AMERICA'S DEBT TO FRANCE "THE MOST UNALTERABLE GRATITUDE' BY WILLIAM D. GUTHRIE Member of the Lafayette Anniversary Committee Reprinted by THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE RELIEF OF FRENCH WAR ORPHANS 120 Broadway (Rooms 1435-36) New York City From the New York Sun of Sunday, September 3, 1916 AMERICA'S DEBT TO FRANCE "THE MOST UNALTERABLE GRATITUDE" BY WILLIAM D. GUTHRIE Member of the Lafayette Anniversary Committee* Washington declared that the generosity of Louis XVI to America during the War of the Revolution "must in- spire every citizen of the States with sentiments of the most unalterable gratitude." The remembrance of our debt to France has undoubtedly been dim at times during the course of our history since 1783, but there are many evidences of its full revival in our own day. The heroism and fortitude and the misfortune and self-sacrifice of the French people during the past two years have re- awakened in every section of the United States, East and West, North and South, the old feeling of sympathy, affection and gratitude. Even among our citizens of German birth or descent there is warm sympathy with France, unstinted admiration of her heroic spirit and con- duct, and full appreciation of the historic ties which bind the hearts of Americans to the French people. The celebration of the anniversary of the birth of the Marquis de Lafayette is singularly fitting and appropriate, and should be looked upon as a patriotic duty. Among the generation of Frenchman who helped us in gaining our independence, he will always be the foremost figure as the incarnation of the spirit of pro-American sympathy and enthusiasm that produced the Treaty of Alliance of Feb- ruary 6, 1778, and made possible our ultimate triumph. *Reprinted from the New York Sun of Sunday, September 3, 1916 While on board "La Victoire" on his way to America, he wrote to his wife that he regarded his Coming military service under Washington, what it truly turned out to be, as "a brevet of immortality." He earned immortality by heroism, soldierly zeal, uprightness and loyalty of the highest order, and he won not only the undying admiration and affection of Washington but the universal and im- mutable esteem and affection of the American officers and soldiers with whom he served. In the past we have been charged by some French writers with ingratitude. The most dishonorable and unpardonable of all crimes, individual or national, is ingratitude, and it is to be hoped that at an early day some competent historian will take up and wholly refute this charge. At any rate, 1 pray that the charge may not be made of this generation of Americans. Such an historian might eloquently point out the strange nemesis which has followed the history of the French on our continent. It is a very long and complicated and an extremely sad story, each series of splendid and glorious exploits of Frenchmen being followed by disaster and eclipse. Everywhere on our continent there are evi- dences of heroic services by French explorers, soldiers, priests and scholars everywhere monuments, ideals, tra- ditions and institutions which have sprung from French faith, courage, genius and art; but nowhere has France secured adequate return or recognition ; nowhere has she reaped material rewards from the seed she sowed. Consider French Canada, planted by the sacrifices of the children of France and growing up and prospering under another flag! Such an historian would also be able to explain the causes of the misunderstanding, irritation and friction which unfortunately arose between the governments of the United States and France, and which for more than a cen- tury clouded their relations and chilled the underlying feeling of cordial sympathy and affection between the two peoples. Too often the governments held each other at arm's length, and functionaries and politicians often misinterpreted the feelings of the people and misrepresented the permanent and best interests of their respective countries. The irrita- tion began in 1790 with our first tariff law and the tonnage duty it imposed, which the French believed was aimed at them and which led to retaliatory measures. Then came President Washington's stand for neutrality in 1793, and Genet's intolerable affronts to Americans compelling the request for his recall. The friction became more acute in 1798 by reason of the many high-handed acts of the Directoire. Indeed, we were at one time almost drifting into war, for there were actual hostilities at sea between American and French vessels. Then followed the treat- ment by Congress of the claims of the Frenchman Beau- marchais and his heirs, and our haggling over the account, which was not settled until 1835, thirty-six years after the death of Beaumarchais, and which left to succeeding generations of Americans a reputation among Europeans for