Following is an article I wrote about an ancestor. A version of it was published in Carologue, Spring 2016, the quarterly journal of the South Carolina Historical Society.
Envoy Designate - Ralph Izard, Commissioner to Tuscany
by Robert E. Gribbin
In July 1777 the Continental
Congress named Ralph (pronounced Rafe) Izard of South Carolina Commissioner to
the Court of Tuscany. Izard who was then
in France, accepted the diplomatic assignment with alacrity, “The Department
they have allocated to me -- is Tuscany. I shall go to Florence, as soon as I
understand that anybody from America -- in a public character -- will be
admitted there.”[i] He
was correct to be concerned, because ultimately the Grand Duke refused to
receive an American diplomat. Thus Izard’s formal diplomatic career was short
lived. But how did this all come about?
Born in 1741 Ralph Izard was
the scion of a prominent Charleston family.
His father died young. At an early age Ralph was sent to England for
schooling. He studied at Hackney and then at Christ College, Cambridge. Upon
returning to America he divided his time between the family plantations near
Charleston and New York city where he met and in 1767 married Alice De Lancey,
herself from a well known family. The Izards departed for England in 1771 and
settled in London. There they made many
friends and contacts. Izard’s intellectual bent and passion for politics,
especially as American colonial issues evolved, ensured that he became
acquainted with many important personages of the realm.
In 1774 Ralph and Alice
toured the continent for several months.
While in Rome they posed for a portrait by John Singleton Copley, a
painting renown as one of his best. (The
painting was purchased from the artist’s widow in 1834 by the Izards’ grandson Charles
Manigault. It descended to his son Dr. Gabriel Manigault and was sold by his
estate in 1903 to the Boston Museum of Fine Art, where it resides today.)[ii]
Although he never operated in
any official capacity in London, Izard became known as an articulate proponent
of American causes. He found that most
British decision makers, as well as the public at large, were quite
contemptuous of American pretensions seeing colonials as bumbling backwater
cowards. How dare they challenge the
wisdom of Parliament, the decisions of the king or ultimately the military power
of the empire?
In his letters home, often to
friends who were delegates to the Continental Congress, Izard reported on
atmospherics in England. Regarding a
1775 Continental Congress petition to the King, Izard observed, “Your Petition
to the King is just published, and I admire it much. It was extremely
well-judged, to have drawn it in such moderate terms. Do not, however, imagine
that argument will affect him, or that justice will operate on his mind. The
people of America must, by this time be pretty well acquainted with his
character. ..I wrote to you (earlier) that the people of England were much more
against America than they are at present; that is they were much more ready to
adopt the Ministers’ measures ...that the Americans were cowards and would not
fight ; consequently they expected an easy triumph... the opinion of people now
(after fighting at Lexington and Concord) begins to change; they affect to feel
for the effusion of blood and the distresses of their countrymen. Humanity is a
pretence: fear, and interest, act more powerfully on their minds." [iii]
Izard debated and entreated
with intellectuals, Parliamentarians, and ministers of the crown. He attended debates in Parliament and was
asked to testify before the House of Lords.
He pressed throughout for common sense, for understanding of the
American position that if unresolved Britain’s unfair taxation and trade
policies would lead to further conflict. Initially Izard believed that
differences could be sorted out short of separation and supported the idea of
Britain’s sending a negotiating team to America. However as that proposal jelled in London, it
became clear that such a team would not be empowered to negotiate with the
Continental Congress, but would merely offer amnesty to certain individuals. Izard’s support evaporated. He passed his views on to Prime Minister Lord
North, and later commented, “God knows whether I may have done any good.
Ministers, generally, think themselves too wise to be instructed. I have, however, done my duty.” [iv]
Izard continued to provide
insight into the British mindset and the swirling rumors that passed for news
pending the arrival of dispatches from the far away conflict. “This place contains many politicians - some
for, and some against us.“ In further
critiquing British ineptness, he added, “It is fortunate for America that the
governing powers of this country have had as much folly as wickedness in their
conduct.” [v]
In the spring of 1776, Izard
took on the task of agitating against the use of German mercenaries. He pointed out to his interlocutors that
employment of Hessians would “infallibly prove a bill of divorce between Great
Britain and America.” [vi]
As fodder for thought he wondered if Germans would actually fight or would they
desert and join their countrymen already resident in America?
Following the invasion of
Canada, the death of General Montgomery and adoption of the Declaration of
Independence in July 1776, it became abundantly evident that there was to be no
accommodation between the warring parties. Attention in Britain turned to
tracking the fortunes of the various British generals in the campaign. Information and misinformation swirled
around. During this period Izard and
other expatriate Americans and their British friends and sympathizers came
under increased scrutiny by authorities.
