To Secure the Blessings of Liberty: Selected Writings of Gouverneur Morris

9 • To Governor Johnstone (1779)

95 The Pennsylvania Packet, or General Advertiser, March 11, 1779. Reprinted from Letters of Delegates to Congress, 1774–1789, ed. Paul H. Smith et al. (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1976–2000), 12:146–52. 9 • To Governor Johnstone (1779) After Congress snubbed the Carlisle Commission, George Johnstone returned to Parliament to defend his conduct. He gave a long speech in the House of Commons on November 27, 1778, in which he blamed just about everyone for the commission’s failure. He blamed the North ministry for advocating nothing but coercion and the opposition for wanting nothing but concession. For good measure, Johnstone also blamed the French and the Americans. He reminded the House that he had long recommended a policy that combined force with negotiation, and argued that such an approach would have succeeded. Finally, he defended himself against charges that he had tried to bribe Joseph Reed, the president of Pennsylvania . Johnstone’s speech was summarized in the Pennsylvania Packet on February 11, 1779, and then published in full on March 9. All of Morris’s quotations come from the full version. Even as busy as he was with Congress ’s business, Morris clearly thought it was vital to give a swift response to Johnstone’s speech. •• For the PENNSYLVANIA PACKET. To GOVERNOR JOHNSTONE. Sir, Philadelphia, March 4, 1779. Having seen your speech on American affairs at the opening of the session , I cannot avoid making some observations upon it; for although it contains important facts and sensible remarks, yet it is not without some mistakes . You say, the cause of America is wicked, because we are united with France for the express purpose of reducing your country.The object of our alliance with the 96 chaPtEr 9 Most Christian King, is simply to secure that Independence without which our liberty would be but a name. And although you are too weak to maintain the present contest, yet you are too powerful to be conquered. Neither is it the interest of the House of Bourbon on the one hand, or of America on the other, that you should. Britain would be as troublesome a province to France, as America to Britain: Either would distract and enfeeble their masters. But, assuming your fact, is it wicked to attempt the reduction of a nation which hath lately shewn itself the common enemy of man? which hath drenched this country in the blood of its inhabitants, for the impious purpose of reducing them to unconditional submission. Impious, as you have repeatedly declared, as they have “with singular unanimity” directly acknowledged. Is it wicked to crush a court and a ministry profligate beyond conception, and deceitful beyond example? You aver, that the treaty with France is not ratified in a constitutional manner. You are mistaken even on your own ground. Still more are you mistaken on the ground assumed by your government; for they confessed the authority of Congress to form treaties, by the very application which brought you hither. You are equally wrong in supposing, that the objects of your commission were frustrated by delay. The draught of the bills arrived in season, and the sentiments of Congress were expressed on them so early as the twentysecond of April, previous even to the knowledge, much less the ratification of a treaty with France. They were expressed with an unanimity which, on such occasions, is not singular. You say, it was always your view that force should accompany the concession. What concession do you mean? The acts of Parliament gave no more than what you frequently contended for as our right, and to assert that there is concession in giving a man his own, is hardly common sense, but certainly not common honesty. The idea of vigorous coercion in the moment of treaty, is a genuine British idea. It is a good one, provided the offers to be made in treating are generous and honest; but if insidious and unequal, it is marked with the spirit, not of a man, but a tyrant. That preparation for war is the best means of obtaining peace, is an old and true adage, but there is an essential difference between peace and dominion. Those in either country who seek the former on safe and honourable terms, will be gratified; those who aim at the latter will inevitably be, as they ought to be, most grievously disappointed. The opprobrious language you make use of is but little ornamental to your eloquence, and would flow with...