they had occupied in 1713. But not only had the Americans refused to recognise the Act of 1774, annexing the lands north of the Ohio to the Government of Quebec, but they had to some extent occupied the territory in question. In the Ohio Valley, what are now Kentucky and Tennessee had been partially settled by Scots-Irish Presbyterians moving chiefly from Pennsylvania after 1769. This continuous movement had been complemented by a skilfully conceived and brilliantly executed raid, conducted by George Rogers Clarke with a party of Virginians, on the old French settlements which had passed into British possession by the Treaty of Paris. Clarke had surprised the French settlement of Kaskaskia, and thereafter the whole population of frontier settlers had joined him (1777-9). The Virginians by an act of the legislature had appropriated these lands and incorporated them in their State under the name of Illinois County. Raids and counter-raids ensued, but the Ohio Valley remained in the hands of the Americans. Upon its possession depended the possibility of their expansion westwards.

When Oswald approached Vergennes, he replied that France could do nothing without consulting her allies. The treaty must be general, but France would have several demands to make. Before returning, Oswald obtained from Franklin, then the only American commissioner in Paris, a paper in which he had sketched his personal views as to a basis of negotiations. Britain, he suggested, should be generous, and voluntarily cede Canada and Nova Scotia, on condition that so much of the waste lands there should be sold "as would raise a sum sufficient to pay for the houses burnt by the British troops and their Indians, and also to indemnify the Royalists for the confiscation of their estates".1 This paper was given by Oswald to Shelburne, who, regarding it as private, did not communicate it to his colleagues.

There being evidently no hope of a separate peace, Oswald was ordered to Paris, since Franklin had expressed a desire for his return, to settle with him "the most convenient time for setting on foot a negotiation for a general peace and to represent that the principal points in contemplation are, the allowance of independence to America upon Great Britain's being restored to the situation she was in by the Treaty of 1763". Fox was to appoint a proper person to make a similar communication to Vergennes (23 April). He chose Thomas Grenville, son of the author of the Stamp Act. The conduct of negotiations by two separate Secretaries of State, the one dealing with America and the other with the other belligerents, was perhaps inevitable, but it was bound to be embarrassing, and proved the more so, because Fox wished all negotiations to be conducted by his department and disagreed on fundamental points with Shelburne.3

1

Franklin, Works, vIII, 470.

2 Corr. of Geo. III (ed. Fortescue), 1, 244.

* Grafton, Autobiography, pp. 318–23.

FOX AND SHELBURNE

773 Fox, regarding France as the natural enemy of England, wished to form alliances with the northern Powers. Offers of mediation had been made from St Petersburg and Vienna in 1779, 1780 and 1781. Fox's first step was an unsuccessful attempt to negotiate separately with the Dutch through the medium of Russia.1 With France, overestimating her anxiety for peace, he thought he could make more favourable terms by at once granting independence to the United States. Shelburne, on the other hand, remembered Chatham's failure to create a great Northern Alliance. He appreciated the unstable character of the Empress Catharine, and even contemplated an eventual alliance with France, to curb the aggression of those Powers which had recently been responsible for the partition of Poland. He believed that to commence negotiations by conceding independence would merely encourage France to increase her demands, whilst sacrificing a valuable asset in the bargain to be driven with the United States. He preferred to keep his hands free for negotiating a separate peace with each belligerent, and to play off against each other the conflicting interests of France, Spain and America. In all this he was strongly supported by the King, who did not conceal his distrust of Fox and his methods. Shelburne instructed Oswald to acquaint Franklin that America must be truly independent and not bind herself in any way to France, and that no idea of reparation for damages, such as he had suggested, could be entertained. A free trade to every part of America was expected and early payment of all debts due to British subjects. No independence was to be acknowledged without care being taken for the indemnification of the Loyalists. For himself, Shelburne had come most reluctantly to the idea of granting complete independence; what he had wished for was a federal union between the two countries.2

Fox's instructions to Grenville indicated his line of policy. If, as he expected, France rejected the status quo of 1763, then it would be evident that, after having secured the independence of the colonies which was the avowed object of the war, she was continuing it for her own ends, in which America had no interest. In that case, Grenville was to sound Franklin as to a separate peace, which "would open the best road for a general peace". Vergennes' answer was, that he must consult his allies, but as for independence, it was not to be ceded to France, and would not be regarded by her as an inducement for granting a favourable peace. America must negotiate for it separately. Conde d'Aranda adopted the same attitude on behalf of Spain.

