John Jay Papers

From John Jay to Alexander Gillon, 9 October 1781

To Alexander Gillon

Madrid 9 Oct. 1781

Sir,

The paper herewith enclosed is a copy of a letter which I recieved this morning from his Excelly the Count de Florida Blanca, his Catholic Majestys principal Secretary of State, and Minister for foreign affairs.1

You will perceive from it, that two men on board your frigate are claimed by this Government, as deserters from one of his Majestys Irish Regiments of Infantry; and that you are said to have refused to deliver them up, because, among other reasons, your crew are the subjects of his most christian Majesty.

If the two Men in Question are Citizens of one or other of the United States of N America, & admitted to be such, your refusing to deliver them up as deserters from the Service of Spain may be proper, because while their own Country is at War, they cannot without her consent, enter into the Service of any other power.

If they are Spaniards, then they are the Subjects of his Catholic Majesty, & ought not to be withheld from him.

If they are Foreigners, in that case, whatever Right they might have to enter into the American Service, they certainly had an equal one to enter into that of Spain, and if they had previously engaged with the latter, their subsequent Enlistments with you were void, and Spain, being in friendship with us, has a just right to reclaim them—

If they deny their having inlisted in the Spanish Service, still like all other foreigners, who come into This Kingdom they ought to submit to the Justice of the Country, and you ought not to screen them from it; especially as it cannot be presumed that the charge made against them is destitute of probability.

As to the circumstance of your crew’s being subjects of the King of France, I cannot think that any argument to justify your detaining them, can be drawn from it, for admitting them to be french subjects, yet as it may be lawful for them, (France & Spain being Allies) to enter into the Service of Spain, the right of Spain to enlist, must necessarily involve a right to compel obedience, and also to retake and punish deserters— Besides, as any questions about the legality of such enlistments concern only those two crowns, Americans cannot with propriety interfere.

In whatever light I view this affair, I cannot perceive the least right that you can have to detain these men, after then having been thus formally, and regularly demanded by proper authority, as deserters from the Service of his Catholic Majesty.

You may observe that I treat this Subject merely as a question of justice, arising from that general law which subsists and ought to be observed, between friendly nations— I forbear making any remarks on the impolicy of your persisting to detain these Men. I hope never to see America do what is right, merely because it may be convenient. I flatter myself that her conduct will uniformly be actuated by higher, and more generous principles; and that her national character will daily become more & more distinguished by disinterested Justice, and heroic magnanimity.

I shall take the earliest opportunity of transmitting a particular State of this affair to Congress;2 and I cannot doubt but that your conduct will merit their approbation, by being perfectly consistent with a just regard to the dignity and rights of a sovereign, who has acted not only justly, but generously towards our Country—

If your reluctance to deliver up these men should have arisen from an apprehension of their suffering the Punishment which, on conviction, would be due to their offences; that reluctance ought now to cease, because his Excellency the Minister has been pleased to assure me, that they shall not be punished, but only obliged to fulfil those engagements, which they ought to have honestly performed, instead of deserting.

In short Sir Altho on the one hand, I will never advise, or encourage you to violate the rights of the meanest man in the World in order to answer political purposes yet on the other, I shall always think it my duty to advise and encourage both you and others, to render unto Caesar whatever may belong unto Caesar. I am your most obedt & very hble Servt

John Jay3

Commodore A. Gillon

ALS, SpMaAHN, leg. 3884, exp. 16, doc. 6 (EJ: 12119) Endorsed. LbkCs, DNA: PCC, item 110, 2: 17–20 (EJ: 4190); NNC: JJ Lbks. 1 and 6; CSmH (EJ: 3439).

