John Jay Papers

Report on the State of Negotiations with Gardoqui, 11 April 1787

Report on the State of Negotiations with Gardoqui

Office for Foreign Affairs 11th. April 1787

Sir

In Obedience to the Order of Congress directing me to give Information of the State of my Negociation with the Encargado de Negocios of Spain &c:, I have the Honor of informing your Excellency that on the 6th. October last I wrote the following Letter to Mr. Gardoqui, Vizt.1

[Here inserted letter JJ to Gardoqui, 6 Oct. 1786, above]

That I have since had several Conferences with Mr. Gardoqui on the well known Points in Difference between us, Vizt. on the Navigation of the River Missisippi and on the Limits.—2

With Respect to the first Point we have had repeated Conversations which produced nothing but Debate and in the Course of which we did not advance one single Step nearer to each other. He continued and still continues decided in refusing to admit us to navigate the River below our Limits on any Terms or Conditions, nor will he consent to any Article declaring our Right in express Terms, and stipulating to forbear the Use of it for a given Time. But he did not appear to me so decidedly opposed to the same Ideas in the Way of Implication—though he did not say so. I drew that Inference from a Number of Circumstances, but yet he said nothing so unequivocal to warrant it, as to commit himself. I thought it therefore advisable to try how far he would silently yield to that Idea; and therefore drew up Articles in a Variety of Shapes, clearly implying the Right, and expressly forbearing the Use during the Term of the Treaty. These Drafts he positively refused to admit; and finding that Arguments in Support of them rather irritated than convinced him, we parted without doing any thing. Subsequent Conferences took place, and he continuing inflexible in refusing the Articles as they stood, we gradually but very cautiously talked of Amendments. It was my Business to endeavour to change the Dress but retain the Spirit and Sense—many Difficulties and Questions unnecessary to detail, occurred—It was however finally so adjusted as in my Opinion to save the Right and only suspend the Use during the Term of the Treaty; at the Expiration of which this and every other Article in it would become null and void. It is as follows Vizt.

“And to the End that this Treaty may the more effectually provide for the Continuance of that perfect Harmony which at present happily subsists between his Catholic Majesty and the United States; and that all Differences and Questions which might otherwise arise respecting the Navigation of the River Missisippi may be avoided & obviated by an amicable Stipulation on that Subject. As his Catholic Majesty’s System of Government & Policy prohibits all foreign Trade, Intercourse and Commerce within his Territories, and as the United States are desirous as far as possible to meet the Wishes of his Majesty, and to evince the Sense they entertain of his friendly Disposition towards them, and of the recent Proofs he has been pleased to give them of it, Therefore it is expressly stipulated and concluded that his Catholic Majesty and the United States are freely, and in common, and without receiving any Interruption from each other, to use and navigate the said River from its Source down to the southern Boundary of the said States; And that the United States will faithfully observe that Limitation, and not navigate or use the said River below, or further down than the said Boundary in any part of its Course therefrom through his Majesty’s Countries to the Mouth thereof.—”3

Congress will doubtless observe that the Reasons assigned in this Article for Forbearance, militate against a Supposition of his Majestys having an exclusive Right, for it does not either admit his Right or relinquish ours, but on the contrary, in Order to avoid and obviate Differences and Questions, to suit his Majesty’s System of Government and Policy, to meet the King’s Wishes, and to evince our Sense of His Friendship—it only stipulates not to use &ca:

On that and every other Occasion I thought it best to be very candid with Mr. Gardoqui—I told him that he must not conclude that what I might think expedient would also be deemed so by Congress, and hoped that when he considered they were sitting in the same Place with us, he would see the Propriety of my observing the greatest Delicacy and Respect towards them.—

As to the Limits, I have Reason from him to believe that notwithstanding the Extent of their Claims, he would in Case all other Matters were satisfactorily adjusted, so far recede as to give up to us all the Territories not comprehended within the Floridas as ascertained by our separate and secret Article with Great Britain, of which I early perceived that he was well informed.—

As he could not in any Manner be drawn lower down than this Line, it struck me that it would be prudent to confine if possible all Questions of Limits, to the Land between the two Lines; and therefore hinted the Expediency of settling the Dispute so limited by Commissioners—He expressed no Reluctance to this, and I believe he has written for Instructions on that Point but am not certain. He seemed very cautious of committing himself; and I cannot now say that he admitted our Rights to extend down to the first Line, but only gave me to understand that, all other Things being agreed, his Majesty from Motives of Accommodation might be content with the Limitation.4

