assured Deane I'that the people and their cause are
very respectable in the eyes of disinterested persons.“7
Deane was pleased, and he had just cause to feel that he
and the cause he represented had been well received.

Little did Deane know or realize that since 1763
France had been expecting and preparing for such an agent
as he. In 1763 the Due de Choiseul, Minister of Foreign
Affairs, “scarcely before the ink was dry on the pen“8 had
originated the policy of preparing for the next round in
the Anglo-French struggle. The files of the French Foreign
Office already contained maps of the coast of England with
designated landing areas, and through the years a variety
of French agents had felt and reported the temper of English-
men in north America.9 Also the army and especially the navy
had been systematically enlarged.10 Perhaps the time had

7Iharton, Diplomatic Cgrrespgndsnce, II, 116.

8James Rockford to Lord Shelburne, January 7, 1767,
Shelburne Papers, vol. 38: 9h, Clements Library.

9Pacheco, Fgench.Agents in America, p. #5; James Brock
Perkins France in the American Revolution (New York, 1911),
p. #5, £8, 55, 62; Edwin S. Corwin, F ench Po ic nd th
American Alliance of IZZB, (Princeton, 1916,, p. 73-5.

10new gateriglg For the Histogg of the American Revglup
tign, John Duran, ed. New York, 1 9 , pp. 32-33.

 

28

come to re-open the struggle -- that was a decision that must
be made by the ministers of France.

In 1776 the form of the despotic government of Louis
XIV remained, but where Louis XIV had dominated his minis;
ters, Louis XVI was dominated by his ministers. Louis XVI
wished to serve France and considered its interests as
primary but in the end was unable or unwilling to resist
the proeAmerioan views of his three principal advisers. They
were Comte de Haurepas,11 the King's principal adviser, an
astute political observer; H. Sartine, linister of Marine,
an able administrator; and Comte de Vergennes, Minister of
Foreign Affairs, heir to Chciseul's policy of revenge and
strong man of the government. H. Turgot, Controler of the
Treasury, opposed any war because of the strain it would
place on the French treasury. Turgot, had he remained,
might have been ablt to influence Louis XVI from war, but
his resignation in May of 1776 removed the last barrier to
the pro-American policy; French intervention was only a
question of “how“ and “when!. The question of “when" forced
the French to adapt a policy of “watchful waiting,“ and the
final decision was made when Vergennes felt that the tide of
battle had definitely turned in favor of the Americans. The
answer to the “how“ was supplied by a most extraordinary

person, M. Caron Beaumarchais.

11‘lladame Campan rice sur a vie ivee Marie
Antogettc, 3 vols. {PaflrflTW—Wis, l 22 , , o.

 

. I t
a . n. t \o it.
\ N .

a. . . .. . .
. . e u
.
L Q t _
I . k v .
. , . a
9. . r
. .. . .
s t
\ . .

i . i . Al
. . c He. \
.q. a \

.. .. .

. s \ .- \ not
. e . f

t. . .34

u I e .
l t . ‘
. r
L
. i
. . \ 1
. .
a! .
4 fl
1 \ v e- . be
\
. .
. .
IQ. . a
. o . . .
. v I m
I e A
a . ,
.
. .
.6
n
. O
O
. . l.
e - -- r
.
O
o .
I

29

The relationship between H. Vergennes, Minister of
Foreign Affairs, and M. Beaumarchais is a study in contrast;
ing personalities working for a common goal. In 1776 H. de
Vsrgennes was fifty-four years old. He had been trained
from his youth in diplomacy and had served his apprentice-
ship in the principal courts of Europe. Grave, laborious,
and methodical in manner, he could keep his own counsel
until the time for action arrived. From the first he seems
to have wished the Americans well if only in order to humble
England, but he was determined to take no rash step that
would embarrass France without the possibility of realizing
French objectives. His political morals were certainly not
inferior to those of the average diplomat of his day. It
is a known fact that he was not above employing spies among
his friends as well as among his enemies. It is questionable
whether much transpired which was not known to him. The
fact that he left office as a man of moderate means would
suggest that he had been scrupulously honest as far as
handling state finances was concerned. That he could and
did deliberately deceive Lord Stormont, the British Amp
bassador, was considered a legitimate rule of statecraft.12

An early enthusiastic and vociferioum convert to the

American cause was M. Caron Beaumarchais, self-styled

12Adams, Works I, 229; Perkins, France In the Americ
Revolgtion, pp. 51; Corwin, Frepch Policy and the American
W pp. 3-9. sit-60.

30

“Vatchmsker of the King,“ unsalaried music teacher of the
King's daughters, Controller of the pantry, Secretary of
the King (by right of purchase), author of the popular drama
Lg_ggriage gg_Figaro, husband of a rich widow, and a man
trusted by two kings on missions so delicate that they could
not be handled through the regular diplomatic channels.13

It was in London while on a “delicate mission“ that
Beaumarchais met Arthur Lee, agent of the colonies, at the
home of John Wilkes, the well known English radical. There
is little doubt that Beaumarchais, whether from over-en-
thusiasm or some other design, promised Lee five million
livres worth or arms and ammunition for the American cause,
but there is positive proof that he was not authorized to
commit the French government to one sou. with all the meal
he possessed, Beaumarchais launched a one man crusade to
win official French support for the American cause. He
bombarded Vergennes and the King with long memorials
showing that it was to the advantage of France to support
the cause of the rebels.11+ The proof of Vergenne's approval
is adequately expressed in his gesture of forwarding to the
king Beaumarchais' suggestions and recommendations for

official aid to the revolting colonies. It was Beaumarchais
13Charles J. Stills, Beaumarchais and “the ggst Million",
(Fhiladelphia, 1890); Laura C rlotte eldon, ce d t e,
agrican Revglutigp, (Ithaca, Few York, 1900); Elmo” . .-
ard, Beaumarc sis and the American Revglution, (figstgn, 12l0).

1“Stevens, Faceimileg, #1311, 1320, 1328.

31

who devised the plan whereby the French government could
secretly aid the Americans, a plan which would also relieve
the government of all responsibility 1. namely a private
corporation using official funds.15

If Beaumarchais was enthusiastic about his plans for
aid to the Americans, Vergennes was no less calculating in
evaluating the risks involved. For some time Vergennes
had been reviewing the Anglo-French relations and explain-
ing to Louis XVI and his colleagues the possible results
for France of French aid to the colonies. His final deé
cision was that aid might be secretly given but active
intervention should at first be postponed, pending further

developments.16

Deane's Commercial Activities

One of the factors that had determined the Secret
Committee of Correspondence to select Deane for the Mission
to France was his thorough knowledge of the needs of the
American army. This he had acquired by his work with
various congressional committees dealing with the Armed
Services. His first interview with Vergennes had resulted
in permission to trade freely and the information that the

French army had been newly equipped. Vergennes was even

15Durand, New Materials For the Higtggy g; the Ameri-
can Revolution, pp. 7-103.

15stcvens, Egcgimilgg, #1310, 1316, 1319, 1320.

32

thoughtful enough to suggest that Deane communicate with
Beaumarchais and upon Deane's inquiry regarding Beaumarchais'
financial standing, assured him that Beaumarchais was capable
of fulfilling a large contract.17 Deane acted promptly and
when Beaumarchais, as head of the House of Roderique Hortalez
and Company, offered to ship three million livres of goods
on the credit of Congress, Deane, with Vergennes' approval,
accepted.

Deane, in gratitude but at first with some bewilderment,
wrote to the Secret Committee of Correspondence: “That a man
(Beaumarchais) should, but a few months ago, confine him-
self from his creditors, and now on this occasion be able to
advance half a million, is so extraordinary that it ceases

'18 Deane explained that "everything he

to be a mystery.
says, writes or does, is in reality the action of the
ministry."19 But at the same time he was so pleased and
gratified that he gave ”all the business to Beaumarchais.'2°

Beaumarchais immediately requested Deane to bring him
his lists of supplies and apologized that his resources

were not as large as he desired. He also stated that it

17New York Historical Collections, 1, 183, Wharton,
giplomatio Correspondence, II, 117.

18New York Historical Collections, 1, 217.

192229,, p. 217; Vharton, Qiplgmatic Correspondence,
II, 123.

203;; 1521-; Historical Collections, 1, 212-13.

 

33

would be necessary to have prompt returns in order to con-
tinue his advances. At the same time he assured Deane:
'I desire to serve your country as if it were my own, and
I hope to find in the friendship of a generous people the
true reward of a labor that I conseorate to them.‘21

With such a common purpose the terms of a contract were
soon agreed upon and the business of collecting and forward;
ing the supplies to America was seen under way. By the
terms of the contract Beaumarchais was to procure the de-
sired supplies and they were to be paid for by the proceeds
of tobacco and other articles, which would be shipped by
Congress as fast as the vessels could be provided.22 Deane
asked for no longer credit than twelve months and expressed
the hope that considerable remittance would be made within
six months.23

The terms of the contract made it clear that the
supplies were to be paid for and were not a gift. The
language is clear and specific. In his instructions from
the Committee, Deane had been ordered to obtain clothing
and arms for twenty-five thousand men. The committee had

said: 'fle mean to pay for the same by remittances, while

as to linnens, woolens and other merchandise they were to

21M.) De 158e
22Wharton, Qiolomatic Correspondence, II, 102.

23§ow York Hiotoricol Collectioos, I, 153.

34

be settled at once on a cash basis.'2h

Upon the basis of
his instructions Deane informed the Committee that he was
negotiating with Beaumarchais on the basis of eight months'
credit from the time of delivery and that he had certified
to the French merchants “that Congress would pay for what-
ever stores they would credit than with." He specifically
warned Congress: 'If I effect this, as I undoubtedly shall,
I must rely on the remittances being made this fall and
winter without fail, or the credit of the colonies must
suffer.'25 Beaumarchais was equally explicit when he re-
ported this transaction to the Secret Committee: 'I request
you, gentlemen, to send me next Spring, if it possible for
you, ten or twelve thousand hogsheads, or more, if you can,

tobacco from Virginia, of the best quality.'26

The Secret
Committee of Correspondence never once sent a reply to his
letters, and there were many to the committee, from
Roderique Hortalez and Company. Perhaps Congress itself
wondered why supplies continued to arrive while they cone
tinued.to ignore the request for payment. Little did

Deane or Beaumarchais realize that Arthur Lee, the man with
whom Beaumarchais had discussed the possibilities of sending

supplies, was frantically writing to his brothers and to

2bVharton, Diplomatic Correspondenco, II, 79.
25;bid., p. 120.
25Ibid., p. 130.

35

Congress that the French Government did not expect any pay,
that Beaumarchais was not a merchant and that he (Lee) felt
that what had been intended as a I'gratuitous" gifthad been
turned into a commercial transaction -- for the benefit of
Deans and Beaumarchais at the expense of Congress.27

Having made his contract, Beaumarchais undertook its
execumion with his usual zest and high spirits. He rented
the H8te1 de Hollands, one time residence of the Dutch Am-
bassador, and there with a great force of clerks he disproved
M. du Dourg's assertion that in France there was no one who
would not hesitate to do business with him,23 and with an
energy that tended to offset his deficiencies in business
methods and ignorance of commercial affairs. For as he
wrote Congressi 'I promise you, gentlemen, that my inde-
fatigable seal shall never be wanting to clear up difficul-
ties, soften prohibition, and facilitate the operation of a
commerce which your advantage, more than mine, had made me
undertake."29 It is to his credit that his performance al-
most equalled his flamboyant language, which indeed must
have surprised, if not shocked, the homespun revolutionists

of North America.

271bid.. pp. 522-23.

zaatevens, zoooimilooy #881.
29Iharton, Diolomatic Corresoondenco, II, 131.

36

The selection, collection, and shipping of arms and
munitions to the ports of France from their arsenals consti-
tutes an amazing story -- how they avoided detection by
British agents and cut French bureaucratic "red--tape,"30 and
and how the seal and the untiring efforts of Deans and
Beaumarchais levelled all obstacles.31 When.Yergennes indi;
cated to Deane that it might be possible to receive military
supplies from France, he did not say or even intimate that
such a request had been anticipated. Such, however, had.teen
the case, for in 1775 the French Minister of war, St. Germain,
had ordered du Courday, an eminent French artillery officer,
to visit French arsenals for the purpose of determining
what munitions of war could be drawn from them for American
purposes in case it should be determined to render aid to the
colonies in America. Early in September, 1776, du Courday
visited Strassbourg, Dijon, nets, Besancon, and Charterville
where he selected 'two hundred four pounder field pieces,

a hundred thousand balls, twenty-five thousand small arms
with ammunition, and tents for twenty-five thousand men."32
Thus we see that earlier preparations now permitted greater
expediency. So under the cover of darkness, literally

under the noses of British Intelligence, and in spite of

30Stevens, Facsimiles, #899.
311212.. #911.

32Friedrick Knapp, The Life or John Kalb (New York,
188h), p. 8h.

37

'red tape,“ the supplies moved to the coasts. When Deane
informed Beaumarchais that he could not provide American
vessels, Beaumarchais supplied French ships and went in
person to supervise the loading.33

Though Beaumarchais was indefatigable in his efforts
he was not always equally Judicious. When, for instance,
Beaumarchais went to Le Havre to supervise the loading of
the cargoes personally he took the name of Durant so that
3h

his presence would not be known. However, as one of his
comedies was being presented in the city and he did not
hesitate to attend rehearsals and coach the actors, naturally
his presence was not concealed from British agents. Through
Lord Stormont, the British Ambassador in Paris, they pro-
tested vigorously. The protest was so strong and the evi-
dence so irrefutable that finally Vergennes was forced to
issue a restraining order. Before Vergennes officially
ordered the operation to cease, however, the first vessel
carrying munitions and cannons, the Amohitrite, sailed.
Events caused it to return to port a few day later, much to
the disgust of Deans and Beaumarchais. Two other vessels

had been almost ready to leave, and Beaumarchais gave

Vergennes no rest until the ban was lifted and the ships

33Stevens, Facsimiles, #912.

3”1bid., #911.

38

sailed for America.35 So with the approval or at least with
the secret connivance of the French government, secret aid
continued to reach America.36
The badly-needed supplies reached America but neither
Deane nor Beaumarchais received tobacco or instructions.
Still Beaumarchais could write: 'There is no news from Amer-
ice and no tobacco either. This is depressing, but de-
pression is a long way from discouragement."37 To Deane it
was a period of great anxiety. In his letters to the
Secret Committee of Correspondence runs the melancholy
phrase “without intelligence” and I am “frantic with doubt
and dispair.‘38 On December 3, 1776, he wrote his friend
John Jay: “If my letters arrive safe, they will give you
some idea of my situation. Without intelligence, without
orders, and without remittances, yet boldly plunging into
contracts, engagements and negotiations, hourly hoping that
something will arrive from America."39

In December of 1776 Deane's status changed. Benjamin
Franklin arrived December 21, and with Arthur Lee, Deane

351mm, #618, 912-916; Wharton, Diplomatic Correspon-

dence, II, 153.
368tevens, Facsimiles, #611, 612.

37Hew York Historical Collections, 1, 318.

38Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 120, 153. 173,
192; New York Historical Collectiops, I, 378.

39Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 212.

39

became a member of a three man commission. But it was not
until the 11th of January that Deane learned from Robert
Morris, who was a member of the Secret Committee of Corres-
pondence and often acted as the Committee secretary, that,
'I have been long aware that you would suffer vexation
from want of remittances . . . but such has been our situa—
tion and circumstances it was not possible to mend the

matter.“0

He wrote of the capture of ships, ports blockaded
and little to export from the Eastern States, but explained
that the Committee was buying tobacco in Maryland and
Virginia.h1

That Deans and Beaumarchais were to suffer from charges
and accusations made by enemies who later stated that they
had turned a I'gift into a commercial operationI cannot de-
tract from the extent of their efforts nor from the fact
that the supplies they sent were badly needed by the Ameri-

can army and were effectively used.

Deane's Relations With Other Americans
When Deane arrived in Europe he did not know a single
individual. As instructed, he had early met Dr. du Bourg
and Vergennes in France. Deane's instructions also had

ordered him to write to a Dr. Edward Bancroft, an American

“New York Historlcal Collections, I, 156.
h1Ibid., p. #56.

#0

living in London. He had formerly been a student of Deane's
in Connecticut. Bancroft supposedly had the means of supply-
ing Deane with valuable political and commercial informa-
tion. After a slight delay Bancroft came to Paris, at
Deane's expense, and there he learned all the details of
Deane's mission. Upon his return to London he made a “deal"
with the British government. For Z 500 down and Z 400 per
annum 'ur. Edwards“ (Dr. Bancroft) engaged to correspond
with a Hr. Wentworth and to communicate to him whatever
might come to his knowledge of any of the following subjects.
These included all of Deane's letters, the progress of any
treaties, or any pertinent commercial or political news.
However it does not seem apparent that this perfidy was
suspected at this time by any Americans. Bancroft served
Deane as a confidential adviser and was later with Franklin
as “semi-Secretary of Legation' at Passy. At all times he
had access to private papers belonging to the commission and
was even trusted with a key to them.“3

Throughout the entire time that Deane was in Paris,
Bancroft reported to the Foreign Office in London not only

Deane's plans and dealing with Vergennes and Beaumarchais

hzmdward Bancroft, l narrative o; the Obgects and Pro—
oeedings of Silas Deane, as Coppissioner of t e Un ted ates
t France° Made to the British Government in 1226, Faul L.
gord, ed. (Brooklyn, New York, 1 91 ; Stevens, Facsimiles,
235.

n31bid., #65, 151, 2&8, 273, 322; Richard Henry Lee,
ife f thur Lee 2 vols. (Boston, 1829), 1,, 367.

 

 

 

#1

but also his private conversations and observations. This
he did by letter, by courier, or by frequent trips to Lon-
don.hu

In addition to his political activities and scientific
studies Bancroft was known to be a dabbler in English stocks.
Because of his known financial operations he was never
freely or fully trusted by the British ministers and,
especially, by George III. However Deans, and later Frank;
lin, trusted him completely, defended him against charges
of disloyalty and dishonesty by Arthur Lee,"5 and praised
him highly to the Secret Committee of Correspondence and
Congress.“6

That Bancroft was genuinely fond of Deane is demonstraé
ted by his affection and care of him when Deane was ill and
in disgrace in London. Such was Deane's best friend and
adviser during the first part of his mission, a man funda-
mentally dishonest but warm to him personally and able to
deceive him.

Shortly after Deane's arrival in Paris William Car-
michael of Haryland, after an extended visit in England,
stopped in Paris on his way home. He met Deans and decided

uuThomas Humchinson, The Diary and lotters of His Ex-
ce e c Thomas Hutchinson ter Orlando Hutc inson, ed.,
rthfifimwrm’m.

“5stevene, Iocsimlles, #269, 286, 300.
héwharton, Diplomatic Coppespondence, II, 175.

#2

to stay and act as his aid without pay for an unspecified
time. Carmichael was of great assistance to Deane, acting
as his 'trouble-shooter' and "chief-inspector" of goods and
ships. There is no evidence to support any later charges
made by Arthur or William Lee questioning Carmichael's
loyalty. That he was vain, glory-seeking, and a braggart
who possessed great personal charm and some ability cannot
be denied. His letters to his various women intimates in
England were regularly intercepted by the General Post
Office in London and provided some 'spicy' reading for the
censors.“7 Carmichael's frequent and loud declarations
that his only desire was to serve his country and have 'a
little fun.""'8 were accepted by Deane at face value. Deane
praised him to Congress and used him advantageously in the
work of the mission.“9 Later Carmichael was to give before
Congress 'his understanding“ of what he thought was a pri-
vate commercial transaction that was derogratory to Deane.
One of the great faults of Carmichael's character was
that he soon felt that he should be permitted to direct the
operation. Later John Jay, on his mission to Spain, was
to discover that William Carmichael, his Secretary, must

have the center of the stage or his interest soon wandered.

“7Stevens, Facsimiles, #h9,
”81bic., #u7u.

“9Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondepce, II, 175.

43

Within six months after his arrival in France, Carmichael
had become very critical of Deane and Franklin and disgusted
with the French. 'I must repeat again,‘I reported a British
agent to London, quoting Carmichael, “that Mr. Deane is too
open in his transactions and exposes many things that might
be kept secret, and swears by all that is sacred that they
shall not have anything from him again."50 The same agent
reported that Carmichael was enraged at the French to the
highest pitch imaginable. He, so the report reads, de-
clared that the French could not be depended upon and if he
had the management of affairs the French would not have the
least idea of what they were about. Such was the devotion
given by another of Deane's associates.

George Lupton, an early acquaintance of Deane's in
Paris, though an American, was a paid agent of the British
government, and reported directly to William Eden, under-
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Lupton posed as an
American businessman waiting for additional capital to in-
vest in the American trade.51 He was liked and trusted by
Deane and seemingly they spent a great deal of time together.
He reported on Deane's breakfast conversations with himself,

Dr. Bancroft, and Carmichaelu"2 He also noted and reported

5°Stevens, Focsimileo, #168.
52Ibid., #1u7, 15h, 179.

an

Carmichael's trips to Nantes, Bordeaux, and Dunkirk to in-
spect goods and ships being dispatched to America.53 He
discovered and reported that Deane received mail from
England via Holland under the name of Honjeui Benson.5n
Once, when Deane left the room, Lupton slipped into his
closet and read his letters and an unfinished dispatch to
Congress.55 He also reported that he had met John Nicholson,
Captain of a continental ship, who was closely associated
with Beans in privateering and highly esteemed by him:
l'I say I got on the blind side of him (Captain Nicholson)
and discovered just what I wished for a man of his turn.”6
George Lupton was in no way associated with Deane
except as a 'well wisher" and how long he would have been
able to continue the deception will never be known as he
was “betrayed by that girl'57 and was dropped by the
British from the lists of agents in France.
In his relations with other Americans we obtain some
of the keenest insight into Deane's personal views on current
politics and policies of the day and the results of his
meditative thinking regarding what would now be considered

531.1119.- , #2oli.
“polo. , #162.
552219,. #162.
5511319,. . #187.
571219,. #265.

45

world politics and international relations. The Secret
Committee of Correspondence which had instructed Deane to
contact Dr. Edward Bancroft of London also suggested
establishing relationships with Hr. Arthur Lee, represented
tive of the Committee in London and C.W.F. Dumas, agent of
the Committee in Holland. The first proved a traitor and
the second Deane's worst enemy, but with Dumas the correspon—
dence ripened into a life long friendship. In none of
Deane's other correspondence, private or official, can one
find such a variety of his political views.

Early in the correspondence with Dumas, Deane ex-
pressed his views regarding the cost of public sacrifice
to an individual and his own willingness to assume this
burden. I'I ever keep in mind the motto, de republics nil
desperandum,‘ he wrote. 'I counted the costs when I enter-
ed the list, and balanced private fortune, ease, leisure,
the sweets of domestic society, and life itself in vain
against the liberties of my country: the latter instantly
predominated, and I have nothing to complain of, though
much to grieve at, occasioned by the miscarriage of delay
of my full power for open and public application."58

Again as a staunch patriot and a man confident in his
vision of the future of America he wrote: 'Be not discouraged,

my dear friend, America must come off in the end triumphant,

58Wharton, Diplopotic Correspondence, II, 225.

#6

and under new and unprecedented laws, liberty and commerce
to be the happy asylum for the sons of men in future ages.
Whatever disappointments I may meet with I never despair
of my country, for which I shall count it my glory to
suffer all things, if it receive any advantage therefrom,
and if not, I shall at least enjoy the pleasure, the in-
alienable pleasure, resulting from a consciousness of
having done all in my power for its happiness and connected-
ly for the happiness of mankind in general."59

As a merchant Deane was conscious of a necessity for,
and to a degree apprehensive of the commercial future of,
the United Colonies. He was fully cognizant of the various
mercantile systems that existed in Europe. Like John Adams
and Benjamin Franklin, Deane was fearful of 'alliances'
and would have preferred to have America remain free of all
political entanglements, but for commerce he was eager.
'The United Colonies only ask for what nature surely en-
titles all men to, a free and uninterrupted commerce and
exchange of the superfluities of one country for those of
another . . .' Though Deane would have preferred the
colonies to remain free he did not feel that independence
would be obtained without foreign intervention. This was
the basis for his constant urging of Congress to be more

pressing in its desire for an alliance with France.60

59Ibid.. pp. 22u-25.
601219.. . p. 331.

h?

The question of a possible reconcilation with Great
Britain could not be ignored during the closing days of
1776 and throughout the year 1777. This possibility made
the various negotiations more insecure and difficult for
all the Americans abroad. Deane, however, felt it was an
,unnecessary apprehension and apropos, wrote that he had
'1ong been convinced that no act is too actrccious for them
(the British) to attempt, nor any report too ridiculous and
improbable for them to propagate to serve their purpose.“
He admitted that reconcilation was possible but he stated
that he would not be surprised if Congress decided to con;
tinue the war unsupported. 'I know my countrymen perfectly,
and the principles by which they are actuated, do not
believe that they will ever accommodate on terms lower
than independence; yet in the same situation, and with the
same offer made them, I-am certain any other people in the
world would accommodate."61 This conviction was not due to
vanity. While denying any desire to place his countrymen
above any other nation in the world he pointed out that the
Americans were a new people possessing ideas that were new
or at least long unpracticed. Therefore it would be diffi-
cult to compare them to other nations. That the Americans
had dared to defy Great Britain was in itself a unique
distinction.

5lipia.. p. 332.

#8

Deane, experienced professionally in trade and the law,
did not hesitate to point out that England had been the
leading exponent of the balance of power theory and that
while most of the politicians and statesmen of Europe still
thought along these conventional lines he, Deane, saw a
new universal monarchy on the political horizon. This was
his prophesy: '. . . but I will venture to predict that if
Great Britain, by forming an accommodation of friendship or
an alliance with the United States, renders herself, as by
nature she easily can, mistress of the world, by taking
possession of the East Indies into her own hands, she will
be in possession of exhaustless treasure, and in 1780 the
charter of the East India Company expires when both the
territory and commerce will be at her disposal. Add to
that her strict and close alliance with Russia. I say
that it is easy to forsee that Great Britain, America,
and Russia united will command not barely Europe, but the
whole world united."62

Deane felt that both the United Colonies and

Russia would be dependent upon Great Britain for manufactur-
ed goods for a long time._ Speaking of England he said:
“Like a Colossus, with one foot in Russia and the East and
the other in America, it will bestride as Shakespeare says,

your poor European world, and the powers which now strut

62:929.... P- 333-

“9

and look big will creep about between its legs to find dis-
honorable graves.“ This was Deane's prophecy but he was
willing to try to prevent it from happening. Not that he
cared particularly for EurOpe “for it is my ultimate and
early wish that America may forever be as unconnected with
the politics or interest of Europe as it is by nature
situated distant from it, and that the friendly ties arriv-
ing from a free, friendly and independent commerce may be the
only ties between us.“63

So it is apparent that Silas Deane was not only
actively concerned in the practical areas of the revolution-
ary commerce and continuance for the moment, but in the far
reaching implications of future and widespread economic and
political theory. This interest he was to retain through-
out his disgrace and until the time of his death.

Recruitment of French Officers: A Policy of State

In France the American Revolution produced mixed re-
actions but the predominating one was generally favorable
to the revolting colonies. The French government was
particularly interested in all that was occuring because
of the potential harm to and its effects on the colonial
and commercial power of England. The French intellectuals
were intrigued and hopeful -- America now represented a

practical experiment which was proceeding along lines

631212.. p. 333.

50

indicated by the 18th century political philosophers and
the widely read writings of the Encyclopedists and Rousseau
and Voltaire. To the professional soldiers of France any
exploit offered the ever attractive possibility to army men
of a fertile field to win glory and promotion.

A plan for sending officers to America was first
suggested to Deane by Beaumarchais. The latter admitted
that Arthur Lee had first mentioned it to him.6u Deane was
fully aware of the shortage of trained officers in the Ameri-
can army. He was also conscious that the sending of French
officers had to be frowned upon officially by the French*
War Ministry as a matter of expediency and diplomatic
policy, but that in the final analysis, most of the officers
actually to be sent were “recommended by the ministry here,
and at this instant are really in their army, but this must
be kept a secret.“65

The decision to enlist the aid of French officers in
the American army, therefore, was not a matter of impulse
or a hasty one with Deane. Early in December of 1776 he had
been approached personally by a number of French officers
offering their services to the colonists. Deane immediately
reported their request to the Secret Committee of Corres-

pondence and asked for instructions. The Committee failed

61‘gew York Historical Collections, II, 399.400.
65Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 21h.

51

to give him the desired instructions, and so he decided to
follow Beaumarchais' advice.

Once having opened the gate Deane soon discovered, and
Franklin later verified, that the pressure to accept the
services of more and more officers was almost unbearable.
Deane's wholesale grant of commissions (contracts) to
foreign officers early in the was was a genuine source of
discontent and a mixed advantage to the colonists. Some
of the officers sent were good; some were bad; all occasions
ed some problem. The officers of the Continental army
generally resented them. These frictions caused increasing
embarrassment to Congress. That some of the foreign
officers appointed did acquit themselves creditably and in
many individual cases gained the gratitude of the colonies
is attested by the many names of American counties and
cities which stand as a tribute to the officers who served
the American cause during the struggleofor independence.

The contract that caused Congress the most embarrass-
ment and Deane the most grief was the one from which he had
expected the American army to derive the greatest benefit.
Early in 1776 when the French government had anticipated a
request from the Americans for arms and munitions, the
French War Ministry had ordered H. du Courday, an experienced

artillery officer, to inspect all French arsenals and select

66Ibio., pp. #11, #57.

52

materials that could be released for.the American army.
When du Courday offered to deliver the artillery, and with
a corps of young officers properly to instruct the Ameri-
can army in its use, Deane felt that he had secured a good
bargain. To the Secret Committee of Correspondence Deane
reported that du Courday had been recommended as a good
and faithful man by the minsters of the court. Deane ad-
mitted that it was too “tempting an object for me to hesi-
tate about, though I owe there is a silence in instruc-
tions.“67 However, in spite of his previous service and
good recommendations both Deans and Beaumarchais had cause
to be disgusted with du Courday before he finally sailed
for America. The General and his suite sailed from Le Havre
on December 1h, 1776, just in time to avoid the restrain-
ing order issued by the French government. In a few days
the ship returned, much to the disgust of Deane and
Beaumarchais. General du Courday had not liked either his
quarters or the kind of provisions that had been put at
his disposal. Deans and Beaumarchais were put to much per—
sonal inconvenience and worry to secure new clearance
papers in spite of the restrainig orders. When the ship
sailed again, the temperamental du Courday had arranged
both the cargo and passenger list to his own satisfaction.

67lbid., p. 127.

53

The enlisting of du Courday as an officer in the
American Army eventually caused trouble for Deane in the
United States. General du Courday and his party arrived in
Philadelphia in June of 1777. When he applied to Congress
for the rank of Major-General, assigned to him by Deane,
with command of both engineers and artillery, there was
both an immediate and violent reaction. Generals Greene,
Knox and Sullivan all tendered their resignations which
Congress did not accept. Courday was then offered by
Congress and accepted the title of Inspector-General of
Ordinance. On the eve of the battle of Brandywine he
requested and Congress granted him permission to join the
army as Captain of Engineers. His drowning while crossing
the Schuykill on September 16, 1777, solved the problem
for Congress but it did not lessen the resentment against
Deane,68

According to the reports of British Intelligence over
four hundred officers were permitted to serve in the Ameri-
can army. One, however, who did not come caused a great
deal of embarrassment indeed. This was occasioned by the
curious offer made by the Comte de Brcglie.69 Through his
agent, Baron de Kalb, he suggested to Deane that “Congress
should ask of the King of France someone who would become

68Wharton, Di lomatic Corres ndence II, 367-70, 388,
#37-38; Bm'nett,—L_—___fl—Mtte psofCon gpess ,I,b00, 1403, #06,
h17-h21.

69Stevens, Facoimileo, #604.

5#

their civil and military chief, the temporary generalissimo
of the new republic.”0 Of course, the designated “chief“
was assumed to be de Broglie. Uncertain as to the origin
of the suggestion, Deane listened. He did not commit him-
self and after consulting Benjamin Franklin, who was now in
France as one of the three newly appointed commissioners,
he transmitted the request to the Secret Committee of Corres-
pondence without personal comment. In relaying the request
to the Committee he gave the name of the wrong man which
must be taken as an indication of his lack of interest and
involvement in the arrair.71 Franklin's thoughts and
comments are likewise unknown. All parties were saved from
making any final decision by the refusal of the French
government to approve. It must have been painful to Deane
even to transmit this request. His respect and affection
for General Washington are too well known to assume that he
was in agreement.72

From the correspondence of congressmen and the observa;
tions of foreign visitors the presence of the foreign officers

caused the single greatest resentment against Deane and was

70New York Historical Collectiono, I, #27; Stevens,
Facsimileo, 0 .

71Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 218.
720har1es J. Stille, “The Comte de Brogolie, Proposed

Stadtholder of America,“ Pennsfilvania Hogazine of Historz
ond Blogpoppz, XI (1887), 3 9- 05.

55

-the greatest single factor in his recall by Congress.73
From the advantage of hindsight Deane seems to have used
poor judgement in the selection of officers and the terms
of their contracts. It is possible, of course, that Deane
was playing for higher stakes than was ever appreciated by
Congress. He was vitally concerned with public support in
France. The French coterie of officers were an influential
factor in society. Deans, and Franklin later, seems to have
grasped the fact that in France where public meetings were
prohibited public opinion was formed and expressed in
social affairs. Jehn Adams and Arthur Lee apparently never
grasped this and as a result failed to understand many of

Deane's motives and moves.

British Attempts to Discredit Deane
as a Dangerous Agent
The activities of Silas Deane were watched by the

British government with great care and interest. When the
French government decided not to receive Deane officially,
the British ambassador, Lord Stormont, was also then forced
to “ignore him officially.“ He naturally watched every
visitor, every word said, or every move made. Deane was
aware that he was under constant surveillance and though he
was under the protection of the French Court was in constant

73Theveneau de Francey, ttepo_of Theveneau de Fr e ,
1222-1280, John Bigelow, ed. New York, 1870), p. 10.

56

fear of abduction by agents of the British Secret Service.
There is little doubt that as an agent of the rebels,
Deane was a subject of interest to British Intelligence in
France. In London they knew that he had been successful in
securing secret aid from the French Court. He was outspoken
in opposing any plan of reconcilation. He was suspected of
making plans for weakening England‘s was effort by raids on
the coasts of Scotland and England, by granting licenses
himself to privateers to raid English commerce, and of
making plans for stirring up revolts in various English

7“ These were all means of preventing England

possessions.
from re-enforcing her armies and as a result may have
caused the British ministers to seek ways of discrediting
him with the people of England, with the French Court,.ané
finally, perhaps may have been sufficiently influential

by means of well placed reports of malfeasance in office

to secure his recall by the Continental Congress.

Shortly after Deane's arrival in France a rope factory
and the docks of Portsmouth, a commercial and shipping cen-
ter in England, were burned. John Atkins, alias John the
Painter, was arrested and accused of the crime. He ad-

mitted his guilt in open court and stated that he had been
hired by Silas Deane, the rebel agent in Paris, to burn the

7“Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 167, 172;
merican Archives Peter Force, ed., 5t ser. 3 vols.
(Washington, 858

1 ~53). 1. 973-

 

BE

57

city. The arrest and public trial for arson of John Atkins,
as the agent of Silas Deane, representative of the rebels in
Paris, was designed to enrage the people of England.75

There is some truth in Atkin's testimony.76 He was
correct when he stated that he had visited Deane in his
rooms in Paris, but that he was hired by Deane is extremely
doubtful. This was the opinion reported by a British agent
in Paris who was well acquainted with Deane.77

The trial was given great publicity in London but if it
was staged as a means of discrediting Deane in the eyes of
his public in both England and France as a person using
exceptionally distasteful methods, the attempt miscarried.

Another attempt was made later to discredit Deane with
the French government. This occurred in the closing days
of 1777. At the time the negotiations between the Comp
missioners and the French government were at a very deli-
cate stage. H. Favier, a man well known to the Paris
police, was requested to renew and report upon the activi-
ties of his former associate, Paul Wentwcrth. Wentworth
was suspected, and rightly so, of being a British agent in

Paris and H. de Vergennee was curious as to his activities.

7f’Stevens, Eacsimiles, #66#, 1#87; William Bell Clark,

“John the Painter, enns vania Ha azine of Histor nd
W 68. (1939). 1-23.

76New York Historical Qolleotiooo, II, #, 2#, 30.
77Stevens, Facsimiles, #696.

58

Wentworth told M. Favier that he and Deane were old friends
and often “supped together with axeoman whom he believed
to be his [Deane's] mistress“ and also that Deane had
willingly transferred money to Wentworth's relatives in
America. He very casually mentioned that he had suggested
several financial.and.cnmmercial speculations to Deane but
that “Deane, who refused it, . . . not out of scruple, but
because he was engaged with Messrs. Grand, Beaumarchais and
Panchaud who transacted business in the funds; and who had
admitted him into their speculations and profits.“78 This
attempt to discredit Deane makes Wentworth's motives appar-
ent and it seems that M. Favier did not consider this tale
as reliable. He knew what was going on in both commercial
and political circles. To Vergennes he wrote: “If this
tale about Mr. Deane is true, you are certainly aware of
it“ and if Vergennes did not know it was because the French
Secret Agents were unaware of it. The latter is doubtful.
It is interesting to speculate whether such a story
was originated and planted by British agents with the de-
liberate intention of circulating until it might reach the
ears of Congress through Arthur Lee or some other American
and thus dispose of the one man they considered the most
dangerous. Lord Stormont in a report marked Confidential

gave as his considered opinion that “Whatever his [Franklin's]

781bid., #1818.

59

talents may be, I am persuaded that he is a less dangerous
instrument than Deane."79

If the British government of Intelligence had a hand
in the recall of Deane by Congress it cannot or has not
been as yet proved. That the British government had its
agents in and around Congress may be accepted as a matter
of standard operating procedure. In discussing Deane's
recall, Bay de Chaumcnt observed to Vergennes: “If we com-
pare dates, we find the recall of Mr. Deane coincides with
the period when Lord North was able to intrigue in Congress,
guided by what he had read in the despatches he had caused
to be stolen. Hr. Deane's head was a good one for him to
strike down . . . 9° 1

That some of Deane's contracts with foreign officers
caused embarrassment and resentment in Congress is well
known. It is not unreasonable to suppose that any
intelligence service would fail to exploit an opportunity
to remove its enemy's most effective agent. Such an idea
may be a fancy but it is a fact that Deane's recall, the
reason for it, and the name of his successor were the
subject of official correspondence between the Foreign
Office in London and the British Ambassador in Paris

79Lord Stormont to Lord Weymouth, December 25, 1776

cited in Edward E. Hale and Edward E. Hale, Jr., Franklin
In France, 2 vol. (Boston, 1888) II, #21.

80Stevens, Facsimiles, #810.

before it was officially known by American Commissioners.

811bid.. #199. 1890.

60

CHAPTER III

THE COMMISSION

In December of 1776 Deane's official status changed.
At that time he became a member of a three-man commission
with full diplomatic powers. The creation of the commis-
sion represented the determination of Congress to seek
military aid from France in their war against England, and
for this aid the Congress was willing to enter into a formal
alliance. In the implementation of this policy Silas Deane
was to play a vital if not conspicious role. The decision
marked a turning point in Congressional policy.

The decision to seek foreign military aid had been
forced upon Congress by the deteriorating military situa-
tion. During the latter half of the year 1776, while
Deane was arranging for supplies in France, Congress had
been debating the need for foreign intervention. However
time and military reverses were required to crystallize
congressional opinion. In Silas Deane's Instructions of
larch 3, 1776, he had been directed to test French reaction
to the proposed Declaration of Independence and to the
possibilities of an alliance with France. In his reports
to the Secret Committee of Correspondence Deane had repeat-
edly urged permission to press for an alliance but both the

Committee and Congress remained silent.1

1Wharton, Qiplomatic Correspondenco, II, 190.

 

51‘

62

Congressional fears and indicision are fully reflected
in the thoughts and words of BenJamin Franklin and John
Adams. Both were thoughtful men and while thinking of the
present each already had considered the possible effects
of each day's action on future events. As late as July,
1775, Franklin wrote to a friend in England that 'we have
not applied to any foreign power for assistance nor offerb

'2 But Franklin, states-

ed our commerce for this friendship.
man that he was, knew that war and independence meant leav-
ing the British mercantile system. He was also fully aware
that to carry on a successful war the colonists must have
trade. It was with this in mind that on February 26, 1776,
he introduced a resolution in Congress providing for the
opening of American ports to I'ehips of all countries.‘3
Congress resisted the resolution and its implications until
April 6.“

In ngmon §gngg_published early in 1776 by Thomas Paine
a political and commercial policy was presented to the
colonists that brought a favorable response not only in
Congress but with the country in general. Paine wrote:
'Our plan is commerce, and that, well attended to, will

secure us peace and friendship of all Europe; because it is

zBenJamin Franklin, The Writin s r Ben amin Prankl
Albert H. anyth, ed., 10 v-o'fe'". T—Jflew War , 907 , , 09.

3Jgggna1s of Congress, Iv, 63, 159n, 172.

“Ibldg’ p. 257.

