To talk in a general style of confidence in the French Court, &c. is to use a general language, which may mean almost anything, or almost nothing. To a certain degree, and as far as the treaties and engagements extend, I have as much confidence in the French Court as Congress has, or even as you, Sir, appear to have. But if, by confidence in the French Court is meant an opinion, that the French Office of Foreign Affairs would be advocates with the English for our rights to the fisheries, or to the Mississippi river, or our Western Territory, or advocates to persuade the British Ministers to give up the cause of the refugees, and make Parliamentary provision for them, I own I have no such confidence, and never had. Seeing and hearing what I have seen and heard, I must have been an idiot to have entertained such confidence, I should be more of a Machiavelian, or a Jesuit, than I ever was, or will be, to counterfeit it to you, or to Congress. M. Marbois' letter is to me full proof of the principles of the Count de Vergennes. Why? Because I know, (for it was personally communicated to me upon my passage home, by M. Marbois himself,) the intimacy and confidence there is between these two. And I know further, that letter contains sentiments concerning the fisheries, diametrically opposite to those, which Marbois repeatedly expressed to me upon the passage, viz. "That the Newfoundland fishery was our right, and we ought to maintain it." From whence I conclude, M. Marbois' sentiments have been changed by the instructions of the Minister. To what purpose is it where this letter came from? Is it less genuine, whether it came from Philadelphia, Versailles, or London? What if it came through English hands? Is there less weight, less evidence in it for that? Are the sentiments more just, or more friendly to us for that? M. de Rayneval's correspondence too with Mr Jay. M. de Rayneval is a _Chef de Bureau_. But we must be very ignorant of all Courts not to know that an Under Secretary of State dares not carry on such a correspondence without the knowledge, consent, and orders of the principal. There is another point now in agitation, in which the French will never give us one good word. On the contrary, they will say everything they can think of to persuade the English to deprive us of the trade of their West India Islands. They have already, with their emissaries, been the chief cause of the change of sentiment in London on this head against us. In general they see with pain every appearance of returning real and cordial friendship, such as may be permanent between us and Great Britain. On the contrary, they see with pleasure every seed of contention between us. The tories are an excellent engine of mischief between us, and are, therefore, very precious.