DOCUMENTS Which accompanied the mcffage cf the Prefirtent of the United States to both Houses of Congrtfs, January 19, 1797, Letter to Mr. P'mcknej, Minifler Plenipotentiary qf the United States to the French Republic. ' Continued. 7. " Notwithstanding the faith ef treaties, it gave " an asylum to these fame EngliOi, who alter having J " insulted her flag, pillaged her citizcns, eame alfoto " brave the American people in their ports, and to ! "t-kei flation whence to cruise, 011 a favourable " ciportumty, against the French." This like mod other of Mr. Adet's charges, is bat the renewal of the complaints of his predeeeilor, Air. Fau&het, andthe vindication of the government, will ' appear in the answer and communication* from/tlie 1 Secretary of State to tha,t minilter, in the years 1794 j and 179 ;. The cases particularly noticed were those of the Britifli frigates Terpsichore anfl her prize la Montagne ; and of tlie.Britilh Ihip Argonaut and her prize L'Efpera»ce. The Thetis and Hussar Britifli fri gates with their French prizes la Prevoyance and la Kaifon are also mentioned, but without any facls or cir o.iiiftances as fubjeCU of which of course is precluded. That of the Terpsichore ami her prize ap pears to have been the firft cafe of the kind in which the Executive of the United States and those of the particular states were called te interfere ; and there fore, it will not be thought extraardinary if the Exec utive of Virginia was unprepared with arrangements to give infyant effeiSt to the flipulation of the 17th article of the trtatyof 1778, forbidding,an afy|um to the arm ed veflels of the enemies of France and their prizes. What delay took place seems to have been the result of accident; certainly not of design. And by letters from this department the Executives were garneftly prefled to take the neceflary order for a prompt execution, in future, of this part of the treaty. But why ihould the French ministers complain with fu-.h energy, that a -Britifli fhipof war, withhef prize, remained in one of our ports during perhaps twenty or five and twenty days ; when against the earnest rejjuefts and orders of the 1 Executive, the French privateers, armed in o»r ports in violation of the laws, Wg continued to keep on our coast and enter our harbours, thence 011 favorable opportunities, to ciuife against their en-mies? The Columbia, or Carmagpole, continued such her unlawful afls for more than a year. After all the zealous remonflrances of Mr.'Fauehet, row renewed by Mr. Adet, about the capture of the French corvette L'Efperance, by the Briti/h (hip Argo naut, who went with her prize into Lynn Haven Bay, what were the fads 1 The Governor of Virginia went personally to the French Consul at Norfolk fer infor mation concerning this declared violation of the treaty —but " received none which appeared to juflify the " uneafmefs eccafioned by that event, he charging no " circumjiance at improper in the captors but rather " fcemed to consider the introduction of the prisoners " made 1 on that occasion, so soon into a place where "the exchange would be effefled, as an alleviation or ■" the misfortunfc of lofi!!g the veflel." The Captain of the French corvette himft If wasdefircl to give evi dence in the cafe ; he promised hut failed to" appear. He was called upon the fccond time to give informa tion, but discovered an unwillingness to do it, observ ing that he had given the Consul a circumstantial ac count of the tranfadfion oa his arrival, The governor having heard that a refpcftable pilot by the name of Butler was acquainied with the circumstances of this affair, ne directed hisdepofition to be taken: it was taken and imported that Admiral Murray himfelf purchased the prize L'lfperance, and manned and fit ted her in Lynn Haven Bay for a cruise. But Butler's deposition was afterwards taken on the part of the Britifli, in which he contradided all the material fa<fts recited in the former deposition ; for which he ac counted by faying that he could neither write nor read, and that there had been inserted in his firft deposition wJiat he had never said. Under these circumstances it was desirable to o'.itain further information. This was furnifhed by the Britilh miaiflerin the extr-i<Sl of a let ter from Admiral Murray, which bears every mark of candour and humanity, and of refpeft for the United States. It is as follows. " The#French (loop of war L'Efperance was « brought into