 

63

to the interest of all Europe to have America a free port.
Her trade will always be a protection . . ..As Europe is
our market for trade, we ought to form no partial connect-
ions with any part of it. It is to the true interest of
America to steer clear of European contentions, which she
can never do, while, by her dependence of Britain, she is
made the makeweight in the scale of British politics."5

John Adams, in weighing America's needs for assistance
against the danger of entanglements, strongly advocated a
simple commercial treaty.6 when the time came to formulate
a proposed treaty with France, Adams successfully defended
his exclusively commercial position in committee and open
debate in Congress.

Shortly after Richard Henry Lee's triple motion of
June 7, 1776, for independence, for confederation, and for
taking 'the most effectual measures for forming foreign
alliances,"7 a committee was appointed to draft a proposed
commercial treaty and submit it to Congress. As a member,
John Adams repeatedly said in committee and in Congress
that an alliance that would embarrass and conceivably in-
volve the nation in future European wars should be avoided.

He reasoned that a treaty of commerce would automatically

5Thomas Paine, The Com lets Writin s of Thomas Pain
Philip 8. Foner, ed., 5 vols. (New Yerk, I953}, I, 20-21.

QAdams, Works, II, h88-#89.

7Journals of Congress, V, #25.

repeal the Navigation Acts and bring lance into equal parti-
cipation of American commerce. He also stated that if France
should become involved in a‘war for supplying the colonies
with goods and recognizing their independence, the trade of
the colonies would be ample compensation.8 However, during
the congressional debates, Adams said that he was opposed

by his 'own intimate friends, Samuel Adams and Richard Henry
Lee.“ The latter thought there was not sufficient tempta-
tion for France to Join the colonies and moved for sessions
and concessions that implied “warranties and a political
alliance“ that Adams had sought so carefully to avoid.9
Adams won a temporary victory and the instructions that
Pranklin carried to Paris with him authorised only a
commercial alliance.

In October of 1776, Samuel Adams and Richard Henry Lee
were able to convince Congress of the desirability of em-
powering the Commissioners in Paris to seek recognition
from still other courts of Europe.10 In December of the
same year an additional victory was gained by them through
securing the appointment of commissioners to the courts of

Spain, Austria, Prussia and Tuscany.11

8Adams, Works, II, 516.

91bid., x, 269.

1owharton, Diplomatic Cgrrespgndence, II, 172.

lnggggals of angzess, VI, 1054—58.

65

The original members of the Commission to France con;
sisted of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Silas
Deane. Jefferson refused to accept the commission. As a
consequence Arthur Lee, In London, was elected to assume
the duties of the third member. Franklin was elected
September 26, 1776, and sailed for France October 26 of
the same year. He landed in France December 3. Having
missed Vergennes' messenger warning him not to come to
Paris, he arrived there December 21. He stayed at the
Hotel d' Hambourg in the Rue de l'Universite., After a few
weeks he moved to an ”elegant hotel'I in Passy, Just outside
of Paris, belonging to Monsieur Hay de Chaumcnt. As the
house was offered rent free it was not hard to detect the
fine hand of H. de Vergcnnes, Minister of Foreign Affairs.12

The nerve center of all rebel activity in France was
Franklin's headquarters in Passy. The house at Passy served
as a chancery, offices, home, and a social center for '
Franklin and Deane. Arthur Lee preferred to maintain his
own establishment. Franklin, by common consent, became
the unofficial but recognized 'Head of Mission.“ Lord
Stormont, British Ambassador, referred to him as “chief of
the rebels.I From Passy Franklin directed and co-ordinated
'the work of the mission. Because of the failure of Congress
to provide any administrative assistants, Deane and the

1ZJohn Bigelow, 'Donaten Le Hay Chaumont,‘I ggngg;y_
(March, 1888), pp. 250-65.

66

other Commissioners were handicapped in handling routine
affairs. During the entire time Franklin's only personal
assistant was his grandson, Nilliam Temple Franklin, a lad
of sixteen years. Though a good copyist, he could not be
entrusted with drafting any of the many papers that Franklin
was forced to write. Dr. Edward Bancroft, the double spy,
and Mr. lilliam Carmichael, the ambitious young man from
Haryland, and others were hired to do clerical work, but
as they had no legal status they could not be regarded as
part of the official family. Arthur Lee's opinion to the
contrary, Franklin was a very able diplomat and a most
casual examination of his reports to Congress shows that he
was aware of the issues and kept fully informed. John
Adams, no strong admirer of Franklin's, told.Arthur Lee
that ninety per cent of the letters that came to Passy
were addressed to Franklin or required his attention. Such
was Franklin's position in the American Commission.13
BenJamin Franklin's devotion to public duty was again
ably demonstrated in 1778. He was seventy years old when
he was selected one of the three commissioners to France.
Cnhesitatingly he accepted the commission without regard
to health, physical dis<nmfort, or financial loss. During
the time he was in France, a total of nine years, he res

ceived only his salary and lived on it. During that time

13Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 760.

67

he handled and was responsible for thousands of dollars but
when his accounts were audited not one single instance of I
mismanagement of public money could be brought against
his.“

Of all the men in public life Franklin was the most
familiar with political conditions with which he had to deal
when he came to France as envoy. As Postmaster-General he
had traveled into every inhabited area of the colonies.

For forty years he had been active in Pennsylvania poli-
tics. During this time he had been associated with several
attempts to form an alliance or union among the colonies.
He had been active in the wars against France in raising
men and supplies. Nor were his political experiences limit;
ed to America. He had been an agent for Pennsylvania,
Hassachusetts, new Jersey, and Georgia in England for a
number of years. Perhaps there was no living American so
familiar with and observant of English politics as was
Franklin at the time he had left England in 1775. France
he had first encountered as an antagonist when America had
supported England during the colonial wars.
. In 1767 he visited Paris and made many friends.1 When
he returned in 1776 he found himself treated as an honored
and beloved guest. IISocial France received him as an idol:
1“Due to the influence of Arthur Lee and.nalph Izard

a committee was appointed July 17, 1782, to audit Franklin's
accounts.

68

philosophical France received him as a co-worker in a great

work; military France greeted him as an ally against an old

foe; commercial France at once set him down as a means of

netting considerable sums and all alike welcomed him warmly."15

His reception by the Ministers of France was cordial. Dur-

ping the year 1777, however, Franklin's diplomacy was primari-

ly with the French people. In his dealings or relations

with the French government he wrote: 'I have never chang'd

the opinion I had in Congress, that a Virgin State should

preserve the Virgin Character, and not go suitoring for

alliances, but wait with decent Dignity for the Applications

of others.'16
Arthur Lee, one of the three commissioners to the French

Court, and later sole commissioner to the Court of Spain,

was a native of Virginia. He was born December 20, 17b0,

and received his early formal education at Eton College,

England. Later he studied medicine at Edinburgh and re-

ceived the degree of doctor of medicine. After a period

of travel on the continent he returned to Virginia to

practice medicine. Being dissatisfied, he returned to

15Ha1e and Hale, Eranklin in France, I, 77; Stevens,
£5cgimiles, #1u02.

16Franklin, Wgrks, VII, 35.

69

England and studied law at the Temple between 1766 and 1770.17
As a patriot Arthur Lee ranks second to none. This

even his bitterest enemies, and there were many, were willing

to concede but beyond this opinions vary greatly. Arthur

Lee himself admitted: 'Unhappily my fate has thrown me into

public life, and the impatience of my nature makes me em-

bark in it with an impetuousity and imprudence which in-

crease the evils to which it is necessarily subject.”18

Even John Adams, himself inclined to suspicion, admitted

that Arthur Lee "had confidence in no body, believed all

e.“19 Beaumarchais

men selfish, and no man honest or sincer
described Lee as an “insidious politician,"20 Benjamin
Franklin thought him half crazy, which Silas Deane thought
more than generous.21 That both Arthur Lee and Iilliam Lee
learned their politics from John Wilkes may account for
some of the use of invective and vituperative language found
in their correspondence. Seemingly, however, there was an
inherent quality of suspiciousness in Arthur Lee's character.

17Dictonar: of National Bioggaphy, x1, p. 96-101;
Richard Henry Lee, fe f rthur Lee I; Lyon G. Tyler,
'Arthur Lee-A Neglected Statesman, Tyler's Quarterly Hist—
orical 23d Genealggical Magazine, No. 2 October, 1932 ,
19 ~21 ; T mas P. Abernethy, The Ori in f the Frank in-
kge Imbroglio,‘l North Carglina Historical Review, XV 193 ).

1-52.

18Wharton, Diplggatic Cgrregpgndencg, I, In“.

19Adams, Works, III, 188.

2°Stevens, Facsimilgs, #1763.

21low York Historical lelegtions, II, 327.

 

When he encountered a person whom he could not dominate or
bend to his wayof thinking, he immediately convinced hims
self that some nefarious plot was afoot to destroy him.

As neither Deane nor Franklin would yield to Arthur Lee's
leadership or policies, according to Jared Sparks,

the characteristic foible of Mr. Lee began to show
itself. He conceived the notion that all the friends
of Deane must be his enemies. Then came over his
mind strange visions of plots and intrigues and
combinations formed to mar his peace, defame his
character, and injure his reputation. He believed
it was a part of this knot of adversaries to write
paragraphs to his discredit and procure their in-
sertion in the European gasettes and to take care
that they were repeated in the American papers. He
conceived them to be busy also in writing letters of
the same purport, and thus to be infusing poison not
only into the public mind, but into the minds of
individuals whose good opinion was important to his
fame and success. At the head of this formidable
league in his imagination was placed ur. Deane, by
whose arts 23d machinations it had been brought

into being.

As an individual Arthur Lee might have been unable to
do little good or evil, but as a member of a powerful
family with political and social connections he was a
factor that could not be safely ignored. In a letter to
George Washington dated April 26, 1779, John Jay traced the
failure of the naval affairs of the colonies to the 'family
compact.‘| The term I'family compact,‘ as later used by Jay,
is explained by a statement in the Pennsylvania Packet of
December, 1778, I'that by four brothers of the Lee family

zzJared Sparks, "Review of the Life of Arthur Lee,'
North American Review, xxx (April 30, 1830), #95-525.

70

71

were held two seats in Congress, four foreign missions, the
French Commercial Agency, and a London Aldermanship under
Wilkes." But the real strength of the "compact“ derived its
strength from the devoted support of the New England dole;
gates sympathizing with the views of Richard Henry and
Arthur Lee. James Lovell, self-styled 'ur. Secretary“ of
the Foreign Relations Committee, was one of the most

active in presenting and defending the views of the “com-
pact." Samuel Adams was also a pillar of strength in sue
pporting the Less in general and Arthur Lee in particular
during the controversy with Deane.

That any of the Lee brothers were ever guilty of dis-
loyalty to the Revolutionary cause is extremely doubtful.
However, such was their loyalty to each other that it ill
served any man to oppose them. Beaumarchais, Silas Deane,
and Benjamin Franklin all earned the hatred of Arthur Lee
and thereby the enemity of the Lee brothers — Beaumarchais
died a pauper, Deane in disgrace, and even Franklin was
forced to appear before Congress on a formal charge of
censure. Such as the nature of the Commission which was
to replace Deane, then American agent, at the court of

France e

CHAPTER IV
THE WORK OF THE COMMISSION
December, 1776, to March, 1778

The work of the American Commission in Paris ended in
success but it was accompanied by strain and uncertainty
punctuated by personal rivalry and Jealousy. The failure
of Congress to draw a clear line of demarcation separating
their respective duties and responsibilites contributed
much to the disharmony that permeated the work of the
commission.

The organization of the American Commission in Paris
was a simple and informal affair. With the arrival of
Franklin from America and Arthur Lee from England on the
21st and 22nd of December, the commission was formally
organized. Within a few days Franklin and his colleagues
were received by Vergennes in a private but not a secret
audience.1 They presented their letter of credence, the
draft of a proposed treaty of commerce, and a request for
eight ships to convoy merchant ships to America. The re-
quest for eight ships was immediately denied.2 Such an
action would mean that France openly espoused the cause of

the Americans and would immediately result in a war with

1Stevens, Facsimile #1uoo; Iharton, Diplomatic
Cgrregpondence, II, 2 -51.

2Stevens, zacsimiles, #621.

72 2

England.3 For such a war Vergennes indicated, but did not
say, that the time was inopportune. The reception of the
proposed treatyof commerce was also disappointing to the
commissioners. Vergennes accepted a draft of the treaty
and agreed to take it under advisement.

This step meant that France was not yet ready to
recognize the independence of the United Colonies. Ameri-
can commerce was the only advantage or inducement the
commissioners had to offer. Indeed, this was a doubtful
gain to France as the maritime power of England dominated
the three thousand miles of water between America and
France. Neither was the military situation encouraging.
The British army had taken New York. Shortly it would
take Philadelphia and the rumor was strong in French
official circles that Burgoyne was to start south from
Canada. Early in 1777 the military situation was far from
bright for the American cause. If the commissioners were
expecting to negotiate an early treaty they were doomed
to disappointment. Accepting the extended protection of
the French Court, they retired to plan the next step and
wait.

The instructions of the commissioners made them Jointly
responsible, but any two members were authorized to make an
official agreement. All American affairs unless otherwise

delegated by Congress to another party were placed under

3Wharton, Diplomatic Correggpndence, II, 28h—85.

73

their Jurisdiction. With the exception of Franklin, the
commission was without previous diplomatic experience or
precedence to guide them, and without an adequate staff

the commissioners faced their Joint assignment.

Arthur Lee, conceiving that aid and recognition might
be secured from other European courts, decided to visit the
courts at Madrid, Vienna and Berlin.“ Though Franklin did
not approve he consented to these missions. Leaving Paris
in February, 1777, Lee spent the remainder of the spring
and summer months visiting Spain, Austria, and Berlin. He
was not successful either in gaining recognition or obtain-
ing significant aid.5

Franklin, remaining in Paris, carried on his diplomacy
primarily through the medium of social intercourse. From
Passy went a barrage of letters to persons of all classes
and stations in French society. He dined out, he enter-
tained, and he regularly attended the Academy of Science.6
The people of Paris were always conscious that Franklin,
the American, was in their midst. At the same time no
major decision was or could be made without his advice or

consent. When matters concerning a load or a gift from the

French government required his presence he personally

“Ibis.” p. 264.

5Paul Leland Haworth, 'Frederick the Great and the Ameri-
can Hevolution,‘l American Historical Review IX (l90h), #60-78.

6

Stevens, Facsimiles, ##86.

7a

visited Versailles, usually late at night, to consult with
Vergennes or Gerard. But normal routine matters, the liaison
work, was left entirely to Silas Deane.

Deane continued in charge of the financial and commer-
cial departments. Franklin refused to assume any responsi-
bility for the continuance of any commitments resulting
from Deane's arrangements or contracts. These Deane was
left to conclude entirely on his own responsibility.
Beaumarchais wrote to Deane respecting the new arrange-
ments. *On January 6, 1777. Deane replied: I'In answer to
yours of this morning, I have to inform you, the Joint
commission from Congress to my Colleagues and me does not
supersede or interfere in the least with my former
Commission and Instructions to purchase and send out
Stores and Merchandise to America; and my Colleagues will
not intermeddle in the Engagements taken by me previous to
their arrival. The Whole, therefore, of this affair remains
in the state it was at first, and it lyes solely on us to
take the best measure in our power to get the Shipps to
Sea with the Stores as soon as possible.'7

The commissioners were forced to “solicit the court
of France for an immediate supply oftwar material] . . . .
This application has now become the more necessary, as the

private purchases made by Mr. Deane of those articles is

7flew Igzk Histgriggl Collections, 1,. ##9.

75

rendered ineffectual by an order forbidding their exporta-
tion.’8 However, any new contracts, or arrangements that
were made from December of 1776 on were actually under
Franklin's direction. Deane merely served as Franklin's
detail and 'leg' man. Deane accepted Franklin as 'Chief of
Hission' and the two worked in perfect harmony and under-
standing.

The relations of nations are based upon Public Inter;
national Lew. Its develOpment has slowly evolved out of
the experiences of nations. Then, as today, nations were
inclined to accept or fail to observe those provisions of
law that did not fit the desired objectives of their foreign
policy.

Silas Deane, upon his arrival in France, as agent of
the Secret Committee of Correspondence, had realized in;
mediately the harm that privateers could do English commerce
and that, in addition, privateering could also become a
valuable source of revenue for the treasury of the united
Colonies. Privateering was at that time, of course, an
accepted practice. In his reports to the Committee he re-
quested that Congress send him blank conmissions that he
authorize privateers to prey upon the English.9 However,

during Deane's tenure as Agent of the committee this phase

8Wharton, Diplgmatic Cgrrespondence, II, 2h5.
921ml" 1). 2&9.

76

of his work was not a disturbing element with the Franch
government.

lhen Franklin arrived in France he carried orders to
buy eight ships of the line. Captain Wickes, who commanded
the ship that had brought Franklin to France and who had
captured two prizes on the trip and brought them to port,
was designated by Franklin to investigate ships and make
recommendations for the possible purchase to the Commission-
ers. Uickes did a thorough job and reported to Franklin
on what he considered suitable for American waters. Even
if and when they had the money to purchase ships the
Commissioners soon found that purchase was only the be-
ginning of their difficulties. The selection of officers
to command, of sailors to make up the crews, of merchants
to fit them out, or cannon and stores to be bought, and
cruises to be made when the ships were ready was a compli-
cated set of problems. Hone of the Commissioners was ex-
perienced in maritime affairs yet they were forced to act
as a department of the navy. Deane, as a merchant, was
best equipped to take charge and supervise this intricate
operation. This he did with the support, if not the
actual help, of Franklin.

The status of neumral nations under international
custom, later dignified into public international law, did
not seem to cause the Americans as much trouble as it did

the French Government. Among the more complicated legal

7?

problems the following seemed to disturb the British and em.
barrass the French the most. 1. Were American war ships and
privateers to be allowed in French ports? 2. Could Ameri-
can privateers sail from neutral ports, take prizes and re-
turn to the same port? 3. Was it legal for English sailors
captured at sea to be confined in French ports and later
exchanged for American prisoners in England? In addition

to or beyond the general principles of the law as mentioned
above, France and England had definite treaty arrangements
dealing with these particular points.10 This was recog-

nized by the French ministers.11

and Lord Stormont's viewh
point was so clear and irrefutable that Vergennes was
forced to delay rather than evade the issues of violation
of French neutrality or rather France's violation of her
own agreement.

The French were not neutral, however, and in spite of
Lord Stormont's ability to cite chapter and verse of con-
stant and repeated violation of the treaty of Utrecht, the
French ministers were almost always tardy in taking action
against the Americans. In fact, the handling of Lord

12

Stormont's complaints was almost reduced to a formula.13

10Treaty of Utrecht, Articles XV, XXXVI. Discussed in
Hale and Hale, Franklin lg 29.122; I. 1). 130-39.

11stovene, {acsililes, #1u91.

12mg" #1u83.

13:021.. #1b87.

79

Upon a complaint by Lord Stormont of activites of Ameri-
can privateers in French ports Vergennes would plead ignor-
ance of the facts but would promise an immediate investiga-
tion. In due time he would renuest information from the
Minister of Marinelu who in turn would reply that he had

no information but that he would inquire of the officials
at the port in question.15 By the time Vergennes would be
in a position to give Lord Stormont an answer the ship would
have finished refitting and left port. If the privateer
should have been so slow or so unlucky as still to bein
port, orders would be given that it must leave in twenty-
four hours -- which simply meant transferring to another
port.

The French ministers knew and deliberately winked at
the constant violations.l6 Vergennes was willing to match
wits with Lord Stormont but he was not yet ready to risk a
war with England. From time to time he would write the
Commissioners a severe reprimand for some particular act,
but the reprimand was never followed by any drastic action.
To the Commissioners he wrote:

You cannot forget that at the first conversation I had
with both of you I assured you that you should enjoy
in France, with respect to your persons, every securi-
ty and comfort which we showed to foreigners; and as

to your commerce and navigation, we should grant every
facility compatible with the exact observation of our

l“1b1d., #1u93, 1563.
15Ibid., #1565.
16Ib1d., #1551, 1590.

treaties with England, which the King's principles
would induce him religiously to fulfill. In order
to prevent every doubt with respect to the vessels
that may participate in the favors we grant in our
ports to nations in amity, I pointed out to you the
article in the treaty which forbids the power of
allowing privateers free access in our ports, un—
less through pressing necessity, as also with
reapect to deposit and sale of their prizes. You
promised, gentlemen, to conform thereto.

After so particular an explanation we did not press

the departure of the ship Feprisal, which brought

Jr. Franklin to France, because we were assured it was
destined to return with merchandise. We had quite lost
sight of this vessel, and imagined she was in the Ameri—
can seas, when, with great surprise, we understood that
she had entered L'Orient, after taking several prizes.
Orders were immediately given that she depart in
twenty—four hours, and conduct her prizes to the only
admiralities that were authorized to judge of their
validity. Captain Wickes complained of a leak. Being
visited by a proper officer, his allegation was found
to be legal and admissible, the necessary repairs were
permitted, and he was enjoined to put to sea again.

After such repeated advertisements, the motives of
which you have been informed of, we had no reason to
expect, gentlemen, that the said Kr. Wiches would
prosecute his cruising in the European seas; and we
could not be otherwise than greatly surprised that,
after having associated with the privateers, the
Lexington and the Dolphin, to infest the English
coasts, they should all three of them come for refuge
into our ports. You are too well informed, gentlemen,
and too penetrating, not to see how this conduct
effects the dignity of the King, my master, at the same
time it offends the neutrality which His Majesty pro~
fesses. I expect therefore, from your ecuity, that
you will be the first to condemn a conduct so oppo—
site to the duties of hospitality and decency. The
King cannot dissemble it, and it is by his express
order, gentlemen, that I acquaint you that orders have
been sent to the ports in which the said privateers
have entered, to sequester and detain them, until
sufficient security can be oftained that they shall
return directly to their country, and not expose them-
selves, by new acts of hostility, to the necessity of
seeking an asylum in our ports.

 

90

As to the prizes they may have taken, if they have
brought them to our ports, they have orders to go

out immediately, and the same conduct shall be ob—
served towards any capture of any nation whatever.

Such are the obligations of our treaties, which the
King cannot by any means evade. It will be highly
prOper for you to make these intentions known, wherever
you may think it most expedient, so that new privateers,
from the example of misconduct of those against whom

we are obliged to be vigorous, may not expose them—
selves to the like embarrassments.

To this clear and explicit letter the Commissioners,
rather lamely, replied that Captain Wickes and his com-
panions had returned to L'Orient after their cruise because
they had been chased by an English man-of—war. They added
that Wickes had been already ordered to return to America --
which he later did. But the letter did not promise, nor
did the Americans intend, to cease their illegal activi-
ties.18 In time France did take semi—effective steps to
curb her would—be allies but not until the English put her
ports under an unofficial state of blockade.19 Vergennes
explained to M. Chaumont, in whose house Deane and Franklin
lived: "I eXpect that they will not be pleased with the
course we are taking with regard to their privateers —— it

is indespensable at this moment, moreover there is no

question of vexing anyone, only assuring ourselves that

17Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 36u-65-

18Ibid., p. 365; Ruth Y. Johnston, "American Priva—
teers in French Ports, 1776-1778," Egpgsylvania Magazine of
HistoryAand Biography) LIII (1929) 352.7&.

19Stevens, Facsimiles, #1580.

 

 

81

they will not leave until we can be certain they will cease
to infest our sees."20

In March of 177?, before the French Court was finally
forced to take drastic action, Deans and William Hodge, a
fellow'American, conceived the idea of fitting out in the
port of Dunkirk an American privateer which should make a
prize of the Harwick packet. Arthur Lee was in Spain, and
it is doubtful if Franklin had much to do with the affair.
At least Deane's name is the only commissioner listed in the
papers, and evidently he attended to all the details.

The scheme was not only a bold one-it was successful.
Deane and Hodge purchased a lugger at Dover, through a Cep-
tein Cruise. The boat was taken to Dunkirk and there under
Hodge's direction was secretly fitted out for the expedition.
when the lugger put to see she was under the command of
Gustavus Conynghen who held e Continental commission as
Captain?1

With esse Captain Conyngham not only captured the
Herrick mail packetbut also captured a brig. Then he bra—
senly returned to Dunkirk, hispoint of departure on his
cruise, with his prizes. The affair caused great excite-
ment in official circles in both England and France. Captain

Conynghsm was immediately arrested and the prizes confiscated.

2°1bid., #1579.

21'Narrstive of Captain Gustavus Conynghsm, U.S.N..
While in Command of the Surprise' and ‘Revenge' 1777-1779,“
Fennsylvenis Magazine of History and Biography) XXII

1 9 0 79-900

 

82

Much to the satisfaction of the English Court, France at
once promised that Conyngham should be given up, the prizes
restored, and nothing of this nature should be allowed
again. When the packet boat and brig were returned to the
English.Deane remarked that it "gave them a temporary
triumph.“22

That the Americans did not take the French threat of
action against privateering seriously soon became evident.23
Deane and Hodge immediately determined to seize the Harwick
packet again. They purchased and fitted out another cutter
with fourteen six pounders and twenty-two swivels. Upon
representation that he was to sail directly to America, Cap—
tain Conyngham and his crew were released from prison. Mr.
Hodge gave bond for his intentions to sail directly to
America. To avoid any possibility of a mishap, the French
government offered to buy the vessel but as the offer was
refused the vessel sailed on I'a trading voyage” as one of
the Commissioners remarked. A mishap did occur for no
sooner was the cutter out of port than Conyngham proceeded
to make a prize of everything he met, even threatening to

burn the English city of Linn.2“ As Conyngham did not

22Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 380.

23Samuel F. Henkels, The Confidential Correspondence
of Robert Morris, (Philadelphia, 19177, p. 62.

2“Wharton, Diplomatic Opprespondence, II. 379-81.

83

return to a French port, nothing was said directly to the
Commissioners.25 His surety, Mr. Hodge, was arrested and
sent to the Bastille.26 But he was discharged27 when Deane,
acting for the Commissioners, stated that he was a man of
character and could not "conceive him capable of any willful
offense against the laws of this nation."28

Similar incidents, many times multiplied, give ample
evidence of the range of privateering activities carried on
by the Americans and to which the French Ministers gave a
semi-connivance. Rarely were there less than a dozen ships'
captains receiving hospitality at the unofficial headquarters
at Passy.29 Arthur Lee, upon his return from Spain, was
amazed and distressed at what he considered a most brazen
display of nonchalance on the part of Deans and Franklin in
the face of French hospitality and he believed this to be a
serious threat to the development of amicable relations to-
ward an eventual a111snce.3° In the later months, both

Arthur and William Lee brought this episode forward as a

25Stevens, FacsimilesI #1655.

26;p;g,, #16n7.

27gpid,, #169h-

28Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondgppe, II, 375.
29Stevens, Facsimiles, #ZHB.

3ORichard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur:Lee. I, 320-22.

84

detracting instance in their attempts to discredit Deans
and Franklin.31

The failure of Congress to separate the commercial and
diplomatic functions of the Commission became a source of
much misunderstanding and bitterness. This over-lapping
jurisdiction caused dissension among the Commissioners in
Paris and in time the dispute invaded the halls of Congress.

Soon after Deane's arrival in Paris the Secret Committee
of Correspondence appointed Thomas Morris, half brother of
Robert Morris, as commercial agent at Nantes. He was also
authorized to serve as agent for the firm of Willing and
Morris, a commercial firm of Philadelphia. In that capacity
he was independent of the Commissioners in Paris. However,
Deane, supported by Franklin, drew a distinction between com-
mercial and naval Jurisdiction. Deans and Franklin, but not
Arthur Lee, included privateering and the sale of prizes un-
der the Jurisdiction of the Commissioners in Paris.32

Thomas Morris proved to be a drunkard and completely
incompetent both as a commercial and naval agent. Dean and
later the Commissioners collectively informed Robert Morris33

31wiiiism Lee, Lptters of William pge, 1266—1283,
Worthington C. Ford, ed., 3 vols. Brooklyn, New York,
1891), 1, 279-80.
32vinism Lee, m I, 100.

33w” zork sistgrica; Cpllsction, II, zus.

 

u
. v1 I!
i .
y s . o.
. v .H
i l A a v
. a s . t ’1. .
2
. . .
. . u § !. a I
I A k
,
. c ‘ m f.
A e I .. I ‘
.
i a: .,. M
.
p . ’ 4 x 1
wt . .
. . a . c I. a .
u. s. v . . . a
n ‘ a l
A A h a V. V
o , i . i . . s. .
.
. 1 . a . .
. \. . . . .. 0 .. . . . .
. n
u . v a . .
v. . . . a . .r - .
. \I . . o .
i . . . .
w l 4 v: . a
. r r v - a . a
. . _ - Q
... O u
.
. I .
. . e ‘1 ,
_ _ . a
. .
ta . .
.
.
, ., .. .1 .
. . a . v A k .
v 0
. .
. a . . .. 4.
l I I
. t v a .m
. c I all! .
.
. .
. .~ v
_ i . , . . . r.
O
I I
, ~ 4
‘ . c r . i
.
n
. . . _ . ., 1
.
c .
1 ‘ r
. . .
a f
I . » . ,
_ . .
u u p it ,
l
c . 1 ,s
r n. ‘ . .
, . ~
. .
. . . e.
.
.l
O a . . ..
. . .
. . .
, , v
s
p . ~ .
s . O u
. .
s. . s. o
. . \ b
. .
. e. t .
. u
. . . s
. .1 /
. .
. . . .
s , A.
U I!
4 v
.
s .,
.

. . .
g c t I
. | O
4. . A
a 1 a _ r. a
a .

a]. o u
a
. o a I‘ ‘
I -
.c .
l! .0
_ .
.
f o . u
0 .
e . .. . m
x: i .
I .. .. I
u e .b
I

t. .
I ‘ '.a.
‘4 .n.
. v 6. . ..
. u. a ». t
t . . at . ..
. . .

at a n
w 0
i ..
~
v V
:1, , a
.. . e v . .

‘ O
.n o
a . 0
.
i ..
. . u
. . t
. .
. .
. .. . .
a. l 9‘ .
.
. O
.
.
- Q
‘ p
y -
. .
J 9
3.
Or

85

and the Secret Committee of Correspondence of Thomas Herris'
|'irregularities" and recommended that he be replaced as com-
mercial agent. One month later, while in Spain, Arthur Lee
wrote to his brother, Richard Henry Lee, in Congress, "that
the superintendent general of the commerce is immersed, and
has been ever since his coming over, in the lowest debauch-
ery and scottishness. Irrecoverably and notoriously so.
Think then, how much your commercial interests must suffer
in the hands of two such men. . . .The Alderman in London
William Lee, [their brothefl would be the best controller
general of your commerce that could possibly be found.'3u

William Lee was a successful merchant in London. He
was a staunch supporter of Jehn Wilkes, of that city, and
was elected Alderman with Wilkes' support and endorsement.
He did not surrender this British Aldermanship until after
American public opinion forced him to do so. If he failed
to render a great service to the Revolution, it was not be-
cause he lacked offices with official status during that
time. He was simultaneously Alderman of the city of London,
Commercial Agent at Nantes, and the Commissioner for the
courts of both Vienna and Berlin. However the services he
performed were limited.

With or without the benefit of Arthur Lee's advice the
Secret Committee of Correspondence informed Deane that William

3hlbid.. p. 22.

86

Lee of London has been appointed Joint—commercial agent at
Nantes with Thomas Morris. As ordered, Deane, in the name
of the Commission, wrote to Lee informing him of his appoint—
ment. Due to his personal affairs William Lee did not arrive
in Paris until June, 1777. As no instructions had been for-
warded to Paris or to William Lee personally, he decided to
remain inactive pending the arrival of his commission from
the Secret Committee of Correspondence. He soon clashed
with Deans and Franklin over the commercial agency at Nantes.
As he was not permitted to visit either Vienna or Berlin, his
mission there must be considered a complete failure. Most of
his time was spent in Paris complaining that he was not being
consulted by the other Commissioners and writing to his
brothers in Congress his opinions as to the proper adminis-
tration of various and sundry congressional affairs which he
felt would be better under his Jurisdiction.35 His central
theme of complaint was that Deans and Franklin were guilty

of exceeding their authority and were more interested in
private than public business. However, William Lee's let-
ters indicate that he retained a very active interest in
stock Jobbing36 while at the same time drawing money from

the American Treasury, certainly a questionable procedure

35William Lee. Minna. I. 262-63. 271. 279-80, stems,
36213.45}... pp. 2824-85. 295. 300.

87

for one who was accusing others of being guilty of the same
practice. William Lee remained in Paris from June until
August waiting for a commercial commission that never came.
Then he went to Nantes at the request of Deans and Franklin
to see if he could bring order into the chaotic affairs of
that important center of American commerce.37

In the meantime the affairs at the port of Nantes had
become so critical that drastic action was required. The
outfitting of privateers and the sale of prizes required the
services of an intelligent and able man, an agent who must

often anticipate and evade the orders of the port officials.3‘t5
From Philadelphia Robert Morris sent John Rose to

investigate the affairs of Willing and Morris and Co. and if
necessary to take charge. In May, Deane with Franklin's ap-
proval, asked Jenathan Williams to go to Nantes and take
-charge of the privateering business, in reality supplanting
and superceding Thomas Morris. He was so satisfactory that
Deane decided to retain him although he knew that William
Lee expected to serve as co-agent of the public commercial
business at Nantes. He confirmed his decision to Williams:
“Mr. Lee's arrival would make no odds in this business, as

it is distinct from anything contained in either of their

37Ibid.. pp. 370-37u.

38Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, #35.

88

appointments, and your appointment from us is the only one
at present that can be of any force.'39

The decision to suspend Morris was resented and
protested by him upon the authority that his commission from
the Committee of Secret Correspondence placed the sale of
prizes under his Jurisdiction. Deane, though quite worried.,""0
did not alter his decision and as long as he remained in
France the naval affairs of the port remained with Jonathan
Williams. A new element was added when in July John Ross
wrote Deane from Nantes: "Permit me to inform you, Mr.
Morris is possessed of the Instruction to Mr. Lee, from Com-
mittee of Congress, of his being appointed Commercial agent
here. . . .These instructions are contained in a letter ad-
dressed to Mr. Lee and Mr. Morris as Jaint Agents, which is
similar and of equal force with the separate powers on which
Mr. Morris acted hitherto. I therefore take the liberty to
recommend Mr. Lee's repairing hither immediately, to assume
the Management, being certain Mr. Morris will possess him of
this letter, so soon as they meet, tho' long kept back, pro-
bably from inattention.“+1

As this letter was received in July, Deane knew, but

did not inform William Lee, that Thomas Morris had in his

39New Ibrk Historical Collections, II, 8?.

“Oatevens, Facsimile_s_, #198, 201+.

ulNew Iprk Historical Collections, II. 97.

89

possession Lee's instructions from the Committee. At this
time and after his departure from Paris for Nantes, William
Lee and Deane were on the best of terms. On August 12,
William Lee wrote to Deane: 'I will write you on the busi—
ness as soon as those that have hitherto been concerned will
permit me to enter on any, which has not been the case as
yet, nor indeed have I been able to procure a sight of any
letter, instructions or papers whatsoever relative to the
business.”2 As long as Alderman lee was in Nantes he found
that neither his presence nor his advice was desired or fol-
lowed. He soon returned to Paris. However, having learned
of Thomas Morris' letter, he wrote to his brother, Richard
Henry Lee, that he too had been suspended by Silas Deane,
Ithough he knows perfectly well that the sale of prizes was
OXprBBSly committed to Mr. Morris and myself by the Secret
Committee.”b3 To his brother, Francis Lightfoot Lee,
William Lee complained: “In the first line I could and as—
suredly should have been of great {use} unto the public, as
well as myself: especially if the Secret Committee would
support their own authority and show an insolent meddler
[Deane] here that wé’properly notice his presumption in tak-
ing on himself in many instances to contravene their

appointments and orders,uhh

quilliam Lee, Lptters, II, 215.

n31bid., I, 271; New Egrk Historical Collections, II,
235-40.

M1sz York Historical Collectipns, II, 213.

90

The battle of the commercial agency continued and to
reassure Jonathan Williams of the legality of his position,
BenJamin Franklin wrote: “You need have no concern as your
orders being only from Mr. Deane . . ..but as he generally
consulted with me and had by approbation in the orders he
gave, and I know they were for the best aimed at the public
good, I hereby certify you that I approve and Join in these
you have received from him, and desire you to proceed in the
execution of the same.'h5

In September of 1777, Deane wrote Robert Morris a
letter in which he spoke highly of Jonathan Williams and
praised Williams as "generous and disinterested'--except in
rendering service to the colonies."6 However, to retain
harmony, at least on the surface, Deane proposed and Franklin
agreed that the entire commercial transactions and naval busi-
ness should be returned to Thomas Morris and William Lee, but
after the letter had been written, Arthur Lee not only refused
to sign it but refused to permit the letter to be sent. His
excuse or reason was that as William Lee had in the meantime
been appointed Commissioner to the Courts of Berlin and
Vienna, he would soon be leaving for this new post.”7

Seemingly the "battle of the agents" was over when word

came that Thomas Morris was dead. William Lee, upon the

”5Frsnklin, Works, x, 3u3; New York Historigal Collections,
II, 282.

héNew York Hiptorical Collections, II, 159—60.
“71bid., p. 329.

91

advice of the three commissioners, went to Nantes to prevent
Morris‘ papers-from-being seized by the French Government.
To Francis Lightfoot Lee, another brother in Congress,
William Lee wrote that he was going to Nantes to take charge
of the public papers of Mr. Morris and "to form some plan
for conducting the public commercial business as I am imme-
diately going on my Embassy in Germany.”8 Arriving in
Nantes, William Lee secured control of Morris' paper without
any difficulty.

The death of Thomas Morris, instead of solving the
problem of the commercial agency, merely added fuel to the
fire. Deane was informed by John Ross that William Lee had
spent four days secretly going through the private and public
papers of Thomas Morris and after that he had requested three
American merchants in Nantes to certify that he had only se-
lected the public papers. This the merchants refused to do,
and, as Ross described the situation to Deane, ”Our champion
was so chagrined and mortified on receiving their answer,
that his passion and dignity forced him to a declaration,
that the papers (as they lay in the trunk) should be carried
to Paris and put in the hands of the commissioners.“ In the
same letter Ross also wrote that 'a letter of yours selected”
with many others is said here to have made discoverys of

great imposition on the public.' Ross assured Deane that

“age! zork gistpricp; Cpllectiop, II. 369-

92

Deane had his permission to use his name to refute any
“strained construction and malicious insinuations" that
might be made against Deane.“9
With the death of Thomas Morris the affairs of the
Nantes commercial agency passed under the control of William
Lee. However, the naval affairs remained under Jenathan
Williams' direction until after Deane sailed for America.
William Lee, planning to leave for Germany, offered a part—
nership in the agency to Jonathan Williams, but upon Frank-
lin‘s advice he declined. The Alderman then appointed
William Schweighauser, a German merchant residing in Nantes,
to be his sub-agent. His nephew, Thomas Lee, son of Richard
Henry Lee, was appointed clerk of the new agency. When in-
formed of this arrangement by William Lee, Deane wrote him:
"I can have no obJection to the person you propose appoint-
ing to act under you in the Commercial Agency, nor can I take
any active part in that affair.'5° In the same letter Deane
requested 'that as it is probable that I shall return to
America before you return to France, I conceive it but Just
and honorable in you to inform me previous to either of our.
leaving France of any imputations of this Nature which you
have authorized against me."51 In this Deane was disappointed.

To John Ross he wrote: 'I should be very happy could I bring

“9gew zprk Historical Collections, II, 385-89.
5°Ibid.. pp. 391-92.
511bid.. p. 393.

93

my Enemies here into Open day, and to lay their accusations
and complaints against me formally, in which case I should
know what I had to answer to; but this I despair of, for he
only who made them can alter their dispositions; it is very
hard to be obliged to combat such bush fighting Poltroons,
against whom one can never be too much on one's Defence,
and never sure for a moment, but I trust soon to Lug them
all out into Open day."52

When the Commission was formally organized in December
1776, it was only natural that Deane should retain control
of the commercial and financial departments because of his
previous experience and contacts. He was popular with the
French ministers and had well established channels of com-
munications.53 He also enJoyed a wide circle of acquaint—
ances in French mercantile circles.

While Deane was having difficulties with the commercial
agency, his friend Beaumarchais was having trouble because
of the failure of Congress to send remittances. Due to a
restraining order, Beaumarchais found it increasingly diffi-
cult to forward supplies that he had contracted for with
Deane. Because of the failure of Congress to send him remit—
tances and the refusal of the French government to permit his

ships to sail, Beaumarchais was soon reduced almost to the

52New York Histppical Collections, II, #09.

SBStevens, Facsimilgpg. #686.

94

point of bankruptcy.5u

After many passionate but unsuccess-
ful appeals to Vergennes for financial relief he sent his
nephew, De Francey, to America in September of 1777 to in-
vestigate the failure of Congress to send him remittances.55
From America De Francey warned Beaumarchais that he would
never be paid and urged him to "trim his financial sails."
'There is no doubt that what you have done has been pre—
sented here in a false light. I expect to have many preJu-
dices to destroy and many heads set right, for sending of
several vessels without invoices (a thing which, to say the

truth, is unprecedented), and the errors found in the bill
of lading of the Amphitrite, especially, have caused it to

 

be suspected that the shipments were not made by a merchantflfis

However, Beaumarchais, in spite of these dire warnings,
negotiated a second contract with Congress. Though admit—
ting the arrival of the goods Congress still did not choose
to pay for the supplies received under the old contract with
Deane. Congress apparently preferred to accept Arthur Lee's
positive assurance that Beaumarchais was merely the agent of
the King of France and that no remittances were expected for
the supplies.

