There was an interesting OP-ED piece in Monday’s New York Times called “Socializing as a Political Tool,” in which the author Jon Meacham suggests that President Obama would be wise to emulate Thomas Jefferson’s habit of using his dinner table as a means of “making the rougher edges of politics smooth.” I think this is excellent advice.

The article put me in mind of the dinner parties given by Sarah Jay and her husband John in New York City when he was serving as secretary for foreign affairs for the American government under the Articles of Confederation. Sarah aided him in his diplomatic duties by inviting the foremost politicians and influential people to dinner. During the years 1787 and 1788, she kept a small sheaf of papers on which she wrote the names of their guests in her fine handwriting. While it is not known what dishes were served, one guest, Abigail “Nabby” Adams Smith, wrote her mother that “dinner was à la Française, and exhibited more of European taste than I expected to find.” years politically and, no doubt, the Jays asked people of different points of view to talk to one another over a good dinner, an eighteenth century version of networking. Here is Sarah’s list of invitees for February 12 (a Tuesday), 1788.

The President of Congress ………………….. Sir John Temple
Count de Moustier …………………………….. Lady Do
marchioness …………………………………….. Mr. Van Berkel
mr. de la Foresst ……………………………….. Miss Do
mrs. D[itt]o ………………………………………. Chancellors
mr. Otto ………………………………………….. Col. Wadsworth
mr. Gardoqui ……………………………………. Chaumont
mr. St. John ……………………………………… DuPont
miss Do …………………………………………… Captn. Frigate.

“The Invitations to Supper & Dinner 1787 & 1788” is at the John Jay Homestead State Historic Site, Katonah, New York. See also Louise V. North, “Sarah Jay’s Invitations to Dinner/Supper, 1787-1788,” The Hudson River Valley Review, 21, no. 2 (Spring 2005): 68-79. This dinner party was to welcome the new French minister, the Marquis Eléonore-François-Elie de Moustier, accompanied by his sister-in-law (and mistress), Anne Flore Millet, Marquise de Bréhan. Other guests were Louis-Guillaume Otto; J. Hector St. Jean de Crèvecoeur and his daughter, América-Francès; the British consul Sir John Temple and his wife, Elizabeth Bowdoin; the Dutch minister Pieter van Berckel and his daughter, Jacoba; the Spanish minister Don Diego de Gardoqui; the President of Congress Cyrus Griffin, and Jeremiah Wadsworth, member of Congress.

Sarah Jay’s list is on page 227 of In the Words of Women. Information about the guests, per above, is included in Note 37 on page 362.

The young lawyer Royall Tyler had become acquainted with “Nabby” Adams, the daughter of Abigail and John, when he was a boarder in the household of Mary Cranch, Abigail’s sister. The two fell in love but Nabby’s parents had reservations about Tyler. Abigail whisked Nabby off to Europe with her in the spring of 1784 to join John, and the relationship did not survive. Nabby married Colonel William Stephens Smith in London in 1786.

In September of that year, Mary Cranch had some interesting news to convey to her sister regarding Tyler who had moved from the Cranch household to that of Joseph and Elizabeth Hunt Palmer in Braintree, Massachusetts. She was not a little surprised at the consequence of that move.

We live in an age of discovery. One of our acquaintance has discover’d that a full grown, fine child may be produc’d in less than five months as well as in nine, provided the mother should meet with a small fright a few hours before its Birth. You may laugh but it is true. The Ladys Husband is so well satisfied of it that he does not seem to have the least suspicion of its being otherways, but how can it be? for he left this part of the country the beginning of september last, and did not return till the Sixth of April, and his wife brought him this fine Girl the first day of the present Month. Now the only difficulty Seems to be, whether it is the product of a year, or twenty weeks. She affirms it is the Latter, but the learned in the obstretick Art Say that it is not possible. The child is perfectly large and Strong. I have seen it my sister: it was better than a week old tis true, but a finer Baby I never Saw. It was the largest she ever had her Mother says. I thought So myself, but I could not say it. It was a matter of So much Speculatin that I was determin’d to see it. I went with trembling Steps, and could not tell whether I should have courage enough to see it till I had Knock’d at the Door. I was ask’d to walk up, by, and was follow’d by her Husband. The Lady was seting by the side of the Bed suckling her Infant and not far from her—with one sliper off, and one foot just step’d into the other. I had not seen him since last May. He look’d, I cannot tell you how. He did not rise from his seat, perhaps he could not. I spoke to him and he answer’d me, but hobble’d off as quick as he could without saying any more to me. There appear’d the most perfect harmony between all three. She was making a cap and observ’d that She had nothing ready to put her child in as she did not expect to want them so Soon. I made no reply—I could not. I make no remarks. Your own mind will furnish you with sufficient matter for Sorrow and joy, and any other sensations, or I am mistaken.
Adieu yours affectionately