These are ^the^ Facts, and so Matters at present stand between him and me. A Variety of Circumstances and Considerations which I need not mention, render this Negociation dilatory, unpleasant and unpromising; and it is much to be wished that the United States could jointly and unanimously adopt and pursue some fixed and stable Plan of Policy in Regard to Spain, especially during the Residence of Mr. Gardoqui, who I do verily believe is sincerely disposed to do every Thing useful and acceptable to America, that his Instructions and the essential Interests of his Country, as understood by him and his Master, will permit.5—I have the Honor to be with great Respect & Esteem Your Excellency’s Most obt. and hble: Servant

John Jay

His Excellency The President of Congress

LS, DNA, PCC, item 81, 3: 227–32 (EJ: 3969). Endorsed: “Report—/ Secy: forn. Affairs—/ State of his Negotiations / with Mr. Gardoqui—/ Read April 12th. 1787—/ Wednesday—18th. April 1787 / assigned—”. Dft, NNC (EJ: 5892). LbkCs, DNA: PCC, item 125, 127–31 (EJ: 3722); NNC: JJ Lbk. 3.

1For the order of Congress of 4 Apr. 1787 see C, DNA: PCC, item 122 (Resolve book), 80; LbkC, DNA: PCC, item 125, 126 (EJ: 3721); and JCC, description begins Worthington C. Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1904–37) description ends 32: 152.

2These conferences are detailed in the editorial note “Negotiations with Gardoqui reach an Impasse,” above.

3Article 15 of the draft treaty sent under cover of Floridablanca’s letter to Gardoqui of 5 Sept, 1787, was, as Floridablanca noted, virtually identical to what Gardoqui had agreed upon with JJ. See Gómez del Campillo, Relaciones Diplomaticas, description begins Miguel Gómez del Campillo, Relaciones diplomáticas entre España y los Estados Unidos. Según los documentos del Archivo Histórico Nacional (2 vols.; Madrid, 1946) description ends 1: 384, 396–97. In his dispatch to Floridablanca of 15 Oct. 1786, Gardoqui indicated that JJ, whom he described as fearful, had insisted that he put his opinions in writing. JJ had also indicated they would have to proceed slowly to try to conciliate both parties. On 28 Oct. 1786, Gardoqui reported that JJ had advised him that he had little hope that Congress would agree to these terms and that JJ would not sign any proposal unless nine states agreed to it. JJ had, he said, agreed to concede “something” with regard to the Mississippi, but resisted making any concessions on boundaries. This led Gardoqui to ask Floridablanca for further instructions, receipt of which he acknowledged on 12 May 1787. For this and the assertion that Gardoqui persuaded JJ to agree to this formulation, see Gómez del Campillo, Relaciones Diplomaticas, description begins Miguel Gómez del Campillo, Relaciones diplomáticas entre España y los Estados Unidos. Según los documentos del Archivo Histórico Nacional (2 vols.; Madrid, 1946) description ends 1: 153; and Bemis, Pinckney’s Treaty, description begins Samuel Flagg Bemis, Pinckney’s Treaty: America’s Advantage from Europe’s Distress, 1783–1800 (New Haven, Conn., 1960) description ends 93–94.

4On the boundary concessions, essentially those anticipated by JJ, see Gómez del Campillo, Relaciones Diplomaticas, description begins Miguel Gómez del Campillo, Relaciones diplomáticas entre España y los Estados Unidos. Según los documentos del Archivo Histórico Nacional (2 vols.; Madrid, 1946) description ends 1: 138; Bemis, Pinckney’s Treaty, description begins Samuel Flagg Bemis, Pinckney’s Treaty: America’s Advantage from Europe’s Distress, 1783–1800 (New Haven, Conn., 1960) description ends 71–72; and Kukla, Wilderness So Immense, description begins Jon Kukla, A Wilderness So Immense: The Louisiana Purchase and the Destiny of America (New York, 2003) description ends 57–58.

5On the draft of the treaty sent Gardoqui in response to his request for new instructions, see the editorial note “Negotiations with Gardoqui reach an Impasse,” cited above.

Index Entries