F,»m tbe COLUMBIAN C£NTJA£L.
FEDERALIST.— No. 111.
The OBJECTIONS to the TREATY refuted.
Mr. Russell,
The 7th reason is " because the commerce we
kaye hitherto enjoyed in India, in cpmmou with o
ther nations, it so reilrifted, that in Future it will
be of little or no substantial benefit to our citizens,"
In thCfirft place.it onght to be remarked, tha:
accordingt® the lights,claimed by all nations, having
colonies, to which all other nations have acceded, we
have no potitive right to Roto any of the colonies
of the Britilh'crown ; and that unless fueh right is
obtained by treaty* the Briti(l) may inhabit our
trading, or even entering the ports of their colonial
pnifelfiort, without affording any just cause of com
plaint. The right, of confining the trade of colo
nies to the parent country, and excluding all stran
gers from any participation therein, is as old. and
as universal as any claimed by the present commer
cial nations of t.nrope.
By our treaty Witt France, his most christian
najefty agrees, to cbntmue to the o. the
Jnited States, tKe free ports which have be«n, an;!
ire open to the French iflands,of America : in all of
which free ports the faii fubjecls (hall enjoy the
ame agreeable to the regulations which relate to
them.
An arret of the king of France, on the 30th
August 1784, declares the ftee ports in the islands
,t America, and the regulations they (hall be fub
ieft to—the size of vessels —the articles they may
tarry in, and bring away. The ve.Tcls are to be 60
tons at the kaft, and the merchandizes, wood, fclt
beef, Mh, rice, maize-, vegetables, (kins, furs, rosin,
pitch and tar—Salt beef and fifh are fubjeded to a
duty of thiee livres per quintal, bedde the general
duties on the cargo : which three livres, are
ed into a bounty on the French fiftiery. Tlie ar
ticles, permitted to be taken away in return, were
limited to taffia and mulafTes—and goods imported
there from France. Commissioners were to be ap
pointed to reside in these free ports, to fee that the
regulations were ftridly complied with ; and the
more tbcurely to guard the trade, the merchants and
captains of vessels, residing is those ports,, were au
thorized to chufe from among themfelves,,commif
fioners who should alfcft in watching the foreign ves
sels and denouncing negligeticies. By out treaty
with the United Netherlands, it is cxprefsly agreed,
«' that the United States, their fubje£U, and inhab
itants, (hall leave to those of their High Mightines
ses, the peaceaWc enjoyment of their rights in the
countries, islands and seas in the Eall and Well In
dies, without any hindrance or molellation," It
appears then, that the right of excluding foreign
ers from a direct trade to their colonies and confin
ing the trade of the colonics to the mother country
isnot only praftifed among ail the European nations,
but has been expressly recognized by the United
States of America. Hence it clearly follows, that
every relaxation of the colonial system must be con
lidered as a favour to that nation, in whole behalf it
is 10 relaxed. T!>i« used to be our reasoning on the
ariet of the king of Francc, admitting us, in com
mon with other' foreigners, iu'.o the Weft-ladies,
however limited in the tonnage of the veflcls and
the cargoes permitted to be imported, and exported.
This is considered to be the permanent state of
thin >9. In times of great scarcity in the islands,
thev".have been free f->r the import®!urn of certain
other articles. In times of war, the French haTe
generally opened their .colonies to all foreigners, be
cause it is more im, ortaat to have their fcamen on
board 1 heir (hip* of war, than be the sole suppliers,
and carriers for their colonies. During the lait war,
in the year 1779, the French opened the trade of
their Weft India Islands to neutral nations : the
corifeq-uenees were alarming to the merchants of
Fra.nec, and representations were made against the
mtafare from Bhurd taux, Nantz and other large
towns ; and immediately on%uing the preliminary
articles of peace, this permission to neutral nations,
was withdrawn.
The, lams was done at the Havanrnh. While
Louiißurg and Canada of Fiance, they
were not allowed a direst trade to the Weil Indies.