Grenville thereupon suggested to Fox that, with the object of 1 Malmesbury Correspondence; Correspondence of C. J. Fox, 1, 331.

2 F.O. 97, 157.,

Fox to Grenville, 30 April 1782, F.O., France, 27/2; cf. Fox to George III, Corr. of Geo. III (ed. Fortescue), 1, 313.

4 Grenville to Fox, 10 May 1782.

separating the allies and making a distinct treaty, independence might be granted to America "in the first instance, instead of making it a conditional article of general treaty".1 America would then be less likely to support France and Spain in their large demands. At this opportune moment (18 May), tidings reached England of Rodney's victory and the capture of Dutch posts in Ceylon. Though this news affected the popularity of ministers who had decided to recall and disgrace Rodney, it strengthened their hands in dealing with France. Grenville was, therefore, ordered to proceed as he had proposed.2 At the same time, Oswald was instructed to make peace, either general or separate, with the American commissioners at what the King termed “the dreadful price of independence".

When Grenville announced (15 May) that he was authorised to acknowledge the independence of America in the first instance, and to offer to France the Treaty of 1763 as a basis for negotiation, Vergennes, of course, perceived the underlying intention to separate the allies. He replied that in any new treaty he should prefer that the Treaty of Paris be annulled "except in certain specified articles". The vagueness of this reply showed that France intended to create delays. The Cabinet decided to adhere to its policy, and also instructed Fox to inform the court of St Petersburg that, without formally admitting the Armed Neutrality, Great Britain would make the principles of the Empress' declaration on that subject the basis of a treaty on condition that Russia obtained the neutrality of Holland."

The tension between Fox and Shelburne now became acute. Fox credited Shelburne with duplicity in concealing from him Franklin's suggestion about Canada. He proposed to interpret the recognition of independence "in the first instance" as transferring the whole negotiation to his own department of Foreign Affairs, arguing that the colonies thereby ceased to exist. The Cabinet decided against him. Grenville, however, began to act as if he were sole negotiator, and complained of the interference of Oswald.' The result was to create suspicion in Franklin's mind, whilst Vergennes plainly stated that any attempt to separate France from America would be in vain; that the treaties must go hand in hand; and that France was not daunted by her defeat in the West Indies. Franklin presently proposed the appointment of separate commissioners, each to deal with each belligerent, and "then to consolidate those several settlements into one genuine and conclusive Treaty".8

1 Grenville to Fox, 14 May 1782, F.O., France, 27/2.

2 Cabinet Minute, 23 May; Grafton, Autobiography, p. 321.

Shelburne to Oswald, 21 May, F.Ó., France, 27/2; Shelburne to George III, 25 May,

Corr. of Geo. III, 1, 332, 333.

4 Grafton, Autobiography, p. 321; Memorials of Fox, 1, 331; Fox to George III, 24 June 1782.

5 Fox to Grenville, 10 June.

7 Shelburne to Oswald, 27 July.

Grafton, Autobiography, p. 318. • Oswald to Shelburne, 9 June.

SHELBURNE SUCCEEDS ROCKINGHAM

775

When the enabling Act was passed, a commission was sent to Grenville, "to treat with France and any other Prince or State whom it may concern". This, again, he interpreted as including the United States.1 Fox demanded the recall of Oswald, whom Shelburne proposed as commissioner to treat separately with Franklin, as the latter had suggested. On 30 June Fox urged the Cabinet to sanction the granting of independence even without a treaty, and thus to place all future negotiations in the hands of the Foreign Secretary. The Cabinet decided against him on both points. The majority voted that the grant of independence must be accompanied by the treaty, though it might be admitted as the basis of negotiation. Fox announced his intention to resign.2

The same day Rockingham died. Shelburne succeeded him, with a Cabinet placed, as the King wished, "on a broad bottom", but seven out of eleven were old followers of Chatham, and two of Rockingham. Thomas Townshend and Lord Grantham, the former ambassador to Spain, were his Secretaries of State. Keppel remained at the Admiralty as a matter of duty, but Grafton retired into the country. William Pitt became Chancellor of the Exchequer. Fox, having resigned, was followed by Lord John Cavendish, Burke, Sheridan, and the Duke of Portland, whom they had wished to make Prime Minister. The secession was smaller than they had hoped. Disappointment stimulated the virulence with which Fox and Burke attacked Shelburne in the House of Commons.