Deane continued to support Beaumarchais. In his report

of September 7, 1777, he praised Beaumarchais' efforts in

5“Ibid., #1830, 2008.
55Wharton, Diplomappc Correapondence, II, 392.

56Theveneau De Francey, Letters of Theveneau De Francey,
p. 10.

95

sending supplies and urged prompt payment for the goods and
services already received.” “Whatever this ship [Heureusel
may be loaded with, I pray the cargo may come to Messrs.
Rodreque Hortalez and Co.. as they have advanced for arms
and other articles of this cargo over and above their other
large advances.”8

In December of 1777, when the Amphitrite arrived in
France loaded with a cargo of rice, indigo, and tobacco,
Beaumarchais demanded that the cargo be turned over to him.
Arthur Lee immediately declared that he had never "heard of
any agreement made with him" [Beaumarchaié],59 and Franklin
expressed llsurprise by which money was demanded of them for
goods they never ordered" and "Mr. Deane seemed unacquainted
with any agreement with him [Beaumarchais].'6° In Spite of
their first reaction the Commissioners informed Congress
that “Hr. De Beaumarchais having satisfied us that he had a
prior claim upon the cargo of the Amphitrite, according to

an agreement With Mr. Deane, surrendered the cargo to him.‘n-

The Commissioners later wrote Congress recommending that

Beaumarchais' accounts be settled in France because of a

57Wharton, Diplomatic Correppondence, II, 387.
581bid., p. 387.
59sichard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur Lpe, I, n59.

6°Ibid.. p. 373.
61Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, #59.

96

"mixture of public and private business."62 Arthur Lee,
while signing such recommendations to the Committee, con—
tinued to inform that body that France expected no pay for
the supplies sent by Beaumarchais.63 In reporting the af-
fair of the Amphitrite to Vergennes, Beaumarchais spoke of
that "honest deputy, Mr. Deans” and later repeated that
"one of my greatest encouragements is the gratitude of that
honest man, speaking for his nation.'6n

The insinuations that Deane engaged extensively in
private business while serving as an agent of the Secret Com-
mittee of Correspondence and Commissioners of Congress in
France was freely made by both Arthur and William Lee to
their brothers and friends in Congress in the closing months
of 1777 but without citing specific cases. In reviewing the
state of his accounts, Deane wrote to Jehn Ross March 23,
1778, on the eve of his departure for America, that

As to Mr. Morris's affairs with me, they are in a

very narrow compass. Mr. Delap fitted out a Brigan-

tine, one third on his own, one third on Mr. Morris

and one third on my account. This vessel was taken

and Mr. Delap has charged each of us separately with

one third loss. Mr. Chaumont equipped a large ship

and cargo, in which I engaged Jointed with Mr. Morris

for 100,000 Livres. The Vessel arrived safe, and to

a good market, but no returns are yet come to hand.
I have on this paid Ten thousand Livres, and given

62Richard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur Lee, I, 395, II,
35-38; Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, #96.

631bide’ ppe I+9’"""950

Stevens, Facsimiles, #1500.

97

my note for the rest. The cargo is insured and a
profit from this adventure is certain. These are
all our adventures, except the unfortunate one with
Captain Bell, the loss of which is to be equally
shared between Mr. Beaumarchais, Morris and Company,
Mr. Thomas Morris, Mr. Eyries of Havre, and myself.
I advanced what money was advanced by a credit given
me by Mons. Satelier, in consequence of 86 hhds of
tobacco received by Plairne, Pennet and 00., who
afterwards wickedly converted the avails of the To-
bacco to their own use, and ordered Satelier to
charge thz money advanced to me to the Commissioners
at large. 5

These transactions were later included in Deane's oral and
written report to Congress. William Lee in his complaints
to his brothers was not obJecting to Deane's business prac-
tices, but to the fact that the opportunity was denied him.66
William Lee also failed to avail himself of Deane's invita-
tion I'to inform me previous to either of our leaving France
of any imputations of this nature which you.have authorized
against me.'67

To BenJamin Harrison, a personal friend, Deane wrote,
October 5, 1777: 'I have been, and still am, so engaged in
procuring cloathing and other supplies for the public, the
laborious part which has lain on me, that I have had no time
to attend to any private concern, tho' my extensive acquain-
tance in the manufacturies and with the commercial people in

Europe give me every advantage I could wish or desire."68

65New York Historical Collectionp, II, #22—23.
66;Qig,, p, 214.

672219.. pp. 391-92.

68133. . pp. 172-73 .

To Robert Morris, his accused partner in speculations, he
explained: “While engaged in public affairs, I find it
impossible to attend to any private adventures, our corres-
pondence as Commissioners is very extensive, and applica-
tion of one nature or another is very numerous," and he ex-
pressed the desire “to quite Politics . . . forever . . .
and attend solely to my own affairs, which have been for
several years neglected.'69 To C. W. F. Dumas, his corres-
pondent in Holland, he wrote: ' . . . for myself, I have
really no leisure for several months to write a single let-
ter, but what the instant necessity of time required.'70

Deane's enemies frequently charged that he permitted
inferior goods to be shipped to the Colonies and in general
was very casual in dealing with the public business. But
Deane was operating without adequate staff, from ports
widely separated, and with many fields of interest. In ad—
dition, communication and transportation were poor, com-
plaints from America were scarce and his accusers failed to
produce proof for any of their charges.

Throughout his correspondence runs a stream of orders
and warnings to his agents to use every care and precaution
to protect the public interest. In early January of 1777 he

wrote to Beaumarchais:

691bid.. pp. 307-08.

7°Ibid.. p. 302.

99

As we may probably in a short time send means to
forward the Stores at Nantes and Havre, I can but
mention to you a Circumstance which gives me some
uneasiness, and which I conceive it may be your in-
terest as well as mine to remove. Certain busy
Persons have hinted that the arms and other Articles
were not good nor well laid in. Now though I have
no doubt of the Falsity of these Reports than I have
of the ill designs of those who propagate them, yet
to remove even the Shadow of Suspicion on this sub-
Ject I propose the having an Inspection made in a
way that will be at once satisfactory and without
making the transaction public. To effect this I
will, if agreeable to you, prevail with Mr. Car-
michael, whom you know, to go to Havre, and with Mr.
Williams, the Newphew of Door. Franklin, who is a
merchant, and whose Judgement full reliance may be
placed, to Nantes, to examine personally into the
State of the Arms and Stores, and to make their Re-
port how they find them. I propose, farther, that
Mr. Carmichael stay at Havre untill the Seine shall
be dispatched, and Mr. Williams at Nantes untill the
Stores from there can be got to Sea, if it can be
effected in any Season. If this proposal is agree-
able to you, the Gentlemen will wait on you to re—
ceive any orders you may have, agd set out tomorrow,
or the next Day at the farthest.

Early in February of 1777, Beaumarchais wrote to Deane
regarding a new order from the French Court: I‘All these
examinations, these inquisitions and these inspections of
arms and merchandise, Monsieur, have undoubtedly an obJect
of great utility, since they have been thought indispensa-
ble. They have at least served to refute all the base
suspicions which have been feigned as to the excellence of
the articles furnished, that is to say, in plain French, as
to the honesty of M. Hortalez. But was it worth the time

that we have been forced to lose? And now that there\can

K.

71New York Historica;_Collections, I, #51-52.

100

be only commendation for me and that my cargoes are
admitted to be of admirable quality, may I presume to ask
you, Monsieur, with what right you show yourself so exact-
ing as to the fulfillment of my engagements, when you have
not, as yet, responded to any of your own toward me? Im-
press this consideration somewhat uoon Messieurs, your col-
leagues, who are ready to criticise what they do not under—
stand and who refuse the commonest forms of politeness to
the most useful friend of your country."72

Other correspondence would also indicate that the
allegation of Deane's lack of care in permitting inferior
goods to be shipped to America were contrary to fact. For
in considering his correspondence further it can be noted
that Deane wrote to Sir George Grand, Banker for the
Commissioners: "I will not accept inferior goods . . .
nor if the price is too high,"73 and to John Merckle, a
contractor, Deane wrote that there was "no use using a
menacing style. . . .We never were privy to any contract

with you. . ."7M

and he informed the same contractor that
he "would not accept arms of inferior quality."75 Jonathan
Williams was warned that Deane had reason to be suspicious
of some cloth that was soon to be delivered to Williams at
pp. #93—9#.

73Ibid., II, 179.

741bid., p. 179.
75Ihid., pp. 221, 230.

q

N
H
O‘
H
g.

 

 

101

Nantes for shipment to America. “I have only to caution
you how to receive them, if they will not fully answer the
comparison with those sent by Hessrs. Holker and Co.. were
by contract to be standard."76 Shortly before he returned
to America he informed the firm of Geradot and Halber: “I
must now add decisively that I cannot accept them, or suffer
them to be accepted in any account.'77

The Commissioners also acted as commercial attachés for
the American business men in France. Upon an enquiry two
American businessmen received the following reply written
by Deane: “We are not ourselves concerned in commerce, but
at the same time am desirous of giving our contrymen the
best Intelligence that can be obtained on a subject of so
much importance to them.”8 Such evidence is proof that
Deane was an interested and devoted servant of the public
doing the Job to the best of his ability. Despite the in-
sinuations there is no evidence of dissatisfaction in the
armed services with the materials which Deane sent. One of
the first to express his appreciation to Deane upon his re-
turn to the United States, in July, 1778, was General George
Washington, who would have been aware of any inferiorities

in the supplies sent.

76Ibid., p. 189.
77Ib1do' pp. 310‘110

781bid., p. 231.

102

When Arthur Lee returned to Paris in the fall of 1777
after being rebuffed in his requests for aid and recognition
by the Courts of Madrid, Vienna, and Berlin, differences of
opinion among the commissioners soon appeared. According to
their instructions the Commissioners were collectively re-
sponsible for decisions of the Commission, but each was in-
dividually accountable to the Congress for any financial
transactions to which he was a party. Such a division of
power permitted Deane and Franklin to prevent legally a
settlement of accounts or an explanation for their individual
accounts. Deane in his report to Congress maintained that
Lee was informed and concurred in all contracts and expendi-
tures of money while Lee constantly maintained that he was
denied access to information and that everything was done to
conceal all transactions from him. In an intercepted letter
of October b, 1777, Arthur Lee complained to his brother,
Richard Henry Lee, that ”Mr. Deane, Dr. Bancroft, and William
Carmichael . . . have been practicing against me, and what I
do not know is how far it may extend.“79 Such an arrangement
and feeling may account for Arthur Lee's private letters to
his brothers in Congress of charges and warnings that some-
thing should be done to protect the public interest. Such
an explanation may be logical but it does not explain Arthur

Lee's desire to acquire control of the Commission.

79Stevens, Eacsimiles, #269; Richard Henry Lee, Life of
Arthur Lee, II, 118-19.

103

Arthur Lee immediately charged his colleagues with
failure to press the French for an Alliance, with endanger-
ing and violating French neutrality and hospitality with
indiscriminate privateering and open and illegal sale of
prizes in French ports, and with the mishandling of Ameri-
can affairs because of their greed, incompetence and in-

80

dolence. In these charges he was vigorously supported by

William Lee, Alderman of London, Commercial agent at Nantes
and Commissioner at the courts of Vienna and Berlin.81
Arthur Lee charged, and with some degree of truth, that
the commissioners in Paris had failed to keep him informed
of the progress of affairs during his Journeys.82 He«was
especially critical of the business of the privateers and
charged that large sums of money had been spent without his
knowledge and consent.83 The difficulties of William Lee,
his brother, about the commercial agency at Nantes did noth-
ing to calm ruffled tempers and soothe the pride of the in-
Jured. Deane's midnight visitsau to Versailles for confer-
ences with Gerard and Vergennes added to Arthur Lee's suspi-
cions that important matters were being concealed from him

and that state secrets were being used for private commercial

advantages.85

801b1d,’ 1, 100, 170-71, II, lie—16.

81William Lee, Letters, I, 279-80, 346-b8.
82Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 351.
83Richard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur Lee, I, 3&6.

8nStevens, Facsimiles, #259.
851=lichard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur Lee, I, 3H6.

10h

Such a state of affairs was too much for a man who
ardently desired to accomplish great things for his country.
Arthur Lee soon convinced himself that he was a victim of a
cabal86 engineered by Deane and abetted by Franklin to de-
prive him of the honor and credit to which he was entitled.
To Theodoric Bland, his friend in America, he wrote: “It
is not a little unpleasant to be deprived of that praise
that constant toil and assiduity in the public service have
deserved, and submit to be traduced by those who, instead of
consulting the public interests when in office, have made
immense fortunes for themselves and their dependents; who
are occupied with two things only, their own gain and the
abuse of everyone who will not sacrifice the public to
theirs. Mr. is generally understood to have made.‘
60,000. . . .These things are notorious, and there is no
visible source of their prosperity, but the public money and
state secrets to trade upon. It may be useful to you to know
these things as they concern the public.“87

Discovering that neither Deane nor Franklin were in-
clined to accept his leadership or criticism, Arthur Lee
conceived a plan whereby he could secure control of the Com-
mission in Paris by a shift in the membership. On October
1“, 1777, shortly after his return from Berlin, he wrote

Samuel Adams, his friend and supporter in Congress, this

861bid., II, 118.
87Ibid., I, 161-62.

105

observation and suggestion: ”I have with this been at the
several courts of Spain, Vienna, and Berlin, and I find
this of France the great wheel that moves them all. Here,
therefore, the most activity is required, and if it should
ever be a question in Congress about my destination, I should
be much obliged to you for remembering that I should prefer
being at the court of France."88 On the same day, October
1h, he wrote his brother, Richard Henry Lee: ”My idea of
adapting characters and places is this: Dr. Franklin to
Vienna, as the first, most respectable, and quiet [place];
Mr. Deane to Holland; and the Alderman [William Lee] to Ber-
lin, as the commercial department; Mr. Izard where he is; Mr.
Jenning at Madrid, his reserve circumspection being excel-
lently adapted to that court. France remains the center of
political activity, and here, therefore, I should chose to
be employed."89

Arthur Lee had worked out the above plan which would
manipulate the characters involved and place himself in an
advantageous position. This was not a momentary whim for
again later in the year he lamented to Richard Henry Lee
that: "Things go worse and worse everyday among ourselves,
and my situation is more painful. I see in every department

neglect, dissipation, and private schemes. Being in trust

381b1d., II, 113.
891bid.. pp. 11a-16.

106

here, I am responsible for what I cannot prevent, and
these very men will probably be the instruments of having
me called to account one day for their misdeeds. There is
but one way of redressing this and remedying the public
evil, and that is the plan I sent you."90 The plan of
course refers to the one that would leave Arthur Lee in
Paris and in control of the mission.

Mr. Lee's confidence in his ability to operate the
"great wheel" in Paris was never in doubt, but the suspi-
cions that he had of graft, corruption, and personal specu-
lations were never specifically cited. That he "whispers
in” Samuel Adams' ear of stock Jobbing is not necessarily
proof that it was 30.91

In a letter intercepted by the General Post Office in
London, William Carmichael, hated by the Lees and by Novem—
ber of 1777 at odds with Deane, described the suspicion of
the Lee brothers in this manner: “The misfortune of these
people is to believe that everybody is plotting against
them, they therefore plot against everybody. They think me
leagued with Mr. Deane and Dr. Franklin at the very time I
really feel hurt at their public conduct and the private

behavior of one to my self."92

9°Ib1a.. pp. 127-28

911b1d.. pp. 12u-25.
9ZStevens, Facsimiles, #288.

107

The entire time that Deane had lived in France had been
a period of high tension. It would have been unusual if he
had not failed to control his temper or had not shown resent-
ment for what he considered unfair and unjustified criticism.
Deane was not insensitive to the charges and insinuations of
mismanagement and private speculation. On December 13, 1777,
he wrote a straightforward letter to Arthur Lee asking him to
name the time and place for a meeting: “Mr. Deane cannot be
insensible to the manner in which he has been treated in Mr.
Lee's last two Billets, nor to the insinuations which have
been for many months since made by Mr. Lee, respecting his
conduct. This is not the time to resent either the one or
the other. Mr. Deane wishes not ever to do it, but in the
mean Time, and once for all, urges Mr. Lee to have the Candor
to communicate to him in person the grounds for his uneasi-
ness: in which case Mr. Deane pledges his honor that Nothing
on his part shall be wanting to remove them. This is cer-
tainly a more honorable and Just way, between equals at least,
than Private insinuations and threatening Billets or Complain—
ing ones.'93

To this offer Mr. Lee did not answer. The negotiations
with the French Court soon became the dominant concern of the
Commissioners and new differences soon over-shadowed the ones

of the past.

93New York Historical Cgllections, II, 272-73.

108

The signing of the treaty of Amity and Commerce and
the treaty of Alliance in March of 1778 by France and the
American Commissioners in Paris ended the French policy of
“watchful waiting”. Long before the arrival of Silan Deane
in July of 1776, the French ministers had considered ways
and means of sustaining the revolt of the American colonies
without becoming directly involved in a war with England.
This had been the basis for the policy of secret aid, now
ended with the formal recognition of the American colonies
as an independent state.

When the news of the victory at Saratoga reached the
Chancery in Versailles, Vergennes realized that the moment
of decision had arrived. He foresaw that England must now
make a desperate and drastic effort for a reconcilation or
face the prospect of a long, long war. France, he felt,
”must now either support the colonies or abandon them. We
must form the alliance before England offers independence
or we will lose the benefit to be derived from America, and
England will still control their commerce.”9h

Having reached a decision, Vergennes moved swiftly. He
prepared a paper in which he outlined the policy required by
the new developments. The paper was submitted to Haurepas,
the chief minister, and through him Vergennes' new policy was
presented to the king. After consideration by Louis XVI and

a Council of State, the resolution to form an alliance with

9“Stevens, Facsimiles, #1775-

109

the United States was unanimously adopted December 12, 1777.
A courier was immediately dispatched to Spain with the news
of Burgoyne's surrender and the decision of the French Court
to make an alliance with the Americans because the French
Ministers felt that the opportune time for such a move had
arrived. The concurrence of the Spanish Court was requested
and expected as provided for in the Family Compact. When
the request was rejected by the Spanish Court, France de-

cided to proceed alone.95
The news of Burgoyne's surrender brought rejoicing to

the Americans at Passy. Franklin, if not his colleagues,
knew that a crisis was at hand. He felt that America could
now play England against France, and he was determined to
make the most of the situation. Throughout the year 1777
Franklin's diplomacy had not been aggressive. He sincerely
believed that it was in the true interest of France and her
commerce to prevent the American colonies from being defeated.
He reasoned that the loss to England of her American commer-
cial monopoly would more than repay France for the cost of
supporting American independence.96 His refusal to “court"
95Edward S. Corwin, ”The Treaty of Alliance and Outbreak
of War,“ French Polggy and the Amp;i9an_glliance, pp. l20-h9;
Claude S. VanTyne, “Influences Which Determined the French
Government to Make a Treaty with America,“ Americanfifilptorir

cal Review, XXI (1916), 528-hl; Edmund C. Burnett, "Notes on
the American Negotiations for Commercial Treaties, 1776-1786,"

American Historiga; Review, XVI (1910), 579-87.

96Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 388; Weldon A.
Brown, Empire or Independence: A Study in Failure of Recon-

ciliatigp, lth-lZB} (Baton Rogue, l9hi7i

110

France and his reluctance to "bind America beyond its

true interests" had been reported to London and were a
decisive factor in the British campaign for reconcilia-
tion.97 William Carmichael, in a letter intercepted by

the General Post Office in London, had expressed his opin-
ion that Franklin actually trembled "for Fear his Proposi-
tions would be accepted [in Fraan . He wishes no European

Connections. . . ."98

If the year 1777 was a year of military reverses for
the Americans, and a year of ”watchful waiting" for the
French, until October 5, at least, it had been a year of
golden hapes for the English. In fact, Lord North was al-
ready considering how to speak of America in the King's
Speech to Parliament when it should reassemble. To William
Eden, Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, he put
the question: "How shall we mention America? Shall we be
very stout? or shall we take advantage of the flourishing
state of our affairs to get out of the d____d.war, and hold
a moderate language?"99 Little did he know that his ques-
tion had already been answered for him at a place called

Saratoga, October 5, 1777.

97Stevens, Facsimiles, #277; David Jayne Hill, ”Frank-
lin and the French Alliance," Records of the Columbig_
Historical Society, XXX;‘(1939YI.

988tevens, Facsimiles, #289.

99Lord North to William Eden, November n, 1777. British
Museum.Additional Manuscripts 3hhlh, pp 309-10, Clements
Library; Alan Brown, Willgam Eden and the American Revolu-
tion, unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of Michigan, Film
number 1537.

111

The news of Burgoyne's surrender arrived in England
December 2, causing consternation in all British political
circles. Lord Germain, Secretary of War, wrote to Eden
that he could think of nothing but America, and asked if
Eden had "thought of any EXpedient for extracting this
country out of its distress?“1°o Eden did think of some-
thing. With North's approval, but under Eden's immediate
supervision, Paul Wentworth, former colonial agent and now
a British agent, was dispatched two days later in an elev-
enth hour attempt to forestall any Franco-American Alliance
which the British ministers now considered imminent. Went—
worth was only one of a number of such agents who appeared
independently and secretly to attempt liaison with Dr.
Franklin.

Before Paul Wentworth left London on his mission to
Paris to prevent the signing of a Franco—America alliance
he received a letter from Eden which was to guide him in his
negotiations. If necessary, Wentworth was authorized to per-
mit the Americans to read it. The letter contained an appeal
to the Commissioners to consider carefully all the issues
and factors involved before making any decision that would
prevent reconciliation from taking place of the basis of a
common agreement. This was based on a common national pride,

sentiment, and common interest and warned the Americans

10°Lord Germain to William Eden, December 3, 1777,
British Museum, Add. MSS 3hhlh, p. 310.

112

against trusting an ”alien nation." In his letter Eden
listed a number of questions to serve as a basis of negotia-
tion with the commissioners:

1. Would the colonies pay the expenses of their
own government in lieu of taxes to England?

2. Upon the restoration of charters would the
colonies restore all confiscated property?

3. Would the colonies be willing to pay for their
own military protection?

b. Upon the re-opening of their ports would the
colonies accept some sort of commercial regu~
lations?

5. Would both countries exchange mutual guar-
antees of possessions and restore common
citizenship?

Eden expressed the opinion that the Americans should not
demand complete independence; with a system of "qualified
controul" he felt that the war could be ended to the satis-
faction and honor of all.101

It is not unlikely that Eden was guided by the senti-
ments expressed in another of William Carmichael's inter-
cepted letters. In this letter Carmichael expressed the
opinion, which was interpreted to be that of the commissioners,
that 'If we could on one side lose the idea of supremacy and
on the other side that of independence we might be friends by

Treaty never by Confederacy."102

101Stevens, Facsimiles, #“83-
1021bid., #288.

113

Before Wentworth left London he was not given any
written instructions as to how he should implement his
mission. However, it is not unlikely that Eden suggested
that Deane would be a good contact. In July of 177?

George Lupton, British agent in Paris who was friendly
with Deane, had reported to Eden: "I cannot help mention-
ing an observation or expression which Mr. Deane made to
me and many others and which has startled me, the friend
of America. I breakfasted with him on Monday last at
which he observed that it was a pity that Great Britain did
not bring about a reconciliation with the colonies, and
Jointly make war against France, but at the same time he
observed twould be necessary to let them support their in-
dependence, however I imagine a reconciliation might be
brought about on favorable terms."103

Wentworth left London on the 10th of December, arriving
in Paris on the 12th. He immediately wrote to Deane re-
questing a private interview. He stated that he would wait
for him in his coach the following morning near the barrier
leading to Passy. Then he would attend an exhibition at the
Luxemburg Gallery, and in the evening would go to the Pot de
Vin Bathing House on the river, leaving a note with the num-
ber of the room engaged with the attendant. Wentworth in-
formed Deane that "In the meeting the greatest secrecy and
honour is eXpected."louh In reply Deane stated that he would

1031hid., #179.
lOL‘Ihid” #719.

it III-Ililll

 

11a

see anyone who had business with him and that "Mr. Deane
will always treat every subJect and honour its merit.“105
In his reply Wentworth mentioned that he was on the point
of returning to London "where you may have wishes to make
me useful in which I shall be happy if they promote a
peace." The two men met at dinner and after pledging them-
selves to "secrecy and the confidence of private gentlemen
wishing well to both countries” they reviewed the anteced—
ents of the conflict without arriving at a common view.106

Next morning Wentworth called for Deane at the Cafe
St. Honors where he was having breakfast with Franklin and
Arthur Lee. After the meal the two men went off together
to continue discussion in which Wentworth reported that
Deane displayed a great deal of Republican pride.

In their second meeting Wentworth outlined his plan of
reconciliation, which was to be based on amnesty and a re—
turn to the status that existed at the time of the treaty
of 1763. Uhder this plan the colonies were to be self—
governing in their own affairs and Parliament was only to
interpose in external affairs. He proposed an armistice by
which British troOps would be withdrawn except in New York
and the neighboring islands. He also suggested that the

American leaders would be entitled to such offices as Privy

1”New York Historical Collections, II, 221»

1°6Pau1 Wentworth to William Eden, December 17, 1777,
British Museum, Add. MSS. auuiu, pp. “BB-#2.

115

Seals, Great Seals, local baronies, Knighthoods, and
governor-generalships. To this he suggested a loan of
thirty-million pounds for the benefit of agriculture and
a sound currency.107 It was a rosy picture, and it may be
inferred that Deane showed interest.

Deane, pleading illness, failed to keep his next
appointment with Wentworth. In reply to a note from Went—
worth he arranged a meeting between Wentworth and Franklin.
Franklin stipulated that no mention of personal rewards
would be made and that the meeting would have to appear ac-
cidental. The stipulated condition reveals that Deans and
Franklin had discussed the previous Deane-Wentworth conversa-
tions.

Arthur Lee learned about the Deane-Wentworth conversa-
tions indirectly. "In the evening Mr. Lee visited Mr. Com—
missioner Izard, who asked if he had heard anything of a
proposal to the commissioners, within a few days, from Eng-
land. Mr. Lee said, 'No'. He (Izard) replied, 'you are
ill-treated, and you ought to call Mr. Deane to a severe
account for his conduct'; for that Paul Wentworth had a meet-
ing with Mr. Deane, to whom he made propositions, which Mr.
Deane gave to the French ministry! Mr. Lee said that he had
not heard one syllable of it; that he would enquire into it;

1°7Ibid._

116

but that being a public wrong, he could not resent it
personally."108 The next day “Mr. Lee went to Passy at

12 o'clock. . . .Lee asked Mr. Deane whether a Mr. Went-
worth was in town, and whether he has seen him? Mr. Deane
said that Hr. Wentworth had desired to see him, that he
knew little of him, that he expressed a desire for accom—
modation, and upon what terms it could be obtained, for that
he thought the ministry in England were disposed to it.

This was all he communicated upon the subJect."109 With the
exception of Arthur Lee's feelings the negotiations were a
success. First Deane did the spade work and, having led
Wentworth to expect success, quietly turned the affair over
to Franklin. The French ministers were kept fully informed
of each move and offer made by the British agent—-not only
by their own agents but by Franklin and Deane.

The meeting between Wentworth and Franklin took place
as arranged. For two hours they talked, and Wentworth read
parts of Eden's letter of December 6. Franklin was even
more noncommittal than Deane. Then Wentworth proposed to
send Deane and Franklin to England under a safe conduct to
deal directly with the ministers. Franklin closed the con-
versation by stating that America would never consent to
peace without independence and stated that he really had no

power to deal with Great Britain on any basis.110

108Richard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur:Lee, I, 366—67.
109Ibid., p. 367.

110Lewis Einstein, Divideg_Lgyaltigg; Americans in Engr
land During the War of Independence, (London, 1938), p. 28.

 

11?

In dispatches dated December 25, 1777, and January 1,
1778, Wentworth reported the results of his mission to Eden
who forwarded them to Lord North. Lord North commented to
Eden: ”I was two hours reading Wentworth's dispatches last
night. I do not know what to think of them, and I cannot
pretend to Judge whether there is, or is not any wish of
peace in 51 [code name for Deane‘]."111 The entire corres-
pondence was transmitted to George III. North's comment
to him was that: "This expedition of Mr. Wentworth's may
very possibly end in nothing, but (as he speaks entirely for
himself, Lord North hopes and believes that no mischief can
arise from it), especially as he had the greatest confidence
in the discretion and ability of Mr. Wentworth.“112 In his
diagnosis and evaluation of Paul Wentworth's mission Lord
North was wrong.

The astute Franklin sensed the advantage to be gained
from each British offer of reconciliation. He seized every
opportunity to increase his bargaining power by informing
the French ministers of the offers and suggestions that were
being made not only by Wentworth but by the various other
agents who appeared independently of each other, but he was
pointedly silent on the provisions or terms offered or sug-

gested. In a conversation with Deane, Gerard noted and

111Lord North to William Eden, December 23, 1777,
British Museum, Add. MSS. thlh, pp. #61—62.

112The Correspondence of George III with Lord Northjfrom
1768 to 1283, W. Bodham, ed., 2 vols. (London, 1867), II,
591.

118

reported to Vergennes that Deane "spoke to me with much
uneasiness of the conduct of Mr. Hutton, and confessed that
Dr. Franklin was very reticent in this matter."113 Ver-
gennes instructed Gerard to maintain close contact with
Deane, because, he said: "I do not suspect that any reti-
cence exists on the side of our friend.” Wentworth was

also placed under close observation, and each visitor and
visit was noted and reported by agents of Vergennes.11n

In the meantime, while Deans and Franklin had been consider-
ing overtures from England, Gerard had been commissioned by
Vergennes to Open the preliminary negotiations with the
three American Commissioners and obtain from them the condi—
tions upon which an alliance could be made. The hour for
which Franklin had waited had arrived.

In opening the formal negotiations with the American
commissioners, Gerard's first step was to invite Deane to
Versailles. In his report to Vergennes Gerard wrote: "I
confided my plan to Mr. Deane that, having regard to our
previous interviews, I might be commissioned to announce to
him the execution of a treaty, but I begged him not to in-
form his colleagues. The confidence which this Deputy puts
in me seemed to require this preliminary disclosure, and his

conduct has Justified it.”115 Deans, who refused to hear

113Stevens, Facsimiles, #1831; "Some Accounts of James
Hutton's Visit to Franklin in France, in December of 1777,”
Pennsylvania Maga§;ps of Historyiand Biography, XXXII (1908),
223-32.

11“Stevens, Facsimiles, #718.
115Ibid., #1831.

 

119

any proposals unless his colleagues were present, arranged
for a meeting of the Commissioners with Gerard without dis—
closing the purpose of the Conference.

The three Commissioners did meet with Gerard. The pri—
mary subject was the extent of French aid required to secure
American independence. Gerard opened the discussion by re-
questing each individual to pledge himself to secrecy both
as to the meeting and the subjects discussed. After a slirht
hesitation Franklin broke the silence by saying, "I promise,"
followed by Lee and Deane. Gerard then asked two questions:
"1. What would they, the Deputies, consider sufficient to re—
ject all the proposals of England, which did not include rec-
ognition of full and absolute independence both in politics
and trade? and 2. What would they consider eoually necessary
to produce the same effect on Congress and the American
people?" Franklin immediately raised the auestion of France's
entry into the war, but this Gerard pointed out was a ouestion
that he was not empowered to discuss. However, it stood to
reason that war would soon follow, and he knew that the King
was prepared to wage war, but he could say no more on this
subject. Gerard, having side-stepped the issue of immediate
war, wished to withdraw so that the deputies might consider
their answer jointly and privately.

At the end of an hour Gerard returned and found Franklin

writing a reply. At Deane's request Franklin read his answer

120

to the first question asked by the French Minister. In

his statement Franklin reviewed the "fruitlessness of their
proceedings and the difficulties they had experienced."
Finally, Gerard reported, he read an article to the effect
that the immediate conclusion of a treaty of commerce and
alliance would induce the deputies to close their ears to
any proposal which should not have as its basis entire lib-
erty and independence, both political and commercial. At
this point Gerard stopped him and stated that the king and
his ministers "having presumed that such would be the de-
sire of the deputies, I had been authorized to tell them
that whenever they should Judge that treaty necessary His
Majesty was resolved to at once conclude it, and that it
would be begun as soon as they wished." But Franklin again
returned to France's entry into the war. Gerard hesitated,
"but Mr. Deane encouraged me with a glance” and again being
pressed by Franklin said that two treaties might be con—
cluded--the first of peace, friendship, and commerce; the
second, of eventual alliance. The first would recognize the
independence of the United States and treat with her as an
equal. Gerard explained that the value and the implementa-
tion of the alliance would depend upon events. The only
definite stipulation that the King would make in an alliance
was that the colonies should continue the war until the
British were eXpelled from North America. In his final re-

port of the meeting to Vergennes Gerard wrote: ”I had dwelt

121

on the conquest of the whole continent because Deane had
confided to me that this was according to the Doctor's way
of thinking, and the most definite reason for forming ties
with France, which he was inclined to think the United
States could otherwise do without."116 It was at this meet-
ing that the Americans learned that Spain had declined to
recognize the independence of the United States or Join in
the alliance. The disappointment of the Americans, espe-
cially Franklin, was acute. "The Doctor after some moments
of silence, replied with some emotion: 'We have always been
given to understand, and we have always thought that the
resolves of France were common to Spain.‘"117

On January 18, 1778, Gerard, who had been appointed
the negotiator for Louis XVI, submitted to Franklin, Lee,
and Deane tentative drafts of the two treaties. Two weeks
were spent in agreeing on the details. In accordance with
Gerard's former statement that the King of France was “too
great, too Just and too generous" to profit by the circum-
stances to gain any advantage from them, he counted “only
on the advantages which would result from mutual interest."
With regard to France's renunciation of commercial monop-
olies Gerard had stated and now proved that the King ”was
eager to give to all Europe as well as America on this oc-

casion an example of disinterestedness, by asking of the

1161bid., #1831.
1171bid., #1831.

122

United States only such things as it might suit them to
grant equally to any other power.“ BenJamin Franklin,
Thomas Paine, and thn Adams would all be pleased with this
commercial treaty which did not carry any involvements with
it.

In the second treaty, The Treaty of Alliance, the
Commissioners squarely faced "political entanglements.|I
This treaty was to come into force only in case of an actual
outbreak of hostilities between England and France (Article
I). Article II declared: "The essential and direct End of
the present defensive alliance is to maintain effectually
the liberty, Sovereignty, and indenpence absolute and un-
limited of the said united States, as well in Matters of
Government as of commerce.” Article VI dealt with terri-
torial claims. “The most Christain King renounces forever
the possession of the islands of Bermudas as well as any
part of the continent of North america which before the
treaty of Paris in 1763, or in virtue of that Treaty, were
acknowledged to belong to the Crown of Great Britain, or
the united states heretofore called British Colonies, or
which are at this time or have been lately under the Power

of the King and Crown of Great Britain."118

117Ibid., #1831.

118The Treaties of 1778 and All;ed Documents, Gilbert
Chinard, ed., (Baltimore, 1928), p. 52.

123

In accordance with the expressed wish of the King of
France the treaty stated that "neither of the two Parties
shall conclude either Truce or Peace with Great Britain,
without the formal consent of the other first obtain'd;
and they mutually engage not to lay down arms, until the
Independence of the united States shall have been formally
or tacitly assured by the Treaty or Treaties that shall
terminate the war."119

The negotiation between the French and the Americans
was concluded without any basic difference of opinion. How-
ever, clauses XI and XII of the Amnity and Commerce treaty
related to a proposal by Gerard that France should agree to
impose no export duty on molasses purchased by Americans in
the French West Indies in return for which the United States
should agree to place no export duty upon any American com-
modity purchased by Frenchmen. At first Arthur Lee approved,
but later changed his mind, seemingly after consulting Ralph
Izard of South Carolina, now in Paris serving as Commissioner
to the Court of Tuscany.120 Izard, Arthur Lee, and William
Lee reached the conclusion that Silas Deane, with Franklin's
acquiescence, was attempting to favor New England's commer-
cial interests at the expense of southern agricultural inter-
eats.121 Again Deane acted as Franklin's detail man in

119;p;g,, 52-53.

120Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, #77.

121Ib1d., C77; Richard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur Lee,
I , 390-910

124

ironing out difficulties that arose. After the formal
sessions were over Deane often went to Versailles at night
to confer with Gerard.122 Finding that Arthur Lee was
still dissatisfied with the XIth and XIIth articles of the
Treaty of Commerce, Deans and Franklin reversed their posi—
tion and agreed to support him.123 In reply to their re-
quest Gerard informed them that the King had already given
formal assent and any change would require a long delay. He
informed the Commissioners that Congress, if they so desired,
would be at liberty to strike out the two articles and that
the French King would not object.12”

The signing of the treaties occured February 6, 1778.
With the exception of the differences over articles XI and
XII, the three American Commissioners had worked together
harmoniously—-if not happily. Arthur Lee had proposed con-
sulting William Lee and Ralph Izard, the Commissioners for
Berlin—Vienna and Tuscany respectively but his proposal was
reJected by Franklin and Deane on the grounds that these
two Commissioners were not authorized to treat with France.
This reJection from the deliberations of the Commission did
not decrease the hatred or contempt for Deane but it did
earn for Franklin the hatred of William Lee and Ralph Izard,
a hatred that they would carry to the grave.

lzzlbido, I, 372-73.
123Wharton, Diplomapic Correspondence, II, #82.

12”;bid., b85.

125

Franklin, Deane, and Lee were officially received by
the King, civily if not enthusiastically, on May 20, 1778.
The reception given to Franklin by the people of Paris and
even in the palace demonstrated the effectiveness and suc-

cess of his diplomacy. In the New York Journalthe recep—

 

tion was reported:

When Dr. Franklin, Arthur Lee, and Silas Deane were
introduced to the French King in the duality of Ambas-
sadors from North America, they went in elegant coaches,
attended by a suite. On their entrance into the court
yard, martial music struck up, the soldiers were under
arms, and the French flag was lowered in solemn salute,
which all the officers accompanied.

In the inner part of the palace they were received by
les cent Suisses, the maJor of which announced 'Les
Ambassaseurs des treize provinces unies,‘ i, e, The
ambassadors from the 'Thirteen United Proviences.‘

When they were ushered into the royal presence, the
college of Paris, the bishops, the nobility, ministers,
foreign and domestic, and ladies arose and saluted

them. Old Franklin was noticed to be weak, but the
Count de Vergennes relieved the confusion of the philos-
Opher, by waiving certain forms, and immediately present-
ing him to the king, who, a 1' anslaise, viewing his
credentials, entered directly into conversation. 5

The great object of the mission was a rsality--the
United States of America had been recognized as a member of
the family of nations. She had accuired an ally and no longer
stood alone in her war with Great Britain. To Silas Deane,
merchant from Connecticut, must go a large share of the credit
for the success of the mission. Now he was going home to re—

port to Congress upon America's affairs in Europe.

125Frank Moore, Diary of the American Revolution From
Newspapers and Original Documents, 3 vols. (New York, 1859),
II, 1&3.

CHAPTER V
DEANE'S RECALL

In compliance with an order from Congress Silas Deane
left Paris April 1, 1778. After a residence of some twenty-
two months in France he was going home. He suspected that
there was more to his recall than merely to report to Con-
gress. To Jehn Boss, March 23, 1778, he expressed his irri-
tation: 'I wish to know what has been the complaints against
me, for I have not received one word on the subJect either

'1 Deane's first re-

from Congress or my particular friends.
action had been to remain in France until Congress informed
him of the reason for this censure--for such was his view of
the recall. So now he was going home upon the advice of
Franklin and the recommendations of Beaumarchais. He fully
expected to demolish his enemies,2 vindicate himself3 and

be back in France by autumn." His departure coincided with
a radical change in French foreign policy and an explosive
eruption in the personal relationship of BenJamin Franklin
and Arthur Lee-~e break long smoldering but suddenly brought

to a boiling point by the circumstances surrounding Deane's

lfiew Igrk Histgricg; Cgllegtigne, II, #21-39.
2;bid,. p, nzl-zz.

31bid., p. #39.

“Ibid., p. #20.

 

‘11.! . slut!

