Franklin and Mr Deane, and particularly against
the latter.

Mr Izard represents that there were dissensions and misunderstandings
between the commissioners at Paris. It is true. He is of opinion that
the interest of the public suffered by it, but in this he is mistaken,
as the treaty itself and all our other public transactions will
demonstrate. Mr Izard is of opinion that France might have been
brought to have taken an active part much earlier. If circumstances,
not in our power, had taken place earlier, they possibly might; but
even in that case they would have done it under great disadvantages,
as is evident from the representation I made to Congress when I had
the honor of being heard on the 19th of August last. As the 11th and
12th articles of the treaty are complained of, and as this subject
immediately interests the public, I have drawn up a concise narration
of the whole of that transaction and have communicated it to his
Excellency Mons. Gerard, who agrees to the truth of every part
thereof, which has come to his knowledge. This I beg leave to present
to Congress, as it will show that Mr Izard had not the best
information, and that neither Dr Franklin or myself (though "born in
New England") procured the insertion of those articles; it will
further show that the Court of France never urged it, but on the
contrary left us perfectly free to have them both inserted or both
omitted. It will also appear, that Mr Lee himself wrote and signed the
letter, desiring they might be inserted, and that he afterwards had a
private conference with M. Gerard on the subject, and appeared
perfectly satisfied. If any doubts arise on this subject, I shall be
happy to refer for satisfaction on that head to Mons. Gerard, and also
for what passed between Mr Lee and himself on the occasion, as well as
for the pretended verbal promise that the article should be expunged
if objected to by Congress. I have signed that narration, and shall
sign these observations in which I have avoided taking those
advantages of Mr Izard, which the passionate and partial complexion of
his letters has given me, were I disposed to make use of them;
because, I conceive it to be an abuse, if not an insult to trouble
Congress with any thing merely personal, though I have provocation
sufficient to justify me in the eyes of the world, and am by no means
deficient in materials.

I recollect perfectly well the interview at Passy with Mr William Lee,
at which