1. Jay was referring to his long public letter to Edmund Randolph of 13 Sept., not his short private letter of the same date. Jay first reviewed the progress of his negotiations with Lord Grenville about violations of the 1783 Treaty of Peace. When no agreement was reached, it "became adviseable to quit those Topics, and try to agree on such a sett of reciprocal concessions, as (ballancing each other) might afford Articles for a Treaty . . . beneficial to both parties." Jay submitted a paper to Grenville suggesting "some Outlines for a Convention and Treaty of Commerce." Grenville responded with drafts for two treaties that also contained specific points for adjudication. Topics covered by Jay and Grenville included the U.S. boundary with Canada, removal of British troops and garrisons in the Northwest, free navigation of the Mississippi River, pre-war debts owed by Americans to British creditors, commerce between the United States and British West Indies, trade policies for neutral nations, contraband, and compensation for captured ships.

In subsequent correspondence, the two men debated topics of particular concern. Jay objected to the statement that the British should have free access to the Mississippi River. He also argued that Grenville’s proposals for settling the northwestern boundary would result in a cession of land by the United States. He agreed "that the Northern and Western lines of the United States do not meet and Close, & . . . it is necessary to fix on a line for Closing them," but he could not accept Grenville’s stipulation that a line drawn west from the Lake of the Woods could not intersect the Mississippi.

In addition to explanations about the northwestern boundary, Grenville proposed an article concerning specific regulations of contraband. Such items would include "Arms and Implements" used for war, "Timber for Ship building . . . and generally whatever may serve directly to the equipment of Vessels; unwrought Iron, and Fir planks only excepted." Corn, grain, and provisions would be considered contraband "only . . . when there is an expectation of reducing the Enemy by the want thereof."

Jay also quoted in full a letter of 10 Sept. from Sir William Scott and Dr. John Nicholl concerning procedures practiced in British courts of admiralty regarding prize ships (DNA: RG 59, Despatches from U.S. ministers to Great Britain; see also ASP, Foreign Relations description begins Walter Lowrie et al., eds. American State Papers. Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States. 38 vols. Washington, D.C., Gales and Seaton, 1832–61. description ends , 1:485-96).

2. Randolph wrote two letters to the Committee of Public Safety dated 10 June 1794. On behalf of the Senate, he tendered "their zealous wishes for the French Republick" and vowed that "the full establishment of ther peace and liberty will be ever esteemed by the Senate as a happiness to the United-States and to humanity." On behalf of the House of Representatives, Randolph wrote "the cause of liberty, in the defense of which So much American blood and treasure have been lavished, is cherished by our Republick with increasing enthusiasm." Americans would always "rally" their affections to support the "standard of liberty" and glory in the success of its "avengers" (DNA: RG 59, Notes from the French Legation; see also ASP, Foreign Relations description begins Walter Lowrie et al., eds. American State Papers. Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States. 38 vols. Washington, D.C., Gales and Seaton, 1832–61. description ends , 1:674).

In James Monroe’s speech to the citizens, president, and representatives of the French people on 15 Aug., he declared that his recognition served as "new proof of that friendship and regard" which France had always demonstrated to their American ally. He stressed that "republicks should approach near to each other: In many respects they all have the same interest . . . especially . . . the american and French Republicks. Their governments are similar; they both cherish the same principles, and rest on the same basis, the equal and un-alienable rights of men." Monroe went on to say that the "common dangers and difficulties" the two nations shared "will increase their harmony and . . . union." He assured the French that "America is not an unfeeling spectator of your affairs at the present crisis" and the declarations of the U.S. government "are founded in the affection of the citizens at large, the most decided proof of her sincere attachment to the liberty, prosperity and happiness of the French Republick." Monroe reviewed the French alliance with America in its fight against "oppression" and praised the current political revolution in France. He then conveyed his own wishes of "liberty and happiness" to that nation, confident that his words expressed American sentiments as well (DNA: RG 59, Notes from the French Legation; see also ASP, Foreign Relations description begins Walter Lowrie et al., eds. American State Papers. Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States. 38 vols. Washington, D.C., Gales and Seaton, 1832–61. description ends , 1:673-74).

GW’s letter to the Committee of Public Safety of the French Republic was dated 28 May.

Grenville discussed the comments of Randolph and Monroe in a private letter to Jay dated 7 Sept. He wrote that "neither honor nor advantage will result from what is now done, even omitting the contrast which it makes with the language and conduct which you have been authorized to hold here. I have hitherto been inclined to think the government of the United States sincere in the desire to cultivate among the People of that Country the dispositions of neutrality, of peace, and of good understanding with Great Britain, because such was their evident and unquestionable interest to which I could not believe them blind. But it is not consistent with neutrality to make ministerial declarations of favour and preference, nor can it lead to the maintenance of good order in any Country that its government should give official sanction and adherence to acts at which all Religion & all Humanity revolt." Grenville went on to say, "the Letters of the Secretary of State go far beyond the resolutions of either House of Congress," while Monroe’s speech "is such as might be expected from the most zealous & eager partizan, heated by popular discussion." He warned Jay of the ramifications that might result from the comments. While Great Britain and the United States "shall continue to labour with the same desire to preserve . . . a friendly disposition to each other . . . such a declaration . . . will be taken to be, of the sentiments & views of your government" and make it difficult to support goodwill between the two nations (P.R.O.: F.O. 95/512).

3. Jay wrote "Prood."

4. At GW’s request, Randolph discussed this topic in a letter to Jay of 20 Dec. (DNA: RG 59, Diplomatic and Consular Instructions). He contended that such escheats had been rare and involved mostly, if not solely, cases that had commenced during the war, concluding, "upon the whole; I believe, that Virginia has little or nothing to answer for on this head."