Charles William Frederick Dumas to First Joint Commission at Paris, May 7, 1778

The Hague, 7 May 1778

Gentlemen

After sending you my last letter dated the 5th, which at the end acknowledged your letter of April 30th, I called on the Grand Facteur to show it to him. Although he was dressing to go out, he granted me an immediate interview, during which he told me not to inform our friend from Amsterdam yet that the letter for the Grand Pensionary 1 had arrived, but to say instead that I was expecting it and it should arrive soon; and added that he would tell me the reason for this necessary delay on the following day.

I then awaited the arrival of our friend from Amsterdam; as soon as I was informed of it, I went to his lodgings. He told me that, in accordance with my instructions when I gave him copies of your letter of the 10th and that for the Grand Pensionary, he had religiously concealed them from anyone but the principal of his town 2 who had just arrived with him, wholly approved of both the documents and the use that I was to put them to, and was eagerly awaiting the arrival of the original so that I could begin the task. He is ready to back the operation with all his influence. I then spoke with him following the Grand Facteur’s instructions, but not, however, without secretly suffering at being unable to take advantage of so auspicious an occasion. The next day I visited the Grand Facteur to give him an account of my conversation of the previous day and when I told him of the good dispositions of the principal of the great city he, betraying either surprise or regret at having a remora now attached to the boat, clapped his hands. He told me that he had received a letter from the Comte de Vergennes, to whom he had sent a report on my project and your letters of the 10th at the time I left for Amsterdam, and that the minister found the démarche, so direct on your part, a little premature because one might think that France was initiating this negotiation in an effort to force this state into taking a side in the issue. He added that he was sorry for the delay, but that the minister having written his letter before hearing about the great success of my trip to Amsterdam and the good disposition of our friend there, &c, he hoped to receive further letters in which the project would be given closer attention. In the meantime, I am to keep the letter from the Grand Pensionary in my portfolio and use only your ostensible letter of 10 April and ask our friend to show it to the Grand Pensionary. I told him: 1. that I was not sure our friend would want to do that; and 2. that after the assurance I had given him of receiving the letter for the Grand Pensionary and the démarche he took accordingly with the other principal personage, I would lose all my credibility with these gentlemen if I did not keep my word. He replied that, so far as the first point was concerned, I should try anyway and, in regard to the second, that if his house persisted in wanting to suspend or delay the démarche, he would take it upon himself in this case to let these gentlemen know, in an indirect but sure fashion, that this suspension or delay came from him and not from me. I went, therefore, to see our friend. At first he did not want to show the ostensible letter of the 10th to the Grand Pensionary because he preferred our first plan of action and feared that this new démarche would enable the opposition party to prevent the blow by anticipating it. I finally managed to convince him. Yesterday morning he presented to the Grand Pensionary the above mentioned letter of the 10th, addressed to me to enquire privately into the dispositions &c. 3 He will have a conference with him tonight regarding this matter and tomorrow I shall hear the results.

I am trying to be as concise as possible with all these details. But I have to provide them, so that you may be able to see for yourselves that if I do not execute point by point all that I had promised, the reason lies neither with me nor with Amsterdam, nor with you, but with a quarter from which I expected it the least; and have suddenly been prescribed a course of action far different from that which had been originally planned. I persist in finding that the first plan would have, perhaps, been preferable, but again I must comply obediently. I hope something good will come of it, but fear it will create delays that the other, it seems to me, would have avoided.