1Floridablanca to JJ, 8 Oct. 1781, above. Gillon had vastly overspent an advance from BF, given at the urging of John Laurens, for military supplies purchased in Paris and Amsterdam. In addition to his crew of approximately 200 men, Gillon had on board a 300-man corps known as the Volontaires de Luxembourg, which the French had permitted him to enlist to serve in South Carolina for three years, and 26 passengers, including James Searle; William Jackson, secretary to Laurens; and John Trumbull, son of the governor of Connecticut. Gillon had promised John Laurens that he would transport the military stores and would make space for them by minimizing the amount of provisions he carried. He sailed from Amsterdam in August, abandoning there two vessels transporting the remainder of the stores that the South Carolina was expected to convoy, in violation of his agreement with Luxembourg. Instead of heading directly for America, Gillon cruised for prizes in European waters for six weeks. He then put in at La Coruña on 23 Sept. to resupply and apparently announced his arrival in a letter to JJ of 28 Sept. (not found). His letter to JJ of 30 Sept., C, PPAmP: Franklin (EJ: 2663), tried to justify his conduct against the complaints of his passengers and made no mention of any attempt by the Spanish to remove two alleged deserters. After leaving La Coruña, Gillon cruised for prizes in the Caribbean and played an important role in a joint expedition with Spanish forces that captured the Bahamas from Britain on 8 May. He arrived in Philadelphia on 28 May 1782. His conduct was subsequently investigated by Congress. See BF to JJ, 19 Jan. 1782, below; Lewis, Neptune’s Militia, 28, 30–33, 35–45; PJM description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, Robert A. Rutland, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison, Congressional Series (17 vols.; Chicago and Charlottesville, Va., 1962–91) description ends , 4: 110, 112–13; PRM description begins E. James Ferguson et al., eds., The Papers of Robert Morris, 1781–1784 (9 vols.; Pittsburgh, Pa., 1973–99) description ends , 1: 392–93; 4: 341, 345; 5: 105–6, 276; PBF description begins William B. Willcox et al., eds., The Papers of Benjamin Franklin (39 vols. to date; New Haven, Conn., 1959–) description ends , 35: 554, 652–53, 589–91, 595, 599; PJA description begins Robert J. Taylor, Gregg L. Lint, et al., eds., Papers of John Adams (15 vols. to date; Cambridge, Mass., 1977–) description ends , 11: 294–95; 12: 61–62; Pieter J. van Winter, American Finance and Dutch Investment, 1780–1805, trans. James C. Riley (New York, 1977), 1: 37–43; and Beerman, “Last Battle of the American Revolution,” description begins Eric Beerman, “The Last Battle of the American Revolution: Yorktown. No, the Bahamas! (The Spanish-American Expedition to Nassau in 1782),” Americas 45, no. 1 (July 1988): 79–95 description ends 79–95.

The Gillon affair became another matter for contention between JJ and Carmichael, who reported Gillon’s arrival to Congress in his dispatch of 5 Oct. He noted that Gillon’s behavior had been “much censured” by Searle and Trumbull but considered it improper for him to judge their complaints until Gillon sent JJ an explanation of his conduct. Carmichael reported that JJ might send him to La Coruña to investigate Gillon’s conduct and perhaps to ask Spain to hold the South Carolina in port, a mission he was reluctant to undertake, since it would expose inappropriate American conduct involving aid granted for supplies. He also indicated, however, that he did not want to be absent while JJ might be negotiating a treaty with Spain. JJ, however, informed the secretary for foreign affairs that Carmichael had protested that the assignment went beyond the scope of his commission and that the journey to La Coruña would be too arduous for him. JJ agreed with Carmichael, however, that it would be inadvisable to involve the Spaniards and commented further that the task required someone in whom he had great confidence—a description Carmichael clearly did not fit. In his reply to Carmichael, RRL ordered him to follow JJ’s instructions, which Carmichael subsequently protested he was always prepared to do. See “The Jay-Carmichael Relationship” (editorial note) on p. 171 and RDC description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1889) description ends , 4: 770; 5: 66, 173–74.

2In his letter to BF of 3 Oct., Dft, NNC (EJ: 7809), JJ had already enclosed copies of letters from James Searle of 26 Sept. and from Gillon of 28 Sept. (not found), commenting that they would give BF “much Chagrin,”and asked him to put them under cover of JJ’s letter to Congress of 3 Oct., above. BF’s reply of 16 Oct., LS, NNC (EJ: 5597), commented unfavorably on Gillon’s behavior and noted that Vergennes had instructed Montmorin to assist efforts to prevent Gillon from selling the military stores to satisfy his creditors.

3JJ embedded a copy of this letter in his letter to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs of 28 Apr. 1782, below, in which he accepted Gillon’s subsequent assertion, in a letter not found, that Spanish charges about the deserters were precipitate and appeared to have been dropped. JJ also explained his decision not to become involved in investigating the charges brought against Gillon by his passengers. Beerman, however, indicates that Gillon handed over the two soldiers. See Beerman, “Last Battle of the American Revolution,” description begins Eric Beerman, “The Last Battle of the American Revolution: Yorktown. No, the Bahamas! (The Spanish-American Expedition to Nassau in 1782),” Americas 45, no. 1 (July 1988): 79–95 description ends 85.

Index Entries