ties. I told him, that on receiving his map, I would take
all that he had said into consideration, and take the earliest
opportunity of acquainting him with my sentiments respecting it. I
then observed, that I hoped his powers to treat were equal with mine.
He replied, that he had ample powers to confer, but not to sign
anything without previously communicating it to his Court, and
receiving their orders for the purpose; but to my surprise, he did not
offer to show me any powers of any kind.[5]

A few days afterwards he sent me the same map, with his proposed line
marked on it in red ink. He ran it from a lake near the confines of
Georgia, but east of the Flint River, to the confluence of the Kanawa
with the Ohio, thence round the western shores of lakes Erie and
Huron, and thence round lake Michigan to lake Superior.

On the 10th of August I carried this map to the Count de Vergennes and
left it with him. Dr Franklin joined with me in pointing out the
extravagance of this line; and I must do him the justice to say, that
in all his letters to me, and in all his conversations with me
respecting our western extent, he has invariably declared it to be his
opinion, that we should insist upon the Mississippi as our western
boundary, and that we ought not, by any means, to part with our right
to the free navigation of it.

The Count de Vergennes was very cautious and reserved; but M.
Rayneval, his principal Secretary, who was present, thought we claimed
more than we had a right to.

Having thus clearly discovered the views of Spain, and that they were
utterly inadmissible, I had little hope of our ever agreeing;
especially as the Mississippi was, and ought to be, our _ultimatum_.

It was not long before I had another interview with M. Rayneval. He
asked me whether I had made any progress in my negotiations with the
Count d'Aranda. I told him, that the Count had not yet shown me any
powers from his Court to treat. He expressed surprise that I should
have any difficulties on that head; especially considering the public
as well as private character of that nobleman. I replied, that I was
very sensible of the respectability, both of his public and private
character; but, that neither the one nor the other authorised him to
negotiate treaties with the United States of America; and
consequently, that his Court would be at liberty to disavow all his
proceedings in such business. That it was my duty to adhere to the
forms usual