parsimony and ingratitude. It shames us to have to confess that Congress, after a delay of more than half a century, forced a settlement of a just claim for war sup- plies furnished by Beaumarchais during the Revolution, on the basis of our paying his heirs only twenty-five cents on the dollar. In fact, we paid one-seventh of the amount, adding interest at three per cent., which forty-two years before Alexander Hamilton had decided was justly due to Beaumarchais. Our treatment of this claim, whatever the excuse and however our national government may have been misled by the jealousy and venom of Arthur Lee, will ever remain a blot on our fame. It is one of those pages in our history which should be expunged even at this late day. The existing coolness was intensified in 18oo-183(i by the rudeness of President Jackson in connection with the French Spoliation Claims, leading to the suspension of diplomatic relations, the United States recalling Livingston from Paris, and France recalling Pageot from Washington, and bringing us very nearly to war. Later came the un- friendliness of Napoleon III during our Civil War, and then his ill-fated campaign in Mexico, which was regarded by us as a direct menace to our interests as well as a deliberate violation of the Monroe Doctrine. During the Spanish- American War of 1898 the affection of Americans was again chilled by the natural sympathy of France with her neigh- bor Spain, although the conduct of the French government was irreproachable. Finally, the purchase by us in 1902 of the property of the bankrupt French Panama Canal Company eliminated the last real danger from conflicting interests, and during the past thirteen years contemporaneous with the service at Washington of America's staunch friend, Ambassador Jusserand Franco-American relations have been on a more satisfactory basis than at any time since 1790. Throughout all the years, however, the American people have never forgotten how much France contributed to the ultimate suc- cess and triumph of the Revolution. It should be remembered that long before the Treaty of Alliance of February 6, 1778, the French had rendered much material assistance to the American cause. Aside from the free gifts of Louis XVI and the personal services and contributions of such men as Lafayette, much of the effective equipment of the Continental Army had come from France. Our own historian Perkins in his admirable "France in the American Revolution," writing of Beau- marchais' contributions, says : "Beaumarchais' ships escaped the perils of the sea and the vigilance of British cruisers. They reached Portsmouth and landed greatly needed supplies in time to be used against Burgoyne. Many a soldier who inarched in that campaign [June- October, 1777] wore shoes on his feet, a coat on his back, and carried a gun on his shoulder, which came from the magazines of Louis XVI, and had been procured and fur- nished by the author of the 'Barbier de Seville.' Several more ships, loaded by Beaumarchais, were allowed to sail from France and in due time reached their destination. By September, 1777, he had shipped munitions of war to the value of five million livres." But not until February of the following year was the formal Treaty of Alliance signed. The preeminent service rendered by France during the American Revolution has never, it seems to me, been adequately recognized by American historians, with the exception of Perkins certainly not in the histories used in our schools perhaps in some instances because of the natural disinclination to concede how near the Americans came to utter failure, and perhaps also because of the equally natural hesitation to give to our allies most of the credit, for success. Yet, surely, no one reading the records of those days as they are now at hand for our perusal can fail to realize that, whithout the soldiers and funds and support of France, the American Revolution would have been crushed. The victory was a joint victory, and not ours alone. The efforts of the Alliance Francaise, the Lafayette Fund for French Soldiers, the Museum of French Art, the France- America Society, the Lafayette Anniversary Committee, and other organizations which have recently sprung into activity, have undoubtedly revived the study of the services rendered to our country by France and brought renewed and fuller appreciation and recognition of our debt to the French people. The celebration generally of Lafayette's birthday must be particularly stimulating. Appropriate and eloquent tributes will be paid to his services, as well as to the services of his French companions in arms, and to the generous pecuniary assistance of King Louis and France. Brandywine, Valley Forge, Monmouth Court House and Yorktown will always furnish a deep source of inspiration to those who write or speak of Lafayette. Crowning all is the love of Lafayette