Lynn Haven Bay on the nth of «< Jannary (a few days after my arrival there) by f captain Ball, who had captured her ij leagues «« from the shore, the weather being very pnpef <« tuoas, a lieutenant with a fufficient miml er of «« men only to navigate her (not being half the «« complement the French had in her) w te sent •« on board from the Resolution and Argonaut ; '• and so soon as the weather permitted these ships " to supply her with water and provisions, I sent | " her to sea, that I might give nu umbrage to the < » American states. An additional reason for ! «< bringing L'Efperance into Lynn Haven Bay ' « was out of humanity to the French prifuiurs, I " whem, having had a long voyage. I sent te 1 " Norfolk as soon as would permit : ' " otherwise they must have been kept prisoners on ' «■ board the whole wintei.and sent to Halifax in ' » the Spring j nor was flic equipped or aimed then , ' «< in any manner whatever ; nor did the lieutenant ' «• receive any cemmiffion foe her whllft in Lynn ' »« Haven Bay; and when at sea only an achtig * 1 ' order to command her, which is customary and '« abiVutely necessary in all captures ; otherwise if ■ <« retcX-en by the enemy, he might be conlidcred " as a pirate." Bth. " It might be said that it applauded their " [tha EogiiftiJ audacity ; all fubmifiion to their " will, it allowed the French colonies to be de " clared in a Hate of blockade, and its citizens in. *< ttrdiSed the right of trading with thcin." If among the multitude of such complaints as M r - Adet has exhibited, any ene could excite fur ptife, this chatge is calculated to r, • duce it. Here a formal charge is made again!} the government of the Uni'-ed States, that it did not control, in ano ther Independent nation, the right of judging of its own affairs—that it did not forbid and efft'anally prevent the officers of a foreign power, the Britifli admirals and commanders, in the Weft-Indies, de elaiing certain Frenth colonies to be in a state of blockade! —" But the official legalization of a " a proclamation had been palled up under eur " eyes, prohibiting pur commerce with the French : n " colonies, and fafpendirg us alone the law of c " nations! The anfoer to Mr. Fauche , frum the secretary of state, reprcfents this matter differently. « The Britifli consul general at Philadelphia, by a a publication of the loth of April 1795, g av e no- d ticfc that he had received t.ffi, ial communications a that the ifiands of Guadalaupe, Marigalente and Defirade, were by proclamaiian issued by hit Bii tannic m:jclly's general and vice-admiral command ing in the Weft Indies, declaied to be in an aflual state of blockade; and that neutral (sot singly P Amer'uan) vefTcT-., were prohibited' frcirr attemptjng to enter any ports or places in those iflanda with supplies of any ki;id. under the penalty of being I' dealt with conformably to exilling trea " ties, and as warranted by the eftabhlhed laws of r " nations." And while exitting treatie* (0111 treaty with Great Britain had no eperative cxift- ( ifter.ee till fix months after the consul's advertise . mcnt) and the lavvs of nations were avowed to be . j the rules by which the property of neutrals was in > : this safe to be adjudged, had they reason t# torn -1 ; plain ? If any neutral veflels attempted to enter any - of those ports which were not in reality in a state ef blockade, and yet were captured, could they be condemned ? Certainly not by the rules which the I Britilh prescribed to themselves " treaties and th« c 1 " laws of nations ' But if the Britifli commanders 4 proclaimed untruths, and issued arbitiary orders far - capturisg neutral veflels ; and their cruisers aud 1 courts of admirality executed them arbitrarily ; 1 could the American government pteyent them ? a We coulJ demand of the Britilh government satis . fatlion for injuries to eur own citizens consequent s on such orders : and if any such were fultained, the - arrangements for making reparation are now in h execution. But admitting that any ports in the e French colonies were in fadl blockaded ; who should notify it to neutral nations accuftcmcd to trade j with those ports ? Certainly the officers of that e power whose fleets and armies formed the blockade: - and in the United States no mode of giving univer 1. sal notice could be so effectual as a publication in f hand-bills and newspapers. | gth. "It eluded all the advances made by the " republic