 

127

departure. Deane was soon to become the center of two
controversies raging on both sides of the Atlantic.
Normally the recalling of an agent by his government
does not concern and certainly does not involve the govern-
ment to which he is accredited. Deane's recall, however,
proved an exception to this general rule. Vergennes and
his colleagues chose to read into Deane's recall a victory
for the anti-alliance party in the American Congress.
Should the Americans reject the unratified treaties, re-
cently signed by the Commissioners, France, now openly es-
pousing the American cause and with the treaties known to
the public, might be forced to meet England alone--a pros-
pect that she certainly did not desire. Vergennes knew
that the newly created Carlisle Commission in England would
be empowered to make far—reaching concessions to the Ameri—
cans to block the ratification of the treaties. He had long
been aware of a strong anti-alliance sentiment in Congress.
In a State Paper prepared for consideration by the King,
January 7, 1778, Vergennes wrote: "We are informed that
there is a numerous party in America which is endeavouring
to fix as a basis of the political system of the new States
that no engagement be contracted with the European powers.
Doctor Franklin himself professes this dogma. Necessity
alone has prevented its being established; but as soon as
that ceases to exist, the insurgents, who will have asserted
their independence without our help will think they do not

need it in order to maintain their independence. Then we

128

shall be without any bond with them exposed to their
avidity and perhaps their resentment.'5 Therefore if
Deane's recall was a victory for the Anti—Alliance forces,
Deane, the symbol of the solidarity of the Franco-American
alliance, must be protected from their common enemy.

To show their displeasure with Congress in recalling
Deane, the French ministers decided to bestow upon him the
highest marks of esteem and affection. Again, as in 1776,
it was Beaumarchais who recommended the policy adopted by
Vergennes.

In a secret memoir dated March lb, 1778, ten days
after the news of the recall reached France, Beaumarchais
traced the blame to Arthur Lee. He noted that "Mr. Arthur
Lee, from his character and his ambition, at first was
Jealous of Mr. Deane. He has ended by becoming his enemy,
as always happens in little minds more concerned to supplant
their rivals than to surpass them in merit." Beaumarchais
reasoned that to accomplish this goal Lee had determined to
render Deane "an obJect of suspicion to Congress.” This had
been accomplished by exploiting the unpOpularity and resent-
ment caused by Deane's contracts with Foreign officers, and
by writing to his brothers that all supplies from Beaumar-
chais were a gift from the French government. "Thus it is
clear, in my Opinion," Beaumarchais wrote, "that while Eng-

land sends Commissioners to America, and Mr. Lee‘s relatives

5Stevens, Facsimiles, #182u.

 

 

 

129

and friends exert themselves to render popular a recon-
ciliation between the two countries, there is at the same
time an attempt to destroy by slander the influence or the
credit of Mr. Deane and myself-~the men known to be the
most attached to the policy of an alliance between France
and America."6

To offset the success of the anti-alliance group in
Congress Beaumarchais recommended, and Vergennes accepted,

a plan whereby Deane should return to America reflecting
the esteem, respect, and gratitude of his French colleagues,
the King of France, Louis XVI, and Franklin. Vergennes,
realizing that the center of diplomatic activity would soon
shift to Philadelphia, decided to send a minister plenipo-
tentiary to the United States. His purpose was to insure
ratification of the recently signed treaties and to cement
the alliance that, as yet, existed only on paper. For this
most important mission he selected a man who knew and held
Silas Deane in high regard--Conrad A. Gerard.

Deane was invited to accompany the newly appointed
minister plenipotentiary on the flag ship of the French
squadron of war ships on its way.to American waters. Accord—
ing to Beaumarchais' plan, Deane was to return "loaded with
personal honors."7 In his dispatch case Deane carried a por-
trait of Louis XVI, set in diamonds, a letter from Benjamin

6New York Historical Collections, II, #01.
71bid., p. not.

Franklin praising him as an "able, faithful, active and
useful Servant of the Publick," and letters of commendation
from the King's ministers, M. du Maurepas, N. du Sartine,
and the Count Vergennes. The latter praised "the zeal,
activity and intelligence with which he has conducted the
interests of the United States, by which he has merited the
esteem of the King, my master, and for which his Majesty has
been pleased to give him marks of his satisfaction."8
To Beaumarchais was assigned the task of disillusioning

Congress, if need be, that the supelies sent by Rodricue
Hortalez were not a gift from the French government but a
legitimate commercial transaction. For the first time Beau-
marchais informed Congress, officially, that Rodrique
Hortalez and Caron de Beaumarchais were one and the same.
This statement must have caused little surprise. But the
body of his letter was devoted to explaining the origin of
secret aid and of exonerating Deane from any wrongs:

Long before the arriVal of Mr. Deane in France, I had

conceived the plan of founding a business firm suffi-

ciently strong and devoted to incur the riscues of the

sea and of a war, in carrying to you, as I was informed,
for the ecuipment of your trOOps.

I spoke to Mr. Arthur Lee at London, of this project,

and not only asked whether he had any method of secur—

ing commercial intercourse between us, but I also wrote
him from France that if he could assure me of the prompt
arrival of returns, in the products of your country, to
pay for my shipments and to furnish me anew with the means
of serving you, I might perhaps arouse the interest of
some exceedingly wealthy friends of mine and obtain their
assistance.

81bid., p. 435.

131

Mr. Lee replied that if I insisted upon prompt payments
in tobacco, these Operations would be considerably drawn
out, and he besought me to continue sending stores and
supplies in the interval. I answered that having applied
to the authorities themselves for their clandestine sup-
port, in the shape of material advances, and having been
refused, I should merely form a trading company to co-op-
erate with me, in sending shipments, conditional upon the
Speediest possible returns from America.

Since Mr. Lee did not reply to my letter, I was endeavor-
ing alone to found this Company when Mr. Deane came to
France. From the moment of his arrival, I corresponded
with no one else.9

So Deane could depart, reassured by emphatically expressed
approval from France, the government whose help he had come
to secure.

One of the most unexpected results of Deane's recall was
the personal explosion that occurred in the relationship of
Benjamin Franklin and Arthur Lee.

The exact time that Arthur Lee learned of Deane's recall
and what his immediate reaction may have been is not known.
On March 18, Lee's friend, Count de Lauraguais, informed M.
Maurepas, minister of Louis XVI, that Lee had told him of
Deane's recall.lo Lee did not learn that Deane had left the
city until after he had gone. Nor did Lee learn of Gerard's
appointment until a few hours before Gerard left Paris-~then
only because Gerard called at his house and told Lee of his
appointment. How much did Lee actually know? His actual in-
formation and the use he planned to make of it cannot be as—
certained. However, if Lee were looking for an opportunity
to cast aspersions on Deane's public and personal honesty

911316 e , pe 143?.
10Stevens, Facsimiles, #802.

 

132

the situation was ready-made. It was suggested that
Deane's hurry to leave France was a deliberate attempt to
avoid settling his accounts. To the casual observer and
many members of Congress the suggestion seemed plausible.
That the contrary was the actual truth is revealed in
Deane's letter to Beaumarchais dated March 29, 1778: "It
is unhappy that the short time allowed me to prepare for
my voyage will not admit of our making at least a general
settlement of your accounts; but the absolute necessity of
my setting out immediately, obliges me to leave my other
transactions in the same unsettled state."11

Regardless of the motive, on March 31, the day Deane
left Paris, Arthur Lee wrote a joint letter to Deane and
Franklin: "The reports I hear of Mr. Deane's intending soon
to leave Paris oblige me to repeat the request I long ago
made and repeatedly made, that we should settle the public
accounts relating to the expenditure of the money intrusted
to us for the public. And this is the more absolutely neces-
sary, as what vouchers there are to enable the commissioners
to make out this account are in Mr. Deane's possession. I
therefore wish that the earliest day may be appointed for
the settlement of these accounts, which appear to me an in-

dispensable part of our duty to the public and one another.”2

11New York Historical Collectionsi_II. “39-

12Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 530.

Benjamin Franklin was, by nature, a mild, easy—going
man inclined to see the best in every one. On March Bl, he
had written a highly complimentary letter to Congress re—
garding the conduct of Silas Deane. On April 1, he wrote
his colleague, Arthur Lee. In this he revealed that when
duly provoked he would use plain language in a non-compli-
mentary way. To Lee he wrote:

There is a style in some of your letters, I ohserve

it particularly in the last, whereby superior merit

is assumed to yourself in point of care and attention
to business, and blame is insinuated on your colleagues
without making yourself accountable, by a direct charge
of negligence or unfaithfulness, which has the appear—
ance of being as artful as it is unkind. In the pres-
ent case I think the insinuation groundless.

I do not know that either Hr. Deane or myself ever
showed any unwillingness to settle the public accounts.
The banker's book always contained the whole. You
could at any time as easily have obtained the account
from them as either of us and you had abundantly more
leisure. If, on examining it, you had wanted an ex—
planation of any article, you might have called for
and had it. You never did either. As soon as I ob—
tained the account, I put it in your hands, and de—
sired you to look into it, and I have heard no more
of it since till now, just as Hr. Deane was on the
point of departing. Fr. Deane, however, left with me
before the receipt of your letter both the public
papers, and explications of the several articles in
the account that came with his knowledge. With these
materials, I suppose we can settle the account when-
ever you please. You have only to name the day and
place, and I will attend the business with you.’

In reply to Arthur Lee's charge that Deane's departure
had been deliberately kept a secret from him, Franklin re-

plied: "Mr. Deane communicated to me his intention of

131b1d., p. 530.

settins out for America immediately as a secret, which he
desired I would mention to nobody. I complied with his re—
quest. If he did not think fit to communicate it to you
also, it is from him you should demand his reasons."

When Arthur Lee charged that M. Gerard's appointment
as minister had been made without consulting him, Franklin
replied: "The measure of sending M. Gerard as a minister
was resolved on without consultinfi me; but I think that it
was a wise one, and, if I did not, I do not conceive that
I had any right to find fault with it. France was not con-
sulted when we were sent here. Your ansry charge, there-
fore, of our 'makins a party business of it' is groundless.
We had no hand in the business. And as we neither 'acted
nor advised' in it, which you suppose, your other hieh-sound-
ing charge of our doing violence to the authority that con—
stituted us and a great injury and injustice to you is ecu-
ally without foundation."1u

When Arthur Lee again reminded Franklin that his re-
quest to settle the public accounts before Deane left had
been ignored, Franklin wrote:

When this comes to be read in Committee, for whom it
seems to be calculated rather than for me, who know
the circumstances, what can they understand by it,
but that you are the only careful, honest man of the
three, and that we have some knavish reasons for

keeping the accounts in the dark and you from seeing
the vouchers? But the truth is, the papers naturally

1“Ib16., p. 530.

13b

1?5

came into Mr. Deane's hands and mine; before either
you or I came into France; next, as somebody must
keep the papers, and you were either on lone jour—
neys to Spain, to Vienna, and Berlin, or had a
commission to go and reside in Spain, which it was
expected would soon be executed; whereas Kr. Deane
and I lived almost constantly in the same house,
either at Paris or Passy; you separate from us;
and we did most of the business. Where, then,
could the papers be so prOperly placed as with us,
who had daily occasion to make use of them? I
never knew that you desired to have the keeping

of them. You never were refused a paper, or a
copy of a paper, that you desire.

Franklin also told lee that he had served many publics
in his long life and'there is not a single instant of my
ever being accused before of acting contrary to their inter-
est or duty." And he also reminded Lee that he was account—
able to Congress and not to Lee. "I saw your jealous, sus-
picious, malignant, and ouarrelsome temper, which was daily
manifesting itself against Mr. Deans and almost every other
person you had any concern with. I therefore passed your
affronts in silence, did not answer but burnt your ansry let-
ters, and received you when I next saw you, with the same
civility as if you had never wrote them."15 To Francis Hop-
kinson, Franklin wrote in a more characteristic vein: "At
present I do not know of more than two such enemies that I

enjoy, vie Lee and Izard. I deserve the enmity of the lat-

ter, because I might have avoided it by paying him a

151bid., p. 539.

Aww -

136

compliment, which I neglected. That of the former I owe to
the peeple of France, who happened to respect me too much
and him too little-~which I could bear, and he could not."16
Arthur Lee, not satisfied with Franklin's answer,
continued to pour out his wrath, suspicion, and grievances
into the ears of a Congress which "did not understand the
circumstances." John Adams, Deane's replacement, soon found
that it was impossible to maintain a neutral position in the
Commission. He was accused of joining forces with Arthur
Lee but this is untrue. The Lees in America had been instru—
mental in selecting John Adams with a definite plan in mind;m’
The Lees in France had been coached how to handle him.18
However thn Adams refused to become involved in a partisan
struggle and said so. To William McCreavy he wrote on Sep-
tember 25, 1778: ”If I had been strongly against Mr. Deane,
I should certainly avow it and make no secret of it at all.
I have never been used to disguise my sentiment of Men whom
I have been against in public life, and I certainly should
not begin with Mr. Deane, who is not and never was a man of
Importance enough to make me deviate from a rule I have ob-
served all my life, vizt., when obliged to be a Man's Enemy,

to be openly and generously so."19 To James Lovell, he

16Hale and Hale, Franklin in Paris, I, n59.

17Richard Henry Lee, Ehe Letters of Richard Hengy_Lee,
John C. Ballagh, ed., 2 vols. (New York, 1911—1h), I, 352.

18William Lee, Letters, II, his, nun-us.
19Hale and Hale, Franklin inAParis, I, 232.

 

137

stated quite bluntly: "Mr. Deane complains of ill treatment,
and claims great merit for his services. I shall not add to
the ill treatment, nor depreciate the merit. . . .I have
heard a great deal concerning his conduct-~great panegyrics
and harsh censures. But I believe he has neither the merit
that some persons ascribe to him, nor the gross faults to
answer for which some others inputs or suspect. I believe
he was a deligent servant of the public, and rendered it

useful services."20

To Richard Henry Lee, Adams on August 5, 1778, stated
his respect for Arthur Lee. But he also said, rather point-
edly: “I will have nothing to do with designs and endeavours
to run down characters, to paint in odious colors in differ-
ent action, to excite or propagate suspicions without evi-
dence, or to foment or entertain prejudices of any kind, if

I can possibly avoid it.”21

Many of the Lee partisans constantly urged that John
Adams could and should tell Congress the truth. If Jehn
Adams had anything to say he never said it which is a good
reason to believe that he did not change the views he ex-
pressed to William McCreavy, James Lovell, and Richard Henry
Lee.

For some time before his recall Deane had already

expressed a desire to retire from public life. To Robert

20Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 66b.
211bid., p. 678.

138

Morris he confided that he had "no ambition for being at
courts: I have seen enough of them to ease me of such
passion. . . .” His private affairs had been neglected for
several years and he planned to retire Just as soon as the
treaty with France was signed. ”I shall ask Liberty to quit
politics forever . . . and enjoy what of life may be left
me.”22 This desire he had already expressed to friends in
Congress, and "as I can now do it with a degree of honor
which my Enemies never dreamt of, the Triumph will be mine
not theirs. . . ."23 Deane knew that he had friends in Con-
gress as well as critics but as yet he was not aware of the
number.24
The recall of Silas Deane by Congress was not done in
a moment of irritation. Nor was it the apparent ripening
of a well laid plot by his enemies. Inferences in the pri-
vate correspondence of the Lee brothers and their associ-
ates indicate that they were not Opposed but had actively
cultivated congressional irritation against Deane. For ex—
ample, Ralph Izard, American Commissioner to Tuscany, wrote
to Jehn Lloyd, an American merchant and a mutual friend of
both Izard and the Lees: "I am confident your idea of the
man [Deane] is Just in every particular, but our opinions
of and concerning him, as also other, it will be most prudent

to reserve solely to ourselves, for reasons which are

22New York Historical Collections, II, 307.

Fu— up" -—-—_—-—o

2.Ibid., p.-RD8.

quohn Ruthledse to Robert Morris, January 23, 1777.
A. L. 8., Hubert S. Smith Collections, Clements Library.

 

sufficiently manifest."25 In the same month Lloyd wrote

to Izard: "I am told that the brothers of the gentlemen
whom you have just mentioned are leading members of Congress,
and they have in consequence great influence. If that is the
case, I think Deane stands on very uncertain around, as you
may depend upon his conduct will not be presented in the most
favourable point of View by them, which joined to Forris's
inveteracy, will form a collective power that may throw him
from his present exalted pinnacle to the dreadful abyss of
native insignificance. From the intimations of a friend of
Deane's I have some cause to believe that such an event

would not be unexpected."26

Unlike their brother Arthur, William and Fichard Henry
Lee were too politically astute to make any rash charges
against Deane. William counselled his brothers on both
sides of the Atlantic to proceed with care. In early Janu—
ary of 1778 William Lee was writing Richard Henry Lee:
"with reapect to charges against Mr. Deane and Er. Car-
michael I think you should weigh the matter with Loudon
[Francis Lightfoot] very cautiously and only move when

you see the way very clear."27 In April of the same

25Ralph Izard, Correspondence of Ralph Izard of South
Carolina, from the year 177“ to 180M: With a Short Kemoir,
Anne Izard Deas, ed., (New York, lBCh), p. 379.

26Ibid., 38h.
27william Lee, Letters, I, 33b.

year William Lee wrote Arthur Lee: "I think great caution
ought to be used . . . with Deane . . . but if anythinr de-
cisive can be got at, no time should be lost in conveying
it."28

Rumors were so widespread that knowledge of Deane's
pending recall was Openly discussed on both sides of the
Atlantic. George Lupton, a British spy in Paris, reported

to London in September of 1777 that "Thomas Forris hives out

'31

that Deane is to be recalled" and "Carmichael informs me
that he imarined that Deane would be removed from his
present employment and appointed to one of less consenuance."27
Beaumarchais' aeent in Philadelphia, de Francey, wrote in
a letter dated December 16, 1777, that Deane had been re—
called and that he was a very ill-used man.30
The influence on Deane's recall by Arthur and William

Lee's letters to tieir “rothers in Congress is hard to de-
termine. It is true that Richard Henry Lee mentioned Deane's
"distressing contracts" to Samuel Adams but it was the same
Pichard Henry Lee who, in Conhress, moved for his recall
because it "would have been out of character to continue
him . . . "31 Richard henry Lee's unexplainable inconsistency

28%. I. Ls18.

29Stevens, Taesiriles, #199

Bode Francey, Letters, p, 10.

31Richard Henry Lee, Letters, I, 353.

 

lhl

of defending and condemning Deane's conduct almost simul-
taneously has a tinge of hypocrisy.

The sending of French officers was definitely a great
source of resentment against Deane. And in a letter of
James Lovell, Secretary of the Secret Committee of Corres-
pondence, the antagonism is readily apparent. In December
of 1777 Franklin informed Lovell "that you have no concept-
ion of how we still are besieged . . . by personal applica-
tion' from French officers. “I hope, therefore, that favor;
able allowance will be made to my worthy colleague on account
of his situation at the time, as he has long since correct-
ed that mistake and daily approves himself, to my certain
knowledge, an able faithful, active and extremely useful
servant of the public; a testimony I think it my duty to
take this occasion to giving to his merit not unasked, as,
considering my great age, I may probably not live to give
it personally in Congress, and I perceive he has enemies.'32
In July Franklin assured Lovell that the Commissioners had
never received any instructions regarding the employment of
foreign officers. 'You mention former letters of the
committee, by which.we might have seen the apprehensions
of the resentment, etc. These letters never came to hand.
And we, on our part, are amazed to hear that the committee

had had no line from us for near a year, during which we had

3Q’Wharton, Diplomatic Corregpondence. II. 458-

1&2

written, I believe, five or six long and particular letters

. .‘33 So it is possible that Deane may have been an
innocent victim of Congressional disfavor because of the
lack of communications. However the letters of James
Lovell and other of the Lee supporters indicate that hints
had been constantly placed with various influential people
that Deane should be recalled.

James Lovell, however, chose to disregard Franklin's
spirited defense of Deane's unpopular contracts with French
officers. For example, in June of 1777 Lovell wrote to
Jeseph Trumbuss of Connecticut: '1 have but a poor idea of
that Gentleman's ability to guard against French finesse
and f1attery,'3h and to General William Whipple in the same
month that it "appears that Deane is only a child in the
hands of du Cou,dray.'.'3'5 Eliphalet Dyer, Deane's former
colleague from Connecticut in the First and Second Continen-
tal Congresses, wrote to Jbseph Trumbull that Ithis is a most
unhappy affair [du Coudray] and our old friend Deane has
been in more Instances than one Imprudent to the last de-
gree.'36 George Washington was informed by Lovell in July
that as bad as du Cordray's contract was, Franklin had

33Ibid., p._65%.
3ljBurnett, Letters 9f Cogggess, II, 379.

359.19.. . p. 39“.
35L§l§ae P0 ”060

143

been able to eliminate the worst features from the original
one made by Deane.37

In July of 1777 the idea that a recall was absolutely
necessary appeared in Lovell's extensive correspondence.
To James Whipple he wrote: '. . . ought not this weal or
rogueish man to be recalled; if as a corresponding agent
[hi] did thus, what will he think himself entitled to do
as a commissioner?'38 .Henry Laurens, an honest man
strongly devoted to the Lees, complained in.August that
the I'late flood of French men rushed in upon us under
agreements with Mr. Deane has reduced Congress to a pain-
ful dilemma'39 and in the same month Laurens observed to
John Rutledge that 'one of our agents [obviously meaning
Deane] has not discovered competency to the immense work
in hand."z~"o A more sinister note was injected by Lovell
in August when he wrote to Oliver Wolcott: I'Other causes
have a more powerful influence. If Silas [Deans] and his
york connections could have a good opening to transfer
their whole property to the other side of the water it is

not impossible that they would gladly do it.'u1

3%Wharton, Diplgmatic Correspondence, II, 366.
388urnett, Letters of Conggggp, II, #31.
”Late... pp. nae-39.

”Olhiga. pp. nus-he.

“1M” pp. #60-62.

 

lhh

On September 8, 177?, Congress formally repudiated
Deane's contracts with all foreign officers on the grounds
'that Mr. Deane had no authority to make such conventions,
and that Congress therefore are not bound to ratify or

fulfil them.”2

On November 21, 1777 Congress 'resolved
that Silas Deane, be recalled from the court of France.‘
he William Williams described the vote to Jonanthan Trum-
bull, November 28, “the motion, made last July was revived
for recalling Mr. Deane, was again taken up and carried
without a dissenting Voice. He died at last very easie,
tho there had been at sund. Times before, the most violent
and convulsive throes and Exertions on the same question.
A motion is also made that it be left to the remaining
Commiss. to Judge on the Spot, wethr Hr. Deane may not yet
be employed at some ether Court. The Motion dropd, and I
trust will never be carried.”3
The last chapter of the recall was described by
Lovell in a letter to Richard Henry Lee: 'The day after
you left york, I moved Congress for an order in the followb
ing words. 'Vhereas it is of the greatest importance that
Congress should, at this critical conjuncture be well in-

formed of the State of Affairs in Europe, and whereas Con-

gress have resolved that the Honble. Silas Deane, Esqr. be

”agpurnals of Congress, VIII, 721.
haBurnett, Letteps of Coggress, II, 57b.

 

' v
' a
- , e
I
' a
' v
Q C
U
C ' U
I I
I
.
.. O
O
.
‘ O
l ‘ .
O 0 C
‘ ° I
C ' ' O

   

recalled . . . and direct him to embrace the first oppor—
tunity of returning to America and upon his arrival to
repair with all possible dispatch to Congress."uu But on
the same day, December 8, he wrote to Deane: "The order
stands in need of no comment 1c‘rom the committee to elucidate
it; and being drawn up in terms complimentary to your
abilities of serving these Vnited States . . ."u5

The real reasons for Silas Deane's recall will
probably never be known. Richard Henry Lee, the author for
the motion of recall, insisted that the genuine ones be
omitted from the Journals of Congress.h6 Congress had
lacked the courage to tell Deane their reason. In fact it
had, by its silence, completely misrepresented the purpose.
Lovell, the Secretary of the Committee of Foreign Affairs,
had deliberately lied to make the truth less obvious.
According to James Lovell, Acting Secretary of the Committee
of Foreign Affairs, "the order was complimentary to your
abilities of serving these United States" and needed no

further explanation.u7

h. ' .
u Nbarton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, huh.

”51bid., p. nu; Burnett, Letters of Congrest. II. 58?.

b6

 

 

New York Historiccl Collections, III, 336.

 

“7Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, hbh.

 

CHAPTER VI

DEANE AND CONGRESS

Great events had occurred in the United States during
the twenty-two months that Silas Deane had been in France.
Independence had been proclaimed, an entire British army
had surrendered, and France had become the ally of the new
nation. These accomplishments, tremendous as they were,
were offset by a disastrous currency inflation, a general
war weariness, and the return of many of the original
congressional revolutionary leaders to positions in state
government or other assignments. The loss of these men
from the legislative council of the nation was accompanied
by a decline in the prestige of Congress-—-a loss that the
young nation could ill afford.1

During the early years of the Revolution, while the
insurgent colonies were fighting with little success for
what they deemed to be their rights, attempts were usually
made to sidestep factional differences for the sake of the
common cause. In 1777 the Conway Cabal brought personal
2 The

ambitions and sectional differences into the Open.

effort of the Cabal to remove Washington from command was

1Thomas Perkins Abernethy, Western Lands and the Amerié
can Revolution (London, 1937), pp. 203-13.

2John Fiske, 'rhe French Alliance and the Conway Cabal,”
Atlantic, XXIV (1889), 220-39.

defeated but in the aftermath Confiress suffered a loss of
prestige from which it was slow to recover. The year 1778
was the nadir of Congressional unpOpularity and partisan
strife. The prevailing condition was described by Titus
Hosmer in a report to Governor Jonathan Thrumbul of
Connecticut dated August 31, 1778:

Nine states make a Congress, some States have
delegates so very negligent, so much immersed in the
pursuit of pleasure or business that it is very rare
that we can make a Congress before eleven o‘clock,

and then it seems incapable of a remedy as Congress
has no mean to compel Gentlemen to attend, and those
who occasion the delay are callous to admonition and
reproof, which have been often tried in vain. When

we are assembled several gentlemen have such a knack
of starting cuestions of order, raising debates upon
critical, captious, and trifling amendments, protract-
ing them by long speeches, by postponing, calling for
the previous question, and other arts, that it is
almost impossible to get an important nuestion de-
cided at one sitting; and if it is put over to another
day, the field is open to be gone over again, precious
time is lost, and the public business left undone.

I am sorry to add that the opposition between the
States, and the old prejudices of North against South,
and the South against North, seem to be reviving, and
industriously heightened by some, who,‘I fear, would
be too well pleased to see our uni n blasted and our
independence broken and destroyed.

The return of Silas Deane unintentionally revived the
factional and sectional differences which were smouldering
beneath the surface. The natural cleavage between the
North and South was cut across and largely submerged by

the alliance between the Virginia Lees and the Massachusetts

Adameses in Congress. A personal element was involved in

3Burnett, Letters of Congress, III, 39h.

 

1&8

this coalition, but it represented primarily an alliance of
the predominantly agricultural forces as opposed to the
commercial. Robert Morris was the leader of the Eastern
mercantile interests,” and Richard Henry Lee and Samuel
Adams directed the opposing faction.5 Deane, in general,
was supported by the mercantile interest and opposed by
the agricultural group. The personal feud that existed
between Arthur Lee and Deane only added fuel to the flame.
Deane's recall had been the work of Richard Henry Lee,
but it is impossible to prove that a well laid plot existed
to 'get' Deane. It is true that Lee “rejoiced“ when Deane
was recalled and he assured his brother, Arthur Lee, that
'Deane, as well as others, shall be attended to here.‘6
The letters of William Lee to Richard Henry Lee contain the
heart of a policy that was followed, namely, "not to let
any of his accounts for the expenditure of public money
finally pass without the most authentic vouchers."7
Deane was later to maintain that he had been told by
a friend, not identified, soon after his arrival that it

“was the design of those who wished to sacrifice me to the

\

“Abernethy, Western Lands, p. 205.
SBurton J. Hendrick The Less of Virginia: Biograpgg
f a Famil (Boston, 19355. pp. 179-213; Lynn Mbnttoss, _Ji
eluctant bels: The Star of the.Continenta1 Congress,
izzfi-1zsg (New York, T9305, p. 253.

éBurnett, Letters of Congress, III, 231, 257.

7Villiam Lee, Letters, II, 519-23.

 

 

1&9

family interests and emoluments of my enemies to wear me
out by delays, and, without any direct charges, to ruin me
in the opinion of my countrymen by insinuations, hints, and
innuendos, that though I might with confidence rely on the
Justice of Congress, yet measures would be taken to delay
it on one pretence or another, in a way that would prove

prejudicial if not ruinous to me."8

This controversy and
suspicion, then, was the political climate in America when
the French fleet dropped anchor July 9, 1778, in Delaware
Bay.

The arrival of the French Minister Plenipotentiary
marked another milestone in the history of the young nation.
Deane immediately notified the president of Congress, Henry
Laurens, of the arrival of the French fleet and the Minister
Plenipotentiary.9 On July 1h, Gerard, accompanied by a

congressional committee,lo

proceeded to Philadelphia where
he was installed in the home of General Benedict Arnold,
the Commandant of the city, until suitable quarters could
be found.

Congress was now faced with the problem of determining
the correct manner in which a Minister Plenipotentiary was

to be received. After much debate devoted to the protocol

BNew Ybrk Historical Collections, III, #57.
9Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 6&3.

1°Ibid., p. och.

 

 

150

of the occasion Congress officially received the first
accredited foreign representative.11 In honor of the
event each member of Congress was permitted to bring two
non-member guests to the formal reception. The sentiments
expressed by Gerard in his prepared address and the reply
of President Laurens met with the approval of all.12

The big news event of the day had been the arrival and
reception of the French Minister Plenipotentiary but the
return of Silas Deane, late commissioner to the Court of
France, had not passed without favorable comment by the
press.13 Due to a slight illness Deane had not accompanied
Gerard to Philadelphia. Upon his arrival he had been warmly
' welcomed by old friends, and members of Congress had been
cordial. During the reception for Gerard he had quietly
waited for Congress to find the time to receive him. On
July 28, twenty days after his return, he tactfully remind-
ed Preeident Laurens that he awaited the pleasure of
Congress.

Shortly after his arrival in Philadelphia Deane had re-
ceived a letter from General George Washington in which the

11Ibid.

12Conrad Alexandre Gerard, Des atches nd Instructi ns
f Conrad A exandre Gerard l 8- 0 John J. chg ed.,
%§Eitlnore,Lia39S, #7; AlmonisE-Rgfiembrancer, (17785 v11, pp.
5-8e

13Pennsylvania Packet, July 1h, 1778.

1“Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 668.

fiEib..li

Wilda“

u

.b,

151

General had expressed his personal appreciation for the
service Deane had rendered to the revolutionary cause.

On August 12, Deane replied, saying llhow happy I am to find
that my conduct has met with your approbation.‘ He also
mentioned that his friends had told him the reason why he
had been recalled. The letter did not reveal any bitter-
ness or resentment but pointed out that in his haste to
comply with the orders of Congress he had left his affairs
unsettled and must return to France in either a private or
public capacity to attend to these affairs.15

When Deane was permitted to appear before Congress on
August 15, 1778,16 it soon became apparent that he had not
been summoned home to report on European affairs. Such,
however, had been clearly stated in James Lovell's letter
accompanying the recall. The delaying tactics warrant the
assumption that his enemies, having accomplished the re-
call, were willing to mark the case closed.

On the appointed day Deane presented himself at the
bar of Congress. He was introduced and seated at a table on
the President's right. He delivered two letters from Dr.
Franklin and M. Beaumarchais that were read and tabled.

Deane began his report only to be interrupted immediately
by axnotion that the report be given in writing. He

15Ib1a., p. 681.
16Jgurnals of Congress, XDC p. 799.

 

ll
‘

EJI

 

 

 

152

withdrew and after a lengthy debate the motion was lost.
As the hour of adjournment was near he was ordered to
appear next Monday to "give from memory, a general account
of the whole transactions in France, from the time of his
arrival, as well as a particular state of the funds of
Congress, and the commercial transactions in Europe,
especially with Kr. Beaumarchais, and to answer such
questions as may be asked."17 On August 17, Deane re-
ported as ordered, and resumed his report. Having made
”some progress he was ordered to withdraw” without any
apparent reason. Five days later, August 21, he was per-
mitted to finish his report and again was ordered to withdraw.18
His report finished, Deane again waited the pleasure
of Congress. He expected, and rightly so, that.Congress
would inform him if further attendance was required. After
waiting for eighteen days Deane wrote President Laurens re-
questing information as to the decision of Congress. Recog-
nizing that Congress had many important matters to discuss
he requested to be informed if "further attendance'' was de-
sired. On the eleventh of September Deane expressed his
appreciation to the president for placing his letter before
Congress. He also stated his intention of visiting friends

prior to his return to France.19

17;p;g,, x11, 920.

18New Xork Historical Cgllections, II, #80.
19Ibid., p. #81.

 

For two months (from July 15, on) Deane had complied
with the requests of Congress without any sifn of irritation
or reproach. Now, however, a note of irritation appeared
in his correspondence. On September in, he wrote to his
old friend, former President John Hancock, that his patience
was wearing thin:

The affairs with respect to me have dragged on so
heavily that nothing decisive has been done, though

I have been constantly applying, and my patience is
really worn out, and I cannot and will not endure a
treatment which carries with it marks of the deepest
ingratitude; but if the Congress have not time to
hear a man who they have sent for four thousand miles,
soley under the pretense of receiving intelligence
from him, it is time the good people of this contin-
ent should know the manner in which their representa-
tives conduct the public business, and how they treat
their fellow citizens, who have rendered their country
the most important services. . . .A majority of Con-
gress would do me Justice, and complain of my being
delayed in the manner I am from day to day and from
week to week, but you know that in Congress a few men
can put off the decision of any ouestion by one means
or another as long as they please, and you are not a
stranger to what a certain triumvirate, who have been
from the first members of Congress, are eoual. The
baseness and ingratitude of one of them you have
sufficiently eXperienced in private life to know him
capable of anythini in public, and my old colleague,
Roger the Jesuit, Sherman] with his southern associa-
tion, has been indefatigable ever since my arrival.20

Deane had written to Hancock on September lb, and two
days later he was ordered to appear before Congress on
September 18, "to answer such ouestions as the members may

propose to him, for the better understanding of the state

ZOSilas Deane, "The Letters of Silas Deane," The Ferdi—
nand J. D. Dreer Collection, Pennsylvania Magazine of His—
tory and Biography, XI (1887), p. 205.

 

and progress of public affairs during his mission to
France."21 Cn the seventeenth, however, a committee re—
ported on letters dated January 5, 6, and 31 from Arthur
Lee and letters of January, 1778, from Benjamin Franklin
and Silas Deane. Richard Henry Lee then informed the
Congress that he had information that William Carmichael,
while in France, had publicly charged Silas Deane with
misapplication of public money. Lee was ordered to sub-
mit the information in writing. The paper he submitted
read:

Richard Henry Lee is informed that Mr. Carmichael

did some time in the last spring or winter, say in
Nantes, that he knew Kr. Deane had misapplied the
public money, and that Mr. Carmichael did in strong
terms reprobate Mr. Deane's conduct, both in his pub-
lic and private character; Mr. Carmichael said an Open
rupture had taken place between Er. Arthur Lee and

the gentlemen at Passy; that they had come to a resolu-
tion to do business without consulting Kr. Lee on any
occasion, and that he (Carmichael) knows the excuse
will be made to Congress that the French ministry

have desired it, thoush he does not doubt that desire
has arose from Mr. Deane's insinuations; Mr. Carmichael
condemned Mr. Deane's conduct towards Mr. Lee, and

was pointedly severe in reprobating the system and
measures that he had pursued in his public character,
and which he would fully unfold when he came to
America. 2

Having been denied access to Congress on September 18,
the day he was scheduled to report, Deane wrote a letter to

Congress reviewing the wording of the recall and stressing

21New York Historical Collections, II. “83-

22Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 726; Journals

g:_Congress, XII, 9&2.

lSh

155

the reason for his hasty departure from France without
waiting to close his accounts and secure vouchers. There-
fore, he said, he was unable to give a detailed report
until all the accounts were closed. To close these accounts
and secure the necessary vouchers was the reason for his
haste to return to France. The letter was accompanied by
two accounts from H. le Grand, the Paris banker of the
Commissioners, which showed the eXpenditure of money up to
the day of his departure from Paris.23

The charge made by Richard Henry Lee respecting the
honesty of s public official was too serious to be avoided.
Congress decided that William Carmichael should be examin—
ed “touching the said commissioners and the conduct of
the said commissioners.’ Deane's letter of the twenty-
eecond was postponed until the conclusion of Carmichael'e

exeminstion.24

On the same day Congress ordered that Deane
be given copies of Ralph Izard's letters reflecting on his
character and conduct while in the service of Congress.
Deane was later granted a copy of Arthur Lee's letter of
June 1, 1778. This was also derogatory to him.25

The examination of William Carmichael began on Sept-
ember 28 and continued through October 5. To those who

eXpected sensational disclosures the examination.wee e

23Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 737.
“New York Historical Collections II, #86.

 

2iatlharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 758.

 

 

   

156

failure. It dealt with two incidents -- the fitting out of
two privateers for a cruise in the Mediterranean Sea and the
capture of the Harwick mail packet. The record shows that
Mr. Carmichael'e answers consisted of “I apprehend,“ “I
thought“ and “I assumed.“ The critical and last question
of the first day dealt with the Mediterranean cruise. The
question was: “Q. From the knowledge you had of Mr. Deane's
transactions, do you recollect any instance which you appree
hend to be a misapplication of the public money?“ A. “I
beg to know whether I am to answer from my knowledge, or
suppositions, or opinions in my own mind?“ By a 9-2 vote
Congress decided that “hear say“ evidence was admissible.
This ended the first day of the examination.

When the hearing was resumed Carmichael was again asked
if he knew or if he had heard of any misuse of public money.

“A. I do.“
However, upon being pressed, Carmichael faltered.

“Q. Did you understand that Mr. Deane was to have been
concerned in his private capacity?“

“A. I did not receive such information as to induce me
to believe that Mr. Deane was concerned.“

“1. If you did not believe that Mr. Deane was concern-
ed in his private capacity in those vessels what did you
mean when you said that you apprehended the public money

was applied to private instant?“

'«

 

157

“A. I meant that I thought Mr. Deane had applied the
public money to supply the deficiency of money that others
were to have advanced, but did not, towards the purpose of
fitting out these vessels.“

The second incident dealt with Mr. Hodge and the capture
of the Harwick packet.

“Q. Had you reason to suppose that Mr. Deane was con-
cerned, or any of the Commissioners?“

“A. I did apprehend at that time that Mr. Deane was
concerned in the first equipment.“

“Q. What reasons induced you to apprehend that Mr.
Deane was concerned in the first equipment?“

“A. I cannot recollect the reasons that induced that
belief, but I know that I did at the time apprehend he was
concerned.“26

Deane, again not hearing from Congress, on October 7
requested an “audience“ to answer Mr. Izard's charges as
stated in his letter. Congress ordered that it lie on the
table. On October 12, Deane repeated his request, adding-
that he planned to return to France the next month.27 In a

separate letter of the same date he answered Izard's charges.

He divided them into one general charge and two specific

26Bilas Deane, zapgrs in Relation to the Case of Silas
De us Now Published From the Ori inal Manuscri ts Edward
Ducan Ingraham, ed., (Philadelphia, 1333’: P. 151.

2Viviharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 760.

 

158

ones. The general charge was “That if the whole world had
been searched, it would have been impossible to have a per;
son more unfit than I [Deane] was for the trust which
Congress had honored me.“ To this Deane expressed the
opinion that Congress and not Izard should “determine on
my competency.“ The first specific charge was: 1. “The
exercising of such a degree of hauteur and presumption as
to give offence to every gentleman wich whom I transacted
business.“ To this charge Deane replied, “I transacted
none with Mr. Izard, and therefore must appeal from his
opinion to the business I transacted, and the honorable
persons with whom I transacted it, and who, from the first
of my acquaintance with them to my leaving the Kingdom,
honored me with their friendship and confidence.“ Izard's
second charge was that Arthur Lee had assured him that his
dispatches and even his private letters had been opened by
Deane. Deane replied: “I am surprised Mr. Arthur Lee
never intimated this to me.. . .“

The second group of charges by Izard were made against
Deane and Franklin collectively. The charge was that
opportunities for-writing to Congress had been deliberately
concealed from him [Izard]. Deane asked why Arthur Lee was
not also included in this charge. Deane readily admitted
that the Commissioners had not considered themselves free
“to communicate the treaty or its contents, to anyone until

the French Court should consent,“ and considered themselves

 

 

159

“in the same situation as to the appointment of Monsieur
Gerard and the sailing of the Toulon fleet. As Mr. Lee
sent letters by M. Gerard he must be guilty also.“

Deane admitted that dissension existed among the
commissioners but denied that the public interest suffered.
The source of the hostility between the commissioners was
the inclusion of the llth and 12th articles of the
commercial treaty. The two articles provided for the ex-
change of goods between the French West Indies and the
United States. The proposal had originated with Gerard
and had been accepted by all three commissioners.

Deane said that Arthur Lee changed his mind after a
conference with his brother William Lee and Ralph Izard.

At the conference it was decided that Deane and Franklin
were attempting to favor the Northern commercial interests

at the expense of the agricultural south. The matter was
fianlly resolved by an agreement between the Commissioners

to the Court of France and Gerard that the decision to accept
or reject the two articles should be determined by Congress.

Deane recapitulated the entire William Lee - Thomas
Morris story, explaining that the Commissioners had acted
because of Thomas Nbrris' “irregularities,“ and ended by
citing the fact that when Franklin and Deane offered to re-
turn the privateering business to William Lee it had been
Commissioner Arthur Lee who had refused to sign the letter

and who would not even agree to its being sent.