Izard and several of his correspondents, most notably John Lloyd, an
American who monitored shipping in France, began to use code names and friends’
addresses. Izard noted that long delayed
or missing letters were probably the fault of the postal inspectors.
As the conflict continued,
each party adopted measures designed to restrict expatriates. The Continental Congress and South Carolina
adopted prohibitions against trading with the enemy, including “any sum of
money, or merchandise, whatsoever.” [vii]
Zealots also proclaimed that any American who did not return and fight was not
a patriot. Izard stung with this
criticism as he believed he had done his utmost for the revolution. Even though Izard had tightened his budget
considerably, including a move to cheaper lodgings, his family of six, plus
three servants required upkeep. Izard
had not received remittances from his estate for several years and with the new
restrictions - Britain also imposed prohibitions on the receiving end - he knew
the Izards had to move on. Ralph wanted
to return to America, but British men-of-war ruled the seas and blockaded
(often ineffectively) America’s east coast.
One way around was via French bottoms to the Caribbean and thence onward
to South Carolina, but no ships on that long voyage were suitable for little
girls of station -- and Mrs. Izard was pregnant. Izard petitioned the king for a waiver so his
family could properly travel, but was summarily denied.[viii]
Consequently in the summer of 1777, the family relocated to Paris.
It was in Paris where Izard
got the news of his appointment as Commissioner to the Court of Tuscany. This was good news. It provided him with
funds so relieved financial pressures, but most importantly it underlined to
him and to erstwhile critics that he was indeed a key part of the American
effort. Izard associated himself with
the American commissioners resident in Paris - Benjamin Franklin, Silas Deane and
Arthur Lee - in preparation for his assignment in Florence.
In 1777 Italy was not yet
united. It was a hodgepodge of small principalities: the Kingdom of Naples in
the south, Papal States centered on Rome, Tuscany around Florence, Genoa and
Venice on the coasts, plus smaller entities scattered about the north. Tuscany had flourished under Medici rule
since the fourteenth century, but their line expired in 1737. The Hapsburgs, the Austrian imperial family,
took over. Leonard was the Grand Duke by the time of the American
Revolution. He was a rather forward
leaning ruler who instituted social, bureaucratic and judicial reforms
including orphanages, a juvenile justice system and abolition of the death
penalty. However, despite its past as a
center or art and ideas, Tuscany was barely stumbling into the modern era. Its levels of manufacturing and commerce were
not competitive with nations north of the Alps. Government revenues were small.
Why then would the colonies
desire diplomatic ties? Essentially,
America sought recognition for its struggle, for its right to exist. It sought
allies in the war effort including the provision of supplies, open ports, and
financial backing. Benjamin Franklin and
Silas Deane were tasked to sway France to the cause. Arthur Lee worked on
Spain, the Netherlands, Prussia and even Austria. Clearly those were the leading nations of
Europe, but casting a wider net would include Italy, and of those states
Tuscany was key. That job was given to Izard.
Great Britain also played the
game of alliances within Europe. Although It was the most powerful nation of
the region, it was not part of the continent.
France was Britain’s chief opponent and the two nations had been sparing
since (from the French perspective ) the unsatisfactory resolution of the Seven
Years War in 1763. The American
rebellion provided the opportunity to intensify competition. Profiting from European rivalries to
America’s advantage, i.e. winning French support, was precisely the task
allocated to the commissioners in Paris.
Should France rally to America’s cause, then it would be easier for
other European capitals to join in. Izard assessed this possibility, “The
powers of Europe seem to be waiting for the determination of the Court of
Versailles, respecting the acknowledgement of the Independence of America. As
soon as she sets the example, it will I believe be followed by all those, whose
interest makes them wish for a diminution of the power of England.” [ix] For its part, using the clout of commerce and sea power, Britain pressed hard
on continental governments in Berlin, the Hague, Madrid, Vienna and Florence to
stand aloof from American entreaties.
Izard knew from the beginning
that obtaining Tuscan support would be difficult. Indeed, he knew that even
being received at the court of the Grand Duke would be problematic. Yet he was optimistic, if rather unsure of
specifics. In October 1777 he asked, “Congress will be pleased to honor me with
their instructions on this point; and in the mean time, I shall endeavor to
procure every information.” He added, “If I should be so fortunate as to
succeed in procuring money -- I should be glad to know how it should be
disposed of -- whether in the purchase of such articles as are wanted or
remitted in specie.”[x] He
was instructed to seek a loan of one million pounds at a rate of 6%.
During the next several
months Izard assiduously cultivated Niccoli, the Tuscan minister resident in
Paris. Perhaps naively he interpreted
the minister’s friendliness and courtliness as support. In December 1777 Izard reported to the Committee of Foreign Affairs
“He (Niccoli) is a man of honor and, of considerable abilities, and extremely
friendly to our country. I proposed to
him that I should immediately set out for Italy, and desired his opinion and
advice. He dissuaded me from executing my intentions for the present.” Izard reported that Niccoli had gone to
Florence to plead America’s case and, “I expect letters very soon from
Florence, which will regulate my conduct. Everything in my power has been done
to execute the trust that has been reposed in me by Congress.”[xi]
Izard got no satisfaction from Niccoli.
