The two mediating Courts are themselves of this opinion, since they do not propose the armistice, but in consequence of the acceptation of the first and second Preliminary Articles. The King thinks, that before they can agree to an armistice, it is necessary that the belligerent parties should have established preliminaries; and it cannot be denied, that the basis, which the high mediators have proposed, may lead to a delay of those preliminaries, which should serve as the pledge and security for the re-establishment of peace, when, in fact, they really afford none.

But when these preliminaries shall be invariably established, it may be of consequence to determine what duration should be given to the suspension of arms. The plan of the mediators proposes one year; but this term appears too short not to be illusory. In fact, it should be observed, that the fire of war being kindled in the four quarters of the world, one part of the year will have revolved before the orders can be received by the respective commanders; so that tranquillity will be established in Europe, while hostilities continue in America and in the Indies. Besides, all the powers remaining armed, the slightest circumstance may occasion a violation of the truce.

The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. XI — Part 42

In fine, it is in vain to flatter ourselves with the hope of concluding a definitive peace in the short space of one year; as, exclusive of the variety of subjects, that must necessarily be discussed, the two mediating Courts are at a great distance from each other; nor is there less between the belligerent powers; and we should deceive ourselves, if we supposed, that all the propositions, which will be made on the one part, and on the other, will not give room for much debate and altercation; or, that they will not, consequently, consume much time.

The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. XI — Part 42

To these considerations we ought to add, that an armistice for one year would be very burdensome, because the powers at war will be obliged to remain in arms, to their manifest loss, as it will be impracticable to disarm, as well from the dispersion of the troops, as from the enormous expense, if, (which is highly probable) it should become necessary to renew hostilities. If, then, the mediators wish sincerely to establish the peace they propose, they should prefer a truce of many years to a simple armistice for one year. This expedient is better adapted to consolidate their work, than a suspension of arms for a short time. But a truce will have the same inconveniences, and be equally dangerous with an armistice, if the belligerent powers remain under arms. Thus it seems necessary to agree at the same time reciprocally to disarm.

The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. XI — Part 42