for Washington, whom he idolized ; Lafayette's superb loyalty to his chief; the affection as of father to son with which the grandest and noblest of all Americans regarded the young and ardent and idealistic French aristocrat, the gallant Black Mus- keteer of King Louis' household, who served so bravely and unselfishly by his side. In truth, the name of Lafayette must always be associated in the hearts of Americans with that of Washington. Those who have visited Mount Ver- non will at once recall "Lafayette's room." One of the finest pages of American history was written when Presi- dent Andrew Jackson, on hearing of the death of Lafayette in 1834, ordered, on behalf of the whole American people, "that the same honors be rendered upon this occasion at the different military and naval stations as were observed upon the decease of Washington, the Father of his country, and his contemporary in arms." It is a poetic and beautiful sentiment which has prompted the Alliance Francaise to resolve to lay on September 6th at the base of the statues of Washington and Lafayette in Union Square in the City of New York identical wreaths" of American flowers inter- twined in the colors of the two flags the tricolor of both nations. Notwithstanding the views of some historians, many Americans are convinced of the truth of the following propositions : 1. That the assistance rendered America and the sac- rifices made by Lafayette and his companions in arms during the American Revolution were disinterested and prompted by the almost universal enthusiasm of the French people of all classes of that generation for the American cause. 2. That Louis XVI and his ministers, Turgot, Necker, Vergennes, etc., did not believe that the interests of France would be promoted by a war with England, but were opposed to it, and predicted that its cost would be ruinous. 3. That the signing of the Treaty of Alliance of 1778 and France's active participation in the war were forced upon the King and his ministers by the invincible sym- pathy and constancy of the French people themselves, who were ready and willing to make the necessary sacrifices, and that in entering the war France had no other object than to help us secure our freedom and independence. 4. That the ultimate cost of the war was ruinous to France and vastly greater than most Americans have ever realized. The French King's advisers well knew that the material interests of France required her to remain neutral and profit by the embarrassment of England, and they would never have consented to war if their hands had not been forced by the popularity of the American cause and the ardent sympathy of the French people with our struggle for independence. The latest English historian upon the subject, Sir George Otto Trevelyan, writes in his "American Revolution" that "if France had been content to maintain a pacific attitude throughout the whole period of the American troubles, she would have been rewarded by an immense accession of wealth, and a secure and ex- alted position among the nations' of the world. Those advantages, moreover, would have accrued to her auto- matically and inevitably, without risk or exertion on her part. ..." In order to realize the extent of the "magnanimous policy" of France towards America, as Hamilton expressed it, every American should read the Treaty of Alliance of February 6, 1778, unique in our own history, and the most generous in the annals of the world on the part of a great nation dealing with a weak people. The prime minister of Spain pronounced it "a glaring instance of Quixotism." In it France stipulated for no advantage to herself and no reimbursement. On the contrary, she agreed to make no claim, whatever might be the outcome of the war even if Canada were reconquered. There were, of course, all kinds of intrigues and collateral movements, such as the pressure from the military party and from Frederick of Prussia and the natural longing for revenge on England. Nevertheless, the controlling influence was the general demand of the French people, a demand fundamentally unselfish and which ultimately be- came irresistible. Lafayette more than any other indi- vidual brought about this demand. And we should also remember that the French Queen, Marie Antoinette, was enthusiastically pro-American. I hesitate to stir up the old and buried controversies as to the total of loans and gifts to America from Louis XVI and various individual Frenchmen. I doubt whether even the direct loans were ever entirely repaid ; certainly the debt to Beaumarchais was never fully discharged, and none of the personal gifts was ever returned, so far as I now recall, except in the case of Lafayette. We must accept the statement of Pickering, our Secretary of State in 1797, who in a despatch to the American Minister, at Paris declared that "all the loans and supplies received