In March of 1778 the three
Paris commissioners were received in the French court as representatives of a
sovereign and independent state. Izard
hoped this would lead Tuscany to open its door. Alas, he lamented, “I am sorry
to inform you that a little longer delay is become absolute necessary. I am
assured from Florence of the favorable dispositions of the grand duke towards
us, and I had no doubt but immediately after the acknowledgment of our
independence here the example would have been followed in Tuscany.” As an afterword, given the Tuscan stonewall,
he suggested that he would be available for a commission to the Kingdom of
Naples, if the Congress so desired.[xii]
Later in the summer, Izard
assessed his predicament, “the situation of affairs has not allowed me yet to
go into Italy. My own inclinations, if they alone had been consulted, would
have carried me there long ago.” He went
on to place the blame for Tuscan recalcitrance on the court in Vienna and its
objective to keep both France and Britain at bay. Izard went on to express hope that his
presence in Paris was not “altogether useless; and I hope the papers I have
transmitted to you may not be thought unworthy the attention of Congress.” [xiii]
Without doubt, upon his
arrival in Paris in September 1777 Izard had plunged into the diplomatic
business at hand. However, it was not
easy as the three commissioners were already embroiled in internal feuding;
matters that would only get worse as Izard entered the scene. “Upon my arrival here I found a great
disunion among the commissioners, the two eldest constantly taking part against
the youngest...I immediately endeavored to accommodate these differences, but
found it impossible.”[xiv]
Issues that began as professional disputes quickly became personal, poisoning
relationships all around. Before long
Izard viewed Franklin as arrogant, duplicitous, conniving, secretive and
unethical. Izard told the great man so to his face, but more
often - since Franklin refused to see him -- resorted to spelling complaints
out in letters. He accused Franklin of aspiring, like the pope, to
“infallibility”. Franklin finally wrote
back pledging apologies and vaguely promising to be more inclusive, and to do
better[xv],
but Franklin never changed his practices.
Izard’s bill of particulars
included Franklin’s refusal to share his negotiating stance regarding the
treaty of alliance and commerce being prepared with the French; particularly
clauses regarding the exemption of duties on molasses. Since the treaty was to
be the model for similar agreements with other European states, including
Tuscany, Izard felt he was entitled to be in the information loop. Izard believed that the clauses in question
could be construed to warrant all sorts of unfair exemptions. Secondly, Izard
objected to language that Franklin accepted that was much less explicit in
renouncing French territorial claims in North America. He judged that in these matters Franklin had
little understanding of true American interests. (The Continental Congress
ultimately shared Izard’s views as it modified the treaty accordingly.) Having been cut out of the negotiation
process, Izard was incensed when Franklin leaked to London cronies details on
the signing of the treaty; an allegation that Franklin vehemently denied. Furthermore, Franklin hid from Izard and Lee
the travel of French minister Gerard, accompanied by Deane, to America. Franklin did not share communications or intelligence from the Congress with Izard, nor would he
advise when dispatches were being sent home.
Izard also took issue with Franklin’s nepotism, especially Franklin’s
determination to name his nephew, as America’s commercial agent in Europe.
Izard’s concerns, which he relayed to the
Committee, piled upon other allegations against Franklin and Deane by Arthur
Lee and others accusing them of mismanagement, land speculation, bad judgment
and financial shenanigans. Izard summed
up his view, “France might long ago have been induced to stand forth in our
favor if America had had proper representatives at this court.” [xvi] They
were charged with obtaining kick-backs on military supplies, profiting from the
sale of British shipping taken by American privateers, and general
mismanagement of funds entrusted to them by the Congress. After the fact it was proved that Franklin’s
operation was infiltrated by British spies and that he was dilatory in
promoting American interests. Deane was
subsequently recalled by the Congress, asked to account for his misdeeds, which
he never did satisfactorily. He did not return to Paris. Franklin also was
asked for his accounts and for explanations of the allegations against
him. He never produced his accounts and
was able to successfully duck efforts to question him officially about his
Parisian sojourn.[xvii]
In 1778 Ralph Izard made
several more overtures to the court of the Grand Duke. His Tuscan contact Niccoli was adamant that
neither a visit nor a loan from Tuscany were possible, “I see so many
difficulties in this design that I dare not flatter myself with hopes.” Instead
Niccoli suggested that Genoa might be a possible source for a loan.[xviii] Izard jumped on the advice. With the blessing
of Franklin (apparently they were doing business at arms length), Izard
approached the Count de Vergennes, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs,
asking for French support in an effort to garner a loan from Genoa. The count
demurred and nothing further transpired. [xix]
In one final communication to
Niccoli Izard chastised him for Italy’s inaction. “All Europe appears to me to
be interested in the success of our cause, and Italy will certainly receive no
inconsiderable share of the benefits resulting from the establishment of the
independence of the United States. It is, therefore, not a little to be
wondered at that she should refuse to stir a finger towards the accomplishment
of that event.”[xx]
In a September 12, 1778
letter to Henry Laurens, President of the Continental Congress, Izard summed up
his tenure as commissioner. “I have lamented exceedingly that the situation of
affairs has not permitted my going into Italy. Perhaps my having been here
(Paris), and the observations that I have sent regarding the treaties may not
prove useless. Should my countrymen
think so, it will give me great satisfaction. “[xxi]
Finally, accepting the
futility of his assignment to Tuscany, in early 1779 Izard petitioned the
Congress for permission to return to America. By summer he was granted that
relief.