for renewing the treaties of commerce j " upon a more farorable footing to both nations; j " it axcufed itfelf on the most frivolous pretexts ; r " whilst it anticipated Great-Britain, by soliciting ; " a treaty in which prostituting its neutrality, it 2 " facrificed France to her enemies; or rather loek -5 " ing upon her as obliterated from the map of the £ " world; it forgot the services the had rendered it, . " and threwafide the duty of gratitude, as if in 1 " gia'ittide were a government duty." Or the advances referred to, the firft were made , by Mr. Genet. These yau will fee in tiie printed between him and Mr. Jeffcrfon. Mr. Genet's letter is dated the 23d.ofMay, 1793, in which he informed the government that he was authorized to propofc a treaty on a " liberal and " fraternal bafts." Mr. Jefferfon's letter to Mr. Morris, our minister at Paris, dated the 23d of Augutt, 1793, affigna the reason for postponing the negociation. 4-" The senate (fays he) being " then in recess, and not to meet again till the " fall, I appiifed Mr. Genet that the participation " in matters of treaty, given by the constitution " to that branch of our government, would of " courft delay any dejimlivc answer to his friendly " prnpofition. *Ai he was fenCble of this eircum " stance, the matter has been understood ta lie " over till the meeting of the senate." Congress were not to meet until December; consequently there was no neceflity of precipitating the business. But with the bell dispositions to form new commei- 1 cial arrangementsmutually moreoeneiidalthan those ofthetreaty of 1778, the unwarrantable conduct of Mr. Genet, from the momenthelanded at Charleston until the date of his letter on the fubjeft of the negociatian, was fufficient to excite caution in the American government. He had there violated the fevereignty of the United States. " By autho " rizingthe fitting and aiming of veffcls in that " port, enlisting msn, citizens and ■ '' g' v '»g them commissions to cruize and cftmmit " hoftilitie4.on nations at peace with and with whom we had extensive commercial connec tions. These privateers were taking and bring " ing prizes into our ports, and the cenfuls of " France were assuming to hold courts of admi " rnityon them, to try, condemn and authorize " their as legal prize." Nevertheless, the go"- vernment really drfirous of forming a new and more advantageous commercial treaty tvith France, inftruAed the minitterof the United States at Pa ris to nianifeft the fame to the executive of acid to suggest for this purpose that ti>c. powers of I Mr. Genet be renewed to his fucceffer. It is true • that in his letter, dated the 30th of September, | Mr. Genet had renewed the propofi ion of nego tiating a eommertoal treaty ; but how was it pof fihle for the government to undertake a negocia tion with that minister after The correspondence " -which had taken place between the executive aRd him" (a correlpondence on his part replete with insults " and the ails which he had thought " proper to do and to countenance in oppefttion to " the laws of the {'land?" After the government had infttuficd our minister at Paris to desire Mr. Genet's recal; aid to declare to the government of France " The neceflity of their having a re , " prefentative heredifpofed to refpeft the laws and " authority of the country, an 3 to do the best far " their inteteft which theie would permit :" " and " when it was only-an anxious regard for those " interests, and a desire that they might not fuf " fer, which induced the executive in the mean " time to receive his communications in writing, " and to admit the continuance of his fuiiilions so " long as they (hould br restrained within the li " mits oftltelaw,as theretofore announced to him, " or fliould be of the tenor usually observed to. " wards independent nations by the representative " of a friendly power residing with them !'