from France in the American War, amounting nearly to 53,000,000 livres," had been paid in 1795, that is, twelve years after the Treaty of Peace. There still remains the far greater item, never repaid, of the actual cost to the royal treasury of the participation of France in the war. It was this cost, as matter of fact, which bankrupted the government of King Louis and was one of the principal causes of the French Revolution seven years later. Nor did the King of France plunge into the Franco-American Alliance and the consequent war with England in ignorance of its cost and danger. Turgot had pointed out to him that the first cannon shot in any such war would mean the bankruptcy of France. As it turned out, the salvation of America involved the utter ruin of ihe French monarchy. There is, however, much uncertainty as to the actual figures of the cost to France of participation in the war. The French archives show a direct expenditure of 1,507, 500,000 livres, but these figures do not include pay- ments made in and after the year 1783, which must have been very large. Professor Marion of the College of France has expressed the opinion that the total expenditures were fully -2,000.000,000 livres. Much information will be found in his Historic Financiere de la France depuis 1715 and in Gomel's Les Causes Financieres de la Revolution Francaise. Fiske in his "Critical Period" puts the expenditure of France at 1.400.000.000 francs. Trevelyan states the following in a note to his "American Revolution" : "It was calculated that, between the years 1778 and 1783, the war with Eng- land cost the French Treasury forty-eight million pounds sterling. It was the main cause of those financial difficulties which led immediately up to the Revolution of 1789." This would be 'equivalent to 1,200,000,000 livres (francs), or 240,000,000 dollars, at a time when the purchasing power of money was very much greater than in the twentieth century. Indeed, it is probably not an exaggeration to say that the purchasing power of gold was then nearly three times what it is in our day. 10 In an introduction to Perkins' "France in the American Revolution," Ambassador Jusserand wrote in 1911 as fol- lows : "Ruinous it was indeed, costing the French treasury seven hundred and seventy-two millions of dollars ; but public opinion remained faithful to the struggling States. The people groaned under the weight of taxation, but never grumbled at the expense of such a cause. Peace came, France kept her word ; she did not try to recover any of her possessions on the American continent ; she made a pro-American peace, not an anti-English one. Public opinion again was fully satisfied ; what it wanted had been secured ; there were no protests against the moderation shown towards the adversary; the joy was universal. Years after the war the same pro-American feelings which had appar- ently taken deep root still prevailed, as shown by the French National Assembly's adjourning at the news of the death of Franklin ; the French army going into mourning at the death of Washington, and the glowing eulogies of the new republic still sent home by its French visitors." M. Jusserand in a note refers to Perkins' work as his authority for the figure "seven hundred and seventy-two millions of dollars," but he did not independently verify Perkins' figures in view of the latter's reputation for accuracy. Perkins, however, did not say whether it was dollars or livres. His work was published after his death. Since corresponding with his widow, it now seems to me that Mr. Perkins may have meant livres and not dollars, although livres would represent a figure much below the total cost as shown by the records now available. In a note found among Mr. Perkins' papers is the following: "Chas. Gomel, Les Derniers Controleurs (pp. 36-3?) : A pamphlet appearing in July, 1782, calculated that the amount which American Independence had cost down to that time was T?2 millipns and that commercial relations had not become more important." When this pamphlet 11 was published, the expenses of the year 1782, part of those of 1781, and, of course, those which accrued in 1783, were not fully known and are not included in the estimate. In considering the inevitable expense assumed by France, it must be borne in mind that the burden was not confined to sending fleets and armies to America, the West Indies and the Floridas, but necessitated a very costly naval war with the greatest maritime power of history, and necessitated also the protection of French ports and dependencies by fleets and armies, and campaigns not only in America but also in Europe, Africa and Asia. The great naval victory of Suffern was won in Asia. It is, therefore, quite possible, if not probable, that the total cost of the war to France during the five years of its continuance was fully $772,- 000,000, although the