 

 

Eh1'e'

160

To Izard's complaint that Deans and Franklin “let Mons.
Gerard go away, without giving him wizard] the least intima-
tion of it, was a very high insult to Congress,“ Deane ob—
served that it was not in his power “to permit or prevent
nor to communicate it to anyone.“

To Izard's apprehension that Deane should return to
Europe in some official capacity, Deane observed that he had
never “solicited for any appointment“ from Congress and had
no intention of doing so.28

On the same day, October 12, 1778, Deane also replied
by letter to Congress concerning charges made by Arthur Lee.
Arthur Lee's charge was that Deane should have settled
certain accounts before he left France. Deane's reply was
that the contract dated back to September, 1777, and dealt
with the delivery of goods to American ports. The affair
was very involved due to orders from the French Court
halting the shipment of supplies. He also pointed out that
it was actually Mr. Arthur Lee who had held up the settle-
ment of the contract. When the Commission was formed in
December of 1776, Deans and Franklin had requested M.
Chaumont to undertake the Job of determining a fair settle-
ment. At first M. Chaumont declined, saying that he “found
Mr. Lee of so Jealous and unquiet disposition, and so much

disposed to abuse everyone that he had concerns with, that

28Ibidu pp. 762-68.

161

he had decided never again to have anything to do with the
Commission as long as Mr. Lee remained a member.“ But he
had agreed that if Mr. Lee desired him to undertake the
task of determining a fair settlement he would. “This put
of: the settlement for the time.“29 Secondly, Mr. Lee had
written that “it is this sort of neglect and studied con-
fusion that has prevented Mr. Adams and myself, after a
tedious examination of the papers left with Dr. Franklin,
from getting any satisfaction as to the expenditure of the
public money. All we can find is, that millions have been
expended, and almost everything remains to be paid for.“
Citing the account of the banker, Mr. Grand, Deane wrote:
“The amount of expenditures until the time of my leaving
Paris, was h,0h6,988.l7 livres, and it appears well, from
the nature of the accounts and the explanation in his hands
up to the very day I set out from Paris. The particular
application, indeed, of every part, could not be known un-
til the several accounts should be given in. Mr. Lee him-
self signed the orders for much the greater part of the
monies.“

Thirdly, Mr. Arthur Lee had said that “almost everything
remains to be paid for.“ Deane's answer was: “I really know
not what he means. Things once paid for are not to be paid

for a second time, and the payments stated above are proved

29flew Yerk Histgrical Collections, III, In.

162

by Mr. Grand's account, to have been bona fide made.“ To
the pointed allegation made by Lee that “you see my name
is not to the contracts,“ Deane pointed out that at the
time Lee was in Berlin. Deane also stated that far from
having concealed matters from him, the reverse was the truth.
Upon Lee's return from Berlin he “was made acquainted with
the contracts; Messrs. Holker (now in Boston), Sabbatier
and Desprez repeatedly conferred with Mr. Lee on the sub-
Ject in my presence, and when they brought in their accounts,
and signed with us the order for payment, as Mr. Grand's
account and the orders and accounts themselves will show.“30

Congress ordered Deane's letter of October 12 read and
capies sent to Izard and Arthur Lee in Paris. On November
1, Deane sent Congress plans for an American Bank and an
American fleet.31 These communications Congress ordered
read and laid on the table.32

On November 19, Deane wrote to Congress again. This
time he made a frank plea: “Nothing would give me greater
satisfaction than to learn by what part of my public con;
duct I have merited the neglect which my letters and most
respectful solicitations, for months past, to be heard

from Congress have been treated?“ This letter was received

30Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II. 773-77.

31New Yerk Historical Collections, III, “5.

azggggnals of Congress. XII, 1091.

 

Ea Starla} » m ”.19.,1'
r... a

163

and read by Congress on November 20, without comment.33

Having exhausted his patience, Deane now considered
a more radical move. To his brother, Barnabas, he confided
that he had decided to “lay his case before the public.“
He was going to visit Bethlehem with H. Gerard and would
start the publication of his case “next Thursday.“ “I
have heretofore delayed it, hoping I should not be put to
the disagreeable necessity, and knowing the effects it must
have on public affairs, but the Law of self defense being the
first of all I shall no longer be silent.“3h

Having written ten letters to which Congress had not
replied, Deane, on November 30, wrote once more. This
letter was read December 1, and Congress resolved: “That
after tomorrow Congress will meet two hours at least each
evening, beginning at six o'clock, Saturday evening ex-
cepted, until the present state of our foreign affairs
shall be fully considered.“35

President Laurens informed Deane on December 3 of
Congress“ determination to consider foreign affairs. The
next day Deane expressed his appreciation to Laurens for
informing him of Congress“ decision. He called attention
to the omission that Congress had not fixed the time for

33Ingrehem, gheugeee ofLSilas Deane. p. 128.

3”New York Historical Cpllectiong, III, 59-61.

35Jgurnele of Congress, x11, 1181.

l6#

his attendance and that his detention is “extremely pre-
Judicial to my private affairs.“36 The same day, Decem—
Citizens g£_gmerica_appeared in the Pennsylvania Packet.

Silas Deane's appeal to the American people marked the
beginning of a newspaper feud that was to rage fiercely for
a few months and smolder for many years. The address con-
tained a slashing attack on Arthur and William Lee in
particular and reflections upon the Lee family.

In spite of his former admission to Barnabas of the
necessity of self defense, Deane now stated that the reason
for his appeal was for the public good. He was not willing
to see an individual or a family ”raised upon the ruins
of the general weal.“ The appeal had been necessary because
the ears of Congress “have been shut against me. While it
was safe to be silent, my lips were closed.“

The second part of the address was a review of the work
of the commission in which he said "he had been honored with
one colleague and saddled with another.“ Deane reviewed
the travels of Arthur Lee in the spring and summer of 1777
and retold the story of the Nantes affair. However, a new
note now appeared. Arthur Lee, the friend of Shelburne, had
been suspected of revealing secrets to his one-time patron
in England. “The suspicious, whether well or ill founded,

were frequently related and urged to Dr. Franklin and

36Ingraham, The Case of Silas Deane, p. 131.

165

myself,“ Deane said, "and Joined to his undisguised hatred
of, and expressions of contempt for, the French nation in
general, embarrassed us exceedingly, and was of no small
prejudice to your affairs."

A more serious charge against Arthur Lee was his
correspondence with Dr. Berkenhout, who "had the confidence
of the British ministry.“ Deane accused Lee of giving
Dr. Berkenhout a letter of introduction to Richard Henry
Lee in America. The latter had sponsored him when he was
in America as an agent of the British government.

Deane furthermore charged Arthur Lee with opposing
the French treaty. Lee had been “dragged into the treaty
with reluctance“ and the ”continued bickering“ over the
11th and 12th articles had been to gain time -- time for a
counter proposal by the British ministry.

The number of offices held by William Lee were enumeraé
ted, and it was intimated that William Lee, before Bur-
goyne's surrender, had been careful to do nothing that
would prevent him from retaining his aldermanship in
London.

Deane included an account of his recall. He related
how he had “placed your papers and mine, in safety“ and
had returned to America with all possible haste and how
Congress had delayed in hearing him. While denying “any
pique“ against any of the Lee brothers, he felt that he

was Justified in appealing to the people.

166

The publication of Deane's address produced an immediate
reaction, both favorable and unfavorable. Deane wrote his
brother, Barnabas, “that it has been proposed in the most
respectable companies to have the public thanks of the
citizens given me for my publication.“37 On the other hand,
the reaction of the Lee family and supporters was prompt.
Francis Lightfoot Lee published in the Pennsylvania Packet,
December 8, 1778, a request that the public suspend Judge-
ment until the matter was fully investigated. The next
day, December 10, Deane inserted a card in the Packet that
as Congress had resolved to hear him he felt that he could
not with propriety continue his narrative.

Deane's appeal to the people made Congress the center
of a cyclonic storm. Deane's Opponents denounced his
publication as an insult to Congress, while his friends saw
in his appeal only the effort of a much wronged man to de-
fend his own character. Henry Laurens wrote to Haulins
Lounder of South Carolina on December 7: “This appeal to
the people, this rash unnecessary appeal I trust will this
day be attended to in Congress, but as I am concerned in
no intrigue or Cabal, I am consequently ignorant of the
designs of my fellow labourers. The honor and interests
of these united States call upon every delegate in Congress

for support. If therefore other men are silent, I will

37New York Historical Collections, III, 76.

167

deliver my sentiments on this very extraordinary circum-
stance and I have in prospect the production of much good
out of this evil.“38

When Congress convened on Monday, Laurens laid before
the House “information . . . from citizens of respectable
characters -- that Deane's letter had created anxieties
in the minds of good people of this city, and excited tup
mults among them.“ He himself had found the letter to
contain articles “highly derogatory to the honor and in-
terests of these Uhited States,“ and he cited Deane's
intimation that, following his appeal to the people, he
designed “giving them a course of letters.“ He therefore
deemed it “dishonorable to Congress“ to hear Deane that
evening as planned and accordingly moved for the appointment
of a committee to report upon the contents of the letters.
A motion that the letter to read in Congress was inter-
Jected but was defeated by a vote of six states to five.
The reason stated was that it would.be a waste of time as
everyone had read the narrative. Lauren's motion, he later
averred, was prevented by “spinning out time“ until a certain
order of the day was called for. All that was accomplished

was an order that Deane should report to Congress in writing

upon his agency in Europe.39

38Burnett, Letters of Congress, III, 520-21; thn Ettwein,
Contributor, “The Resignation of Henry Laurens, President of

Congress,“ Penns lvania Ma azine g£_History_and Biography,
x111 (1889), 2432433.
39

 

Journals of Congress, XII, 1200.

Two days later, James Lovell wrote to Richard Henry
Lee, bringing him up to date on the affairs of Congress,
and, in commenting upon the Deans affair, he noted that
Deane "had made himself a culprit before our bar, by re-
fusing to answer any interrogations 'tending to criminate
himself.‘ He was the cause of often delay.“LO

In Paris Arthur Lee, on December 13, long before he
could have learned of Deane's public appeal of December
5, wrote to Theodoric Bland:

I see by the public prints with you, that my
ouondam colleague [Deane] is assuming all the
merit of what has been done here and I know
he is forming a faction against your friend
me). I should never have opened my lips upon
he subJect, did not their assuming merits
which they do not deserve make it an act of
Justice to state the facts. So far, then,
were my colleagues from having any peculiar
merit in the treaties, that it was with the
greatest difficulty I persuaded them to in—
sist on the recognition of our sovereignty,
and the knowledgement of our independence.
They were proposed by our friend, evaded by
his colleagues, and only admitted after being—
re—urged in a manner that made them apprehend
the consequences of an opposition they could
not Justify. It was also in spite of the
opinion, reasoning, and even rsmonstrance
of your friend, that they would insert two
articles in the treaty, which articles were
unanimously condemned by Congress, and have
been accepted here. After this, one would
imagine they might have been content with
equal share of praise, when in truth their
conduct merited censure. They will force

uoLee, Life of Richard Henry Lee, II, 145.

160

me one day or another to bring the proofs of
these things before Congress and the public,
when I am sure they will shed some of their

plums. 'Mr. Deane is universally understood
to have made 60.000 sterling while he was a

commissionerl'

Tie first writer to enter the lists who was not
directly a party to the dispute was Fenex.u2 In the

Bennsylvania Packet of December 15, Fenex stated that

 

he was willing to follow Francis Lightfoot Lee's sug-
gestion and to suspend judgement on Deane's publication.
However, he had expected that some of Mr. Lee's friends
or connections would have attempted to disprove some of
the alleged facts. As they corresponded with both of
the Lees abroad, "they must have it in their power to
satisfy the public mind . . . without delay." Senex
asked such questions as these: Was Arthur Lee Commis—
sioner for both France and spain? Was he intimately
accuainted with Dr. Berkenhout and had he given him

the letters of introduction to Pichard Henry Lee?

ulNew York Historical Collections,IlI, 80-91.

LZSenex is supoosed to have been Pobert Treat Paine,
late one of the delegates to Congress from Fassachusetts.
Almon's Pemembrancer, VII, 371. This identification is
not positive, but as it was not denied it may be assumed
to be correct.

 

 

170

Was William Lee Commissioner for both Vienna and Berlin,
commercial agent for the Congress in EurOpe? Was he still
Alderman of the city of London? Does William Lee charge a
five per—cent commission while Mr. Williams formerly had
charged two per-cent? These points §gpg§_felt could and
should be cleared up at once. He also felt that the Lee
brothers held too many offices. "I do not pretend to enter
into the merits of Messieurs Lees' character, or to peep
behind the curtain: but surely it behooves us to guard
against such dangerous precedents.“

§g§§§_then commented upon the general reaction to the
publication of the Narrative. Personally be approved. He
did not believe that Deane had intended, or that Congress
interpreted it, as disrespectful. His own friends, in
spite if his infirmities, had urged him "to go with them
to find out Mr. Deans and eXpress our thanks for his watch-
ful care over the public weal.I The public, in general,
had approved.

A champion on the Lee side was Thomas Paine, author
of Common §gg§2.and now Secretary of the Committee for
Foreign Affairs, whose reply to Silas Deane appeared in
the Pennsylvania Packet December 15 under the name of
Common §g§§2,

In the first paragraph Common Sense announced: 'I am
no stranger [sic] to, his negotiations and contracts in

France, his difference with his colleagues, the reason of

 

El“: "3511‘
5 .
g

i.

.L/J.

his return to America, and the matters which have occurred
since.“ He then chided Mr. Deane for alarming the public
mind and declared that he was ”particularly circumstanced"
as “two of the gentlemen he so freely censures are three
thousand miles off, and the other two he so freely affronts
are members of Congress . . . and however painful may be
their feelings, they must attend the progressive conduct of
the hour."

Next, Common Sense pointed out that Deane should have
known that his recall was a censure by a body too polite to
say so. The phrase, "my papers and yours," merely empha-
sized “the intricacy of Mr. Deane's gwn_official affairs,“
and he asked: "Why then does N . Deane endeavour to lead
the attention of the public to a wrong object and to bury
the real reasons, under a tumult of new and perhaps unneces-
sary suspicions?“

Common Sense ridiculed the statement that "their ears
[Congressa were shut against me" as being absolutely untrue.
Deane was also taken to task severly for publishing his ad-
dress on Saturday after Congress had already decided to
hear him on Monday.

Turning to Deane's account of activities of Arthur and
William Lee which had been characterized as “stubborn and
undesirable facts," 99mmon Sense pointed out that "his
tpeane's] deductions from them are hypothetical and incon-

clusive.“ Such charges against Mr. Arthur Lee, William Lee,

172

and Col. Richard Lee, "whom I have been well acquainted with
for three years past, . . . are to me circumstantial evi-
dences of Mr. Deane's unfittness for a public character . . ."
Turning to the Berkenhout story, Deane was first
criticized for doing nothing and "then he likewise entertains
us with a history of what passed" but "he [Berkenhout] got
nothing here, and to send him back was both necessary and

civil."

CommongSense commended Arthur Lee for contacts with the

 

Whigs in England and felt that Mr. William Lee's retention
of his office as Alderman was proof that the peOple of London
were "very good Whigs." The entire appeal was characterised
as "a barbarous, unmanly, and unsupported attack on absent
characters . . . far superior to his own." Dr. Lee was too
much of a gentleman to be uncivil to the French nation and
"He [Arthur Lee] might with great Justice complain against
Mr. Deane's contracts."

In conclusion Common Sense wrote: "Upon the whole, I
cannot help considering this publication as one of the most
irrational performances I ever metwith.”3

Paine had meant his remark to apply to Deane‘s Address
but there were those who felt that it should be applied to
his own remarks. Paine was not only threatened but was ac-

tually whipped on the streets of Philadelphia by one of
an

Deane's supporters.

“BThe Pennsylvania Packet, December 15, 1778.

huCharles C. Sellers, Charles Wilson Peale, 2 vols.
(Philadelphia, 19u7), 'I;, 200-21.

173

Two days later, December 17, a partisan who signed
himself Plain Truth informed the public that he would prove
that Common Sense was wrong. "Whether this proceeds from
ignorance or a worse cause, the public will hereafter deter-
mine.“+5 Plain Truth inserted in the December 19th issue
of the Pennsylvania Packet this observation: "Nor shall any
person holdingtany office of profit or trust under the United
States. Dr any of them, accept any present, emolument, of-
fice or title of any kind whatsoever, from any King, Prince
or foreign sthte.‘I This, of course, was a direct Jab at
William Lee.

On December 18 Thomas Paine announced that he would
shortly answer Plain Truth and that as Common Sense rested
his proof on dates, resolutions and letters, ”it is impos-
sible to prove him wrong." Paine wrote that he was not per-
sonally concerned but "He believed the whole affair to be
an inflammatory bubble, thrown among the public to answer
both a mercantile and a private pique." He preposed to
write one more article "which will be his last on this bubble
of the day."“5

In the Pennsylvania Packet of December 21, Matthew
Clarkson (Plain Truthl printed his reply to Thomas Paine.

Plain Truth observed that when memon Sense announced his

 

intentions of entering the lists there had been two schools

of thought: 1. That he would support Mr. Deane. 2. The

“5Pennsylvania Packet, December 17, 1778.
“61bid., December 21, 1778.

l7u

other, the better informed, that Paine would, by casting a
cloud on Mr. Deane, support his friends who had put him in
office.

The main body of the article was another recapitulation
of Deane's affairs. Deane's trouble and accomplishments
were defended. Even the sending of French officers was ex-
plained in such a way as to reflect honor and credit on both
Deane and the services rendered by the foreign offices. The
official recall and Lovell's accompanying letter were printed
to show that Deane had no reason to believe that his recall
was intended as a censure and a disgrace-~in fact, the oppo-
site. A postscript was added that Thomas Paine, like some
zealots in religion, seemingly wished to have himself con-
sidered as threatened and persecuted for the sake of truth.‘W

On December 21 Deane informed Congress that he had
committed his report to writing and requested that an early
date be set for his report.br8 Congress set 6 P.M., December
22.49 Because he did not finish, he was ordered to report
at 10 o'clock the next day. As he was proceeding the next
day he was ordered to withdraw. After prolonged debate and
divisions Deane was ordered to attend December 28, but as a
quorum was not present on that day the report could not be
continued.50

”712mg...

uBWharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 862.
49Journaie of Congress, XII, 1239-uo.

5°;hig,, p. 1258.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

175

The newspaper war continued. The discussion of issues
faded in the heat of name calling and charges of "guilt by
association". Thomas Paine (December 28) publicly demanded
the name of Plain Truth. If it was not revealed, Paine
threatened he would "order an Attorney to prosecute him, as
a party concerned in publishing a false, malicious libel,
tending to injure the reputation of the 'Secretaty for For-
eign Affairs.'"5l Plain Truth replied: "I laugh at the
insolence of office and despise the threat."52

On December 31 Deane again was called before Congress
where he requested that he be permitted to "communicate per—
sonally" parts of his narrative. This was denied, and it
was decided that "Silas Deane's Narrative" should be read.
The Narrativewas another recapitulation of both missions
with one addition. The addition was an account of Arthur
Lee's visit to Paris in 1776: "I was now in the midst of my
affairs with Monsieur Beaumarchais, and was with him every
day. My first interview with Mr. Arthur Lee was at the
gentleman's house. I afterwards frequently met them to-
gether. Mr. Arthur Lee was every day at my lodgings, and I
spent all the vacant time I had with him. I acquainted him
with all my prospects of procuring supplies, and from whom;
and he gave me the highest possible character of Mr. Beaumar-

chais for his abilities and address."53

5lljgnnsylvania Packet, December 29, 1778.
521bid., December 31, 1778.
53New York Historical Collections, III, 155.

 

The war of words saw the old year out and the new one
in with a rehash of the same old charges and counter charges.

Plain Truth and Common Sense continued to see virtue and evil

 

 

in their respective heroes and villains.
On January 1, 1779 Richard Henry Lee blasted Deane in

the columns of the Virginia Gazette for casting reflection

 

upon the good name of his family, but as he had a "good con-
science he was not disturbed."5u

Silas Deane began the new year, 1779. by protesting to
Congress that one Thomas Paine, "styling himself Secretary
for Foreign Affairs" and pretending to address the public in
his official capacity, had ventured to assure the public
that the supplies which Deane had contracted for with M.
Beaumarchais were a gift of the French government. All had
been arranged by Arthur Lee before Deane arrived in France
and Paine had in his possession full proof of this arrange—
ment.55

A new factor was added in the dispute with the appear-
ance of the new year. Conrad Alexandre Gerard, French Min-
ister Plenipotentiary to the United States, had watched the
raging battle of words with apprehension. Regardless of his
personal sympathies, he was a diplomat too well-trained to
permit personal views to interfere with official business.

Therefore, when Thomas Paine quoted Arthur Lee's reports from

54Beprinted in the Pennsylvania Packet, January 19, 1779.
55Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, III, 9-10.

177

the files of the Committee of Secret Correspondence to prove
that Deane was not responsible for obtaining aid from France
and that France had intended the assistance to be a gift,
Gerard could not let it pass unchallenged. Gerard knew his
government had supplied the arms and ammunition shipped to
the Americans and he also knew that France could not admit
that she had supplied aid to the rebels before recognizing
them. The whole operation of secret aid had been invented
to conceal this very fact. Paine's position, although it
was the unimportant one of clerk of the Committee for For-
eign Affairs, not Secretary of State, was official, and the
only way in which this claim could be effectively combatted
was by a specific denial of its truth by Congress itself.
This Gerard demanded, calling to the attention of that body
the impropriety of allowing a secretary, who was under oath
to divulge nothing, to publish documents from secret com-
mittee files.56 After considerable insistence by the Minis-
ter, Congress, after discussion and debate, acquiesced,
categorically denied having received help from the French
Government before the alliance, and relieved Paine from his
employment.57 Actually Paine resigned before he could be
discharged.

On January 9, Robert Morris replied to what he felt was

a direct charge from Thomas Paine. Common Sense had written

 

56Ibid.
57J0urnals of Congress, XIII, 32.

 

 

178

December 31, 1777, that "every state {should} enquire what
mercantile connections any of the late or present delegates
have had or now have, with Mr. Deans, and that a precedent
might not be wanting, it is important that the state of Penn-
sylvania should begin." Morris answered: "I do not conceive
that the state I live in has any right or inclination to en-
quire into what mercantile connections I have had or now have
with Mr. Deane, or with any other person: if Mr. Deane had
any commerce that was inconsistent with his public station,
he must answer for it; as I did not, by becoming a Delegate
from the state of Pennsylvania, relinquish my right of form-
ing mercantile connections, I was at liberty to form such
with Mr. Deane. My now giving the account this author de-
sires, is not to gratify him or to resign the right I con—
tend for but purely to remove the force of his insinuation

on that subject; and to this effectually, I will candidly re-

late all the commercial concerns I have had with Mr. Deane."58

Three days later, January 12, Paine in a slashing attack
replied that he did not think that anyone should have private
interests while in public life. He expressed the opinion
that neither Mr. Morris nor Mr. Deane was capable of Judging
each other when they were partners in the same business. He
indicated his suspicion that Plain Truth_and all of Deane's

supporters had commercial connections. The column ended with

58Pennsylvania Packet, January 9, 1779.

179

the usual laudatory remarks to the Lees which again brought
this protest down to the partisan level.59

In the same issue of the Pennsylvania Packet, January
12, Deane inserted a notice: "Nothing that Mr. Paine has
published could have induced me to alter my resolution to re-
main silent, until the determination of Congress should be
known, and had he not in his wanton madness for abuse, in-
vective and misrepresentation, ventured to state the affairs
of the supplies, which were returned by me in France, in
manner totally contrary to the truth, and highly inJurious
to these States, as well as to the Justice, honour, and
dignity of the Court of France."60

During the month of January the battle of words con-
tinued unabated. Philadethes in a lengthy article listed
twenty falsehoods in all of Common Sense's writings.61
Deane again broke his self—enforced silence and replied to
Richard Henry Lee's statement of January 1, 1779. He noted
that Lee had written: ” . . . had I winked at all the in-
formation of public abuse I do not think I would have in-
curred Mr. Deane's censure." To this Deane asked: "Have I
been charged with the abuse of the public trust reposed in

me, or with having misapplied public monies?"62

9

U1
H

bid., January 12, 1779.

January 1h, 1779.

January 23, 1779.
January 26. 1779.

O\

O
H
D"
g..-
Q.
0

bid.

bid.

0\
H

1
2

O\
H

180

COngress refused either to charge Deane or release him
and on March 15, Deane reminded the President of Congress
that he had last written February 22, and was still without
a reply. He stated that his situation "for eight months
past had been peculiarly distressing," and he again entreated
Congress to "inform me if they expect further information
respecting their foreign or other affairs."63 On March 29.
Deane again wrote, adding: "The settlement of the commis—
sioners' accounts and my own will show that I have received
nothing therefore except money for my necessary expenses."64
He also explained the reason for his silence in ignoring the
attacks in the public prints: "From the moment that I was
ordered by Congress to lay before them, in writing, a narra-
ion of my public transactions I have considered myself as
being before that tribunal and not at liberty to take notice
of any publication."65 In April for the first time, Deane
mentioned his own financial interests. "My own family and
private affairs, as well as those of one intrusted to my
care, have long suffered by my absence; they must suffer to
the last degree, if longer delayed."66

During the spring and summer months of 1779 Deane sent
letter after letter to Congress explaining, refuting, and
requesting to be heard in hiw own defense.67 The newspaper

63Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, III, 79.

641bid., p. 104.
65Ibid., p. 106.

Ibid., p. 109.
67New York Historical Collections, III, #12, H21, #28,
“29, 430‘3727h534620

 

181

war of words increased in intensity and vituperativeness.
Candour, Plain Truth, Candid, Comron Sense, Lysander,
Luisitania, Philathes, and other pundits of the ancient

and modern world continued to applaud and Justify their
heroes and depict their respective vill,ins in pens freshly
dipped in vitriol. Out of this potpourri two charges
against Deane are conspicuous. He was "in trade," and

his accounts were in a state of "studied confusion," to

use the language of Arthur Lee. The public itself was
interested and concerned.

Congress, Just because it was Congress, was not
immune from rebukes. The press of the day stated its
views in unmistakable terms. Under the caption of "Af-
fairs in Congress," dated June 2b and carried in the

Baltimore Advertiserand reprinted in the Virginia Gazette,

 

July 17, 1779, and the New York Packet, July 29, 1779,
was the following extract from a letter from Philadelphia:

Our situation is truly alarming and is briefly
as follows: A Junto early formed in Congress,
have, by some means or other, contrived to keep
their principal leaders, either actually in the
house, or in some of the most important depart-
ments; and by acting constantly in concert,
have at last brought it about that a minority,
and a small one too, can retard, delay, and
even obstruct every proceeding. The foundation
of this Junto was laid during the sitting of

 

 

the first Congress. At that period there were
many real grounds, as well as pretended ones,
for suspecting Mew York, and one or two of the
middle States. This naturally led the north-
ern and southern ones to unit the more strictly
in the measure then pursuing, to obtain the
great objects in view. It is not my intention
to sive you the history of the Junto at present,
but will inform you, that for upwards of twelve
months past, a Club has been formed of certain
of the Delegates from New England, New Jersey,
and this State, and of two or three merbers
from the southward. They meet regularly, de-
bate upon, and adjust the manner of their pro—
ceedings; and Congress, at all times, being a
fluctuating and changing body, these men, act—
'ins in concert, are able to keep back or ob—
struct any measure whatever, until, by the
absence of some me bers, and the division of
others, they can, with a small majority, carry
the vote as they please.

The action or the lack 0? action by Congress is very
revealing and reflects no credit upon the national lesis—
lature. Consress was unable to rise above partisan strife
and put its house in order.68 An outstanding example of
this pettiness occurred on June 10, 1779. A resolution was
introduced by Thomas Burke and seconded by Henry Laurens
"That Silas Deane, Escuire, be ordered not to depart the
United States without the special permission of Consress;

6888s letter of James Lovell to Samuel Adams, Ausust
12, 1779, New York Historical Collections, IV, 59-61;

James Lovell to Richard Henry Lee, August 17, 1779, Lee,
Life of Pichard Henry Lee, II, 1&6.

 

183

and that Arthur Lee, Esquire, be directed to repair forthwith
to America, in order the better to enable Congress to inquire
into the truth of the several allegations and suggestions
made by the said Arthur Lee, in his correspondence with Con-
gress against the said Silas Deane."69 The motion actually
originated with Henry Laurens and as he described the ”droll
scene," the purpose was to prevent Deane from leaving the
country and if he did so without special permission from Con-
gress he would be "pleading guilty."70

On August 6, 1779, Congress adOpted a resolution that
Silas Deane had long advocated. The measure read: "Resolved,
That the several Commissioners, Commercial agents, and other
in Europe, entrusted with public money, be directed to trans-
mit, without delay, their accounts and vouchers, and also
triplicate copies of the same to the Board of Treasury of
these United States in order for settlement.

"Resolved, That a suitable person be appointed by Congress
to examine the said accounts in EurOpe, and certify his opin-
ion thereon previous to their being transmitted.

"Resolved, That the Board of Treasury be directed to report
for Mr. Deane a reasonable allowance for his time and ex-
penses from the expiration of three months after the notice
of his recall to the present time."71

69J0urnals of Congress, XIII, 712.

7OIngraham, The Case of Silas Deane, p. 98.
71Journals of Congress, XIII, 927.

 

A motion was made by Samuel Hartington, and seconded by
Mr. John Fell, that the “Honorable Silas Deane, Esquire,
late one of the Commissioners at the Court of Versailles,
and political and commercial agent be excused from any fur-
ther attendance on Congress, in order that he may settle
his accounts without delay, agreeable to the foregoing res-
olution. The last resolution was amended to read "Dis—
charged" instead of "excused."72 In this terse way Silas
Deane was dismissed by Congress without either censure or
approbation. He was, however, now under the obligation of
finding some means to Justify a claim against Congress for

the remuneration of his services.

721bid., p. 929.

18b

 

CHAPTER VII
THE SECOND MISSION TO FRANCE

A new chapter in the revolutionary career of Silas
Deane began with the congressional resolution of August
5, 1779, which discharged him from further attendance after
thirteen months of waiting. He was discharged so that he
might settle his accounts in France without delay. The
resolution squarely placed the responsibility for the
settlement of the accounts upon Deane and at his own time
and eXpense. Deane could have refused the obligation but
to have done so would have been a forfeiture of his claim
against the government of the United States and the accept—
ance of the stigma of the unproven accusation of his enemies.
He refused because he was determined to clear his name and
secure the money to which he was entitled.

One of the last things that Deane did before he left
Philadelphia was to send a memorial (August 18) to Congress
in which he reminded that body that he had been commissioned
to go abroad by a Congressional Committee, ordered home by
Congress, and as "there are no charges," he must assume that
Congress approved on his conduct as its agent and commis—
sioner. He requested that an auditor be appointed to examine
the accounts in Europe before they were transmitted to Amer—

ica for final settlement by the Treasury Board.1 This would

llngraham, The Case pfASilas Deane, p. 77.

.I‘

I

 

.0 v
. a
- .
u ' n
o .
a. t
v f. n n
v
a y a ,Y
\ v \
fl .
I e
t .
.. r.‘
. x. .
4 , x
e .
. .
.
i
9,. yui
I I
‘.
.
v 4
. x .
. I _
o .
. a
.
'
.. .
v
. a
x c.
. .
.
I
i
.
.
.1 . q
r I . Ia

186

prevent error and save time. He frankly admitted that due
to neglect of his private affairs and the depreciation of
the currency, an extended period of waiting for a final
settlement of his accounts would mean total ruin. Therefore
he prayed that when the accounts were audited the examiner
be empowered to make an advanced payment subject to the final
audit by the Treasury Board. Congress ignored the memorial
but on August 25 authorized the Treasury Board to issue a
warrant to Mr. Deane "for ten thousand, five hundred dollars
in full consideration for his time and eXpenses during his
attendance on Congress from the 4th of June, 1778, until the
6th day of August, inst."2 This was done in spite of the
efforts of Henry Laurens who recounted the scene to Richard
Henry Lee with glee.3

On November 16, 1779, Deane wrote his last letter to
Congress before returning to France. In a dignified state-
ment he returned the warrant for ten thousand, five hundred
dollars explaining that in spite of his depleted private
fortune he preferred to return to France and vindicate his
conduct at his own eXpense. His refusal to accept the offered
sum did not indicate "disrespect to that honorable body, nor
do I feel the slightest emotions of resentment towards those
men who opposed the grant even of that sum to me." He ob-
served that as he had "received no answer to my memorial of

2Journals of Congress, XIV, 997.
3Lee, Life of Richard Henry Lee, II, 1A1.

‘\¢\ ‘\

L
.
I
P.‘:
J.
.-
‘s'our.

. . r
.
. 1 f.
. l
' t
a: ’-
. ‘1
v.
‘
“l
I
- .a

i
f'
“:I'

N

..

I -
Q . ,
~

'.
I
o
'.

-
a
‘2‘

ff ‘
5
3
’ v
'1“.
,l‘
I
I
.v
-\
c
t
,1

‘V
a, ‘
a‘ ' ‘
, U
n
.5 ,
.— . .
~ .
O
I. ‘
~ _i
e
.. _ ,3
L A
,-.
‘
. I
. .

.
. 0"
s ‘ ‘

n
a ‘

C
I,
o
f ' '

J ‘.

\

 

187

August last, I conclude none will be given, and, conse-
quently, that I am laid under the necessity of returning
to Europe in the best manner I can, and at my own expense."u

From Philadelphia Deane went to Williamsburg, Virginia,
to see his brother, Simeon Deane, before leaving for France.
Before he left Philadelphia he had already determined his
future line of conduct. He would avoid all political sub-
Jects, recoup his private fortune, and vindicate himself by
settling his accounts to the satisfaction of every one con-
cerned. These resolutions he found more difficult to keep
than to make.5

From Williamsburg Deane attempted to rearrange his
personal affairs. To his brother, Barnabas Deane, he com-
mitted the care of his only son, Jesse, should anything hap-
pen. "I feel much for him, my only hope, and almost the sole
object I live for; my other family connections are dear to
me but they are (thank God) capable of providing for them-
selves, and are in a good way. If any accident happens to
me, my son must be yours, and our brother Simeon Deane's. I
need not remind you of past occurrences in our lives, to urge
you the most attentive and parental care of him; it would
argue a doubt of your gratitude and fraternal affection. You

”Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondencg, III, All-12.

5New York Historical Collections, IV, 91; Connecticut
Historical Collections, XXIII, 132.

 

D
an 6 1
. \ A
v A
_ .. b .
’1. a tn
0
\ .
l p 1
L I e
u l ,
V .4. . I b
(v I
\
LA . O .
I. u
a x . .
l . I \ . .
I“
e. .
I .
s
i y
. O
\
_
It: 0 1. Is
0 .
4
.
.
1 .. . . a
_ a
L
e. \
.‘ er
. A u i
I O. . .
. .
‘
a II
o .
I p i -
. I\
o O l .1
\ v V"
,g .
. . v,
. o
v -* . r
. f
v f u
,1
i e
. I A . . o,
i ‘ c
y e e
I e .. . \
\,
. L

\I.I

188

will think I write this in a gloomy, desponding turn of
mind. I do not but I am not gay."6

Regarding his private affairs and personal papers, he
informed Barnabas: "You will find among my papers inven-
tories of all the estate of Mr. Webb, and accounts made out
by Joyce under my direction, ready to settle. You.will also
find an inventory of the notes, &., payable to me; pray ob—
tain and preserve them.“ He requested that a "table" be
erected to the memory of his second wife "in the same fashion
as the first'I and requested the family to select the inscrip-
tion as she "was equally dear to them as to me." His son,
Jesse, who had accompanied John Adams to France, was accord-
ing to Deane's plans to remain in Europe for four years to
complete his education and then be placed “to that business
which may best suit his inclination and improvement."7

There was one other family matter that recuired his
attention--unpleasant as it was. Joseph Webb, his stepson,
he gently reproached for his silence and failure to under-
stand his present condition. "I must therefore plainly tell
you that your rejecting my proposals, refusing the power I
sent you, and dissatisfaction at my refusal to put everything
in the world which was mine when I left Wethersfield uncon-
ditionally in your hands, make it appear that you are being
used by my political enemies.“ Regarding the Webb estate he

6New York Historical Collections, IV, 130.
7Ibid., p. 131.

189

wrote:

I am now under the necessity of going into a
voluntary exile, without funds to support me,
and wounded with the ingratitude of those whom
I have not only served faithfully, but saved
from destruction. Reflect a few moments, I
pray you, on the past and present. I do not
aim at moving your compassion, or at exciting
your generosity, but surely you cannot still
think that the pittance of estate which I
have in Hethersfield, not amounting in the
whole to fifteen hundred pounds sterling
money, is exhorbitant for a man who spent
more than ten years of the prime of his life,
principally in taking care of your interests
and of the education of your brethern. In
the course of my management, had I attended
strictly to keep only within the letter of
the law, I must have made a very handsome
fortune; what the consequence would have been,
everyone acquainted with the circumstances of
the estate at the time know [sic] little or
nothing could have been left, if in reality
the creditors would have been paid. I do

not repent of the line of conduct I took up.
Cn the contrary, I reflect on it with pleas—
ure; and the many opportunities afforded

me in reflection infinitely Freater satis—
faction than any which can result from the
possession of wealth. But if our sentiments
on this subject are as distant from each
other as our persons are like to be for

some time to come, at least let us part
friends; or, rather, let us unite in try-

ing to remove this only possible around

for the interruption of that good harmony
which has subsisted between us from your
infancy. To do this effectually, let
judicious and disinterested men settle

every thing betwixt us. I have often pro-
posed and wished for it since I have been
obliged to leave the country. I should,
indeed, prefer a settlement between our-
selves; that at present is impossible;

190

and I wish that the men undertaking this may
not come to it as to dispute between parties,
but to assist to settle an account between
two friends, one of whom cannot possibly at—
tend to it himself. You have an inventory
which will shew you the amount of sums re—
ceived and paid out; you were privy to the
keeping of this account; you have the account
made out from the inventory the winter before
my leaving Wethersfield, no es payable to me
or my order, and ballances Esic] on book much
more than sufficient to pay the ballances
remaining. The landed estate left by your
honored father has long since been divided,
and in your possession; you know it never
yielded me any profit at any time; the

landed securities are in the same predica-
ment, and you know well how much anxiety

and vexation, as well as money, the obtain—
ing and defending cost me, and that the
income never ballanced a fifth part of my
expenses on them; these facts being within
your knowledge. I write freely to you, and
your brethren ought not to be ignorant of
them, for it will affect me sensibly to be
thought, and perhaps represented by them

as a defaulter, which I have done not

simply lesal justice towards them, but

have treated them with parental kindness.

Due to the severity of the Winter the convoy, by

which Deane planned to return to Trance, was unable to

sail until June 20, 1780.9 Deane spent the winter at-

tempting to help his brother Simeon, who was also in bad

financial straits, and gathering together the loose ends

of his own affairs. While he was in Virginia, Deane

81bid., pp. 162-65.

9Connecticut Historical Collections, XXIII, 15?.

 

191

received letters from various friends which left no
doubt that he possessed enemies but also reassured

him that he possessed warm friends. From Robert Morris
.he received, in addition to a business offer, words
that must have pleased him greatly. ”Reflecting on

the unrestricted abuse you have suffered, and not
knowing whether you have any evidence with you to

show that your particular friends were not infected
with the pestilence of the times, I have suddenly and
hastily scribbled a letter to Doctor Franklin. . . ."10

True to his word Morris wrote Benjamin Franklin: "I
consider Mr. Deane as a martyr in the cause 0? America.
After rendering the most signal and Important Services,
he had been reviled and traduced in the most shameful
manner. But I have not a doubt the day will come when
his merit shall be universally acknowledsed, and the
authors of these calumnies held in the detestation

they deserve,"ll

lONew York Historical Collections, Iv, 117.

 

llIbid., pp. 120—21. For a general discussion, see
9180 Abernethy, Western Lands and the American Devolution,
pp. 20 5-160

192

The monotony of the forty—two day return voyage was
broken by the capture of two prizes and the loss of a mer-
chant ship in the convoy. By an accident of fate the con-
voy slipped by the British fleet blockading the port and
landed at Bordeaux July ?5, 1780. Deane was later to learn
that they were fortunate as "few vessells [sic] escape" the
blockading fleet.12

Upon arrival Deane immediately notifed Franklin that
he was in France and that he was proceeding immediately to
Paris. After a few days spent in recovering from the fatigue
of the voyage he proceeded to Paris where he was cordially
received. "I have taken my old lodging with Dr. Franklin,"
he said, "and do not find my character to have suffered
here by the abuse I met with in America during my absence
from France! He received a kind a hearty welcome from M.
Chaumont and M. de Beaumarchais "and the rest of my good old
friends here.” Deane appreciated his reception, and it was
"sufficient to make me forget in some degree what I met with
from faction and cabal elsewhere." From Spain thn Jay sent
a belated but sincere letter eXpressing faith and confidence.
Deane was grateful and appreciated very much the kind words
and token of esteem, but he realized that his precarious fi-
nancial condition would not permit any delay in accomplishing

his mission.13

1232.49... pp. JIM-80.
13M“! pp. 190, 199, 211+.

 

\a.