Mary Cranch was clearly implying that Elizabeth Palmer had borne a child fathered by Tyler while her husband, Joseph Pearse Palmer, was away from Boston in 1786. While Abigail was saddened by the behavior of Tyler, whom she had in fact rather liked, it is interesting to note that she placed the blame for the incident entirely on the woman.

In this case it may be difficult to determine which was the Seducer, and I feel more inclined to fix it upon the female than the paramour, at any rate She is more Guilty, in proportion as her obligations to her Husband her children her family & the Religion of which she is a professer are all Scandalized by her and she has sacrificed her Honour her tranquility & her virtue.

Tyler not only bedded Elizabeth Palmer but married her daughter Mary. The pair moved to Vermont and had eleven children. Tyler became a noted jurist and author. His play, The Contrast, was the first American work to be professionally produced and commercially successful.

Cranch’s letter and Abigail’s response are on pages 192-93 of In the Words of Women. The portrait of Nabby by Mather Brown (1785) can be seen at the Adams National Historic Park.

During the early years of their marriage (1774), John and Sarah Jay were much apart, Sarah remaining at her parents’ home in Elizabethtown, New Jersey, while John shuttled back and forth to Philadelphia. where he served as a delegate from New York to two Continental Congresses, and later, as president of the Second Continental Congress. Letters were important to the newlyweds, John writing that he had “twenty little Things to say” to her. “But the Fate of Letters is so very precarious that I think it prudent to write with a Kind of Reserve, which however disagreeable, I must be content to submit to.”

When war came, John was sent to Spain to secure support for the Revolution. Sarah accompanied him, and the pair were together in Europe for more than four years, moving from Madrid to Paris, where John helped negotiate the treaty that ended the War. In 1784, John, Sarah, and two daughters born abroad returned to New York rejoining their son Peter whom they had left in the care of Sarah’s parents. Now minister for foreign affairs for the government established by the Articles of Confederation, John often had to travel to Philadelphia where Congress was based. Once again letters became the lifeline between husband and wife.

Elizabeth Town 28 Nov 1784Accept my dr. Mr. Jay a thousand thanks for yr. two charming letters. Were you not so tenderly attentive how much less happy shd. I be! I am glad, since Congress have not yet made a House, that you proceeded on to Philadelphia, & likewise that you’ve had some very fine weather to facilitate seeing yr. friends. I think that place must seem nearly as naturel to you as N. York, since it is from society that most places receive their stamp, & there we had a very agreeable circle of acquaintances. …

The inst. I told Peter that you wd. be happy to receive a line from him, he ran for his pens & without hesitation began his letter; & I was very much pleased to observe that he wrote without study or difficulty as if happy in an opportunity to evince his obedience.

This evening the post will arrive, & I flatter myself that in the mail there is a little messenger of Love to gladden my heart & keep alive that softener of absence, all-chearing hope. Have you recd. my letter of the 21st. inst.? If you have, I suppose in yr. next I shall be favor’d with directions about Peter’s schooling. Don’t you think it wd. be well to write to Mr. Barclay to inquire whether he ever heard of the safe arrival of our China at Havre de Grace & if he has, to whom it was consigned. Perhaps if we know in whose care it was, Mr. Swanick might put you in a way to get it to Philadelphia. . . .

Our little ones grow charmingly & are daily more interesting. The more I observe Peter, the more striking I find the resemblance he bears to his Grandfather. Mamma & family desire to be affectionately remembred to you: please to present my Compts. where you know my esteem is already placed. My Love is all your own.
Farewell & happiness attend you.Sa. JayOnly think of the naughty Post! Not a line: the next will be more favorable.