official records, as preserved but not by any means complete, do not support so high a figure. But even if the total was only 1,200,000,000, or 1,500,- 000,000 or 2,000,000,000 livres (that is, approximately 240,000,000, or 300,000,000, or 400,000,000 dollars), and not 772,000,000 dollars, the amount was still stupendous for those days and for a country having a population esti- mated at 22,000,000. This prodigal outpouring of treasure brought France practically no advantage or benefit; in fact, less than no 'gain, except the withdrawal of the Eng- lish Commissioner from Dunkirk. The amount expended in our cause has certainly never been repaid by us in any way or form; and whilst this expenditure for our benefit could never be regarded strictly as a debt in the commercial or business sense, it surely was and still is a moral obligation for generous and unselfish service rendered to us in our dire need at the most critical period in our history, an obligation which, in the noble words of Washington, must always call for "the most unalterable gratitude" unforgettable, imperishable, eternal on the part of every citizen of the United States. That feeling of gratitude should now prompt Americans of all classes to see to it that the bereaved and orphaned and maimed and destitute of the heroic French people shall not suffer or be allowed to want whilst we are enjoying the abundance of the blessed country which French valor and sacrifice did so much to render free and independent. The celebration of the anniversary of Lafayette's birth on September 6th should be availed of as a fitting occasion to show the French people and the world that history shall not inscribe on its rolls that the Americans of the present generation failed in the gratitude to which Washington pledged Americans for all time and that France in her affliction did not appeal to us in vain. Better and nobler still will it be if no appeal to us shall be necessary, but if, inspired by the lofty spirit and example of disinterested friendship and self-sacrifice of Lafayette and his country- men, we Americans rush unasked to the succor of the French. We should be proud and rejoice in the privilege of at last being able to return in some measure the great service so generously, heroically and unselfishly rendered to us a century and a third ago when we were poor, weak and friendless. Every American man, woman and child who contributes to the aid and relief of the French maimed, orphaned and destitute in these days of appalling calamity and devastating war truly helps to repay part of the debt which we have long owed to a great, generous and noble people and never discharged. It would, indeed, be writing a sublime and imperishable record in our own history if the present generation of Americans out of their plenty should now raise and apply to the relief of the French people in their suffering a fund commensurate with that which France so generously expended for us in our distress and need in the days of Washington and Lafayette. THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE RELIEF OF FRENCH WAR ORPHANS (INCORPORATED 1916) HONORARY VICE-PRESIDENTS THE HONORABLE EDWARD DOUGLASS WHITE Chief Justice of the United States His EMINENCE JOHN CARDINAL FARLEY Archbishop of New York THE RIGHT REVEREND DAVID H. GREEK Bishop of New York THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. SHARP Ambassador to the French Republic THE HONORABLE JOSEPH H. CHOATE Former Ambassador to Great Britain DIRECTORS GEORGE F. BAKER, JR. JAMES M. BECK S. READING BERTRON COKNELIUS X. BLISS, JR. JAMES BYRNE THOMAS L,. CHADBOURNE, JR. THOMAS COCHKAN R. FULTON CUTTING CHARLES STEWART DAVISON EUGENE DELANO DA N I FL GUGGEN HEIM WILLIAM D. GUTHRIE THE HONORABLE ROBERT BACON Former Ambassador to the French Republic THE HONORABLE MYRON T. HERRICK Former Ambassador to the French Republic DR. XICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER President of Columbia University DR. JOHN GRIER HIBBEN President of Princeton University DR. JOHN H. FINLEY Commissioner of Education of the State of New York OF THE SOCIETY PERCY A. ROCKEFELLER SYLVANUS L. SCHOONMAKER JOHN W. SIMPSON CHARLES STEELE JAMES STILLMAN LEWIS A. STIMSON WILLARD D. STRAIGHT HENRY M. TILFORD EDWARD TUCK FRANK A. VANDERLIP GEORGE W. WICKERSHAM ALBERT H. WIGGIN ALEXANDER J. HEMPHILL ADRIAN ISELIN GEORGE GRANT MASON CHARLES T. MATHEWS AMBROSE MONELL J. PIERPONT MORGAN VICTOR MORAWETZ DWIGHT W. MORROW OTIS A. MYGATT SEWAKD PROSSER OFFICERS WILLIAM D. GUTHRIE, President JAMES STILLMAN, Vice-President J. PIERPONT MORGAN, Vice-President AMBROSE MONELL, Vice-President THOMAS COCHRAN, Treasurer REGINALD H. GILES, Asst. Treasurer JOSEPH BUCKLIN BISHOP, General Manager SXOWDEN A. FAHNESTOCK, Secretary REGIS H. POST, Executive Secretary GENERAL OFFICES ROOMS 1435-1436. 12O BROADWAY NEW YORK CITY U I LS IV n l\ '