193

Before Deane left America for France he had several
schemes in mind. His immediate object was the settling of
his accounts, but he was also thinking and planning for the
future. He intended to re-enter the mercantile business and
felt that speculation in western land would be a profitable
business with the return of peace.

As a former merchant Deane anticipated few difficulties
in re—entering the mercantile business. Because of the de-
mand for goods created by the war and the shortage of goods
from England, he did not expect any great difficulty in re-
establishing himself. He was widely known in French mercan-
tile circles and had a private account with M. Grand, the
Banker for the American Commission in Paris, with which he
planned to finance his business ventures.1u Unfortunately,
perhaps because they planned to go in business together, he
had given M. Chaumont power to draw on his funds.15 To his
surprise he soon found that his bills were being protested.16
He had brought with him a number of loan office certificates,
which he had expected to sell in France for a commission.17
Because of the inflation and the attempted deflation of the
American currency at a “0:1 ratio, French interest in Ameri-
can trade and investments was nil. Without capital and with-

out credit Deane's prospects of financial rehabilitation in

lnlpig,, p. 132.

15M” p, 280.

16%.: ppo 23““359 237-
17M” pp. 188. 235.

19h

in the mercantile business slowly faded. As he informed
Isaac Moses: "I have not sent out a shilling on any account,
owing to various and unexpected disappointments I have met
with."18

Deane was greatly disappointed in the failure of his
mercantile hopes, but the greatest blow was when a contract
for masts failed to materialize. He was encouraged to secure
a contract to supply the navies of both France and Spain with
masts from America, but with the death of his Spanish contact,
the hope of a contract with Spain evaporated and despite some
encouragement from Versailles the French hope also faded.19

John Jay, who was pressing the contract at the Spanish
court was not very hopeful. He wrote Deane: "The more I en-
quire and hear about your contract the more I am convinced
it will never be ratified."20 Finally Deane was forced to
admit that the Spanish ministers were "disposed to know no-
thing of us in public or private.“21 Deane reported to JEmBS
Wilson, his contact in America: "The contract with France
. is not in a much better situation. It was accepted of, but
conditionally only. When I urge anything here it is natur-
ally replied, that when the cargoes arrive and are approved
of it will be time enough to finish the contract without con-
voy, and none can be obtained. No cargoes can be brought

over, even if they can be procured in America. Thus, to all

181b1d., p. 281.
19Ib1d., p. 190.

0Ibid., p. 29h.
211bid., p. 316.

195

appearance, this is like to be suspended during the war.
The embarrassment in which I found a certain gentleman of
whom I depended here, has hurt me in this affair, as well
as in some others, exceedingly. In short I despair of do—
ing anything in this matter, or in the land way, so long as
the war continues. . . ."22
Deane, like many other Americans of his day, was inter-
ested in western lands. This interest he acquired early in
life and retained as long as he lived.23 After his discharge
from Congress he planned to engage in large scale land specu—

lations.2u

The necessity of his return to France to settle
his accounts would force him to postpone his plan. However,
while he was in Williamsburg waiting for the weather to per-
mit the sailing of the convoy he received a proposition which
would permit him to carry out his original idea on perhaps

an even larger scale. Robert Morris suggested: ”I would
have you inform yourself whether it is practicable to make
sale of vacant lands in America by sending our drafts or sur-
veys, descriptions and certificates, to ascertain the situa—
tion, qualities of the land, title, etc., and in what part

of the continent lands are most desired by such persons as

221bid., p. 316-17.

23511ae Deane to Patrick Henry, January 2, 1775, Miscel-
laneous Collection, Clements Library, ALS; Connecticut
Historical Collections, II, 131-34.

2EE’ilas Dean to Thomas Adams, June 25, 1779, Virginia
Historical Magazine, VI (1889), 32.

 

u .
u .
. n. . . .
.
.
i
. .
z n n
v ,
In ¢
\ e .
_ . i o
. Q r . g «5
. f .
. a o A ~
. . {ll
4 . . s
o . \ . . . .
. . r . c
o a A , ~ I. o 3
.
.
o
u . . v _ , . a .h u t a .
.l v k a. . . .
. ..
I ' . v \ .
I o I
f
. v . o I e .
. .l . , .
|
A a
\ . y a . f .
A .
. . I. o r . . . » . I ,
b —
9 .
a .u . r . , . .
1
.1
o _ . _ t
v
C
. . O i
.
o o . , .‘ , . . A
D u
C . . o u
. a 0 . . . r a .
I O ‘
.
Q i
.
. .
. . e
r . u .
. \ y in i
. . O
1 Y .
o . . .
u . n
u . V s . 4 . a
. . . . .
A a v
. . .
y e o l A
. .
. A u A . v I (T o
r
u ’
.
. . . _ e A ..
.
.. . t .
. \
o . . L
. .
. p . ,
. l,
o. . .
r . ' ; . O
' . I I n O y
. . . . n
..
o ‘ t N A .
l v ‘~ Y.
. . l
f I I
. ..y . . . . r n .
. ..
I u I. D ' u
o P a _ u
\ A
I . .
A n l \
u d x ..
J a I .
n

196

would be inclined to speculate, for I am ready to Join you
in any Operation of this kind that would turn advantageously
to ourselves, as well as those who may purchase from us, and
I would not wish to engage in it on any other terms."25

The operation was extended to include Joseph Wharton
and James Wilson. The arrangement was that Deane would be
the advance agent in EurOpe with one-fourth interest in the
lands purchased. Wharton was to handle the business in
Philadelphia, obtaining grants as fast as possible and send-
ing copies to Deane with the best charts and descriptions
available. Deane was empowered to sell in France or else-
where in EurOpe on one-third, or one-half or more, as he
thought best. Deane, and it is easy to see why, felt that
it would be advisable to sell at least enough to regain the
purchase price.26

Deane landed in France in July of 1780 and wrote James
Wilson in August that he had not had time to enter upon the
discussion of land speculations except in a general way.27
He thought the prospects good. Gerard, the former French
minister to the United States, was considered a likely repre—

sentative to interest French speculators in American land.28

To John Shee, who was not a member of the Philadelphia group,

25New York Historical Collections, IV, 117.

26Ibid., p. 14?.

27Ibid., p. 167.
281bid., p. 197.

Deane wrote that he felt that he could do something with
his shares of the Illinois and Wabash lands "but I fear
your limits are higher than they will go at." However, he
promised to keep Shee's lands in mind and to keep in touch
with him.29

Deane continued in his attempts to interest French
speculators in American land, but apparently the desire to
sell was stronger in America than the desire to buy in France.
In June of 1781 Robert Forris wrote, reouesting information
concerning the sales. According to Morris he had discussed
the project with Robert R. Livingston, the future Secretary
of the Committee for Foreign Affairs, who would write to
Deane ”respecting the sale of some of his own lands."30

The bright hopes of the would—be land speculators did
not materialize. In September of 1781 Deane gave a dis-
couraging report. To James Wilson he confessed: "No one
will have anything to do at present with land adventures in
America, and very few with any other. Its being known that
a merchant has made, or is about to make, any considerable
adventure in America, is of itself sufficient to hurt his
credit in France at this time.31 Thus ended another of

Deane's hopes for financial success.

291b1d., p. 220.
30Ibid., p. u01.

311bid., p. #65.

198

One by one Deane's hopes were fading. He had left
America confident that in a short time he would be able to
clear his name and regain his financial standing, but one
disappointment followed another. To Barnabas Deane he wrote:
"My patience is exhausted, and my affairs ruined by the un—
exampled conduct of Congress, who have detained me here--it
is now more than a year-~waiting for the appointment of an
auditor to settle my accounts, which in reality I believe
they never wish to have settled."32 To James Wilson he con-
fessed: "For myself, almost everything I depended on when
I left America has failed. I built great hopes on the mast
contract, and had good right to do so at the time. I pre-
sumed that something might be done with lands, and I flat-
tered myself that our public credit was not so low in EurOpe,
but that Loan Office Certificates would sell for at least
what they cost in America; but in particular was I confident
that Congress, after suffering me to be calumniated as a pub-
lic defaulter, and in effect treating me as such themselves,
would certainly have an auditor ready to meet me in the exam-
ination and settlement of my accounts, and that they would
seek rather than avoid scrutiny; but I have not been less
deceived in this than in my other expectations."33

Some of these disappointments were caused by the un—

settled economic and political conditions of the times and

32Ibid., p. 46A.
33Ibid., p. use.

2
i‘ '.
l

o
|.
.-

,‘

O
' c a - 3 .i (a
4 .
. -
.
A . _ q ‘ ‘ a.
v
. - '
o
I
t a ‘i "u u‘ .
D
n‘ V
,. . r
.
.}~ ' 2 . ' -
. . .
r , . "o " I
I ‘ .\
.
O - v y . .‘t
k .. ..
' ‘
, A . .
.
.0 .« . o fi
. .
_‘
.~ H ‘ ‘
_ I . Va .

I
,_ ..S ‘
‘P O 1" '
o ' o
C O

,. .I
A o
. ,,
L. w . . .'
.— , , , ' -‘
\
. ‘.r ..
.,
i-
a.
e
‘ 'L
1
" «V - I
I
w ' r "
' ,‘Q¢>
o
r. ‘F. . ‘
o a — v ‘
, n SA
I,
,‘

 

199

could not be attributed to any individual or individuals.
The greatest single blow was the failure of Congress to set-
tle his accounts. As a result, not only was he ruined finan-
cially, but the tactics and methods used to circumvent the
settlement broke his spirit. The record shows that Congress
fully intended to make a fair settlement with Deane after an
audit of his accounts. Deane, by some indiscreet and injudi-
cious words and letters, made it possible for his enemies to
continue to blacken his name with charges of fraud and later
treason, and impossible for his friends to defend either his
conduct or to press for the settlement of his claims.

The settlement of the accounts of the Commissioners,
for which Deane had primarily returned to France in July of
1780, had different values for the different individuals in-
volved. To Silas Deane it meant financial independence, but
to Benjamin Franklin it meant the end of a distasteful and
involved piece of business. Later Franklin was to learn that
it had been whispered that he was opposed to the settling of
Deane's accounts. Naturally, he resented the charge and cor—
rectly attributed it to Arthur Lee and Ralph Izard.3” Frank—
lin also felt that Deane had rendered a great service to the
Revolution and was entitled to a fair hearing and just compen-
sation for his services. This he did not hesitate to say.
In October of 1779 Franklin had been informed of the decision

of Congress to have the accounts of all its Commissioners

BbWharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, III, #16.

200

audited. He had then immediately eXpressed his approval of
the decision to James Lovell, the acting Secretary of the
Committee for Foreign Affairs and an ardent champion of the
Lee faction. He had likewise volunteered his opinion of
Deane. "I had, and have still," he wrote, "a very good opin-
ion of Mr. Deane for his zeal and activity in the service of
his country . . . [and] I still think him innocent."35 This
Opinion, of course, was one that was not shared or appreci-
ated by Lovell who had continuously been in the background
with a resolution or a suggestion when Congress had been con-
sidering any motion dealing with Silas Deane. This antagon-
ism was one that did not abate at any time for a period of
years.

The intention of Congress had been clearly revealed
when, previous to Deane's arrival in France, it had appointed
Joshua Johnson of Nantes to audit the accounts of the Com-
missioners. At first Jehnson had refused to accept the as—
signment but consented when Franklin showed him a vote {prderl
of Congress. By mutual agreement the examination of Deane's
accounts had been postponed until he might arrive from
America.36

Franklin was anxious to finish the auditing Job, and he
expressed his appreciation to Johnson for his willingness to

undertake it and his own impatience with Deane's tardy arrival.

35New York Historical Collectionp, IV, 109; Wharton,
Diplomatic Correspondence, III, 38h.

36Ibid., p. 536.

201

In June of 1780 Franklin informed Jehnson that in a few days
Deane was expected to arrive in France. "I grow more impa-
tient to have these accounts settled; if, therefore, Mr.
Deane should not arrive in the course of a month I must then
desire you would come up. Bring with you, if you can, a good
clerk that is an accountant, to copy, and let us do the busi-
ness together as well as we can.“37 Unfortunately, Deane was
still in America waiting for the weather to permit the sail-
ing of the convoy, and Johnson reversed his decision and later
refused to audit either Deane's personal or public accounts.
Before Deane sailed for France he had received informa-
tion that gave him satisfaction and encouragement. The accounts
of Mr. Williams and Mr. Honthieu and others on which the lee
faction had founded their principde charges, had been examined
and settled, and a balance found in their favor by the refer-
ees, one of whom was Joshua Jehnson. "This has, in a great

measure done my business to hand,"38

said Deane. He had been

in France for several months before he learned that thnson

had refused to audit his accounts. No reason was given, and
naturally he was disappointed by the delay. It was not a crit-
ical one however, as Congress had only to designate another
auditor. Franklin had been greatly disappointed also by Deane's
unexpected delay because it had retarded the settlement of the

accounts of the Joint commission. When he learned of Deane's

37Ibid., p. 809.
38New York Historical Collections, IV, 169.

 

.
t
A
. i p. n
..
b . . u
i
. I
«
x. I . . 5)
A ,i
. .
» . .
4t .
t
-A .
. Q
v r .
.n. Q
\I ‘
v.
Al! O y--
. . . I o
.n . z .
I I I A u s
_ _
.9
‘ I‘ I
y . '
. I . y a
4
. v
‘. p ) , a v . n
,,' ‘ C n
.
i.
C
n
. n O
.
V
a. i
_ . .
i-
w n . q I
I ‘ . t, . u
. .
v.1 O
L. \ I . ,
T u , V I
V. l .x
a .
'0 \ I. a C». p
I
I \
I. r
‘ n
r .,
I
O
O t a
t . . A u
.. e
r..
. .0
.
z.
.A
r . . I
. _
1 r a .
.
I
.
v .
n .
l
.. . . . .
u .
I
i I . . .
v
'
N. f
u. \
_ ,,
O i

0!...

- .‘..—

vac-

.. i -_,-

202

arrival in France, he had immediately assured Congress that
he would "endeavour to see the business completed with all
possible eXpedition.”39

When Deane landed in France he immediately began the
process of closing his accounts. What he had expected to be
a matter of a few months soon became a very tedious and per—

u
plexing affair. O

In September of 1780 he had written to
Robert Morris: "I am now engaging of a full settlement, or,
rather, to state in a clear and simple point of view every
transaction I have been concerned in Europe, and flatter my—
self that I shall get through in a few weeks, in a manner
that will justify your good opinion of me; and the results
I am confident will not cause you or any others to blush for
having been my friend.“+1 In the same month he wrote to
John Jay, former president of Congress now on a mission in
Spain, commenting on his progress and contrasting the treat-
ment of the other Commissioners by Congress with his own:
"I greatly wish to see you, but the settling the commission—
ers accounts must take up some time here. You know that the
only objections against me in America were on the score of
those accounts having been left unsettled; yet Mr. Adams re-
turned to America without settling even his private accounts,
though he had not any other business, nor did anything in
EurOpe but spend money and keep the accounts. No fault was
39Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, IV, 22.

uoNew York HistoricalfiCollections, IV, 252-53.
”libid., p. 216.

k/VJ

found with him and he was reappointed. Mr. [Arthur] Lee,
who remained in France, more than a year after his recall,
has not settled either his public or private accounts. Mr.
Izard, Mr. William Lee are in the same predicament. These
men have, each of them, as appear by the accounts, received
more than twice the amount of public monies which I ever
received, and have literally done worse than nothing.“L2
His correspondence during the fall of 1780 consisted pri—
marily of letters to merchants and to Joshua Johnson asking
for eXplanations of certain items charged to him personally
instead of the commissioners jointly. In November of 1780
Deane informed Johnson: "I have nearly closed the other ac-
counts.”3 Deane had yet to learn that Johnson had refused
to audit his accounts.

As the year 1780 drew to a close Deane had the courage
to write John Paul Jones, who was also having his troubles
with Arthur Lee: "Meantime I can only say that no man feels
more sensibly than I do for the disappointments you have met
with; every one who knows anything of my history will believe
what I say, but I have never lost sight of the great object,
or suffered my ardor to abate on account of anything I have
met with, and I am confident that you are and will be ani-
mated with the same principle."uu At the time Deane wrote
these words he was living on money borrowed from Vergennes,

“zipig., p. 230.

“31b1d., p. 260.
““Ibid., p. 261.

 

_A‘

French minister of Foreign Affairs. In December of 1780 he
expressed the belief that he would soon be able to repay the
loan as "his accounts were almost finally and fully statedq"45
The opening of the New Year, 1781, was not an auspicious
one for Deane. He learned that Johnson had refused to audit
his accounts and that Franklin was not authorized to advance
him funds. On February 3, 1781, he summed up his position to
John Jay: "I have nearly closed all my accounts, public as
well as private, but Mr. Johnson, the auditor appointed by
Congress refused to act, and Doctor Franklin says he cannot
act, nor can he pay any part of the considerable sum due to
me without orders from Congress. Thus, my Dear Sir, I have
been abused in America as a defaulter, whilst a large sum was
due to me, obliged to return to Europe at my own eXpense to
settle the public accounts, and am now refused payment under
pretense that the accounts and vouchers must first be exam-
ined and passed in Congress. I do not blame Doctor Franklin;
he is sensible of my situation, and acts the friendly part,

but his hands are tied by Congress.“6 To his friends and

brothers in America he repeated the story of his predicament.
To his brother Simeon he wrote: ”I have thought of venturing
once more to America with my accounts, but the uncertainty in
which I am with respect to everything there deters me from

resolving decisively."”7 Robert Morris learned that Deane

”51b1d., p. 268.
“51b1d., pp. 277-78.
“71b1d., pp. 282-8u.

 

905

had settled “the public accounts of my fellow commissioners,
as well as my own" and that by his account Congress owed him
300,000 livres. This sum was based on the time that Deane

had served as agent for the Secret Committee of Correspond—
ence. Ey the terms of his contract with the committee he was
to receive a five percent commission on all goods sent to
America. For his services as Commissioner, Deane charged only

L9 In Nay of 1791 DPCRF WTOte to

His personal living expenses.
James Wilson that his accounts had been renfly for six mgntbg

and that Congress had known for over a year that Jo nson would
he

U

h

not audit his accounts. But Congress, as f;r as he knew,
had failed to desirnate an auditor to settle the accounts.
In all his letters now appear two phrases constantly: 1. his
inability to collect one sou for his support, and 2. the fail—
ure of Congress to appoint an auditor. Deans, because Con—
gress had failed to settle his accounts, was living on money
borrowed from his friends. Cnly by practicing a most rigid
. <0
economy was he able to emist.’

In May of 1791 Deane aeain appealed to Congress for re—
lief. He re-told the old story of Johnson's refusal to ac-
cep the appointment to audit his accounts and the failure of
Congress to designate another auditor. He publicly and

frankly admitted his condition: "fly necessities would have

long since have justified my Sei7lnF on the public property

b81bid., pp. 286—89.
u91bid., p. 318.
50Ibid., p. 330.

206

here to the amount of the money due me; but I have withheld
from doing it on account of my regard for the credit of my
country, and have rather chosen to be obliged to strangers
for money for my support.”1 To the charge that he had grown
rich on the public money he pointed out that his situation
and the state of his accounts gave the lie to every assertion
or insinuation of this kind. All he reouested was simple
Justice.52

Month by month Deane had lived in hope of "simple
justice," and his faith that Congress would act in an honor-
able way stands as a tribute to his faith in the country and
peOple he loved. When Robert Morris wrote to him that Arthur
Lee's accounts had been accepted,53 he reconsidered and later
sent his own accounts to Philadelphia.54 Hope was again re-
vived when he learned in September of 1781 that Congress had
ordered a vice—cons 1, Robert Barclay, to settle accounts in
EurOpe. In fact, Congress ordered that a copy of the resolu-
tion be sent to Deane in France.55

In the early fall of 1781 Silas Deane moved to Ghent,
Belgium. This was done because he could live more cheaply
in Ghent than in Paris. When he received the resolution from
Congress announcing the appointment of Robert Barclay to
audit the accounts, he eagerly arranged a meeting. The meeting

with Barclay produced an unexpected surprise. The vice-consul's

51Wharton, Diplgmatic Correspondence, IV, #15.
5211-211.

53New York Historical Collections, Iv, 452.
$3.29..” I’- 516-

55Journals of Congress, XXI, 955.

207

instructions did not cover Deane's accounts.56 At first
Deane refused to believe Barclay and was convinced only af-
ter he had been shown a copy of his instructions.57 Both

he and Barclay agreed that such had not been the intention
of Congress as expressed in the resolution of peptember 12,
1781. In view of the fact that Congress had ordered that
Deane be sent a copy of the resolution, each felt that some-
one was playing a grim Jest.

The story that Barclay told Deane bore the signs of
deliberate chicanery. As Deane related the story to Barna-
bas Deane, what had happened became clear. "He [Barclay]
even told me that, supposing a settlement with me would be
one part of his instructions, he had applied for particular
instructions on the subJect, and had received for an answer
that Congress did not mean that he should have anything to
do in that affair. Enclosed you have the resolution of Con—
gress, and I leave you to Judge whether after such manoeuv-
res [sic] (I am not disposed to give them the name they merit)
I can eXpect Justice from the people at large, deceived and
irritated by men capable of going to such lengths.”58

The information that Barclay was not empowered to settle
his accounts was a terrific blow to Deane's morale. In des-
peration he requested Barclay to write Congress for new in-
structions. He also attempted to secure money from the vice-

consul by citing as a precedent the act of Congress in

55New York Historical Collections, IV, 552.
57Ibid., p. 55a.
581b1d., V, 22-39.

 

V

a
~ “ .
¢
_.
‘ .
\ . V —
| l v
. . .
y
«I
f. . .v
I
. \ .
I v
‘ A .
a . . I
. v
a

U.

.11). .lill‘ olul

granting Beaumarchais an advance pending a final settlement

of his accounts.59 Barclay readily agreed to the first re—
quest, but declined the second on the grounds that he was

not authorized to expend any money without a specific order
from Congress. Barclay, who really sympathized with Deane,
agreed to audit the accounts unofficially. This would pre-
vent any delay should any change of orders come from CongressfSO
Deane also wrote to his brothers asking that they use their
influence with members of Congress.

The last blow of 1782 came when Barclay informed Deane
that his accounts were in the hands of a Congressional Com-
mittee and that the Secretary of the Committee of Foreign Af—
fairs would notify him of the decision of the Committee.

This information Deane received after he was in London.61
The action of Congress, however, is not difficult to
explain. Almost immediately after his return to France,
Deane had been extremely critical of certain Americans in
France and the conduct of the war in America. These senti-
ments he had expressed freely and openly, and the report had
long been circulated in America that he was anti~American
and anti-French. The crowning blow was the publication of
some personal letters in the Tory press of New York. The

publication of these letters gave great Joy to his enemies

and forced his friends to abandon him or remain cuiet.

601bid., p. 69.
61Ibid., p. 116.

'\)

C0

 

209

Deane's letters were long political essays on the nature
of government and the origin of the quarrel with Great Brit-
ain. In them Deane eXpressed regret for the outbreak of hos-
tilities, questioned the sincerity of the French alliance,
and urged careful consideration of the English terms of re-
conciliation.62

During his first mission in France, Deane had considered
it a duty, and indeed it was, to report to the Secret Com-
mittee of Correspondence his observations on political and
economic conditions in France and Europe. With Dumas, the
Congressional agent in Holland, he had written freely and
extensively. Upon his return to France he resumed the prac—
tice of writing to his friends—~this time with disastrous
results.

Silas Deane was basically an honest man and the views
he eXpressed represented his evaluation of the times and were
intended only for the information of his friends. In a sense,
his honesty was the root of his troubles. In France he soon
discovered Americans who seemingly felt that it was their duty
to speak only of the good points of the American scene and to
ignore, deny, or distort the undesirable features or condi-
tions. This false sense of patriotism Deane could not toler—
ate and refused to ignore.

It was commonly asserted that Deane had made a fortune

onQ60,000 by speculation and private trade during his tour

62Silas Deane, Paris Letters or Mr. Silas Deane's Inter-
ceoted Letters, James Bivington, Printer, (New York, 1782).

 

of duty in France. The facts do not Justify such a statement
Before he left on his return voyage to France he had admitted
to Congress in his Memorial of August 18, 1779, his financial
embarrassment. He estimated that the return voyage from
France and the fourteen months waiting in Philadelphia had
cost him fifty thousand dollars.63 To say that Deane was
without resentment before he left Philadelphia would be un—
true, but to say that he hated Congress would not be true
either. To an old friend, Philip Schuyler, he had written:
"No man has a higher respect for the representative body of
this country [America] than I have, at the same time, no one
can have a worse opinion of those who, by their factious in—
trigues, brought that body into contempt in general, and en—
dangered the very existence of those States as free and in-
dependent ones. In these greater mischiefs my lesser mis-
fortunes are, in some degree, lost, and I now flatter myself
that things will be managed in a different manner, and that
our country will see better times."6u

Deane had looked upon his return to Europe as a voluntary
exile forced upon him by the ingratitude of those whom he had
saved from destruction.65 He was determined to fight his ad-
versaries both in and out of Congress but in a manner that
would not embarrass his friends.66 It was Deane‘s determina-

tion to avoid all political discussions both public and

63New York Historical Collections, IV, 160-61.
64%.

651.1221... 9. 163.

“laid... p. 177.

 

.orgy o—w-

I'IIIJ J

 

211

private--a resolution he found easier to form than to carry
out.67 Why? Because as he wrote his former colleague,
Colonel Duer, from Connecticut, "I find such resolutions,
taken in their fullest extent, inconsistent with the duty

we owe our contry, as private citizens, and with what we owe
ourselves."68 He was also greatly disturbed by the change
that had occurred in French public opinion regarding America
and Americans. "The enthusiasm with which France embraced
our cause and us at first, is gone," he wrote, "and the reso-
lution of Congress of the 18th of March last, irretrevably
[sic] damned our credit and honor. Add to this the success
of England at sea, and the language held by Lee and espe-
cially Adams, who not only in private, but in letters to the
minister, has asserted that America is not obligated to
France, but the contrary, and that England will settle with
us at any price."69 Deane also "attentively" examined and
reviewed the state of American affairs in EurOpe, and it was
his considered opinion that "our affairs have never been in
a mone critical state than at this moment, and that nothing
but a speedy peace can prevent the most ruinous Consequence.“70
In August, 1780, he reported these melancholy observations
to his old neighbor in Connecticut, Thomas Mumford, who, he
felt, would not "misuse" his confidence by making any part

of it public.

67;p;g,. p. 182.
68Mo! 13- 213.
69m” p. 191.
7°yggg. p. 210.

 

I I all In]

Deane did not limit his observations to correspondents
in America, but to JOhn Jay in Spain he made some exceedingly
derogatory comments. He deplored the loss of American credit
and prestige in Europe. He lamented that "it is almost as
great a disgrace to be known to be an American as it was two
years since an honor.“71 He complained of the number of rep-
resentatives, "almost thirteen", sent by Congress and the in-
dividual states "who are foolishly making a parade and bidding
on each other.“ France was criticized for "spinning out the
war" instead of making a decisive stroke. He felt that France,
because of England's great resources, had underestimated the
time required to defeat her and that in the meantime America
would be ruined.72 To the same correspondent he wrote: "My
best wishes are for the Peace, Safety and Liberty of America.
. . .But the situation of America wrings my very soul.” He
admitted that he distrusted France and feared that with
20,000 French troOps in America the cause of independence was
lost. "The only actual obJect is, if England or France and
Spain shall in future give the law." He felt that it was "a
dreadful alternative to be reduced to the choice of tyrants
after having risked everything to conquer one."7:3

For Deane it was unfortunate that he did not limit his
observations to his close friends and use more discretion in

putting his remarks on paper. By December of 1780 his remarks

711b1d.. p. 127.
721b1d.. pp. 22u_28.
731b1d., p. 269.

12

213

and his circumstances led Beaumarchais to make certain
pointed suggestions to Vergennes. Beaumarchais was unaware
that Vergennes was already loaning money to Deane as a pri-
vate individual. According to Beaumarchais, he "was the only
person in whom he {Deane} has entirely confided, and he shows
a bitterness that borders on something worse. I am myself so
embarrassed that I can offer him only temporary assistance. .
. .Mr. Deane is a partizan [sic] of France, and his devotion
accounts for nearly all his enemies in America." Beaumarchais
admitted that he "was uneasy, observing his profound emotion
in talking with me of his country, himself, his son, who is
in school in Paris, his present situation, and the ingrati—
tude that has occasioned it." Beaumarchais' remedy was for
France to advance a certain sum for Deane's support rather
than permit a possible deflection——"a grate political errorfl7”

Deane's public remarks had also been noticed by others
who were not so concerned with either Deane's physical or
political well—being. In December of 1780 William Lee in—
formed Arthur Lee: "Your former minister, Mr. Silas Deane,
we are told, since his return to France, has been continu-
ally employed in invectives against his country. According
to him, America is ruined, and must be subjected by England;
therefore, all the aid France gives is so much thrown away.
We are surprised at this, as he lives at Passy with your

minister, and seems to be his favorite and prime councillor.

7u'Ibid . , p. 269 .

 

 

21h

Mr. Deane adds, also, that your grand congress is composed
of fools and knaves; we hOpe he has not experienced them to
be so."75

Francis Dana, an American visitins in Paris, reported
to John Adams that Deane was critical of Congress and fearful
of the military situation. Dana's remarks were based on a
personal visit and a lone conversation with Deane. Accordina
to Dana, Deane stated: 1. America was already conduered.
2. The power of Great Britain was steadily rising while that
of her enemies was almost spent. 3. Holland would be defeated
and the armed neutrality crushed. h. In self interest Europe
should support Eneland rather than America. 5. Congress, a
cipher, had long lost all of its influence everywhere in
America. 6. He apologized for Arnold's desertion. Dana re-
ported that he kept his temper and heard him out but "you may
easily conjecture what my feelings were on such an occasion,
and I manifested them in some parts of my replies."76

There were many in both Europe and America who were not
ready to hear him out but who were ready to condemn. In
Spain, John Jay learned from William Carmichael, Deane's one—
time associate in France and now in Spain as Jay‘s Secretary,
of the substance of statements attributed to Deane. Jay
sharply warned Deane that such reports "will be no less preju-

dicial to you in America than in FurOpe."77 Deane replied

75William Lee, Letters of William Lea, III, 835.
76J0hn Adams, Works, VII, 350.
77New York Historical Collections, IV, 29b.

 

 

 

 

 

 

215

that he could easily guess, but did not name, the source of
Carmichael's information. Deane admitted that he expected

to be called a Tory and an enemy to America. He explained
that he was often called upon to justify certain acts of
Congress, especially the Act of March 18th [l780], which re-
duced the value of currency by a ratio of 40 to 1. As he
could not do it he "avoided going into company as far as I
decently could.” He expressed his bitterness and resentment
against Americans who deliberately misrepresented the mili-
tary and economic conditions in America. He related, in de—
tail, the story of a Mr. Searle, a member of Congress, who
arrived in Paris a few weeks after he did. Searle asserted
that General Washington's army consisted of ?0,000 effective
men and that recruits were pressing to enlist; that America
did not wish peace until "that old lion's claws should be cut
and his teeth drawn;" that the United States could carry on
the war alone; that commerce injured America; that American
merchants were rogues and speculators; that the merchants of
France who complained of the depreciation were speculators
and peddlers and that the goods sent from France had done more
harm than 40,000 Russians sent to fight against the States.
If his assertions were doubted, so Deane told Jay, Searle
would answer with an air of important contempt: "You will
pardon me, good Sir, I am a member of Congress, the only man
that ever came over to Europe in that character. I must know.

I have been chairman of most of their Committees. I think

 

 

 

.-

.‘J
H
O‘\

I ought at least to know."78 Deane reported many such
Americans in Paris who went almost as far as Searle in
distorting conditions in America. Deane:

could not agree with such men. I wished to
remain silent, but, being called upon to
give my opinion, and that in such a manner
that neither gratitude or duty would admit
a refusal, I did what I trust you and every
other honest American would have done, I
told the truth. I did not scruple to say
that our circumstances were very different,
and I gave my Opinion as early as November
last to the minister, thro' our mutual
friend, that nothing short of money or
supplies for our army and a superior fleet
could save America, and without these the
American war would soon be brought to a
close or a dangerous crisis; for that our
finances were totally deranged, our com-
merce nearly ruined, our naval forces next
to nothing, and our army suffered from

want of pay and clothing, and that in-
stant relief was absolutely necessary.79

Deane was not unaware that Dana and Searle had
reported him to America as an enemy and that their reports
would do him harm with Congress. However, he maintained
that he had the best interest of America in mind. To Jay,
Deane put this question: "Yas it inimical for me to declare
the same thing five months since, and do everything a private

individual could to persuade the minister of the real wants

781bid., p. 299.
79Ibid., p. 301

and dangerous situation of America?"80 John Jay, honest
man that he was, approved of Deane's honest statement to
the ministers of France but warned: "How far it was neces-
sary or proper to mention the same things in conversation
is less clear, and if that was the case I think it was not
prudent."81 The advice was good and well-intended, but it
came too late for Silas Deane to profit by it.

The stress and strain of a Revolution places all men in
three camps. Those who favor the Revolution are called pa-
triots or traitors; and those who oppose it are called loyal-
ists or traitors. Those who attempt to be neutral become ob-
jects of contempt and are called traitors by their country-
men, but in time they fade into obscurity and are forgotten.
The patriot, however, who supports the cause and later re-
cants becomes an object of hatred. The apostasy of the turn—
coat is perpetuated in the annals of the State, and his name
becomes a curse in the language of the nation. Such was the
fate of Benedict Arnold whose apostasy was acknowledged and
whose name has become a synonym for traitor. Silas Deane
was accused and condemned by the revolutionary generation,
but his guilt was never proved in a court of law and the
evidence was primarily circumstantial.

Silas Deane was accused by his former associates of
betraying the Revolution for "thirty pieces of silver." It

is well known that Deane was in need of funds during the last

801bid., p. 300.

81Ibid., p. u38.

218

ten years of his life. He was accused of receiving financial
assistance from the British but this cannot be proved. That
British Intelligence was aware of his plight and attempted
to exploit his position is not unlikely. The correspondence
between King George III and his Prime Minister, Lord North,
clearly reveals that an attempt was contemplated or was ac-
tually made to make use of Deane. It is not likely that any—
thing so crude as a direct approach was made, and the corres—
pondence so indicates. In March of 1791 George III informed
Lord North: "I think it perfectly right that Mr. Deane
should be so far trusted as to have three thousand pounds;
but the giving him particular instruction would be liable to
much hazard. ... ."82 The first part of the sentence implies
that the offer could or should be made. The second part in—
dicates that George III did not deem it wise that Deane should
be given instructions that might lead him to believe that the
offer of financial assistance came from a British agent or
government. The adventure, if the offer was actually made,
came to nothing as it is not mentioned in Deane's papers or
again in the George III-North correspondence.

The first indication that the public in America knew of
Deane's rumored defection from the revolutionary cause was
the publication of some letters in the Tory newspaper, the

Foyal Gazette of New York City, purported to have been

 

82The Correspondence of King George III with Lord North.
from 1768 to 1783J W. Bodham Donne, ed., 2 vols. (London,
1867), II, #r6690

 

written by Deane. The printer, James Bivington, later
issued the letters in book form.

The first reaction to the publication of the letters
was mixed, but it was generally believed that they were
forgeries. The letters were written in May and June of
1781 and were supposed to have been taken from an American
ship captured by the British navy. They were then sent to
London and from there sent to the Commanding General of the
British Forces in America, Sir Henry Clinton, by Lord North.
Lord North's covering letter explained that the letters were
selected from a number of intercepted letters. The British
Prime Minister expressed the hope that the letters would
have some "utility," and that Sir Henry should use them as
he saw fit. Lord North refused to disclose the source of
the letters, saying that it would be better for the "reader
to guess the sources of the letters."83

In the George III——North correspondence the discussion
of the "Intercepted Letters” is contradictory. The assump-
tion seems to be that the letters had been bought but were
too pro-British to be satisfactory. In the same correspond-
ence both George III and Lord North mention and even ouote
from other letters that had been intercepted at the same time.
Yet on July 19, 1781, George III wrote Lord North: "I have
received Lord North's boxes containing the intercepted let-

ters from Mr. Deane for America. I have only read two of

83Lord North to Sir Henry Clinton, August 3, 1781,
Clinton Papers, Clements Library, A L S.

them, in which I form the same opinion of too much appearance
of being connected with this country and therefore not likely
to have the effect as if they bore another aspect."8“ Lord
North also thought "them too strong in our favour to bear the
spontaneous Opinions, but that, if supposed to be authentick
{sic}, they will see they have by concert fallen into our
hands,"85 It would seem that these letters between the King
and his Prime Minister offers conclusive proof that Deane had
been bought to write them. But why should the King pay for
and send something to America that neither he nor his First
Minister approved? It would seem that if Deane had agreed

to sell out he would write or permit the British Foreign 0f-
fice to write letters which would please the King. Yet there
is no mention of returning the letters and asking that they
be re—written. There is also evidence in the King's letter
of July 19 that the letters were intercepted. In this letter
the King wrote North: "The extract from Franklin is very .
material; should France not supply America amply I think that
it has the appearance that this long contest will end as it
ought, by the colonies returning to the mother country; and

I confess I will never put my hand to any other conclusion

of the business."86 As British Intelligence was skilled in
the acquisition of letters without their owner's permission,

the securing of Deane's and Franklin's letters would be a

8”Donne, Correspondence of George III, II, #380.
85Ibld.. #381.

 

minor detail in the day's work of any skillful agent.87
Deane first learned of the publication of his letters
from Thomas Barclay, the vice-consul whom he thought Con-
gress had appointed to settle his accounts. In fact he wrote
his brother, Barnabas, that he was not sorry they had been
published: "Disagreeable as this circumstances must be to
me, I shall not be sorry to have all America informed of my
sentiments, and the grounds on which they are founded. I
have seen nothing since to alter my way of thinking, but on
the contrary much to confirm me in it."88 Not having seen
the New York publication Deane was not certain that his let—
ters had not been "doctored". He admitted that he did not
"know what Fivington may have published, but I well know
what I wrote. I have carefully examined the copies of my
letters, and I find nothing in them but what any free subject
has a right to say or write or publish in the most open man-
ner to the world, without being liable to be censured less
to be punished therefore."89 He ridiculed the charge of
having been privy to Arnold's treachery as too ridiculous
and absurd to merit one moment's attention. "My opinion of
his conduct is the same at this time which it has ever been
from my first hearing of his defection, and it is, that af-
ter those who, by their ingratitude and abuse toward him,

pushed him on to these desperate measures have taken on ‘

87Samuel F. Bemis, "British Secret Service and the Franco-
American Alliance," American Historical Beview, XXIX (lQRh),
88New York Historical Collections, IV, 506.

89Ibid., v, 23.

 

(\J

themselves their full share of the guilt of one half of his
treachery, there will still remain enough to render him
criminal in the eyes of honest men."9O

Deane denied that he had sold out to the British and felt
that he was a victim of the intolerance of the day for daring
to Speak and write honestly and frankly as a private citizen:

I cannot be charged with the betraying of any public trust,
for I had none committed to me. That, then, must be the
chain of positions and arguments by which I have been con—
demned? They appear to me to be nearly the following:
Everyone who doubts whether independent sovereignty, in the
hands of a democracy, is the best of all possible civil
constitutions for America, is an enemy; the man who cues—
tioned the sincerity and present disinterestedness of
France in her treaties and declarations respecting America,
is an enemy to both countries, to France as well as Amer—
ica. . . .And he who, claiming the rishts of private Judge-
ments, ventures to censure any part of the proceedings of
Congress, to entertain apprehensions of the designs of
France or to doubt whether the absolute and despotic King
of France is the great and masnanimous defender of the
rights of mankind is not only an enemy, but a traitor to
France and America. . . .If this, as it appears to be, is
part of the political creed of America at this time, the
greatest of all the evils which I apprehended and pre—
dicted is already arrived, and a tyranny established. . . .
I cannot help reflecting that if the temper of the times
and government in America is such as to proscribe and con-
demn the man who ventures to write the truth to his friends,
their calamities and those of our country must already be
too great to admit of any addition from anything which a
poor persecuted exile can say or do; but it is suggested,
and even asserted by many, that I am in the pay of the
British government, and have been bribed by the court to
write those letters. On this point alone can there be any
just ground to charge me with any, even the least degree,
of criminality? I have asserted nothing in my letters
which is not notoriously true. . . .If I had been bribed

to write the truth, this would not have invalidated what

I wrote, though it would justly reflect on me for having
acted from mercenary and base motives; but who knows or
examines but for a moment my situation, and the circum-
stances which have attended me, and my conduct for four

90Ibid., p. 31

years past, can aive the least credit to such idle and
abusive insinuations? 1

Another argument used by Deane which contained a great
deal of logic was that he, as much as anyone in America, had
much to gain by the successful outcome of the Revolution.
His fortune, 300,000 livres, was in the hands of Congress
and it was unlikely that he would endeavor to bring about
"the destruction of that body." He asked, "What inducement
could a British minister have to purchase me?" He answered
his own question by pointing out that he had neither trust
nor employment and was too unpopular in America ever to ex-
pect any. He had been persecuted and, in effect, exiled by
the intrigues of the prevailins party in power. His last hOpe
rested on pecuniary justice from Congress. "In such a situ-
ation, is it possible that any man of common reflection can
conceive me to be a subject of importance to the British
ministry? If I had the forces or the finance of my country
or any important nesociation [sic] committed to my direction
the case would be di””erent; but as ministers of state, any
more than other men, give money without some object in view,
equal at least to the advances made, the auestion occurs,
what object could they have in advancing money to me?"92

The charge was frecuently made and widely believed that
Deane had chanced sides for money. But, as he pointed out:

911bid., pp. 32-33.
92lbid., p. an.

d

 

"my distressed situation at Paris, and at this moment [chenfl,
January 31, 1782 on account of money for my support, suffi—
ciently proves that if I sold myself to the British rovern-
ment, I forgot the most essential article in the bargain, and
received nothing in exchange. I am at this moment indebted
to Doctor Franklin and others at Paris for sums borrowed for
my support, and, being unable to pay, an obliged to their
kindness even for my personal liberty."93 Such was Deane's
justification and explanation for his conduct. It was, of
course, based upon his honest convictions and justified by
virtue of his status as a free and independent citizen.