The letter is from Selected Letters of John Jay and Sarah Livingston Jay, pages 32 and 167-68. Portrait thought to be by Robert Edge Pine, 1770s, copy at the New York Public Library.

Mercenaries from the small states of what is now Germany were hired by the British to supplement their forces. They too had camp followers. Madame Fredericka von Riedesel, with their three children, joined her husband who was a general in Burgoyne’s army. With her were also a maid, a cook, and an old servant of the family. As fighting intensified prior to the British surrender at Saratoga, she witnessed firsthand the casualties of war. In her journal she described what happened on October 7, 1777.

I had just sat down with my husband at his quarters to breakfast. General Fraser, and … Generals Burgoyne and Phillips … were to have dined with me on that same day. …

About three o’clock in the afternoon, in place of the guests who were to have dined with me, they brought in to me, upon a litter, poor General Fraser … mortally wounded. Our dining table, which was already spread, was taken away, and in its place they fixed up a bed for the general. I sat in the corner of the room trembling and quaking. The noises grew constantly louder. … The general said to the surgeon, “Do not conceal any thing from me. “Must I die?” The ball had gone through his bowels … Unfortunately … the general had eaten a hearty breakfast, by reason of which the intestines were distended, and the ball … had not gone … between the intestines, but through them. I heard him often, amidst his groans, exclaim,”O, fatal ambition! Poor General Burgoyne! My poor wife!” Prayers were read to him. He then sent a message to General Burgoyne, begging that he would have him buried the following day at six o”clock in the evening on the top of a hill, which was a sort of redoubt. …

Early in the morning … he expired. After they had washed the corpse, they wrapped it in a sheet, and laid it on a bedstead. We then came into the room, and had this sad sight before us the whole day. … We learned that General Burgoyne intended to fulfill the last wish of General Fraser. … Precisely at six o’clock the corpse was brought out, and we saw the entire body of generals with their retinues on the hill assisting at the obsequies. The English chaplain, Mr. Brudenel, performed the funeral services. The canonballs flew continually around and over the party.
The American general Gates, afterward said, that if he had known that it was a burial he would not have allowed any firing in that direction. … The order had gone forth that the army should break up after the burial, and the horses were already harnessed to our calaches. … we drove off at eight o’clock in the evening.

Narrative from In the Words of Women pages 82-83. Illustrations: View of the West Bank of the Hudson by Thomas Anbury, 1789 and Burial of General Fraser after John Graham.

Thousands of women traveled with the armies during the Revolution: American, British, and Hessian. Called “camp followers,” they served as cooks, laundresses, seamstresses, and nurses. Some were wives—of officers or common soldiers. Others offered themselves as sexual partners, but most were women who hoped to obtain something to eat and earn a few pennies. In fact, in recognition of the useful services they provided many were “officially attached” and entitled to rations. With General John Burgoyne’s army moving south from Canada in 1777, there were between 1,000 and 2,000 women and children. Elizabeth Munro Fisher, wife of a Loyalist, described camp life near Saratoga.

We were deprived of all comforts of life, and did not dare to kindle fire for fear we should be observed from the other side of the river [where the Americans were], and they might fire on us, which they did several times. Being about the middle of October, we suffered cold and hunger; many a day I had nothing but a piece of raw salt pork, a biscuit, and a drink of water. … One day, wearied of living in this manner, I told some of the soldier’s wives if they would join me, I would find out a way to get some provisions cooked—seven of them joined me. I spoke to some of the soldiers that were invalid, and told them if they would make up a fire back in the wood, and get a large kettle hung on, we would fill it with provision, and cook it. … They consented to do it for a guinea; they went to work and built up a fire, hung on a kettle, and put water in it, then we women put in what we pleased; we soon filled it with a variety; it began to boil; we all kept our distance from the fire for fear of the cannon that were placed on the other side of the river on a high hill; they soon discovered our fire, and saluted us with a cannon ball; it struck and broke our kettle to pieces, and sent the provision in the air. We met with no hurt only losing our intended feast. …