(De Francy) to Congress to press payment to the amount mentioned in the official Letter of Oct. 6. Mr. Francy brought a letter signed only by S. Deane—the Capt of the vessel (Landais) brought another letter from Deane; both of these letters were to enforce Mr. Beaumarchais' demand. Mr. Francy arrived with his letters and demand. The official despatches (if I may so say) arrived blank. Congress therefore had no authoritative information to act by. About this time Mr. Deane was recalled and arrived in America in Count D'Estaing's fleet. He gave out that he had left his accounts in France.
"With the Treaty of Alliance come over the Duplicates of the lost Despatches. They come into my office not having been seen by Congress; and as they contain an injunction not to be conceded by (to?) Congress, I kept them secret in the office because at that time the foreign Committee were dispersed and new members not appointed.
"On the 5th of Dec. 1778, Mr. Deane published an inflamatory piece against Congress. As I saw it had an exceeding ill effect out of doors I made some remarks upon it—with a view of preventing people running mad. This piece was replied to by a piece under the Signature of Plain Truth—in which it was stated, that Mr. Deane though a stranger in France and to the Language, and without money, had by himself procured 30,000 stand of Arms, 30,000 suits of Cloathing, and more than 200 pieces of Brass Cannon. I replied that these supplies were in a train of Execution before he was sent to France. That Mr. Deane's private letters and his official despatches jointly with the other two Commissioners contradicted each other.
"At this time I found Deane had made a large party in Congress—and that a motion had been made but not decided upon for dismissing me from the foreign office, with a kind of censure."
Deane was heard by Congress twice (August 9 and 21, 1778) but made a bad impression, and a third hearing was refused. In wrath he appealed in the press "to the free and virtuous Citizens of America," (December 5, 1778) against the injustice of Congress. This Paine answered in the Pennsylvania Packet of December 15, 1778. His motives are told in the following letter addressed to the Hon. Henry Laurens:
"Philadelphia, Dec. 15th, 1778.—Dear Sir.—In this morning's paper is a piece addressed to Mr. Deane, in which your name is mentioned. My intention in relating the circumstances with wch. it is connected is to prevent the Enemy drawing any unjust conclusions from an accidental division in the House on matters no ways political You will please to observe that I have been exceedingly careful to preserve the honor of Congress in the minds of the people who have been so exceedingly fretted by Mr. Deane's address—and this will appear the more necessary when I inform you that a proposal has been made for calling a Town Meeting to demand justice for Mr. Deane. I have been applied to smoothly and roughly not to publish this piece. Mr. Deane has likewise been with the Printer. I am, &c."
1. "Beaumarchais et son Temps," par M. De Lomenie, Paris, 1856. "Histoire de la Participation de la France a l'Etablissement des Etats Unis d'Amerique." par M. Doniol, Paris. "Beaumarchais and 'The Lost Million,'" by Charles J. Stille (privately printed in Philadelphia). "New Materials for the History of the American Revolution," by John Durand, New York, 1889. Magazine of American History% vol. ii., p. 663. "Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin," by James Parton, New York, 1864. "Papers in Relation to the Case of Silas Deane," Philadelphia, printed for the Seventy- six Society, 1855.
2. M. Doniol and Mr. Durand are entirely mistaken in supposing that Lee was "substantially a traitor." That he wrote to Lord Shelburne that "if England wanted to prevent closer ties between France and the United States she must not delay," proves indeed the reverse. He wanted recognition of the independence of his country, and peace, and was as willing to get it from England as from France. He was no doubt well aware that French subsidies were meant, as Beaumarchais reminded the King, to continue the war in America, not to end it. Arthur Lee had his faults, but lack of patriotism was not among them.
{1779}
To Paine, who had given his all to the American cause, nothing could appear more natural than that France and her King should do the same with pure disinterestedness. Here were Lafayette and other Frenchmen at Washington's side. However, the one thing he was certain of was that Deane had no claim to be credited with the French subsidies. Had Henry Laurens been President of Congress it would have been easy to act on that body through him; but he had resigned, and the new president, John Jay, was a prominent member of the Deane party. So Paine resolved to defeat what he considered a fraud on the country at whatever cost. In the course of the controversy he wrote (January 2, 1779):
"If Mr. Deane or any other gentleman will procure an order from Congress to inspect an account in my office, or any of Mr. Deane's friends in Congress will take the trouble of coming themselves, I will give him or them my attendance, and shew them in handwriting which Mr. Deane is well acquainted with, that the supplies he so pompously plumes himself upon were promised and engaged, and that as a present, before he ever arrived in France; and the part that fell to Mr. Deane was only to see it done, and how he has performed that service the public are acquainted with."
Although Paine here gave the purport of the commissioners' letter, showing plainly that Deane had nothing to do with obtaining the supplies, he is not so certain that they were gratuitous, and adds, in the same letter (January 2d): "The supplies here alluded to are those which were sent from France in the Amphitrite, Seine, and Mercury, about two years ago. They had at first the appearance of a present, but whether so or on credit the service was a great and a friendly one." To transfer the debt to the French government would secure such a long credit that the American cause would not suffer. Perhaps no official notice might have been taken of this, but in another letter (January 5th) Paine wrote: "Those who are now her (America's) allies, prefaced that alliance by an early and generous friendship; yet that we might not attribute too much to human or auxiliary aid, so unfortunate were these supplies that only one ship out of three arrived; the Mercury and Seine fell into the hands of the enemy."
It was this last paragraph that constituted Paine's indiscretion. Unless we can suppose him for once capable of a rôle so Machiavellian as the forcing of France's hand, by revealing the connection between the King and the subsidies of Beau-marchais, we can only praise him for a too-impulsive and self-forgetting patriotism. It was of course necessary for the French Minister (Gerard) to complain, and for Congress to soothe him by voting the fiction that his most Christian Majesty "did not preface his alliance with any supplies whatever sent to America." But in order to do this, Paine had somehow to be dealt with. A serio-comical performance took place in Congress. The members knew perfectly well that Paine had documents to prove every word he had printed; but as they did not yet know these documents officially, and were required by their ally's minister to deny Paine's statement, they were in great fear that Paine, if summoned, might reveal them. As the articles were only signed "Common Sense," it was necessary that the Secretary should acknowledge himself their author, and Congress, in dread of discovering its own secrets, contrived that he should be allowed to utter at the bar only one word.
Congress received M. Gerard's complaint on January 5th, and on the 6th, to which action thereon had been adjourned, the following memorial from Paine.
"Honorable Sirs.—Understanding that exceptions have been taken at some parts of my conduct, which exceptions as I am unacquainted with I cannot reply to: I therefore humbly beg leave to submit every part of my conduct public and private, so far as relate to public measures, to the judgment of this Honble. House, to be by them approved or censured as they shall judge proper—at the same time reserving to myself that conscious satisfaction of having ever intended well and to the best of my abilities executed those intentions.
"The Honble. Congress in April, 1777, were pleased, not only unsolicited on my
