tell

¡ FROM DAVID HARTLEY, Esg. M. P. ro

DR. FRANKLIN.

MY DEAR FRIEND,

London, Feb. 1, 1782. "

I write to you one line by this mail only to you that I have seen the minister since I last wrote to you, and that he never did entertain the idea one moment of any propositions being thrown out on your part in the least degree inconsistent with the strictest honour and faith to the allies. I had no occasion to guard against or to explain any such thought, having at all times conveyed the contrary to him in the most explicit terms. I transmit this to you for your full satisfaction. We have had much conversation on the subject of peace, which you may be sure I have most zealously endeavoured to enforce, I should not do him justice if I did not add that I believe his wishes are for peace, and that he gives the most serious attention to every argument, and to the suggestion of every practicable means on that subject. I have stated many things for his consideration, and for consultation with others, after which I shall see him again. I heartily wish the result may be favourable to the prospect of peace. I am ever, your affectionate, D. HARTLEY.

TO DAVID HARTLEY, ESQ. M. P. DEAR SIR,

Passy, Feb. 16, 1782. " I received your favour of the 24th past. You have taken pains to rectify a mistake of mine relating to the aim of your letters. I accept kindly your replication, and I hope you will excuse my error, when you reflect that I knew of no consent given by France to our

treating separately of peace, and that there has been mixed in some of your conversations and letters various reasonings, to show that if France should require something of us that was unreasonable we then should not be obliged by our treaty to join with her in continuing the war. As there never had been such requisition, what could I think of such discourses? I thought as I suppose an honest woman would think, if a gallant should entertain her with suppositions of cases in which infidelity to her husband would be justifiable. Would not she naturally imagine, seeing no other foundation or motive for such conversation, that if he could once get her to admit the general principle, his intended next step would be to persuade her that such a case actually existed. Thus knowing your dislike of France, and your strong desire of recovering America to England, I was impressed with the idea that such an infidelity on our part would not be disagreeable to you; and that you were therefore aiming to lessen in my mind the horror I conceived at the idea of it. But we will finish here by mutually agreeing that neither you were capable of proposing nor I of acting on such principles.

I cannot however forbear endeavouring to give a little possible utility to this letter, by saying something on your case of Dunkirk. You do not see why two nations should be deemed natural enemies to each other. Nor do I, unless one or both of them are naturally mischievous and insolent. But I can see how enmities long continued, even during a peace, tend to shorten that peace, and to rekindle a war. That is when either party, having an advantage in war, shall exact conditions in the treaty of peace, that are goading and constantly mortifying to the other. I take this to be the case of your "commissioner

2

at Dunkirk." What would be your feeling, if France should take, and hold possession of Portsmouth, or Spain of Plymouth, after a peace, as you formerly held Calais, and now hold Gibraltar? Or on restoring your ports should insist on having an insolent commissioner stationed there, to forbid your placing one stone upon another by way of fortification? You would probably not be very easy under such a stipulation. If therefore you desire a peace that may be firm and durable, think no more of such extravagant demands. It is not necessary to give my opinion farther on that point, yet I may add frankly, as this is mere private conversation between you and me, that I do think a faithful ally, especially when under obligations for such great and generous assistance as we have received, should fight as long as he is able, to prevent (as far as his continuing to fight may prevent) his friends being compelled again to suffer such an insult.nqued

My dear friend, the true pains you are taking to restore peace, whatever may be the success, intitle you to the esteem of all good menis If your ministers really desire peace, methinks they would do well to impower some person to make propositions for that purpose. One or other of the parties at war must take the first step. To do this belongs properly to the wisest. America being a novice in such affairs has no pretence to that character, and indeed after the answer: given by Lord Stormont when we proposed to him something relative to the mutual treatment of prisoners with humanity) that the King's ministers received no applications from rebels, unless when they came to implore his majesty's clemency, it cannot be expected that we should hazard the exposing ourselves again to such insolence. All I can say farther at present is, that

in my opinion your enemies do not aim at your destruction, and that if you propose a treaty you will find them reasonable in their demands, provided that on your side they meet with the same good dispositions. But do not dream of dividing us you will certainly never be able to effect it. F•&མ་ ན་

With great regard and affection, I am ever, dear Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant, no quả ân ái recesos com a il B. FRANKLIN.**

From David Hartley, Esq. M. P. TO DR. acryldo tebau (FRANKLIN VAe nitul si & aliul

MY

2 90%.828 019099 DIC 10973 104

DEAR FRIEND, 18:35) JOTO 6 side er sú zs gateb. 28, 1782.. e I have not as yet any thing to communicate to you. I have upon many occasions recommended the road to peace in the most earnest way. I am not without hopes. I think I may venture to say that the arguments which I have stated have made an impression. I have not expected to receive the final answer from Lord North, till after the parliamentary arrangements of the year are settled. I am just for three or four days in the country upon a little business, but upon a furlough, as I may say, with the knowledge of Lord North, who, during the budget week, cannot possibly want to see me. I have therefore taken that week for a little private business in the country, and if Lord N. should happen too wish to see me, my brother keeps watch, and is to send express for me. Public report will tell you that on Friday last there was a division in the house on an American question, of 194 to 193. I cannot answer for the dispositions of ministers, but in point of justice I ought to say, that I think, and aș VOL. II.

F

far as I can judge from the conferences which I have had, that I have found good dispositions towards peace. I do not pledge myself, because I may be deceived; however, that is my opinion; and I say thus much lest my silence should appear suspicious, and create alienation in other parties. I think I have seen good dispositions from the first commencement of my conferences on peace. My brother sends me word that Mr. Alexander is to return by the next mail, I therefore write this to send either by him, or at least in the same packet. I have had much conversation with him, and he will tell you that I have done my utmost to serve the cause of peace. I will conclude this with a quotation which I have applied to another person in argument respecting peace

J&Consulere patriæ, parcere afflictis, fera cade abstinere,

Iræ tempus dare, orbi quietem, seculo pacem suo sEMG

Hæc summa virtus, hâc cœlum petitur viâ.

I

God bless you and prosper our pacific endeavours. shall probably write again to you soon. Your affectionate,

„ruge mojim.uzar o qi boergo powns D. HARTLEY,

31

FROM MR. HARTLEY'S BROTHER, COL. HARTLEY, M. P. TO DR. FRANKLIN JOEPEA

DEAR SIR, betsson Soho Square, Feb. 28, 1782.

to base As I know how anxious my brother is to embrace every opportunity of expressing those sentiments of peace and universal philanthropy, which do you both so * much honour, and of testifying his regard for yourself, I am sorry he is not returned to town before Mr. Alexander's départure. His absence from town has been occasioned by his being obliged to go into Gloucestershire for some papers relating to family concerns, and as I am sure