In June 1780 the Continental
Congress terminated Izard’s appointment as commissioner and resolved that it
“entertain a proper sense of Mr. Izard’s zeal in the service of his country,
and return him thanks for his attention to the Public Affairs and willingness
to promote the Public good.” [xxii]
Thus ended Ralph Izard’s
diplomatic career. He went on to be a delegate to the Third Continental
Congress, and served as senator from South Carolina in the first constitutional
government. He retired to his
plantation, “The Elms” in 1795. He was incapacitated by a stroke shortly
thereafter and died in 1804 at the age of 63.
Robert E. Gribbin is Ralph and Alice Izard’s fifth
great grandson via their daughter Margaret, Charles Izard Manigault, Louis
Manigault, Josephine Jenkins, Emma Gribbin and
Emmet Gribbin. Gribbin followed
Izard’s footsteps into diplomatic service, where he had a forty year career
culminating as U.S. Ambassador to the Central African Republic and to
Rwanda.
[i]
Letter from Izard to a friend, Paris September 26, 1777. Correspondence of Mr.
Ralph Izard, Ann Izard Deas, ed. Charles
and Francis Company, New York, 1844
[ii] A
photograph of the painting graces the cover of In Pursuit of Refinement,
Charlestonians Abroad, Gibbes Museum of Art, University of South Carolina
Press, 1999.
[iii]
Letter from Izard to Thomas Lynch, Weymouth, September 8, 1775. Correspondence
of Mr. Ralph Izard, Ann Izard Deas, ed. Charles and Francis Company, New York
1844.
[iv]
Letter from Izard to a friend in Bath, London, October 27, 1775, Ibid.
[v]
Letter from Izard to John Watts, Bath, December 13, 1775. Ibid.
[vi]
Letter from Izard to John De Lancey, London March 10, 1776. Ibid
[vii]
Resolution of the General Assembly of South Carolina 11 October, 1777, quoted
in letter to Izard from John Lloyd, Nantes, February 14, 1777. Ibid.
[viii]
Letter to Izard from Lord George Germaine, Whitehall, March 28, 1777. Ibid
[ix]
Letter from Izard to Robert Morris, Paris, October 6, 1777. Ibid
[x]
Letter from Izard to Robert Morris, Paris, October 6, 1777. Ibid
[xi]
Letter from Izard to Committee of
Foreign Affairs, Paris, December 18, 1777. The Revolutionary Diplomatic
Correspondence of the United States, Volume 2.
Library of Congress
[xii] Letter from Izard to Henry Laurens, Paris,
April 1, 1778. Ibid
[xiii]
Letter from Izard to Henry Laurens, Paris, July 25, 1778. Ibid
[xiv]
Letter from Izard to Henry Laurens, Paris, February 16, 1778. Ibid
[xv]
Letter from Franklin to Izard, Paris, January 29, 1778. Ibid
[xvi]
Letter to Henry Laurens, Paris, April 1, 1778. Ibid
[xvii] A detailed account of the various allegations
against Franklin and Deane is found in Code Number 72 Ben Franklin: Patriot or
Spy, by Cecil B. Currey. Prentice Hall, New York, 1972
[xviii]
Letter from Niccoli to Izard, Florence, July 28, 1778. The Revolutionary
Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States, Volume 2. Library of Congress
[xix]
Letter from Franklin, Lee and Adams to Izard, Paris, August 25, 1778. Ibid
[xx]
Letter from Izard to Niccoli, Paris, September 1, 1778. Ibid
[xxi]
Letter to Laurens, Paris, September 12, 1778. Ibid
[xxii]
Letters of Delegates to Congress: Volume 12 February 1, 1779 - May 31, 1779,
Richard Henry Lee’s Proposed Resolution. Library of Congress