* Un der such circumstances what answer could the exe cutive return to Mr. Genet more proper, and more marked with attention to Fiance, than that his let ter " would be considered' with all the refpeft and " interest which il# otjefl necessarily requirefl i" It is probable that the powers to negociate a commercial treaty were not renewed to Mr. Ge- 1 net's fucceffur ; certainly they were not communt- 1 cated to our government. ' * 1 We now come to the frefh overtures of a com mercial negociation made by Mr. Adet. 1 he firft notices of them arc found in memoran da of fa<3* dated the 27th and 29th of June 179J, i and fubferibed by the secretary of state. By these 1 1 * State papers, p. 15. ■ ' ; f Stats papers, p. 68. t Letter to Mr. Morris, August tfith, 1793, Stat* pa pers, p. s g. j S Stat: papers, p. 68, it appears, that or the 13th of June Mr, Adet ar lived at Philadelphia. On the 15th Mr. Fattfhet introduced-him to the fecietary of state; —on the 16th Mr. Adet informed the fectetary that he fhauld the next day fend him some aft of the French government, relative to commerce : but it was not sent. On the 2zd of June Mr. Adet was remind ed of the pramifed communication. He said it was copying, and gave reason to suppose that he Ihould forwaid it on that day : but on that day nothing was received. On the 29th of June 1795 Mr. Adet had an interview with the secretary of state : He observed that he brought with him the commercial decrees which Mr. Genet had formerly propounded to our government, and was inttrudted to negociatu a trea ty of commerce upon their basis. He was asked whether he had any documents to communicate. He replied that he would fend them that day. He said lie had to communicate some inquietudes re -1 fpt sting the late treaty between the United States and Great-Britain. He obtCVved that it was un derstood, that the United States had disabled them selves from entering into a new commercial triaty 1 upon a liberal scale with France. The secretary answered that he had determined before he came, ta ask the peimiffion of the President to communi cate to him a copy of the treaty; and then he might fay in what part he supposed that any im ! propriety with refpedl to France exilled. The President having afterwards affentcd, the secretary on the fame day delivered to Mr. Adet a printed copy of the treaty ou which he promised to com municate his remarks. These remarks dated June 30th, and the Secre tary's answer dated July 6th, refuting the objeiSti ons they contained, I have already noticed. The subsequent preceedings will {how either that those ohjeftions did not make any strong impressions on Mr. Adet's mind, or that the Secretaiy's answer had removed them. On the 30th June 1795, Mr. Adet communica ted a part of his inftrudions relative to " a Hew " commercial treaty and a new confalar Conventi " on to be entered into between Fiance and the " United States." The inltrudtions imported that he was only to " prepare with the American go " vernment the means and arrangements" of these treaties, and then to communicate them to the committee of Public Safety. The object of the new treaty was declared to be "to found the com " mercial relatione of the two republics upon fti " pulations more reciprocally advantageous, and " more clearly worded than that of 1778, and the " obj.*dt of the Consular Convention to secure the " execu'ion of the commercial treaty." The secretary of state answered on the ift of Ju ly exprtfllng the readiness of the government to open the proposed negotiation ; and requested a communication of the dates of the decrees to which Mr. Adet's inftru&ian referred. On the Bth of July 1795, Mr. Adet replied to the secretary of state " that he neither knew nor " pofTefled any other decree relative to the new ne " gstiat'on to be opened between France and the " United States than that of the * sth of Febrn "aT '793' communicated to us by Citizen Ge " net." Tiiis letter of the Bth was received the I 2th accompanied by a note of the latter date apo logizing for the delay on account of fickfcefs. On I the I 2th the secretary of state had written to him, prejjing him on the fubjtift of the new negotiation. On the 161U of July I 795, the secretary of state again wrote to Mr. Adet ; and after informing him that as he was not clothed with any very for mal authority upon this fubjeft, the President of the United States had thought proper to place him (the Secretary, of State) upon the fame & no other footing,—-the secretary proposed that the negotia tion should be conducted in wiiting, unless when either thought it expedient to have an interview OVI any particular difficulty. And then assuring Mr. Adet that no unnecttfiiy procrastination (hould be found in the secretary of state, further proposed, that Mr. Adet should state ift the parts of the tteaty which he wished to be abolilhed : id, those parts which he wished to be c«>rre&edand 3d, any additions which seemed to him defirallr : But ex