And such has been the jealousy of European nations
refpedting theif colonies, that France once palled a
decree, ordering the governors of their W-elt India
colonies to seize and eonfifcate (hips and cargoes-,
coming within a league of the (hotes-of their Isl
ands. .
The right we erjrty, without treaty, -ot going
into the Britifn Eatt'ludies is merely permiflive in
tftat natron. The trade has been but of few years,
!L or d ShefftsM in his argument again# admitting
•the Americans into theWcft India Iflonds, remarks,
" That the Americans have 110 more pretentions
to go to our Weft India iflands,'than to our Eall
Jmita Settlements,-yet the latter would be iho't-a
very extraorduiaiy Hep.'
The fentimeiits of tbis writer have been much a
clopted by the liritifh government relative to their
Xf'ek Indies, iince the revolution, and may there
fore give us fume idea what that nation thinks of
our riaht to a commerce with their, Ea(t India set
tlements. ' If Great Britain should rei'ufe to admit
our veflels into ha'Eall India poffclfions, it would
be no jtift cause ot complaint nn the part of the U
opened the trad* of some of their colonies, during
the last war, to all neutral nations } and immediately
on return of peace, that trade was again confined to
the. parent countries. Neither the United States,
nor ar.y other nation, who had enjoyed the bennfits
of this free trade, pretended to claim a continuance,
b-caufe tt had been permitted to them, or to deny
t,he authority of these two nations to prohibit them
cnterin"- their colonial pofleffionS, much less to
make complaint at being denied a privilege, before
indulged to them.
Hiving then no rights of commerce in the British
Eaft-lodiea, which that nation may not take from us,
fi.ler what arc the reftriitions irnpofod on the trade by
treaty, and whether it will not continue to be a feb-j
ftantial benefit to our citizens, notwitliflanding these j
reftr'nflions. .
By the 1 jth .article, there is an expreU Uipulation on
the part of the Britilli king, that we fiia!! freely carry
oa a trade "with the Britifli East-Indies, paying a ton-
. *|
nage duty on «nr vefTeU, no higher (
pay in American ports, and no hig
importation and exportatioa of their
be payable on the lame articles, wh
ported iu British vefiels, the artiel
carried to the United States and th
both parties whenever it lhall We foj
adopt such regulations as (hall be nei
observance of this stipulation.
Two' questions ariie on this part oft]
supposing tlie trade to be abfoluteli
carrying of merchandize of any fori
prohibited, to the tfritifii Ealt-Indiesj
ing from those fcttlenients, diredlly
States, all articles not absolutely prohl
Is 3 trade thus limited, ?
We must either procure tha produce of that
country, direfllv from the Ealt-Indi«, making pay
ment there, in fucli articles as (hall bj convenient for
us to carry, and suited to their markit; or we inuft
them in Europe, and pay for thei} there.
Taking for granted then, that there is no pront on
the carg», carried to the Eaft-lndies, { tlwugh fume
times very great profits ape made on the outward car
go, ) let it be considered that in the £fft cafe, we pro
cure all our East-India goods, at tJwrfirft cost, from
the hands of the producer. In t>e latter, they are
pure ha ltd "with all the additional ihargci of freight to
Europe, commHTlons, and profit* of every man con
cerned 111 procuring them in India, fending them to
Europe, and felling them there ; and when it is remem
bered that the trade from Europe is exdufively veiled
in companies which pay an immense sum for this mo
nopoly, and is at vast expense for the support of mili
tary and civil establishments, to secure their trade and
p'offeffions, and the orderly management of their con
cerns ; all which must be charged on the goods, be
fore they are fold in Europe ; it cannot be doubled
that the direst trade to and from the Britifli Eafl-In
dies, will continue to be substantially beneficial. In
deed it is a well authenticated fail, that East-India
goods are twenty-five per cent, cheaper in the United
States than in Europe; and if imported from Europe
kyus, the charge must be made of at lead ten percent
more, which would arise for tommifiions and ex
change. It is clear then that we (hould procure our
Eall-India goods from thirty to forty per centum
cheaper under this article, than without permission to
go to thf East-Indies, which it secures to us ; tht dif
ference maybe fairly called a substantial benefit to our
citizens. This is the cafe in times of peace —ir, time
;>f war, the difference will be greater, the«charge in
Europe, being greatly accumulated by war, freight,
and insurance.