Men who make revolutions have too much at stake to be
judicious in weighing and judging those who are accused of
deviating from the revolutionary line. Silas Deane in all
honesty might protest his right to eXpress honest opinions
to his friends, but his countrymen reserved the right to pass
judgment upon his remarks and draw their own conclusions.

His friends had remained loyal to him when it was reported
that he was makinq remarks derogatory to Congress, the con-
duct of the war, and the duplicity of France. The publication
of his "Intercepted Letters" raised some doubts, but when
their authenticity was acknowledged, his friends could no
longer champion his cause. Many, no doubt for self—protection,
joined in the hue and cry that was immediately raised asainst

him; others chose to remain silent.

93Ibid.

225

In official and semi-official circles the rumor of
Deane's defection was handled very cautiously. Robert R.
Livingston, the Secretary of the Committee for Foreivn Af-
fairs, warned John Jay aeainst any communications with Deane
"as I know you once had confidence in him."94 Thomas Paine,
Deane's original antagonist, wrote to Pobert horris: "I
hepe this man's knack of creating confusion is at an end.
Whether the letters be senuine or not I do not undertake to
give judsment upon, but his lansuaae in France is equally
stranse as anything contained in these publications."q5
James Madison commented to Edmund Pendleton: "The genuine-
ness of some of these letters is upon good ground questioned,
but more of them contain marks of authenticity which denounce
him to be an apostate and consign his character to the same
infamy with that of his friend Arnold. This sentence is de-
livered ayainst him with less hesitation because a prior and
indubitable 1316} evidence of his degeneracy had been re—
ceived through another channel. Whether this deflection has
proceeded, from a mercenary contract with the enemy, from a
view of obtaining such a one, or from a chasrin at the ob-
stacle which his country has by a total prohibition of inter-
course with the enemy opposed to the commercial projects he

went to Eurooe to execute is as yet matter of speculation."96

9uwharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, IV, 81h.
95New York Historical Collections. IV, 525-

96James Madison, "The Writines of James Madison, Gaillard
Hunt, ed., 9 vols. (New York, 19003 I, 161; Burnett, Letters
Of CopgressJ VI, 262. '

 

On December ll, 1781, Iadison informed Pendleton that "on
which ever side Hr. Deane's letters are viewed they present
mysteries.“97 Pendleton's verdict: "I have long given up
Deane as an unworthy man whom I thought much otherwise when
I served with in Congress."98 In January of 1782 Oliver Wol-
cott told a friend that "the letters of Deane are here gener-
ally believed to be genuine."99 "Hr. Deane has fully proved
himself to be a traytor [sic] to his country. . . .The min—
istry of Great Britain have certainly fLound} his price and
given it to him," was the opinion of Nicholas Eveleigh of
New York.100

In Congress no official notice was taken regarding the
commonly accepted apostasy of its former commissioner. But
at the suggestion of James Lovell, the Secretary of Congress,
Charles Thomas informed Pobert Norris, both old friends of
Deane, that "although Congress think it beneath their dignity
to pass an express resolution for changing the name of the
Deane, a U.S. vessel of war, yet another name will be more
agreeable to them, and you will be justified in making the
change." The change was suggested by Hr. Lovell because "the
person after whom she was named has by his perfidy and defec-

tion forfeited all title to every mark of honor or respect. . . 311

97Madison, Eritings, I, 166.

98"Unpublished Letters of Edmund Pendleton," Massachusetts
Historical Society Collections, 2 series XIX (19057, VI, 28E}

99Burnett, Letters of Congress, VI, 28h.
1001b1d., p. 296.
lOlIbid., p. 36a.

 

The reaction of Arthur Lee to the publication of the
"Intercepted Letters" was both curious and typical. To James
Warren, Lee complained that "the defection of Mr. Deane seems
not to have drawn any punishment nor even odium upon his one
time friends and associates."102 But later he became con-
vinced that "If my action against Deane is brought on now, I
think a Jury will give me swinging damage. It will give me
great pleasure to see Payne's observations on his letters."103

George Washington, who had approved Deane's conduct in
July of 1778, now declared: "I wish never to hear or see any—
thing more of so infamous a character."10LL Washington also
wrote to the Governor of Connecticut, Jonathan Trumbull, ex-
pressing his satisfaction for his letter in which Trumbull
had eXpressed not only his own reply but also "the Sense of
the Legislative body of your State."105

Joseph Reed, one-time friend of Deane, wrote to General
Greene that he rejoiced that the schemes of Deane had been
detected but felt that it was unfortunate that his "friends,
partners, supporters, and abettors, appear in public, unblush—
ing, join in the cry of infamy as cordially as if they had
neither been in the counsel, or participated in the profits

f iniquity."106 Benjamin Tallmadge bluntly informed Deane

1021b1d., p. 326.

1°3Ib1d., p. 277.

10”George Washington, The Writings of George Washington
From The Original Manuscript Sources l7h5-1793, John Fitz-
patrick, ed., 39 vols. (Washington, iaai—hui, XIV, 250.

105Ibid., p. 300.

106William B. Reed, Life and Correspondence of Joseph..
Reed, 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 18h75, II. 373-73:

 

   

2?8

that the "epithet of Traitor is freely bestowed on you."107
David Watson, after an interview with Deane in Ghent, con-
cluded that "Mr. Deane must be regarded as an enemy alike
to France and America."108 Bobert Livingston confirmed to
John Jay: "No doubt is entertained here of his [Deane's]
apostasy, or of his endeavour to weaken the efforts of the
United States, and to traduce the character of the people
and their rulers, both in Furope and America."109

Benjamin Franklin also conceded that a change had
occurred in Deane. Jranklin had praised Deane highly in
1778 when he had been recalled and had welcomed him at
Passy in 1780 when he returned to France. He had heard but
refused to believe that Deane had repudiated the principles
of the Revolution. However, in March of 1782 he admitted

an

to Robert n. Livingston that Deane had changed:

There is no doubt of their {the letters] being all
genuine. His conversation since his return from
America has, as I have been informed, gone gradu-
ally more and more into that style, and at length
come to an Open vindication of Arnold's conduct:
and with these few days he has sent me a letter

of twenty full pages, recapitulating those letters

lO7New York Historical Collections. IV: 558-

108Elkanan Watson, Ken and Times of the Pevolution:
or, Memoirs of Flkanan Eatson, Including his Journals of
Travel in Eurone and America, From the Year 1777 to 18b2,
Winslow C. Watson, ed. (New York, 1861), p. 216.

109Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, V, 146.

 

 

 

 

 

“3
DJ
\0

and threatening to write and publish an account of
the treatment he has received from Congress, &.

He resides at Ghent, is distressed both in mind
and circumstances, raves and writes in abundance,
and I imagine it will end in his going over to

his friend Arnold in England. I had an exceed—
ing good opinion of him when he acted with me,

T

and i believe he was sincere and hearty in our
cause; but he is changed, and his character
ruined in his own country and in this, so that
I see no other way but Fnsland to which he can
now retire.110 -

The evidence is conclusive that many people were convinced
that Deane had betrayed the Pevolution. The evidence is also
conclusive and time would reveal that his brothers and many
other friends did not then or ever believe that he had com-
mitted treason by either word or deed. Barnabas feared that
the publication of his letters would ruin him "although they
may contain only the truth." Barnabas admitted: "For my
part, I am more surprised at his imprudence in writing so
freely than at any action in his life."111 Simeon wrote
Silas that to report the coffee house talk was needless "but
they suspect treason." He expressed resentment against the

unjust treatment Deane had received from Congress and closed
with a declaration of faith: "I trust, my dear brother,

that you are sure that I bear you the most affectionate regard,
and would risque [sic] my life most freely where it might be

of service to your just reputation; but at present what can

110Ibid., p. 216.
111New York Historical Collections, IV, 531.

 

be done? To oppose a torrent is madness; to sit ouiet,
impossible."112

This second mission to France-~this time a personal
one-—was a series of disappointments. Deane's attempts to
regain financial independence by various business enter-
prises came to nothing. He also made no progress in settl-
ing his accounts with Congress. When he left America to
return to France his enemies had insinuated that he was a
profiteer. The critical tone of Deane's letters regarding
the prosecution of the war by Congress and also highly crit-
ical of the apathy of France plus his approval of anland's
offer of conciliation all save his enemies the opportunity

to chanse the charge of profiteering to that of treason.

llzlbid., p. 535.

a)

‘4.)

CHAPTER VIII

DEANE IN ENGLAND

The fighting in the War for American Independence came
to an end with the surrender of Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown
on November 18, 1781. Independence was recognized by the
provisional articles of peace that were signed November 30,
1782, and the formal separation occurred with the signing
of the Peace Treaty on September 3, 1783. Silas Deane had
been wrong in his analysis and prophecy regarding the out-
come of the conflict. France had continued to support the
Revolution with men and materials and England had lost the
war. The peace for which Deane had yearned so long and so
ardently was now a reality, but for him, as he was soon to
discover, there was no peace.

Now that the war was over, Deane felt that "peace will
calm men's minds."1 He did not believe that "an individual
will be regarded as an enemy because, in the hour of des-
pondency, and apprehension for his country, he imprudently
attempted to warn his countrymen of what he thought their
danger. .~. .It is true that I wrote them [letters] to my
private friends, for their information; it is equally true
that some of those letters were basely betrayed, and that

others were intercepted and published in New York, not to

lNew York Historical Collections, v, l3u.

 

serve Great Britain so much as to injure me; and for that
purpose some of them altered in many places, and the whole
placed in the most unfavorable light. Though I am ready to
acknowledge that I was misinformed and mislead in some, and
even in many, things, and that I was imprudent to write or
speak at all on the subject, yet, as a free citizen, I had
a right to do both; nor will I ever part with that right of
speaking and writing my sentiments on the state and the man-
agement of the public affairs of my country; but I shall,
from what has past, be more on my guard in the future."2
The end of the war found Deane in a very precarious
position. For the past eighteen months he had been living
in Ghent, suffering from physical distress and mental anguish.
"For almost eighteen months past I have lived in lodgings
barely decent, without a servant, and dined at an ordinary,
a stile of living which you well know I am neither accustomed
nor inclined to, and to which necessity alone could ever re-
duce me--a hard necessity, indeed for without this rigid
economy I must, with an only son, for whom I had a risht to
promise quite the reverse, have been reduced to extreme want;
and what has imbittered even this scanty subsistence (as if
I had not already a sufficient portion of gall in my cup),
I have owed the greatest part of it to a friend in Paris, who
generously lent me money, and whose bills drawn on me, not,

indeed, in his distress, but in his want of money, I was

2Ibid.

z);

obliged to protest; and they still remain unpaid, though
I was long since informed of the suspicion you mention of
my being in the British interest."3

Hany individuals were aware that Deane was enduring
physical hardships in Ghent, and those who knew him best
feared for his sanity. As early as December of 1780 Beau—
marchais had reported to Vergennes his uneasiness after ob-
serving Deane's "profound emotion," and of a "bitterness
that borders on something worse."u By 1782 Franklin was
describing Deane as "being distressed in mind and circum—
stances, raves, and writes in abundance."5

Iv?

Again referring to Deane, Franklin said that 'ne con—
tinues to sit croaking at Ghent, chagrined, discontented
and dispirited."6 Deane himself wrote to Governor Jonathan
Trumbull of Connecticut admitting that it was not "Improb-
able that my private losses, and the ingratitude and injus—
tice which I had met with, too forcibly affected a mind, un-
fortunately for me, not gay and volatile, but rather serious
and gloomy; and that at the time when I wrote. . . .I viewed
things through a dark and discoloured mediam, which often
magnifies shadows and annihilates realities."7

222.151... p. 137.

Ibid.,“. 266.

5Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, V, 279.

6New York Historical Collections, V, 70.
7Ibid., p. 10“.

With the end of hostilities in America Deane felt that
normal trade between Great Britain and North America would
be resumed. He had an unsettled account in London which he
felt he could settle if he were there. He wrote to John
Jay telling him of the account and explainins that he hoped
"for some advantage from being among the first in sending
out goods to America."8 Deane asked Jay for his opinion be-
cause he had been "told it would be taken ill by my country—
men should I go to London, thourh hostilities are suspended,
and everyone at liberty to so there when they please."9 In
reply Jay advised Deane that such a move would be imprudent.
As Deane was suspected of being -n the British interest such
a step would strengthen the suspicion.10

In Spite of his urgent need to so to London where he
hOped to secure capital to re—enter the mercantile business,
Deane did not leave Ghent until the American Commissioners
in Paris had "no objections."11 He arrived in London the
last of Harch, 1783, and took a room at 135 Fleet Street.12

The appearance of Silas Deane in London immediately
started a new series of rumors that merely confirmed what

his enemies claimed was true and his friends could not deny.

 

 

 

 

 

"3
Km)
\n

Deane's primary interest continued to be the settlement of
his accounts, and he retained contact with Barclay, in hope
that the vice-consul would receive new instructions which
would make the settlement of the accounts feasible.13 In
April of 1783 Barclay informed Deane that Congress had sent
his new instructions and that he would show them to Deane
when they met.

The instructions, so long looked for, proved to be a
new source of disappointment. Barclay was ordered immedi-
ately to refer any cuestionable item to Congress for settle—
ment and he was not authorized to advance any balance that
was due on any account.lu Congress, by these instructions,
reserved the right to approve the time and manner of makin?
the final settlement.

In April of 1784 Deane confided to Beaumarchais that
he was almost convinced that Congress had no intention of
settling the accounts. He explained:

Kr. Barclay has been with me to examine my accounts.
But his instructions from Congress are such that it
is impossible to settle with him. I can but tell
you freely that I think them drawn up in that man-
ner with desisn. Men who have no disposition to

pay are often ingenious at putting off a settlement.

He, Barclay, has orders to pass no articles of ac-
count without the most explicit vouchers; to pay

a.-

 

\u Ln
{‘0

 

no regard to any settlement already made without
examinin? of it himself; and for merchandize and
stores shipped to America, he is ordered to en—
ouire if they were of a good duality, if they
were charsed at a just price, by whom they were
shipped, etc, etc. Thus cloathins [sic] of
their army, furnished by you seven years since
and still unpaided for; the canon, fusees [sic ,
and powder, etc., sent out to them by your
exertions, and by my unceasine promises and
encourasements to you. Yes, Sir, the duality,
price, and Quantity of those very arms and
stores which enables their army to triumph

over General Burgoyne, and decided the fate

of the United States, are now minutely in—
cuired into, and you are to receive no money
until the result of the incuiry shall be
approved by Consress.

In June of 1784 Barclay transmitted to Robert Morris

Superintendent of Finafice, a copy of Deane's accounts "as
settled by himself, to which I have added some remarks,
none of which seem to be of much consecuence."l6 In the

same month, June, Barclay informed Deane that he had sent

several copies of his accounts to the Superintendent of

ij

inance. He also enclosed a copy of his remarks covering
the accounts. In September 178M Robert Morris forwarded
the accounts with Barclay's statement to the President of
Congress for congressional action.l7 Everything that could
15Ibid., p. 295.

léIbido, p. 300'

 

237

be done in EurOpe had been done and now the next move
rested with Congress.

By order of Consress the accounts had been minutely
audited and now the auditor's report awaited final ap-
proval before being sent to the Treasury Board for final
action. Congress did not choose to act and the accounts
remained in a suspended state. Deane, at the end of his
financial and physical resources, at last abandoned hope
and ceased pressing the matter with Congress. In June of
1789 he made one final and last appeal to John Jay and
George Washington, requesting them to urge congressional
action: "I am extremely solicitious to have my accounts,
which lay for so many years unnoticed by the late Congress,
examined and settled. Not that I ever expect to receive
the balance due me-—this I have long despaired of--but that
it may be fully known and ascertained, for the satisfaction
of the public at large and of my own friends and family in
particular, if I have Just merited the treatment I have met
with, or any part of it."18 During the past ten years
Silas Deane had written many letters to Consress reauesting
a settlement of his accounts but this was his last appeal,
an appeal that was never answered.

The failure of Congress to settle his accounts was
denounced by Deane as an injustice. To his personal and

political enemies he was a man who had been caught attempting

181b1d.. pp. Ssh—26.

238

to convert an intended gift into a commercial transaction.
During the ten years that Deane attempted to convince Con-
gress that the charges asainst him were not true his enem—
ies were ever vigilant in their campaien to blacken his
name and lost no opportunity in exploiting the many rumors
that reached America of Deane's continued anti—American
activities. In this cloud of suspicion and distrust is to
be found the key for Congressional inaction.

Deane was not unaware of the prevailing atmosphere and
its consequence to him. To Benjamin Franklin he sadly com-
mented in October of 1783: "I have found by experience
that from the moment a man becomes unpopular every report
which any way tends to his prejudice is but too readily
credited without the least examination or proof, and that
for him to attempt to contradict them in public is like an
attack on the hydra; for every falsehood detected and calumy
obviated several new ones of the same family come forward."19

While Deane was still living in Ghent, there appeared

in the London Chronicle, November IZ-IM, 178?, a lurid ac-

 

count of Deane and his commercial transactions in France.

It was boldly asserted that he was living in Ghent because
his dishonesty had been discovered and he had been literally
expelled from France. Deane immediately attempted to locate

the origin of the story but without success.20 Upon Deane's

19Ib1d., p. 212.
20lbid., p. 117.

?39

request Benjamin Franklin sent him a certificate saying:
"I think it my duty, in compliance with his reouest, to
certify and declare that the paragraphs in question, ac—
cording to my best knowledge and belief, are entirely
false, and that I have never known or suspected any cause
to charge the said Silas Deane with any want of probity,
in any purchase, or bargain, whatever, made by him for the
use or account of the United States."21 Thus Deane in his
exile was again brought to the attention of the public in
both Europe and America and not without repercussions.

At this time there were many Americans in Europe and
such news would be read and reported in America. William
Lee was quick to note and to take offense at the statement
issued by Franklin. He wrote that "The Doctor . . . can't
be bro't to Justice he has too deeply merited" and he was
sure that the "old connection between S. Deans and his
former associates and correspondents was not broken off."22

From other sources the news of Franklin's continued
support of Deane's honesty was carried to America. Arthur
Lee wrote to his friend William Gordon in America express-
ing indignation that Franklin had given testimony "in be—
half of the said Deane's honesty in his mercantile transac-
tions for Congress."23 In July of 1783 Henry Laurens wrote

to Robert Livingston that he had heard and would soon verify

2lIbm.
22William Lee, Letters, III, 915.
23Lee, Life of Arthur Lee, II, 290.

2&0

that Silas Deane "had been an active hand in chalking out

a treaty of commerce for us."2u From the Hague John Adams
reported: "My advices from England are that Lord Sheffield,
with his friends Deane, Arnold, Skeane, and P. Wentworth,
are making a party unfriendly to us; that the Ministry

adopt their sentiments and measures.u25 The European Maga-

 

zine and London Beview in October of 1783 devoted several
pages to the career of Silas Deane. The remarks were no
doubt intended to be complimentary but they revived memo-
ries of the war and the part that Silas Deane had played in
that conflict, memories that were not likely to win him
either friends or supporters in America.26
Deane was aware of these criticisms and did not hesi-
tate (categorically) to deny them. In July of 1783 he wrote
to James Wilson, an old business associate of better days,
that "certain persons, mischievously disposed, to keep alive
prejudices against me in the United States, have inserted in
all the public papers here that I attend the levee of minis-v
ters, and am intimate with them, and their adviser in their
measures respecting our commerce. . . .I can with the great-
est truth and sincerity, assure you that from the time I
parted with you in Philadelphia until my arrival in this
city, in March last, I never saw or corresponded with any of

the ministers, or with any one in their service or confidence

2“Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence. VI. 555.

25Ibid., p. 630.
26New York Historical Collections, V, 194.

 

except by accident and in company. During the sitting of
Parliament, I was only once in the Gallery of the House of
Commons, and once to hear an interestina debate in the House
of Lords. My curiosity would, indeed, have carried me there
often, but as it was each time inserted in all the morning
papers, with comments on it, I declined going again."27

In the same vein Deane did not hesitate to refute what
he considered to be inaccurate press reports. To Robert
Morris he wrote: "The newspaper writers of this country
are as mischievously busy as those of ours. Since my ar-
rival I have been made by them to visit the Duke of Portland,
Lord North, Mr. Fox, and to be intimate with General Arnold,
to have furnished Lord Sheffield with materials for a pam-
phlet on American commerce. I can only assure you, that I
have no interest to deceive you, that there is not the least
foundation in truth for any of these reports, but that I
have lived since my being in London in such obscurity that
I have no acquaintance in it, except of some private individ-
uals."28

One of the most devastating rumors was that of Deane's
association with General Benedict Arnold. The rumor was cir—
culated shortly after his return to France that he had pub-
licly defended Arnold's treason. Deane's own account of the

affair in Paris was that while he held no brief for Arnold's

27Ibid., p. 166.
28Ibid., p. 205.

conduct, he had roundly denounced Arnold's enemies whom

he felt had "improved every circumstance and accident to
n

push him into desperate measures."‘9

When Deane went to London, Arnold, for reasons best
known to himself, attempted to renew their old relation—
ship. His advances caused a great deal of embarrassment
for Deane and the loss of the friendship of John Jay.
Deane's former friendship with Arnold in America as well
as his misrepresented remarks in Paris were recalled, and
his meetinrs with Arnold were accepted as proof of his
apostasy.

Deane's own account of his meetings with Arnold vary
somewhat from the accounts that circulated in America.
Deane's version was as follows:

The next day after my being in London, when I had
no reason to suspect that anyone knew anything of
me save those to whom I had sent notice of my be-
ing in town, and of my lodging, I was surprised
to find General Arnold introduced into my chamber
without being announced by my landlord until he
opened the door (my circumstances do not permit
me to keep a servant). Several fientlemen were
with me, and among others Mr. Hodge of Philadel—
phia. I can most sincerely say that I was never
more sincerely embarrassed; and after a few

Questions on either part, and as cold a civility
as I could use consistent with a common decency,

29Ibid., p. ugh.

 

242

he took his leave. You well know that he is
one who never wanted for assurance or address,
and, as if we had been on our former footing,
he ursed me, at partins, to dine with him,
which I civilly declined. The next day I
changed my lodrins, and received from him
repeatedly cards of invitation to his house,
which I declined acceptins, and in a few
days he again called on me, at my new lode—
ins, in the same unceremonious manner as
before. A gentleman from America was then
with me, and remained in my chamber until

he left. On my partinc with him on the
stairs, I told him freely that his visits
were disagreeable to me, and could be of

no service to him; that I could not re-

turn them, except that I might call with

Er. Febor some evening to pay our respects
to fire. Arnold, from whom I had received

so many civilities in Philadelphia. This

we did a few eveninss after, and from that
time, now more than five months since, I
have not seen him, except in his carriage,
passing me in the street.30

There is no reason to doubt the validity of Deane's
statement, but it was senerally believed that he and Arnold
continued to be friends. These reports were accepted as
true by John Jay and as a result Jay completely repudiated
Deane. When Deane called on Jay in London he was out, and
when he returned he did not bother to answer Deane's card.
However, from Chaillot, France, Jay expressed his feelings
in no uncertain terms: "You are either exceedinsly injured
or you are no friend of America; and while doubts remain on

that point, all connexion between us must be suspended. . . .

30 n,
Ibid., 9. L13.

———.—-.—.

I was told by more than one, on whose information I thousht
I could rely, that you received visits from, and was on
terms of familiarity with General Arnold. Every American
who gives his hand to that man, in my opinion pollutes itflal
Thus, in January of 1784 ended a friendship that had existed
since the days of the First Continental Congress. Only once,
in June of 1789, Deane wrote to Jay requesting him to use
his influence to settle his accounts. He had dared to make
the reouest because "Mr. Sayre told that you enquired after
me and expressed a wish for my return."32 The letter was
not answered.

One of the most damaging reports circulated in America
was a rumor that Deane was in the confidence of the ministry
and was serving as a ministerial advisor on American affairs.
This was denied by Deane, and his denial is supported by un-
contested evidence. When Deane was in Belgium he had met
Andre Allen, a friend of Lord Shelburne. Allen had been in—
pressed by Deane's knOWledae of American affairs and his de—
sire to re—establish Anglo—American trade on a satisfactory
basis.33 Allen recommended Deane to Lord Shelburne, and

Shelburne's correspondence indicates that Allen's suggestion

31Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, I, 570; Jay,
Life of John Jay, II, lh3—hb.

32New York Historical Collections, V, 526.

33Andrew Allen to Lord Shelburne, October 17, 1792,
Vol. 89: 119 ALS; Silas Deane to Andrew Allen, December 25,
1782, Shelburne Papers, Vol. 87: 2b? ALS.

 

2A5

was at first accepted. But upon more mature reflection
Lord Shelburne decided that because of Deane's unpopularity
in America his presence would be more of a liability than
an asset in the negotiations.3u Rumors to the contrary,
Deane played no part in the settlement of 1783.

Almost from the time of his arrival in London the rumors
began that Deane was urging an anti—American commercial pol—
icy to the British ministers. The basis for this rumor was
the publication of a pamphlet by Lord Sheffield. This pam—
phlet was based upon a series of conversations that Deane
had with Lord Sheffield, and Deane maintained that the views
stated in the publication were the exact opposite of those
he expressed. Deane gave this account of the incident:

I accidentally became acquainted with Lord Sheffield a
few days after my being in London. I had no previous
knowledge of his political character, nor was I inter-
ested to enquire what it was. I had no knowledge of
his intention, if in reality he then had any, of writ—
ing on American commerce, and I answered his oueries
on the subject without reference; there could be no
ground for any, for the answers I gave afforded no
kind of information not to be had from thousands of
persons as well or better informed on the subject, or
even from the Custom House books. I had but little
aceuaintance with anyone in London, and his lordship's
polite attention to me, a stranger, naturally lead me
to visit him often, and without ceremony, and to form
an intimate accuaintance in his family. When he in—
formed me of his design of writing on the subject, we
had many conversations on it, and in the presence of
persons of note, particularly of Sir Robert Herries,
who, with his lordship, can testify what my sentiments
and mode of reasoning was, and that I differed materi-
ally from those contained in the pamphlet. Yet such
has been my fate, that simply from my acquaintance and

34Andrew Allen to Lord Shelburne, January 10, 1783,
Shelburne Papers, Vol. 87: 2H7 ALS.

known intimacy with his lordship, I have had those
arguments and principles which I opposed attributed
to me. His object is to secure to this country the
carrying trade, and to preserve the Navigation Act
from being in any way altered. Hy arguments have
been to show that the carrying trade, beyond a cer-
tain dearee, cannot be retained by this country.

That it is, in fact, already in great part irrecov—
erably gone into other hands, and that the Navigation
Act, though wisely formed for the period when it
passed, wants many alterations to adapt it to the
present times; and like all other acts which respect
commerce, that it ought to be made conformable to the
present circumstances. This, sir, is the true state
of everything that gives the least foundation for
those reports.3

In spite of his most positive assertions to the con-
trary Deane also received credit for the undesirable com—
mercial clauses in the treaty of 179?. To his brother
Simeon he wrote:

I find my name again taken up, and “rom being a
poor, distressed, and even despised exile, I
have influenced the councils of nations, and
directed the late Ministers in their measures
respecting our commerce. Every American in
Europe professes to believe this fully. . . .
It would be of no purpose to authorize you,
or any other friend of mine, to contradict
those reports. For though I sent you proofs
of the falsity of those reports strong as
those from holy writ or mathematical demon-
stration, it would avail nothing in the pres—
ent temper of times. . . .The general belief
among my countrymen here is that but for the
advice and information I gave, on my first
arrival in the country, we should have been

35New York Historical Collections, v, 214-15.

2A6

admitted by treaty and by acts of Parliament

to a free commerce with the British West

Indies and with every other part of the Brit—

ish dominions, on the same terms as before

our separatio from, and independence on,

this nation.
Deane maintained that with the exception of Mr. Fox he was
not accuainted with any of the British ministers. On one
occasion he had sought and received an interview with Fox
and had discussed with him "a plan for accommodating the
affair of our commerce and intercourse with the British West—
Indies, and to give him my reasons in support of it."37 Fox
listened to his plan and arguments and assured him that he
would introduce a bill along the ideas Deane had presented
and that he felt that commerce would be established to the
mutual benefit of all.

Deane believe that the chief source of resentment
asainst him could be traced to the publication of Lord fhef-
field's pamphlet. Yet, as he pointed out: “the act of Far—
liament and the king's proclamation. . . .confining the West—
India commerce to British ships are dated and were issued
previous to the first publication of that pamphlet.”8 Re-
gardless of the consequences of the publication of the pam—
phlet in America, Lord Sheffield proved to be one of the
few friends that Deane made in England.

Lord Sheffield and his family were sincere in their

affection for Deane. During the entire time that Deane was

36Ib1d., p. 290.
37Ibid., p. 299.
381b1d.

fa?

in Ensland he was a frequent and welcomed guest in the
London home of the Sheffield family.39 In August of 1785
his Lordship wrote to Deane complaining of neglect and ex—
pressing the hope that he would soon make his promised visit
to Sheffield Place.40 Due to freouent ilness this visit
never took place."P1 The correspondence between the two men
reveal a mutual regard and admiration based on a common in-
terest though conflicting views.l‘L2 There is little doubt
that during Deane's last illness Lord Sheffield contributed
to his support and offered to pay his passage to America
should he care to return to his homeland.

In the fall of 1787 Silas Deane gained a new lease on
life. In September of that year he submitted to Lord Dor—
chester, Governor—General of Canada}L3 a plan for a "canal
from lake Champlain around the rapids of St. John, into the
river St. Lawrence of a certain burthen.” Lord Dorchester
was impressed and told Lord Sydney, British Secretary of
State for Foreisn Affairs, that "as far as a cursory view
of the country can Justify an opinion, this object appears
to be practicable and useful, both in a commercial view, pro-
vided the conditions of excutina the same be not objection-
able . "M”

39Connecticut Historical Collections, XXIII, 177.
“Olglg,. p. 209.

blNew York Historical Collections, V, #63.

uzConnecticut Historical Collections, XIII, 210, 228.
“3lblc., p. 218.
“4New York Historical Collections, v, nos-7o, 476-81.

Deane submitted the plan to Lord Sydney and for a time
had great hopes that the government would support it. Deane
proposed that the canal be constructed with government funds
and then a toll be charged for ships using the new passageway.
If the minister approved, Deane planned to so to Canada "to
arrange and prepare what is necessary for the execution of my
plan.“ The idea of again doinc something excited him. If it
failed he would "be in no worse shape than at present" and
"it relieves my mind by a prospect of success in a great and
important undertaking." To the great disappointment of Deane
the project was never approved. It was Just as well because
he was unable to undertake the mission to Canada.u5 This
failure of his one last hOpe may account for his last and
most severe illness.

The last ten years of Silas Deane's life were a decade
of disappointment. It was a period when one by one he saw
each plan for relief and recovery fade and wither away.

These years of frustration and privation had taken their toll
upon his body and spirit. During these years his brothers
and friends had constantly worried about the reports of "the
distressed state of his mind."

In 1783 he recorded his condition as follows: "My
circumstances from 1780 to this hour shew that I have been
in distress, which everyone who knows me knows that I never

was before. Doctor Franklin, Mr. Beaumarchais, Mons. Monthieu,

“5Ibld., p. A76.

250

and others, know what my funds have been, and whence
obtained for my support, on the very small remains of
which subsisting, not livinr. I have not kept a servant
or ventured into a hackney coach, except in a storm, since

I have been in this country; such is the economy to which

I am forced by my misfortunes.”6

In 1788 a glimpse of Deane's life may be gleaned from
his letter to Lord Sheffield. In this letter he apologized
for his failure to write:

Hy distressed state, both body and mind, have
prevented my writing and acknowledging the
receipt of yours of the 18th. I have every
day resolved to write, but found myself too
weak, and too much affected, when I took up
my pen to proceed. I have wished and hoped
from day to day to find myself more at ease
in mind, and for some relaxation of my dis“
orders. . . .My fever has been almost con-
stant and increasinx, and my strength leav-
ing me, until I am just able to walk my room
{aid}. Three days since I walked as far as
the Bird Cage Walk, and accidently met with
Mr. Irwin, who relieved my then extreme want;
for the rest Mr. Wilkerson has chiefly as—
sisted me. As to pecuniary matters, my
friend Bancroft is in distress, and involved
in vexatious lawsuits with men who depend
principally on this circumstance for success
against him. He has, besides this, a family

uéIbid., pp. 203-04. With the exception of Deane's
letters little is known of this phase of Deane's life,

 

to support; yet such is his friendship, that he
has repeatedly assisted me with a part of what
he had. This, my lord, is a brief state of my
situation as to money matters. I get little
rest at night; for my coughing is almost in-
cessant, and my night sweats, which but lately
affected me, are profuse, so that I have scarcely
a thread of my linen dry in the morning. ky
appetite is gone; I have not ate anything solid
for more than ten days. Fruit, a poached egg,
or an egg beat up in milk, warm from the cow,
with sugar, nutmeg, and some spirit in it, have
been my sole nourishment; nor has my stomach

at all times been able to bear even these; and
I have freguently cold and anguish turns of
c-‘hivering.’7

One of Deane's doctors, Dr. Jefferies, recommended a sea
voyage which Deane felt that under the circumstances would
not be wise. He knew from experience that during the voyage
he would be without fruit, milk or vegetables, subject to
the heat and calms of the passage and violent eouinoctial
gales--conditions severe enough for a man in good health.

He reasoned that as his body was racked with pain and his
mind "distracted with reflections on the past, present, and
probable future," he would not survive the voyage. "But my
physician is in favor of the voyage. My lord, when a physi—
cian has a patient whose disorders baffles [sic] him, he
recommends to him a short voyage to sea or to watering places,
or, in short, anywhere, to get him out of the way and off his

hands." From his past experiences Deane knew that a sea voyage

u7Ibid., p. bee.

was out of the ouestion, a decision that both Lord Sheffield
and Dr. Bancroft shared with him}!8

In his letter to Lord Sheffield Deane had described his
physical condition in detail but to his brother, Barnabas,
he related an incident in which American officials became
involved: "I have been confined for the greater part of
time, ever since December last to my chamber, by a complica-
tion of disorders, occasioned in part, and greatly increased,
by the distressed state of my circumstances, which have at
times drove me to a state of almost absolute distraction.
The assistance of Dr. Bancroft and of two other friends, have
kept me from perishina, as great part of the time I have
scarcely been able to recollect one day what had passed the
preceeding. In this state advantage was taken, and I was
plundered of almost the whole of my cloathe [sic], and many
papers of importance.“r9

The man who stole Deane's papers went to Paris and
offered them to Thomas Jefferson, the American ambassador,
for one hundred and twenty guineas. He informed Jefferson
that he had "laid hands" on them because Deane had owed him
one hundred and twenty guineas and he could have them for the
same price or he would offer them to the British government.
Jefferson reouested and obtained twenty four hours to examine

the books and determine the value of the volumes. Jefferson

“81b1d., p. #89.
”91b1d.

253

reported to John Jay that "one contained all of his accounts
with the United States, from his first coming to EurOpe to
January 10, 1781. Presuming that the Treasury Board was in
possession of this account till his arrival in Philadelphia,
August, 1778, and that he had never given in the subseouent
part, I had that subsequent part copied from the book and

now enclose it, as it may on some occasion or other, perhaps,
be useful in the Treasury office. The other volume contained
all his correspondence from March ?9th to August 23rd, 1777.
I had a list of the letters taken, by their dates and address,
which will enable you to form a general idea of the collec-
tion. On the perusal of them, I thought it desirable that
they should not come to the hands of the British minister,
and, from an expression dropped by the possessor of them, I
believe he would have fallen 50 or 60 guineas." Jefferson
requested authority to buy them as he thought the material
worth the price. "Indeed, I would have given that sum to

cut out a single sentence which contained evidence of a fact
not proper to be committed to the hands of enemies."

At the end of the twenty—four period the man returned
and Jefferson surrendered the books saying that he must wait
for orders from his government. According to Jefferson the
owner returned to London "without making any promise that he
would await the event of the orders you might think prooer

to give."50

50Department of State, Diplomatic Correspondence of the
United States, 1783—1283, 7 vols. (Washington, 1833-3b),

 

 

pan

In his reply to Jefferson's request for authorization
to buy Deane‘s Account and Letter Books Jay wrote: "I wish
you had purchased them. On this subject I cannot, indeed,
give you any instructions or authority, but I will venture
to advise you, in express terms, to make the purchase."51

The next episode in the drama of Deane's stolen papers
occurred in March of 1789. Jefferson wrote to Edward Ban—
croft saying that he had purchased two volumes of Deane's
accounts and correspondence. But as the seller had hinted
that Deane still had "six or eight volumes more, and being
to return soon to London, he will try to get them also, in
order to make us pay high for them." Jefferson proposed to
Bancroft that he purchase all of the remaining volumes. "I
think you might venture as far as fifty guineas, and propor-
tionably for fewer. . . .I suppose his distresses and his
crapulous habits will not render him difficult on this
head."52

Bancroft's reaction to this letter is unknown and it is
doubtful if he took the matter up with Deane, but he did an-
swer Jefferson's letter. In March of 1799 Jefferson informed
Jay that he hOped the business was finished. After some bar-
gaining he reported that he had been able to purchase the two

volumes for 25 louis instead of the original one hundred and

x.

511b1d., p. uni.

52Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson:
being his autobiography, correspondenceigreports, Messageg,_
Addresses, and Other WritingsJ Official and Private, H. A.
Washington, ed., 9 vols. (Washington, 18533, II, 578.

255

twenty. He was also pleased to report that he had been
informed that Deane had no other volumes in his possession.53
The tone of the Jefferson-Jay correspondence indicates that
they were pleased to acquire Deane's books.

For a number of years Deane had toyed with the idea of
returning to the United States. Fach time the uncertainty
of his reception had caused him to postpone the decision.
As early as 1783 he had written to his brother, Simeon: "I
am at present in a most isolated state. Calumniated and
persecuted in America, in effect proscribed in France, and
without friends or patrons in this country, and what is
worse, without funds to procure them or to enable me to en-
ter on any business of consequence, I have entertained
thoughts of returning to Virginia, and to prosecute a plan
which I have mentioned to you in several of my letters, of
saw mills and of the manufacture of tobacco on a large scale;
but the climate deters me, and my ianorance of the times
respecting me makes me pause. I can by no means think of
returning to a country, however dear to me, in which I may
be subject to insult or contumely."5u

From Edward Langworthy in June of 1783 Deane also re-
ceived an unvarnished statement of his unpopularity in America.
"It is painful for me to mention, & even beyond your imagina-
tion to conceive, how much wicked & malicious Men have

53Department of State, Diplomatic Correspondence, IV, 77,
5L‘Iew York Historical Collections, V, 183,

 

256

endeavored to blacken your character with your countrymen.
their sic] persecution has been detestable, & cruel; but
as I am confident of your Innocence, & know the Insratitute,
that has been the reward of your Labors, it has had no in-
fluence on my mind, but rather encreased ‘sicj my esteem &
affection for you. I was lately in Philadelphia, & was
pleased, in a conversation with your old Friend Pelatiah
to find that he still retained his Esteem for you & spoke
kindly of you."55

The idea of returning to America was not forgotten,
and in 1785 Fobert Morris, in an answer to a ouery from
Deane, wrote:

What reception you misht meet in this country is

very difficult to determine. You cannot be ignorant
that a great flame was kindled by the publication

of your letters. . . .and in the ferment of Opinions
on that subject your enemies would probably direct

the public odium against you on your arrival in Amer—
ica. This is one side of the picture. You will find
on the other, that the resentment aaainst our disaf—
fected daily subsides. Pains convinced, on all hands,
that the power of Great Fritain can never be established
in the United States, they are content to become good
citizens thereof, and the people in general seem dis-
posed to receive them. It misht therefore, be supposed
that your wish to return would not be very strenuously
opposed. If you should return, you will naturally ex-
pect, and not be disappointed, should you meet with a
cold reception from those with whom you were once on
terms of intimacy. Many will persist in attributing
your conduct to bad motives, and will not believe in
the assurances you give to the contrary. Others (if
convinced) will not avow that conviction, nor act in
conformity to it. Those, therefore, (and they are but
few), who charged your errors to be imprudence, not
wickedness, being unable to stem the torrents, must

55Connecticut Historical Collections, XXIII, 181.