piefled the readiness of the secretary to adopt any other better mode of conducing the negotiation, if fudh occurted to Mr. Adet. On the 20th of July 1795, Mr. Adet mention. ing his sickness which for fifteen days had obliged him to abstain from business, replied on the fubjeft of the negotiation in these words <« In a few days " I ftiall have the honor of feeing you, and of ta " king the neeeflaip meafurcs in order to com " nience the business relative to the'digefting of " the new treaty and new Consular Convention." From this detail, it must I conceivc be no easy talk to find aay facts by which Mr. Adet's chatVe can be supported. What ".ie afFedb ta call " frivo lous pretexts'' are fubflantial reasons ; and in res pedl to his own advances to treat, the condufl of our government manifefts an eagerness to enter on the negotiation : certainly you will discover in it no disposition to elude or to procrastinate. You will be pleased to observe, fir, that the let ter from the secretary of state to Mr. Adet, ex plaining the manner in which they should proceed in the negotiation is dated the 16th of July and that Mr. Adet's answer agreeing shortly to meet ihe secretary, in order to take the necefTary mea futes for commencing the business is dated the 20th of July ; yet in his note of November 15th 1796, alter having charged the government of the Uni ted States. '• With eluding all advances made by " the republic for renewing the treaties or cora " merce and excusing itfelf on the molt frivolous " pretexts," after acknowledging thgt the Prefi dei t had authorized the secretary of. state te nego tiate, and that the latter had explained the manner of preceeding, he asks " But at what time ? When " the ratification ef the tteaty concluded between .Lord Grenville and Mr. Jay no longer permitted " the to pursue that negotiation." I am forty fir, in this place to call your attention to dates. The Britilh treaty was not ratified until the 14th of August 1795, that is about a month after the plan ef negotiating with Mr. Adet had * Mr Adet h?.i since corrected this date, the decree intended being dated February 19,1793. • 1 his is already publifhcd witi the State paper* ef taat year, page 15. been propofed.tn birr by flic fr letaryof flair, and twenty-five days'aitei lie bati i,p proceed u» it. And if that ratification finally induced him to abandon the idea of negotiating anew treaty he. tween France and ihe United Stales, it did nci in. flantly produce this determination. He doul.rhfs perceived that his own obje&ions to the British tieaty were obviated by the answer from the fecre- (late,and when he acknowledged the receipt of it, be had given up the right of judging of the treaty, whether it was good or bad I fhaU (fays he, in his letter of July 20th 1795) " transmit it (the «i fecrerary's answer) to the French government " together with my observations and the treaty. " In fucb important circumftanees, it is exclufivdy " the ijroviuce of my government to judge ; and " I csnnot permit myfelf to decide at all." And then immediately adds—y In" a few days [ fhs 1 " have the honor of feeing you, and of taking the " necelTary measures in order to commence the bu " finefi relative to the diverting of the new tieaty " and new Consular Convention." The British treaty then did not obftr\i6t the negotiation, the principles of which might have been agreed on, and the articles drawn into form to be fubmitud to the refpeftixe,governments : for that was allnhfe refpe£tive negotiators were authorized to do. Will the minilteir of the French republic never cease to Reproach us with " ingratitude >" If, in. deed, " France wrought" a 6 well i "guaranteed " the independence of the United States," as Mr. Adet asserts, "at a time when (he n»i»h', as the " price of that very indeptndence, have granted " them lefj liberal condi'ions," our oldigario, arc greater than wehavehithertoimagined. Eu'it is time that these claims to our giatitude were iivclligated, and iheir extent ascertained. We have citizens yet alive who were actors and witnesses of the declara tion of our independence, and of the efforts to main, tain it, with their effefls, prior to our treaty with France. But laying no (tiefsdn our own recollec. tions or consciousness, we will icfort to the telti meny of France herfelf. France, by her minister the marquis deNoaillej, having, in the declaration of the 1 jth of March 1778, which I have