The other question thatarifes on this article, is, arc
we, that is to fay, both nations, conftraincd to-keep
thii trade thus limited ? Has not Britain the power to
grant, and the United States the capacity to exeVcifc
the right of carrying East India (foods to Europe, if
both parties consent ? When two make a comra£t, in
which no other is interested ; may they not di(To're it,
if both please ? If dillbive it, may they not grant to
each other larger and greater benefits tliaii are ftipu'a
ted in the contract ? Does stipulating to grant a right,
by an individual or a nation, preclude a power to ex
tend that right, or grant or permit the exercise of
others ? Is there any moral or natural* incapacity in
the United States, to receive an extension of the com
merce, granted in that article ? Is there any in
Bfitain to grant ? The answer anuft be clear, and will
readily Ihew, that having certain rights by express
ftipulatiori, cannol interfere with the grant or permis
sion of others.
Has any other power a right then to prohibit Bri
tain from permitting, and America from cxercifiag
other rights ? It is not ptetended there is any.
If the treaty is ratified, anil Great-Britain shall chufe
to demand of us to make i'uch regulations as will in
sure to them, that the vefTels of the United States (hall
carry the goods laden in the East-Indies, to the United
States, and there unlade them, we stall be bound to
do it. But at this is a stipulation c*i our part, and for
her benefit, if (he chooles to wave it, and clear out
our veflels fi'om her ports for Europe, they will have a
right to go there. The Cuftom-houf« clearance would
be an express consent on her part, and our right could
not be contested by any one.
A mistake of the treaty, has induced some pec*
pie to fupppfe there are more reftric\ions on this
trade, than it fairly warranted by the article.
It has been supposed, that the coafling trade of
India, bow enjoyed is henceforth absolutely inter
dicted. The words are, " it is alio undet Itood, that
the permiffio* granted by this article is not to ex
tend toa'.low the veiTels of the United States tocar
ry on any pait of the coasting ti adeof the B.ritilh ter
ritories." The legal natural import of these words
is, By virtue of this article, no right ftjall be claim
ed to the coasting trade of the British territoiies in
India. The words ate intended to prevent a right
by implication; which the generality of the terms,
exprefiing our authority to trade there, might be
conllruid to include. It certainly takes away no
right drawn fromotherclaufes., If aright t»the coall
ing tJade of India, can be founded on other prin
ciples, or derived from other sources ; this article
certainly does not infringe that right: For the words
are, " that the permifiion granted by this article, is
not to extend, &c. &c. We are fvtrely then in pof
fefiion of all the rights we weie entitled to with
out the treaty.
Great Britain, unless the treaty i? ra.ificd, may"
reftrift us from the coasting trade of her territories
in India, and also from all trade there, even that
of direct importation and exportation. If the trea
ty is ratified, {he will possess, netwithftanding that,
the right (he had before, and no greater, to pro
hibit us from that eoafting trade ; but fne will not
pofTefs a right to refufe us the direct trade of impor
tation and exportation from hei East India settle
ments. Before the treaty is ratifi«d, (he may per
mit to our vefTels the coasting trade—after is is ra
tified (he may permit the fame.
By our treaty with the United Netherlands we
recognized 111 express term# their colonial rights in
the Ealt and Weft Indies. No body ever doubted
they were free to permit and we to exercise theright
of trading to her colonies, and accordingly they
have permitted to us, and we hrfte e«joyed a very
lucrative, though reftridled trade to some of them,
especially to Surinam and Demarara.
The Bth re;ifon offered by the town againfl rati
fying the treaty is, " becauf'e in every llipwlalion
tefpefting our intercourfs with the colonial pofleffi
ons of Great Britain, the whole commerce of the
United States, in such intercourse, was colonized in
return."
