Page images
PDF
EPUB

But

nicated. This had no friendly afpect, at a time when commiffioners were going to America to treat about reconciliation; and it plainly fhewed, that diffimulation and hypocrify were at the foundation of the whole proceeding. There could be no more difhonour in reading a letter fent by a rebel officer, than in fending commiflioners to negociate with rebel ftates. when men once fall into the maze of inconfiftency, there is no end of their wandering. The British miniftry wanted one effential principle neceffary in all reconciliations, and that is, the fpirit of forgiveness: they were determined at the fame time that they propofed a reconciliation, to remember their old claims, and indulge the fuppofition of rebellion and difaffection in the character of the colonifts. And it would require more charity than the nature of the thing admits of, for thofe that are any way acquainted with the characters of the British miniftry to believe that they intended fincerely to promote a reconciliation.Had they actually intended to have promoted this defirable end, they would have withdrawn their fleets and armies, and thewed fome figns of forgiveness by removing the objects of terror and deftruction. This would have intimated a difpofition of being reconciled, and inclined the minds of the Americans to have liftened to an accomodation. But men coming with arms in their hands, did not fhew very fignificant marks of reconciliation. It was generally fuppofed that the influence of contractors, and other ministerial tools, a fort of political vermin, that live upon the ruin and fores of the public, had a mighty hand in preventing the fuccefs of all conciliatory measures, by voting on the fide of every motion that any way tended to clog the negociation. Among thefe devourers

of

of the community, the reafonableness of the war and the honour of the nation, were conftant topics of argument, when their real meaning was their own intereft and emolument. While parliament were debating concerning a method of reconciliation, the French had actually figned a treaty of commerce with the Americans, and had a fleet ready to fail to fupport it. Of all this the miniftry were either ignorant, or at leaft pretended to be fo; and when they were required to speak explicitly upon the fubject, replied they had only heard of these things. It was not long till the minister was obliged to bring the French King's declaration into the Houfe, with many grievous complaints of the treachery of the French, and their per. fidy in breaking the faith of treaties. This was con

fidered as a deserved rub to the minifter and the am. baffador at Paris, who had not endeavoured to be better informed concerning matters of fo great importance to the nation. As to the breach of faith in tranf greffing treaties, it did not appear that there was any. treaties that confidered the American independence as forbidden in it; or that the French might not enter into a treaty with thefe colonists, provided they were free ftates, as well as England did with the States of Holland. The charge of perfidy, fuppofing the French might in former cafes have deferved it, could not in this be fo well applied to then; and it was confidered as minifterial cant ufed in all cafes when nations entered into war.

The doctrine of French perfidy was fully published by the friends of the minifter, more with a defign to inflame the nation against the Americans than againft the House of Bourbon. It was believed that the people in general would now confider the war in a new

fight, and engage heartily agamft the colonists, be cause they had entered into a treaty with the French King. Whatever might be the fecret views and defigns of the parties, yet there appeared nothing in the face of the public tranfactions, uncommon, unjust, or unreafonable. The ministry had by a course of vio lent and unconftitutional measures driven the colonists to a state of independency, and they had now pub. lifhed that independency, and declared themfelves free ftates to the world. In the view of the powers of Europe, the American colonies belonged no more to Great Britain than the United States of Holland belonged to the Spanish monarchy; they could not in entering into any treaty with the thirteen colonies, or states in America, be confidered as guilty of infringing any treaty that had been formerly made between any nations in Europe, unless this cafe had been expressed in such a treaty. It was undoubtedly as little imagined by any flate in Europe that Great Britain would have behaved fo impolitically as to drive her colonies to the ftep they had now taken, as that it is unjuft for any power in Europe to enter into a treaty of commerce with them. The whole force of this charge of perfidy depends upon the justice of our conduct with America, and of her right to declare herself independent, when fhe could not poffefs those natural rights which the laws of England have fecured to all the fubjects of the British empire. It might not even be incumbent upon the French to enquire into the nature of the claims of parties; the question which they principally were concerned to know was, the matter of fact, whether the colonists were independent ftates? If Great Britain in her hour of fol ly and madness, had driven them from her, it was no perfidy

perfidy in any other nations to ferve their own intereft by entering into a commercial negociation with them.

The idea of the treachery of the French, and that now the causes of the war were changed, or at least in fome measure altered, produced a wonderful change upon the minds of many who otherwife disapproved the proceedings against the Americans. Some by

confounding the ideas of the juftice of the American refiftance, with those of the injuftice of the French interference, began to view them as one object, and thought that the whole was now a French war :and others through the hope of particular gain, engaged heartily in the conteft, and commenced hoftilities for the fake of plunder. A great number of privateers were fitted out by combinations of merchants, and gentlemen, to distress the trade of the French, 1under the notion that the French were their enemies for making a treaty with the colonists, by which their monopoly of trade was interrupted. The juftice and morality of the cause were totally put out of the queftion, and private intereft was the grand fpring of action and leading motive for manflaughter, bloodthed, and plunder.

The convention of Saratoga had for fome time been matter of altercation at home; the troops who were made prifoners of war had not been fent home according to agreement, and the minifterial writers were now bufily employed in publishing the perfidy of the Americans, as well as the treachery of the French. The cause and circumftances of this delay were not as yet known in Britain, and every one was left to in dulge his own conjecture. As nothing could be affirmed for certain, the hirelings of the ministry, whose confciences generally are not very fcrupulous with reDdd

gard

gard to truth, founded with a loud alarm, that all the articles of convention had been broken by the congrefs, and they, as well as the French, were a faithlefs as well as rebellious affembly. As circumftances concerning this transaction were not fufficiently known for impartial perfons to form a judgment upon, these fcriblers were fufferered to go on without any reply or contradiction. The ground of this accufation was a complaint of the British officers concerning their quarters near Boston, as being neither conformable to their expectation nor rank, or to the terms of convention and capitulation. Upon this head, General Burgoyne in his complaint to the congrefs, had expreffed himself in ftrong terms, which they confidered as charging them with a violation of the conditions of the convention, and with a defign in him and his men to confider the capitulation as broken; for as he had charged them with infringing the articles, they con ceived that he did not confider himself bound by them, when once he and his men were cut of their powerThey also infifted that they had fufficient reasons to be lieve that the foldiers had not delivered up all their ac coutrements, which they confidered as a breach of the articles of capitulation. Their refolution upon this head the writers of the Annual Regifter call a paltry refolution, shameful in its nature, and highly difgrace. ful to the congrefs. But thefe authors ought to have remembered that those that are unfaithful in little will alfo be unfaithful in much; and one article of convention is really as binding as another. The charge of infringing the capitulation depends upon the matters of fact, whether the men did fecret their accoutrements, or whether the Americans could really afford the British officers as good quarters as they thought

they

« PreviousContinue »