 

?57

give way to it. From the hand of time alone can you
expect hat the impression asainst you will be oblit—
erated.

Not all the reactions that Deane received were unfavor-
able. In July 1785 Deane heard from Jacob Sebor of New London,
Connecticut: "It gives me sreat pleasure to hear you enjoy
your health and I had flattered myself you would have taken
a passage for America this Spring. Your friends in this
state often enouire [sic] after you, and would be very happy
to see you and I can assure you they are not a very few."57

In September of 1788, Barnabas, Deane's brother, ex—
pressed the fear that he had died because he had not written
for so long. Barnabas told of the reports he had received
of Deane's poor health and financial circumstances. "Let me
intreat [sic] you to return to this country again [sic] you
have friends that will keep you from want. You can Compound
with your Creditors, they have already taken all the property
you have in this country; they can set no more."58

After Deane's severe illness in 1788 Lord Sheffield
offered to pay his passage to America. Deane, for reasons
of health, refused. In November of the same year he received
from Winthrop Saltonstall a remonstrance for Deane's failure
to write and eXpressing alarm at a "late hint of your scanty
situation. . . .I am exceeding glad at the suggestion of your

56New York Historical Collections, V, b7l.

57Connecticut Historical Collections, XXIII, 213.
581bid., p. 229.

intention to revisit America; no one will be happier in
embracing you in this part of the world than I shall. When
at New London I shall be very happy in receivins you into
my family, and thoush not with that elesance you have been
used to, you can no where receive a more sincere and hearty
welcome."59 In December of the same year Barnabas urged
more strongly: "Yours of Auaust 10th is just come to hand
and the contents gives me pain Altho from Peports it was not
long unexpected, I just bee of you to leave London, what can
you Expect by Staying there but Beaaery and Distress, I have
not the least Expectation of you Ever doing any kind of Busi—
ness Again, I Judse from what is Past, I will willingly find
a home for you if you will come to this place where I have
a good House partly Built, your Creditors will not find it
worth their Attention to put you in Coal."6O

In England Deane lived the life of an exile. During
this time he had experienced severe financial, physical and
mental anguish. Periodically he had toyed with the idea of
returning to America. Repeatedly he postponed this decision
because of the reception he might receive. So for ten years
he remained abroad, apart from his family, friends and those
who misht have been willins to assist him in a reestablish-
ment of his sood name.

In August of 1789 Silas Deane finally did decide to

return home. The time and cause of his decision are unknown

59New York Historical Collections, V, 501-03.
6OConnecticut Historical Collections, XXIII, 235.

259

but the reaction was both varied and definite. From his
post in Paris Thomas Jefferson wrote James Madison: "Silas
Deane is coming over to finish his days in America, not hav—
ing one sou to subsist on elsewhere. He is a wretched monu-
ment of the consequence of a departure from riaht."61 How-
ever, from London in the same month, August, Samuel Peters
wrote to Deane:

Permit me to wish you a Safe and Speedy Passase from
London to your Native Country, and a happy meeting with
your friends and countrymen, who owe their present
Liberties to your Sagacious and Patriotic Spirit and
Prudence at the court of France. I sincerely hope your
Zeal, Wisdom, and labours may find a proper reward in
the Gratitude and Justice of Congress and of the Amer-
ican citizens at large; but should Southern policy pre-
vail arainst Northern Intesrity, and your merit so on
neglected, you will enjoy the Consolation of having been
the Saviour of the Pights and Liberties of America, and
thereby proved yourself a true Son of your pious and
patriotic Ancestor, who fou ht every danser to avoid
Persecution, and to turn a Savage,§orld into an Asylum
for Peligious Virtue and Liberty.b‘

These conflicting sentiments of Jefferson and Peters,
the first representing the view of the majority of Americans
and the latter the minority, could have aptly been inscribed
on Deane's tombstone. Silas Deane died September 23, 1799,
after an illness of four hours, on board a Boston Packet bound
for his native country. The vessel, some four hours out, re-
turned to Deal and Deane was buried in St. Georse's burial
ground. Silas Deane after a decade of frustration had met his
last disappointment. He was fifty—four years old at the time
of his death.

61Thomas Jefferson, The Torks of Thomas Jefferson In
Twelve Volumes, Paul Leicester Ford, ed., 1? vols. (New

York, 1905), V, “9b.
62Connecticut Historical CollectionsJ XXIII, 2&5—H6.

 

 

 

(I. OU

In England Deane's death was noted in the newspapers.
His obituary notices were, in the main, fair, factual and
from the English point of view complimentary. The Centle-
man's Magazine observed: "He was second to very few poli-
ticians in knowledge, plans, designs, and execution; defi-
cient only in placing confidence in his compatriots and do-
ing them service before he had got his compensation, of which
no well-bred politican was before him ever guilty." The

American Mercury,in a reprint from a London paper, noted:

 

"Having . . . been accused of embezzling large sums of money
intrusted to his care for the purchase of arms and ammuni-
tion, Mr. Silas Deane sought asylum in this country, where
his habits of life, at first economical, and afterwards penur—
ious in the extreme, amply refute the malevolence of his
enemies."

The death of Silas Deane, like the last ten years of
his life, was of little interest to the majority of the people
in America. No flags flew at half-mast by presidential order,
Congress did not pause in a moment of silence in honor of
their former colleague, nor did any orator deem it fitting
and proper to recall his contribution to the Revolution or
even note his passing.

The reaction of Deane's immediate family was mixed. That
the family sincerely mourned his passing is not to be doubted
but that they did not regret his death is not unlikely. Simeon,

who had declared himself ready to give his life for Deane, was

261

dead. Larnabas, with whom Deane planned to make his home,
expressed the proper appreciation to Deane's friends in
England and "paid the ballance of the funeral charges."63
Jesse, the beloved son, found it necessary to sell his
father's gol" snuff box "after the picture is taken out,
which I would have sent here."6u The sentiments of John
Beachley Webb, 8 stepson, if recorded have not been pre-
served but another stepson, John, upon hearing the news of
his stepfather's demise angrily and bitterly exclaimed:
"The Scene with Salas] DE‘ane is closed."65 Dr. Edward
Eancroft, the man who had betrayed Deane in 1776—78 but who
had befriended him in England, characterized him as a Christ-
ian gentleman and "esteemed his memory."66
The death of Silas Deane could be ignored but his
unsettled accounts always stood as a reminder that he could
not be forgotten. Fore than half of a century ensued before
Congress consented to settle this unfinished business of the
Revolution. In IBLO Deane's heirs presented a petition for
compensation. On February 17, ldhl, the Senate Committee on
Fevolutionary Claims reported favorably on the petition. On
February 3, 19b2, the Senate Committee again reported in
favor of the petitioneers and on July 27, 18b2, the Claims

Committee of the House of Representatives concurred. Congress

63New York Historical Collection, V, 532.
6“Connecticut Historical Collections, XXIII, 2H7.
65Webb, Family Letters, p. All.

66New York Historical Collections, v, 533.

 

 

 

then granted a claim
ground that a former
a cross injustice to
justice" which Silas

before had been done.

67Ibid., I, 13; G

Leader in the American Fevolution,

§37~60.

no
O\
K)

of 337,000 to Deane's heirs on the
audit was "ex parte, erroneous, and
Silas Deane."67 At last the "simple

Deane had requested sixty—four years

as Deane, A Connecticut

- L. Clark, 911,
(Dew York, 1913), DD.

BIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY

I. Historical Guides and Biosraphical Aids.

A number of historical guides and well—known
biographical aids were consulted in compiling an orisinal
working bibliography. In the field of diplomacy Samuel T.

Bemis and Grace G. Criffen, ed., Guide to the Diplomatic

 

History of the United States, lZZfi-lQQI (Washington, 1935),
is superior to any other publiCation in this field.

In the more specialized area of Revolutionary history,
William Eathews, Compiler, American Diaries Written Prior
to the Year 1861 (Berkeley, California, 19h5); Clarence L.
Brigham, History and Bibliography of American Newspapers,
1690—1820, 2 vols. (Yorcester, Massachusetts, lau7); and
Ruth Lepham, ed., Check List of American Revolutionary War

Pamphlets in the Newberry Library (Chicano, 192?), offered

<3

aluable leads. Howard S. Peckham, Guide to the Menu-

 

scripts Collections in the William L. Clements Library (Ann
Arbor, Kichisan), was essential in usins manuscript collec—
tions of Revolutionary War material.

Justin Winsor, Calendar of Arthur Lee fianuscripts In

’

 

the Library of Harvard University (Cambridge, 1882)°
Francis L. Berkeley, "MES Pertaininc to Arthur Lee in ohe
Fare Books and Kanuscripts Division of the Alderman Library,"
Charlottesville, Virginia; and Justin Winsor, "Manuscript

Sources of American History; The Conspicuous Collections

4'» v 4...:

Extant," Kafiazine of American History, “VII (1887),
20-34 were invaluable in locatins and checking original
sources against printed material.

Thoush not classified as guides, Justin Winsor,

 

Narrative and Critical Historonf America, 8 vols. (New
York, 1888~80), contains valuable biographical aids.
Volume VII contains many critical essays and editorial
notes. The bibliography is full but not discriminating.
John Pichard Alden, The American Revolution, 1725-1783,
(New York, 195b), and John C. Miller, Triumph of Freedom,
1275-12531(New York, 1948), are readable accounts of the
Revolution but each has an outstanding bibliography.

Allen Johnson and Dumas Kalone, ed., Dictionary of Amer—

 

ican Bioeraphy, 22 vols. (New York, lQPP—bh), constitutes
a ready and available source for general biographical
material on the leading men of the Pevolutionary Venera—

tion.

II. Manuscript Collections.

The Hanuscript Division of the William L. Clements
Library contains the private and official papers of men
:ho participated on both sides of the American Revolution.
The papers of Sir Henry Clinton, Commandina General of the
British Forces in North America, 1778-1782, and the papers
of Lord George Germain, British Secretary of State, deal
primarily with military operations. However, the few

scattered reports and observations on diplomatic and

h)
J\
\n

political events are rewarding. The Shelburne Papers,

the Holker Papers, and a Miscellaneous Collection aided
greatly in supplying information on disputed points in
Deane's career. As Lord Auckland was director of British
Intelligence in France, the Auckland Papers were of great
value. These are found in British Museum Additional Manu-
scripts (Microfilm) #?9475, 3uu12—3uu17, Papers and cor—
respondence of William Eden, first Lord Auckland, under—
secretary of state and peace commissioner to America.
These papers contain the record of the activities and ob—
servations of British agents in Paris who reported directly

to Eden in London.

III. Public Documents.
Among the basic printed collections of public docu-

ments Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the

 

Continental Congress, 8 vols. (Washington, 1921-36), is
a convenient compilation of both diaries and letters written

by the delegates. C. G. Chinard, The Treaties of 1728 and

 

 

Allied Documents (Baltimore, 1928), and David Hunter Miller,
Treaties and other International Acts of the United States
of America, 8 vols. (Washington, l931—U8), are standard

collections. Peter Force, ed., American Archives..., Fourth

 

Series, 6 vols. (Washington, 1837-u6), and Fifth Series, 3
vols. (fiashington, 1848—53), contain a vast ouan it* of
documents gathered from many sources and dealing with almost

every phase of the Revolution during the years l77u-76.

266

These volumes have a few letters to and from Silas Deane
while he was in Congress.

Worthington C. Ford, ed., The Journals of the Conti—
nental Congress, 177h-1789, 3h vols. (Washington, 190h—37),
is indispensable for the activities of the American central
government. Jared Sparks, The Diplomatic Correspondence of
the American Pevolution, 12 vols. (Boston, 829—30), has

largely been replaced by :rancis Wharton, The Revolutionary,

 

Correspondence, 6 vols. (Washinsnon, 1889), and is now ac-
cepted as the standard work. Diplomatic Correspondence of

the United States, 1783:1799, 7 vols. (Washington, 1833-3u),
lies largely outside the area of this study but was valuable
because of Jefferson's attempts to secure Deane's papers

when he was in London. "Pevolutionary Debts," 15th Congress,
1st Session, House Document, Serial 9, No. 111; 20th Congress,
1st Session, Serial 128, No. 220, are committee reports deal—
ing with Beaumarchais' accounts. Deane is not directly in-
volved but is mentioned as a party to the contracts.

Benjamin Franklin Stevens, ed., Facsimiles of Manuscripts
in_European Archives Relating to America, lYYB-1783, P6 vols.
(London, 1889-95), offers a wide variety of documents taken
from the Auckland Manuscripts, British Records Office and the
French Archives. This is the best printed source for Deane's
first mission to France. John Durand, ed., New Materials For

the History of the American Revolution: taken from Documents

 

in the French Archives (New York, 1889), makes a valuable

 

267

supplement to Steven's work. Henri Doniol's, Historie de

 

1a Participation de la France a L'Ftablissement des Etats-
Unis et Documents, 5 vols. (Paris, 1890), is listed as a
source. This publication embodies four types of text: 1.
the author's narrative which is frequently a running para-
phrase of documentary material; 2. documentary material set
in the narrative; 3. footnotes containing additional docu-
mentary material and reference to the archives; h. docu—
mentary appendices to the individual chapters. This work

was used for background material only.

IV. Printed Sources.
The published papers of American and British leaders
dealing with the American Revolution are both extensive and

revealing. John Adams, The Works of John Adams. . . ,

 

Charles Francis Adams, ed., 10 vols. (Boston, 1856), is
valuable because of Adam's habit of recording his observa—
tions and view on the events of the day. Samuel Adams, The_
Writings of Samuel Adams, Harry A. Cushing ed., a vols. (New
York, l90u-08), reveals that Samuel Adams conceived a dis-
like for Deane in the First Continental Congress. This per—
sonal dislike led to a political dislike during the Deane-
Lee feud.

Many of the states have published extensive records of
their early history. The Public Records of the Colony of

Connecticut From October, 1772, to June, 1776, Inclusive

 

Charles J. Hoadley, ed., 2 vols. (Hartford, Connecticut,

{‘0
O\
(I)

1887—90); The Public Records of the State of Connecticut
From October, 1776, through October, 1797 ed., Charles J.

Hoadley, Leonard Woods, Labree, and Albert E. Van Dusen,

9 vols. (Hartford, 189u—l953), shows that Deane was a man

of prominence before the Pevolution. These were extremely

helpful for the personal rather than political life. Silas

Deane, "Correspondence of Silas Deane, Delegate to the First

and Second Consress at Philadelphia, 177h—1776," Cpllections

 

of Connecticut Historical Society, Vol. II, J. Hammond Trum-
bull, ed. (Hartford, 1870), is limited to Deane's political
activities throuah his term of service and appointment as
agent of the Secret Committee. Included are a collection of
letters to and from his wife, brothers, and personal and
political friends in Connecticut detailing his work, views
and opinions on issues and personalities. Silas Deane, Th§_

Deane Papers; Collections of New York Historical Society,

 

Charles Isham, ed., 5 vols. (New York, 1886-1890), contains

the great bulk of the published and unpublished Deane papers.
This collection includes family letters and official and
business correspondence. The principle unpublished papers
were secured from Hrs. Isabella Thomas of Norwich, Connecticut,
granddaughter of Silas Deane, papers from the Connecticut
Historical Society, and the Sparks and Lee Manuscripts in the
Library of Harvard University. It is without editorial

comment. Silas Deane, The Papers Pelating_to the Case of

 

Silas Deane, Edward D. Insraham, ed. (Philadelphia, 1895),

 

269

did not meet expectations because of the uneXpected death

f the editor. However, as a supplementary source it is

of some value. Silas Deane, The Deane Papers: Correspondence
Between Silas Deane, His Broth,rs and Their Business and
Political Associates, 1771-1795, Coilections of the Connecti—
cut Historical Society, Albert C. Bates, ed., vol. XXIII
(Hartford, 1930), consists of the correspondence between
Deane, his brothers and their business associates. This
volume affords ample evidence of the affection and regard
which the Deane brothers felt for each other. Letters from
former business associates bear testimony that some, if not
many, did not regard Silas Deane as a traitor. A valuable
source of Deane's early activities in Paris is the report
of the double spy, Mr. Edwards, who, as Edward Bancroft,

informed the British government in A Narrative of the Ob-

 

Jects and Proceedings of Silas Deane as Commissioner of

the United States to France; made to the British Covegpr
ment in 1776, Paul Leicester Ford, ed. (Brooklyn, New York,
1891). The discovery and identification of Mr. Edwards ex-
plains how the British ministers were so well informed as

to Deane's reception and activities in Paris. Deane‘s views
on American affairs during his second mission to Paris are
set forth in Silas Deane, The Paris Papers: or Hr. Silas
Deane's Late Intercepted Letters to his BrothereLAand Other

Intimate Friends in Ameripa, reprinted by James Pivington

 

(New York, 1782). These are the so-called "Intercepted

270

Letters" which Deane did not deny writins but eXpressed the
fear that they may have been "doctored" before publication.
Silas Deane, An Address to the United States of North America
(London, 178%), is merely a restatement of his case asking
that "simple justice" be done.

Theveneau de Francey was sent on a mission to Philadelphia
by his uncle Caron 6e Beaumarchais. In his letters he tells
of Deane's unpopularity with Congress and of his pending re—
call. Theveneau de Francey, Letters of Theveneau de Pranpgy,
1222—1780, John Bigelow, ed. (New York, 1870), reflects the
political atmosphere that existed in Congress on the eve of
Deane's recall in 1778. In his despatches, Conrad Alexander
Gerard, Despatcres and Instructions of Conrad Alexander Gerard,
1228-1280, John J. Hens, ed. (Baltimore, 1939), reported to
Vergennes on political trends and existins factions in the
Congress of the United States. It should be noted that Gerard
was pro—Deane.

Cther observations and opinions of Silas Deane were made
by George III, The Correspondence of George III with Lord

North, 1768—83J 2 vols, W. Bodham, ed. (London, 1867); The

 

 

Correspondence of King George III from 1280 to December, 178?,

 

Sir John Fortescue, ed., 6 vols. (London, 1783).
One of Silas Deane's most distinguished associates was
Benjamin Franklin. There are two collections of Franklin's

works, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Albert H. Smyth, ed.,

 

10 vols. (New Xork, 1905-07); and The Works of Benjamin Franklin,

 

.’\)

71

John Bigelow, ed., 12 vols. (New York, 1905). Due to their
close association the view of this distinguished American are
of great value. Patrick Henry: Life, Correspondence, and
fipeeches, William Tirt, ed., 3 vols. (New York, 1891) shows
that Henry and Silas Deane had a common interest in western
land.

There were other Americans closely associated with Deane
who did not resard him so hiahly and who did not hesitate
to exnress their opinions. Some of these are to be found in
Palph Izard, The Correspondence of Hr. Palph Izard of South
Carolina From the Years l77u to lPOb: With a Short Memoir,
Anne Izard Deas, ed. (New York, 1884). However, it seems
that Izard hated Franklin and possessed only a contempt for
Deane.

A former colonial governor, Thomas Hutchinson, was

living in London in 1776 and his The Diary_and Letters of

 

Thomas Hutchinson, Peter Orlando Hutchinson, ed., 2 vols.
(London, 1884), contain material of interest regarding the
activities of Deane in Paris.

One of Silas Deane's closest friends was John Jay, whose
works, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henryf
P. Johnston, ed., 4 vols. (New York, 1890-93), is valuable be-
cause of his friendship with Deane. Jay's repudiation of
Deane may serve as an index to the reaction of the general

public in America. Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas

 

272

Jefferspn, Julian P. Boyd, et al eds., 10 vols. (Princeton,

 

1950- ); The Works of Thomas Jefferson in Twelve Volumes,
Paul Leicester Ford, ed., 12 vols. (New York, 1905); and

The Writings of Thomas Jefferson. . ., H. A. Washington, ed.,

 

10 vols. (Washington, 1853), reveal Deane's plisht in London.
The letters of the Lee brothers' are not only an impor-

tant source for the politics of the Revolution but also re-

veal the close family tie that existed between the brothers.

Pichard Henry Lee, The Life of Arthur Lee. . . , 2 volS.

 

(Boston, 1829); and Richard Henry Lee, Memoir of the Life of
Richard Henry Lee. . . , 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 1825), are
without value except for the diary, documents and letters con—
tained in the four volumes. Charles Lee, The Lee Papers, in
Collections Of the New York Historical Fociety, U vols. (New
York, 1871-75), consists primarily of the papers of General
Charles Lee. They contain several biting comments by a sol-
dier on politics and politicians. Bichard Henry Lee, Letters
of Richard Henry Lee, James C. Ballash, ed., 2 vols. (New
York, 1911-14); William Lee, Letters of William Lee, Worthing—
ton C. Ford, ed., 3 vols. (Brooklyn, 1891); William Lee, Egply_
of William Lee to Charges of Silas Deanel 1279, Worthington C.
Ford. ed. (Brooklyn, New York, 1891), sive the Lee point of
view on what American diplomatic and commercial policy should
have been and how it should have been conducted. Franklin,

not Deane, is the evil genius of American diplomacy.

 

 

 
 

273

James Madison, The Writings of James Kadison, Gillard
Hunt, ed., 9 vols. (New York, 1906), reflects the temper o“
the American people to Deane's apostasy. Pobert Forris, The
Confidential Correspondence of Pobert Torrie, Stanley V.
Henkels, Publisher (Philadelphia, 1017); and “Revolutionary
Papers, Letters of Pobert Norris; Papers of Charles Thomas,"
Collections of New York Historical Fociety (New York, 1878),
reflect the plight of Deane's friends after he was accused of

treason. Thomas Paine, The Writin s of Thomas Paine, Honours

D. Conway, ed., 3 vols. (New York, 189b); and The Complete

 

Tritinss of Thomas Paine, Philip S. Foner, ed., 2 vols. (New
York, 1945), demonstrate that Paine did not carry his war
with Deane into his private correspondence.

Edmund Pendleton, "Unpublished Letters of Edmund
Pendleton," Proceedings of Massachusetts Historical Society,
2d Series, XIX (Boston, 1903), 107-167, and Eilliam B. Peed,
Life and Correspondence of Joseph Peed, 2 vols. (Philadelphia,
18b7), are works of men who were personal friends of Silas
Deane and both confirm the seneral unfavorable reaction of
the public to the publication of Deane's letters.

Samuel Bleachley Webb, Correspondence and Journals of

 

Samuel Bleachley Webb, Worthinston C. Pord. ed., 3 vols.(New

 

York, 1893); Pamily Letters of Samuel Bleachley Vehb, North—

ington C. Ford. ed. (Boston, 1913); and Some Social Notes

 

Addressed to Famuel Bleachley Webb, 1776—1791, Vorthington
C. Ford, ed. (Boston, 1911), are valuable in establishing

family relations.

Silas Deane had the sreatest respect and admiration for

George Washington, whose views are to be found in the Writings

 

of George Washington Prom the Original Hanuscript Sources
thfi—lZQ}, John Fitzpatrick, ed., 39 vols. (Nashinston, 193l-
bh). Washington once called Deane "friend" and thanked him
for his services to the cause. Later Washington refused to

answer his letter.

V. Fecondary Works.

The secondary works that reveal any knowledge of the
Pevolutionary career of Silas Deane are few. This leads to
speculation as to why biosraohies of prominent fisures of
that day senerally omit references to Deane. Was his part
so unimportant? Here his activities so mistrusted that com—
promising correspondence with him may have been destroyed?
Perhaps his activities were limited to such a narrow phase
of the Pevolution that larder events of a later period ob-
scured their importance? with one exception Deane is a

secondary figure in all the accounts that are listed.

Thomas Perkins Abernethy, Testern Lands and the American

 

Pevolution (New York, 1937), deals indirectly with Deane and
his activities. The account is unfavorable. John Pichard
Alden, The American Revolution, 1775—1783_(New York, 1959),
refers to the well known treason of Silas Deane in a foot—
note. Helen Ausur, The Secret Tar of Independence (New York,
1955), makes Benjamin Franklin the central point of interest

to the point of isnorins Silas Deane and Arthur Lee. John

73* - V.’ w , \ :3 :nm . ran 7' “1 .3 ""
pi{elo-, The Life of .en». in Tr nTlin, ? vols. (Piilareluhia,

ll .-—.

1

1975), is a standard work of the rreat American.
The well—known histories of Thomas A. Bailey, A Diplo-
U

matic history of the American People. 3rd. ed. (New York,

lgbé), and Samuel F. Penis, The Diolomacy of the American

 

Revolution (New York, 1036), are standard texts in American
diplomatic history.

Poser Sherman Boardman, t*‘og'er Sherman, Sinner and States—

 

man (Philadelphia, 1939), mentions Deane as Pherman's col-

league in Confress from Connecticut. Alan Brown, "william

Eden and the American Revolution", unpublished Ph.D. thesis,
\

Ann Arbor, flichisan, Film #1537, has a good account of Deane

in Paris in 1778. Weldon A. Brown, Empire or Independence:

 

A Study in Failure of Peconciliation, 177P-l783_(Baton Pouse,

 

l9ul), makes Franklin the central fieure of the diplomatic
game in Paris.

Edmund C. Burnett, The Continental Congress (New York,

 

1941), shows that Deane was a hard—working committee merber
when he was a member of that body. Madam Campan, Kemoires

sur la vie privee de Harie Antoinette, 3 vols. (Paris, 1922),

 

FT?

L

ives some insight into French political life. Geor e L.

Clark, Silas Deane: A Connecticut Leader In the American

 

Fevolution, the only full lenrth biosraphy of the rebel from

 

Connecticut is readable but lacks bibliosraohy and footnotes.
Edward S. Corwin, French Poligy and the Alliance of 1779
(Princeton, 1916), is one of the older but more reliable books

in this area.

2'76

Works vhich sive an insicht into the Revolutionary
oeriod but which almost irncre Silas De-ne are William Penn

Cresscn, Francis Tana: A 3uritan Pinlomat at the Court of

 

Catherine the Crest (New York, 1930); Anna DeKoven, The Life

 

and Letters of John Paul Jones, 2 vols. (New York, 1913);

 

Edward S. Dela laine The Life ot Thomas uohnscn: Fember of
!

 

the Continental Con“ress,_First Governor of Naryland, Associ-

ate Justice of the Tnited States Sunrene Court (New York,

 

1927); and Fobert A. East, Business Fnterprise in the Ameri-

 

can FevolutionaryAFra.

 

Lewis Einstein, Divided Loyalties: Americans in Ensland

 

Quring the War of Indecendence (London, 1938), is useful as
background for the secret service activities that were carried
on in France during Deane's first mission. Edward E. Hale and
Edward E. Hale, Jr., Franslin in France Trom Crisinal Focu—
ments. 2 vols. (Boston, 1888), is one of the best sources of
the relationshio that existed between Deane and Franklin.

Blanche E. Hazard, Beaumar.hais and the American I=evolution

 

(Boston, 1910), adds nothing new to the Beaumarchais story.

Burton J. Hendrick, The Lees of Vireinia: Bicaranhv of a

 

Family (Boston, 1935), has a chapter dealinfl with Arthur Lee
which is favorable to the Lee's in the Deane-Lee feud.
Gaillard Hunt, The Deoartment 0? State of the United
States: Its history and Function (New Haven, 191E), is neces-
sary to an understandins of some of the oroblems facins our
early statesmen in the field of diplomacy. Gillard Hunt, ed.,

:ragments of Revolutionary_History (Brooklyn, 1802), consists

?77

of excerpts from the newspapers of the day arranged chrono-
logically. William Jay, The Life of John Jay: With Selec-
_ions from his Correspondence and riscellaneous Papers, 2
vols. (New York, 1833), is an older but still standard bio-
graphy of Deane's early friend. Merrill Jensen, The New
Nation: A History of the United States During the Contedera-
tion 1791-1789 (New York, 1950), contains information pertain—
ing to Pobert Morris as Superintendent of Finance. Frederick

Kapp, The Life of Frederick von Stuben (New York, 1859);

 

Frederick Kapp, The Life of John Kalb (New York, lBSu); and

 

Arnold Kinsey King, Thomas Paine in America, 177F-1797

 

(Chicaso, 1951), add nothins new to the Deane story.

George Lemaitre, Beaumarchais (New York, 19h9) is neither

 

exciting nor informative. Benson J. Lossine, The Pictorial

 

Field—Book of the Ievolution or Illustrations, by Pen and

 

Pencil, of History,,Bioara,hy, Scenery, Felice and Traditions

 

of the War for Independence, 3 vols” (New York, 1859), is in-

 

teresting and contains good background material.

John Chester Killer, Triumph of Freedom, 1775-1783_

 

(Boston, 19A8), has an excellent bibliography for the period.
Nontross Lyons, The Peluctant Febels: the Story of the Con—

tinental Congress, lZZU—1789 (New York, 1950), is a readable

 

account of the Continental Congress based primarily on the
Journals. Louis de Lomenie, Beaumarchais and His Times, H. S.
Edward, trans. (New York, 1857), is considered the best account

of the man and his times. Jules Kason, Beaumarchais, et les

3“)

78

affaires d' Amerique lettres inidities (Paris, 1919). adds
little as a source for Beaumarchais‘ commercial activities.

Prank Nonafihan, John Jay: Qefender of liberty (Indianapolis,

 

1935), presents a readable account of Jay‘s life but does not

improve on the older accounts. Ellis Paxson, Pobert Morris:

 

Patriot and Tinancier (New York, 1903), attempts to explain
and defend Norris' financial Operations.

Josephine 7. Pacheco, ”Trench Fecret Aments in America"
unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Chicaoo, 1950, shows
the extent of French interest in American affairs long before
1776. James Parton, Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin, 2

vols. (New York, 186h), is both readable and colorful but

is almost out of date. James Breck Perkins, France in the

 

American Pevolution (Boston, 1911), contains the best descrip-
tion of Franco-American relations and is based largely on
French sources.

Charles B. Pitcheson, British Politics and the American
Pevolution (Norman, Oklahoma, 195U), is sood for the political
struggle that was takina place in England at the time of the

Pevolution. Kenneth P. Bossman, Thomas Nifflin and the Poli—

 

tics of the American Pevolution (Chapel Hill, 195?), is dis-

 

appointing in that the Deane-Lee feud is largely isnored.

Kate Mason Powland, The Life of Charles Carrol of Carrollton,

 

1732:1837, 2 vols. (New York, 1898), and Kate Mason Powland,

The Life of George Fason, 2 vols. (New York, 1892), comments

 

upon politics and politicians. Lorenzo Sabine, Biographical

 

Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution, 2 vols.
(Boston, 186k), lists Deane as a Loyalist. Charles Coleman
Sellers, Charles Wilson Peale (Philadelphia, 1au7), comments
upon Deane and his reception by Consress. Laura Charlotte,
France and the American Pevolution,,lZ€3-lZZ§ (Ithaca, New

York, 1900), adds nothing new. N. M. Specter, 'The American

 

Department of the British Government, 1868—82 (New York, 19h9),

 

is helpful in understandins the operations of the British
sovernment in the time of the Pevolution. Willis Steel,
Benjamin Franklin of Paris, 1?Z§-1285 (New York, 1923), is

a colorful account of Tranklin's activities in Paris. Henry
P. Stiles, The History of Ancient Tethersfield, Connecticut,

3 vols. (New York, 1903), is a sold mine for local color and

o

h

H-

story. Charles J. Ftille, Beaumarchais and “the Lost

 

Killion"(Phi1ade1phia, 1890), is another attempt to explain
Beaumarciais' financial operations. Gerald Ftourzh, Benja—

min Franklin and American Poreisn Policy(Chica?o, 195A),

 

includes Deane's views on foreign policy, treats the Paris
Commissioners fairly, and presents a good account of the
treaty negotiations.

Isaac H. Stuart Life of John Trumbu11,,Fenator, Governor
3

 

of Connecticut (Boston, 1859), W. G. Sumner, The Financier

 

 

and Pinances of the American Pevolution, P vols. (New York,

 

1891), Charlesmasne Tower, The Marsuis de LaTayette in the

 

American Pevo5ution with Some Account of the Attitude of Trance

 

Toward the Tar of Independence, 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 1895),

 

and John Trumbull, Jonathan Trumbull: Governor of Con-

 

necticut, 1769-178k (Boston, 1919), are valuable for the

 

Pevolution but add little to the Deane story.

Claude H. VanTyne, The Bar of Indanpndence (New York,

 

1929), is a standard work on the Revolution. This volume
is an exception in that it is fair in its treatment of

.-

Deane. Carl C. Van Boren, Secret history of American Pevgr

lution (New York, l9bl), accepts Deane as a traitor. Carl

C. Van Doren, Benjamin Franklin (New York, 1938), s con—

 

sidered the outstanding one volume work on Franklin. David

A. Wallace, The Life of Henry Laurens (New York, 1915), por-

 

trays the 1ife of a well—meaning but self-riehteous individual.
Percy Warren, Historv of the Piss, Progress and Termination

4

of the American Pevolution, 3 vols. (Boston, 1805), reflects

 

the view of the Tevolutionary aeneration. Winslow C. Watson,

ed., Fen and Times of the Pevolution, or Temoirs of Plkanah

 

Watson (New York, 1856), fives a first hand account of an in-
terview with Deane in Paris durins the Second Mission. Nill—

iam Nirt, The Life and Character of Patrick Henry, 2 vols.

 

(New York, 1833), fails to mention Deane. Georse C. Wood,
Conaressional Control of Foreisn Pelations Purin: the American

_.L__

Pevolution,_1?7b—l?89 (Allentown, Pennsylvania, 1918), is an

 

account of the struggle between the aericultural and commercial
factions in Conrress to dominate the foreien policy of the

United States during the Pevolution.

VI. Newspapers

1. The Pennsxlvania Packet

 

2. The Virginia Gazette_

 

3. The Pememhrancer: or Imnartial Peoository o” Puhlic

 

Fvents for the years 1776-1290. Printed by John

 

Almon, London.

. Gentleman's hagazine, lZY6-1283,

 

Pivington's P0151 Gazette, 17YY—1ZP?.

 

. The London Chronicle.

 

\lmmt

. New-York Gazette and Weekly Iercurv. 1780, 1781,

 

1782, 1783.

(1)

London Gazette.

 

9. Connecticut Courant

 

VII. Magazine Articles
Abernethy, Thomas Perkins, "The Origin of the Franklin-

Lee Imbroslio," North Carolina Historical PevieW, XV (193?),

 

91-52.

Abernethy, Thomas Perkins, ”Commercial Activities 0‘
Silas Deane," American Historical Peview, YTYIX (1933),
“77-87.

Andrews, Charles M., ”A Note on the Tranklin—Dean Tis-

sion to France," Yale UniversithLibrarz_Ca7ette, II (1928)

 

53-68 0
Bemis, Samuel F., "British Secret Service and the Franco-

American Alliance," American Historical Peview, XXIX (192b),

 

9714-95.

Eemis, Samuel F., ”Payment of French Loans to the YTnitecl
States, 1777—1795," Current history) XXIII (1926), 82b-9l.

Bourdin, Henry L., ”How French anoys Sought Payment of
America," Current history, XVIII (1926), 832-36.

Bigelow, John, ”Donatein le Fay Chaumont," Century, LXIV
(1889), 791—59.

Erovn, Margaret L., ”William Binsham, Agent of the Con-

tinental Congress in Fartinieue," Pennsylvania Yagazine o”

 

History ans Pio~ranhz, LXI (1937), 55-65.
Brown, Alan, "The British Peace Cffer of 1778: A Ptudy

In Ministerial Contusion," Paoers of the Fichisan Acaeemy ot

 

Science; Arts and Letters, XL (1955—56), 299-60.

 

Burnett, Edmuno C., "Note on the American Nesotiation

for Commercial Treaties, 1776-1786," American historical

 

Peview, XVI (1910), 579-87.
Burnett, Edmund C., "Negotiations with Austria," Amer-

ican historical Review, XXI (1915), 391-76.

 

Clark, William Bell, "In Defense of Thomas Disses,"
PennsyIVania Kagazine of history and Biosraphy, LXXVIII
(1953)) 381-38-

Clark, William Bell, "John the Painter," Pennsylvania

 

Nagazfne of History ans Biosranhy, LXVIII (1939), 1—23.
Conyngham, Gustavus, "Narrative of Gustavus Conynaham,
U.S.N., While in Commanfl of the Furorise anfi Pevenae, 1777—

1779," Pennsylvania Nagazfne op Fistc-y anra Piovragry, XXII

 

(1998), b79-90.

Corwin, Edward 8., “The Trench ijectives in The

American Revolution," American :istorical Heviev, XXI

(1915). 3?— 61

Cummin s, Pobert, "Pobert Forris and the Pnisode of

the Palacre," Pennsylvania Hagazine of History and Biograohy,
LXX (19 6). 239-57.

Dreer, Ferdinand J., Contributor, I’Letters of Silas
Deane; Crisinals in the Collection 0‘ Ierdinand J. Dreer,"
Pennsylvania Harazine 0* History and Biograohy, XI (1987),
199-206.

Ettwein, John, "The Pesisnation of Henry Laurens as
President of Cons ress, 1778," Pennsleania Yaaazine 0?
History and Pio:raohy, MI I (1999), 292—36.

Piske, John, "The Trench Alliance and the Conway Cabal,"
Atlantic Fontrly, LXIV (1899), 273—91.

Gilbert, Ceorae A., "The Connecticut Loyalists ,
American Historical Peviev, IV (1899), 273-91.

Guttridae, George H., "Lord Germain in Office," American
Historical Peview, YTXIII (193D), 260-75.

Harlow, Palph V., "Some Aspects of Pevolutionary Pinancesfl'
American Historical Peview, XXXV (1193 b), 32-95.

Hart, Charles Henry, "Robert Torrie, the Financier of
the American Pevolution," Pennsylv~nia Hagazine of History_
and 5 Mo raoiy, I (1877), 68—80.

Havorth, Paul Leland, IFrederick the Great and the Amer—

ican Pevo ution, " American His torica 1 evie", IX (190M),

-79.

Hill, David Jayne, "Franklin and the French Alliance,"

PecorFs of the Colunhia Historical Pocietg, XVTI-XXXII

 

(1090), no-6o.

Hill, Favic Jayne, “A Fissin" Chaoter of Pranco—American

 

History," Amerisen Historical_?§yiezj XXII (1916), 719—7N.
Hoadley, Charles J., “Pilas Deane," Pennsglvania Hana-

 

zine on Historv and Piosraphy, I (1877), hO-60.
Hutton, James, "Home Account of James Hutton'e Visit

to Franklin, in France, in December of 1777," Pennsylvania

 

Nafazine o? gistorv and Biorranhy, XXXII (1908), 223—32,

 

Izard Fallh and Laurens, Henr "Izard-Laurens Corres-
’ i

’ W

pondence," The South Carolina Historical anc Ceneelorical

—_

Kagfizine, XXIII-XXII (19? ), 1-1?, 39-53, ZP-EQ.

./

 

Johnston, Ruth Y., "American Privateers in French Ports,

TY
M

1776-1778," Pennsylvania Magazine of history and Biogrnggy,
LIII (1929), 259-74.
Kite, F izabeth 8., "Benjamin Franklin-Piplomat,"

Catholic worle, XLII (1935—36), ae—37.

 

Kite, Elizabeth 8., “Silas Feane: Diplomat st and

‘Jo

Patriot Scaperoat of the Revolution," Daushtera of the Pevoln-

 

tion Mafazine, LX, #9 (l9? ), 597—b6.

 

Leffmann, Henry, "The Peal Thomas Paine, Patriot Anfi

Publicis : A Philoeooher Kisunceretood," Pennsylvania Nasa—

 

7ine of History an? Pio“ranhy, XLVI (192?), 81—100.

Lombard, Mildred E., "James Pearle: Pafiical Business—

" Pennsylvania Harazine 0” History ans

#-

men of the Pevooution,

Biorraphgj LIX (1935), 28b—9U.
Hens, James J., "A Footnote to Secret Aic in the American

Revolution," American Historical Peviev, XIIII (1938), 791—95.
Peckham, Howard, ed., "Dr. Berkenhouts Journal, 1778,"

Penney1Vrnia Hawnzine of Historv and Piosraohy, LYV (1941),

r‘. 0
X- f .

Stephenson, C. W., "Suooly of Gunpower in 1776," Ameri—

can Historical Pevie“, XXX (1925), 277—8u.

 

Stille, Charles J., "The Harouis 6e Largyette in the

Americrn Pevolution," Pennsglvania Kasazine of Histogy and

 

Eiorrauhy, XIX (1895): 1‘21-

 

Stille, Charles J., "The Comte 6e Prosolie, Proposed

Stattholder of America," Pennsylvania Haaazine of History anc

 

 

Stills, Charles J., "Silas Deane, Diplomatist," Pennsvl—

vania Hasazine of History and Pioaranhyj XVIII (199M), 273—92,

 

Tyler, Lyon C., "Arthur Lee, A Neglected Statesman,"

Tvler's Quarterly Historical cnfl Genealosicnl rpgpzine, LIV

(1933): 198‘216.

.-

Van Tyne, Clause H., "French Aid Before the Alliance of

1779," American Historical Review, XXXI (1925), ZO-QO.

 

Van Tyne, Claude H., "Influences Which Determined the
Trench Government to Hake a Treaty with America, 1778,"

American Historical Pevier, XXI (1916), 528-h1.

Date ' Due

 

Demco-293