Shelburne at once replaced Grenville by Alleyne Fitzherbert, whom he brought from Brussels to negotiate with the French court, whilst Oswald dealt with the Americans. On 9 July, Franklin stated his ideas for the basis of a treaty. Four conditions he named as necessary: complete independence; definition of boundaries; restriction of the Canadian boundary to at least what it was before the Quebec Act; and freedom of fishing on the banks of Newfoundland. Other conditions he described as desirable for promoting friendly feeling—an indemnity of half a million for the destruction of towns; an acknowledgment of error on the part of Great Britain; the States to enjoy the same privileges in trade and shipping as the British; and the cession of Canada and Nova Scotia. He withdrew his suggestion for making provision for the Loyalists, because they were so numerous and Congress had no authority over the particular States which had confiscated their property. At this juncture much delay was caused by the rumour spread by Grenville that Shelburne did not intend to concede independence. Only with difficulty was confidence restored. John Jay was now associated with Franklin in Paris. He was 1 Franklin to Shelburne, 27 June 1782.

3

2 Grafton, Autobiography, pp. 318-21.

3 Oswald to Shelburne, 10 July, F.O. 97/157.

4 Oswald to Shelburne, 10-12 July; Franklin to Oswald, 12 July; Shelburne to Oswald, 27 July.

convinced that France and Spain intended to use the American alliance for extorting concessions for themselves. He therefore now demanded that the United States should be treated with as an independent Power. In this he was supported by Vergennes, who calculated that, the object of the alliance having thus been fulfilled, he could leave the Americans to look after themselves and play for his own hand.1 At present he desired delay in hopes of securing Gibraltar and the Mississippi for Spain, and establishing French claims in the East and West Indies and the Newfoundland fishery. A letter intercepted by the British Government from M. de Marbois to Vergennes, and a memorandum from M. Gérard de Rayneval, Chief Clerk of the French Foreign Office, demonstrating that the United States had no right to the Mississippi Valley, confirmed Jay in his distrust of his allies, whilst Oswald was frightened by the hint that the Americans were concluding a treaty of commerce with Spain. Both sides being anxious, it was therefore at length agreed that independence should be granted absolutely and irrevocably as an article in the treaty, and Franklin's four "necessary" articles were accepted as the basis of negotiations. Oswald had been instructed that the right of drying fish on the Newfoundland shore would not be ceded, and that payment of debts before 1775 and compensation for Loyalists must be stipulated in the treaty, but that the British claim to the ungranted domains and territory between the Mississippi and the Alleghanies might be waived in part to provide such compensation. But when Jay produced a draft treaty on 5 October, Oswald yielded on all these points.

The delimitation of the frontiers involved prolonged discussion. The limits of the thirteen colonies as fixed by the Proclamation of 1763 were, westwards, the Mississippi as far north as the southern boundary of the Hudson's Bay Company, and in the south the boundaries of Georgia and South Carolina. On the north-east, the Proclamation defined the Government of Quebec (Canada) as

bounded on the Labrador coast by the river St John, and from thence by a line drawn from the head of that river, through the lake St John to the south end of Lake Nippissim; from whence the said line crossing the river St Lawrence, and the lake Champlain in 45 degrees of north latitude, passes along the high lands which divide the rivers that empty themselves into the said river St Lawrence from those which fall into the sea, and also along the north coast of the Bay des Chaleurs, and the coast of the Gulf of St Lawrence, to Cape Rosiers, and from thence crossing the mouth of the river St Lawrence, by the west end of the island of Anticosty, terminates at the aforesaid river St John.

As to Nova Scotia, the western boundary after 1763 was defined by the River St Croix, and a line drawn due north from the source of that river to the southern boundary of Canada, that is, the line Life of John Jay, 1, 142 seqq., II, 472; Vergennes to La Luzerne.

Amer. Dipl. Corr. VI, 483; Life of John Jay, 1, 144, 490; B. Vaughan to Shelburne, 12 Sept. 1782.

3 Townshend to Oswald, 1 Sept.

• Shelburne to Oswald, 31 July.