already quoted, announ edto the court of London, the treaty ofy filendfhip and commerce (he had formed with the United States ; and that to maintain the commerce of bis fii! jefls with them, which was the objett of that tieaty, his mod Chriflfan majedy had " takep.eventual mea " fures in concert with the United States of North " America that court publittjed a jullificative memorial to vindicate to the war (he had determined to wage agamft France. In the ob servations of the eoutt of France on this Brit memorial, we find the following declarations on the part of Fiance, " * While the amkaflador of Eng " land put the king's pp.tience ta the ftipngeft " proots, and while the court of London was con. " ftaatly repeating denials ofjuftiee to his majffty's " fabjefls, at the fame time.that the British officers " continued to desolate them on the sea, an eytnt " came to pals in America, which eflcntially " changed the face of things in that quarter of the " world. This event was the defeat of the army " under general Burgoyne. The news of this un " expe&ed disaster, which arrived in Europe, in " November 1777,aftonilhed the British ministers, " and mud have the more sensibly affe&ed them, " as it overthrew the plan they had laid for the re '■ duSion of the colonies." The observations then fugged that this great event induced, in the British cabinet, the idea of conciliation with America, and of a coalition against the crown of France, in revenge for the fnppofed aid rendered, by her, to the United States ; and to gratify " their mod dear and conltant wi(h—that of humbling " fit was natural for the British miniltry unable " to fuldue her colonies, to seek ta be reconciled to " them, and to engage them to espouse her re " fentment. They so much the more flat " ter themselves that they should fticcced herein, " as the proceedings of France with regard to " American privateers, and especially the dijlike the " king had et ail times mar.ifcjled to any engagement " with the Cangrfs, mud have given difgult and " dtfTstisfadtion to their deputies, and indue tjjem, " notwithstanding thrir well 'known averfloo, ta " seek even in England, the fafety of country " when they failed to find it in France." f " The king, well informed of the plan of the " court of London, and of the preparations which " *"e"re the confequenee of it, perceived that no " mote time was to be loft, if he would prevent " the designs of his enemies: His majesty deter mined, therefore, to take into consideration, at " length, the overtures of the Cong-refs." § " The Cominiflioners [from the United StatesJ " propoftd to the King a Treaty of Amity and Com " mer6e, and an alliance offenfive and defenfive, by " which his Majesty ihoukl engage not only to ackriow. •' ledge (imply and purely the Independence of the Uni " ted Stitei, but also to guaranty and defend it by " force of arms. Ihe King ordered an answer to be " given that he could indeed look upon the Indepen. " dence of the United States m exifling ; but that it " did not belong to him to acknowledge it, becauft he " had not any right to judge 6f it; neithtr rotild " guaranty it, as he did not intend to enter into ivarfor ' " its support. His majesty in tonfequence refufed an " offenfive alliance, and confined himfelf to th: Treaty ""f -Amity and Commerce. But as it was more than <£ probable that the eowrt of London HAD formed a de. " Jign of attacking France His majesty thought" he '' ought to enter into an alliance with the United States 11 E-ventual and" purely DefenfS've. The llipulatjons " contained in this second treaty are in substance, thit; " // France fJmuld be attaacked by the Court of Lo'n. " don before the cefifation of hostilities b'etwecn that ' Court and its Colonies, that the King and the United States should mutually aflift cach othtr tin® " common enemy 1 That the King (bould arante* " the Independence and sovereignty of the United States, and that he flaould not lay down hisarnsi tiU " it Ihould be acknowledged by Great Britain." Thus it is maßifefted that the United State., were to . ' tO , their own battles unUfs Great BrU tarn fhovid choose to increase the number of her enemies by attacking France in which cr e it weulci be truly the "ltercft of France as of the United States -to make it i common cause. £To be continued.]] * Obs. f. 60. , 1 + Obs. p. <54. i Obs. p. 66. j" Obs. p. 6;,
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers