that out of these, one hundred and thirty thousand freeholders elect ninety-two members for fifty-two counties; forty-three thousand citizens, freemen, and others, elect fifty-two members for twentythree cities and two universities, and forty-one thousand electors choose three hundred and sixty-nine members for one hundred and ninety-two towns and boroughs; that fifty of these members are returned by three hundred and forty electors; and a number scarcely above six thousand, being a majority of the voters of one hundred and twenty-nine of the boroughs, return two hundred and fifty-seven representatives, which is a majority of the whole English House of Commons, and the efficient representation of above five millions of people; that many of these boroughs are immediately under the influence of the Crown, as the cinque ports; many of them are private property, affording hereditary seats, as those under burgage, tenure, and some of them almost without houses or inhabitants, as Galton, Newtown, and Old Sarum; that, considering the representation with reference to property, many counties return representatives out of all proportion to what they contribute to the public revenue; that Cornwall pays to land tax and subsidy sixteen parts out of five hundred and thirty, and sends forty-four members to Parliament, while Middlesex pays not less in proportion than two hundred and fifty-six, and sends eight members; so that the inequality of the representation of this country with regard to property is still greater than when estimated according to the numbers of its inhabitants." The Westminster committee, after considering this report, Mr. Fox in the chair, came to the following resolutions:

"1. That annual Parliaments are the undoubted right of the people of England; and that the act which prolonged their duration was subversive of the constitution, and a violation, on the part of the representatives, of the sacred trust reposed in them by their

constituents.

2. That the present state of the representation of this country is inadequate to the object, and a departure from the first principles of the constitution.

"3. That thanks be given to the sub-committee for their very intelligent report.

4. That copies of it be sent to the several committees of the counties, cities, and boroughs of the kingdom."

I have been thus particular in stating the proceedings of these

committees because it must be an advantage for Congress to have them all in view, and to see the whole of the foundation that is laid. They are some of the most important proceedings of the present reign; they are the commencement of a new sovereignty in opposition to the old. If there is virtue or good sense in the nation, these machines will discover it, and set it in motion; and provided the war. continues, it will prevail; but if there is neither virtue or sense remaining, or not enough of these to produce the desired effect, it will probably be the last national effort made in favor of liberty, and despotism will range at large.

If the King would make peace now, he would dissipate all these combinations in England, Ireland, and Holland, as well as prevent the treaty with Spain (which I believe is in a good way, from a letter which I lately saw from Mr. Carmichael) from giving advantages to Spain and disadvantages to England, which can never be altered. But if he continues the war long, if he should have signal successes, these may dispel the storms in England and Ireland; but if he should be unsuccessful, the new sovereignty will probably prevail against him, after involving the three kingdoms in confusion and blood.

I have the honor to be, &c.,

JOHN ADAMS.

TO THE PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS.

Paris, April 4th, 1780.

Sir,

There is an anecdote from Malaga, which ought to be mentioned to Congress, because it cannot fail to have serious consequences.

The Swedish frigate, the Illerim, of thirty-four guns, commanded by Captain Ankerloo, on the 28th of February, at half after eight o'clock at night, met an English privateer belonging to Minorca, of twenty-eight guns. The Swedish Captain, after hailing the privateer, let her continue her course, and went on quietly his own; about half an hour after, the privateer returning, ranged herself astern of the frigate, and unexpectedly discharged both his broadsides, loaded with langrage, which killed three sailors, broke the thigh and the right leg of the Captain, wounded the Lieutenant and some people of the crew. Ankerloo, who in the evening had been obliged by a violent

gale of wind to draw in his guns and shut up his ports, not finding himself prepared for battle, his officers took immediate measures, with the utmost alertness, for repulsing the privateer, which did in fact at last receive one broadside from the frigate; but, upon the whole, she escaped in the night, by the force of sails and of oars. After this perfidy on the part of the English, Ankerloo would have entered Marseilles for the sake of dressing his wounds, but having met with contrary winds and bad weather for three days, he put into Malaga, where he went ashore to the house of the Swedish consul, where he is since dead of his wounds.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest respect, &c.,

JOHN ADAMS.

TO THE PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS.

Paris, April 6th, 1780.

Sir,

It may be necessary to transmit the decree of Sir James Mariott, against the Dutch ship la Sybellina Hillegonda, in order fully to comprehend the proceedings, which I have sent before. The decree

is this:

"The fact in this case is, a Dutch ship loaded with naval stores, for a port in France, under the convoy of not less than five men-ofwar, and the commander of these men-of-war, not measuring his conduct by the line of the treaty, resists, fires upon the boat of the English Commodore, and forbids the execution of the treaty. The English Commodore returns the fire. The Dutch Admiral fires again, and strikes; so that the fact is to be adjusted, and it is of such a nature as has never before happened in the history of this nation. It falls unfortunately to my share, to decide upon these facts and their consequences.

"It is, nevertheless, a consolation, that although the judge of this court may decide, in the first instance, there is still a superior tribunal, in the last resort. This court ought to judge of the case of the treaty, since, in virtue of a special commission, under the great seal of the kingdom, the judges of the courts of admiralty are authorized and required to take cognizance of, and proceed judicially in, all manner of captures, seizures, prizes, and reprisals, and decide

upon them according to the course of the admiralty and the law of

nations.

"The claimant disdains to found his right in any other way than upon the treaty. My idea is, that all the maritime treaties which subsist between two friendly Powers, form but one code of laws, one great confederation, one indivisible union. They are, if it is lawful to make use of these sacred words, the Bible, the Book, or the Testament of the social contract between the nations, to be maintained inviolably, as a system, whereof we cannot break one part without dissolving the whole.

"The Dutch subjects have, in virtue of the treaty, particular privileges, superior to those of every other country, but they may overleap the bounds of these privileges, and from that time they ought to be weighed in the balance, like other neutral nations. To be found under a convoy is not, in itself, an infraction of the treaty, but the conduct of this convoy is to be considered.

"The fifth article of the treaty of 1674 is reciprocal. If any ship belonging to the subjects of his Majesty of Great Britain shall, in open sea, or elsewhere, out of the dominions of the said States, meet any ships-of-war of the Lords the States, or privateers belonging to their subjects, the said ships of the Lords the States, or of their subjects, shall keep at a convenient distance, and only send out their boat, with two or three men only, to go on board such ships or vessels of the subjects of his Majesty, in order that the passport, or sea-brief, concerning the property thereof, according to the form hereunder annexed, may be produced to them by the captain or master of such ship or vessel belonging to the subjects of his Majesty; and the said ships, so producing the same, shall freely pass; and it shall not be lawful to molest, search, detain, or force such ship from her intended voyage. And the subjects of the Lords the States shall enjoy, in all things, the same liberty and immunity, they in like manner showing their passport, or sea-brief, made out according to the form prescribed at the foot of this treaty.'

"The sixth article is, 'If any ship or vessel belonging to the English or other subjects of Great Britain, shall be met making into any port belonging to an enemy of the Lords the States, or, on the other side, if any ship belonging to the United Provinces of the Netherlands, or other subjects of the Lords the States, shall be met in her way, making into any port under the obedience of the enemies

of his said Majesty, such ships shall show, not only a passport, or sea-brief, according to the form hereunder subscribed, wherewith she is to be furnished, but also her certificate or cocket, containing the particulars of the goods on board, in the usual form, by the officers of the customs of that port, from whence she came; whereby it may be known whether she is laden with any of the goods prohibited by the third article of this treaty.'

"Such are the terms of this treaty, which this court will not declare to be now in force; but one of the parties may renounce it; and it would be from that time, so far forth, a good cause of annulling it. It could not ever have been the intention of the contracting parties that the merchant ships of the subjects of the States should become the transport vessels for the service of the King of France, nor that the men-of-war of the States should serve as a convoy to them. It is impossible to form an idea more unworthy of the sovereignty of the States. The idea of granting a convoy to all Dutch ships destined for the port of an enemy is offensive, and still more aggravating when accompanied with resistance, or orders to resist, when they go so far as to reject ipso facto all the ordinary ways of public justice, and to set at nought the articles which had been established to prevent the consequences of the intervention of neuters, as parties in a war, by public acts; articles which stipulate a legal procedure for discussing all the points in controversy before the courts of Admiralty reciprocally; and in case the parties should not be satisfied, they ought to be finally heard by their respective sovereigns in council. Such is the tenor of the twelfth article of the treaty of 1674.

"In the present state of the cause, this court will not say, nevertheless, that the States have annulled the treaty; because the orders of Admiral Byland have not appeared, and his conduct may be disavowed by the States; but even the granting of a convoy, and, above all, of a squadron, is essentially offensive, since the Dutch subjects are already sufficiently armed by the treaty, and by the methods of redress prescribed, which are the same with all maritime nations. The party complaining follows the ship and the papers which she has on board into the jurisdiction of the place and country where he is carried, as the subject, who in the nature of things and proceedings, can only of necessity be judged there, where the original proofs exist; the judges specially constituted for the decision of