The writer of these remarks is at a loss to com
prehend the preeife meaning of the town in this rea
son. Does it mean that if we are permitted to
trade with the Colon!*! of Great Britain, we can
trade with those colonies only, or that we -cannot
export the articles we obtain these, from the Uni
ted States to any other country.
Some nations have fitrrendered the whole com- '
merce of their colonies to an exclusive company ;
others, without eftablilhing an exclusive company,
have "confined the whole commerce of their colonies
to a particular part of the mother country—whence
no (hip was allowed to fail, but either in a fleet,
and at a particular season ; or if fipgle, in conse
quence of a license. Other nations leave the trade of
their colonies free to all their fubje&s who may car
ry it on from all the different parts of the mother
country, and who ha*e occnfion for no other license
than the common dispatches of the Cullom house.
This is an account of the conduct of pvent coun
tries to their colonies, by the celebrated Adam
Smith, in histreatife en the wealth of uations, An-,
derfon, in his origin of commerce, speaking or. the
fame fubjeft fays, " By every principle of judiec,
of the law of nations 4nd the cudoms of the oih-r
powers of JEurope, who had settlements and distant
dependencies, the mother country had an exclusive
right to trade with, and to forbid all others from
having any interceurfe with them. Such an exelu
five viyrht cannot be denied to be the very offence of
colonization."
•an Britifli v*ffel»
ier duties on the
.argoes, than (hall
i imported or ex-
is exported to be
ire unladen, and
nid nece(t r y Jha"
:effary to the due
he article —firft,
confined to the
, not absolutely
ind the import
into the United
ibited.
The above quotations are made for the parpofe
of obtaining a clear idea of the rights of nations
having colonies, and the obligations and telln&ions
of such colonies, that by examining the state of our
commerce under the treaty, we may conclude whe
ther conformable to any just idea affixed to the
terms " colonizing eommeiee - ' it can be truly (aid,
" that the whole commerce of the United States in
such intercourse is colonized in retur#.'' By co
lonizing commerce mud then probably he tinder
ftood, reftri&ing commerce to a particular country,
and particular people.''
Tl\c 3d and 13th articles of the treaty appear
to be the only one 6 that refpe£t our tiade to the
British colonies. By the 3d, we may trade freely
by land in their colonies, we may carry there all
fortt of goods, and bring back any thing in [(turn.
We are still free to procure the like articles, from
any other part of the world—and what we bring
from those colonies, we may export wherever we
plcafe.
Here is no reftri&iou as to the artirlej to be im
ported into their colonies, »r exported from them
by us, nor as to the place to which w« may export
the articles, so brought from thrrn.
ooloiiifts rajy comc into the United States
in the fame manner and for the fame purposes as
we enter there territories ; but their is no redac
tion that w« will fell only to them ; or which gives
to them any exclusive piivilege ; that the fame
lights granted to them by treaty, are not free to
grant lo all the world.
The 13 article gives us a right to trade to the
East-Indies, but contains r,o contrail, ihat we will
not buy elsewhere, the like articles, that we procure
trom their ftttlements—neither does it fay, that
they (hall have the exclusive privilege of trading
with us—ind the merchandiie brought into the
United States, from those fettlcments, are as free
to be exported to any part of the world, as though
that article did not cxill—There does not appear
any thing like that fort of reftriftion on us, or ex
clusive right to th?m that can jurtify the terms.
•.-•lonizing the whole commerce of the United
States in such intercourse, in return."
The ninth reason given by the town is, " because
the clause by which the Britife government re
serves to itfelf the right of imposing on American
vefTels, entering British ports in Eutope, a duty
which (hall countervail the differanee of the d'.:ty
payable on the importation of European and
Afiaiic (roods, into the United States, in British or
American bottoms, plac-s in the powe* of that
government, to enable British fubjetli to become
the impo.ters of Asiatic and European goods,
into the United States, to the exclufjon of our own
citizens."
It is really difficult to comprehend how the
reservation here mentioned, can I>e attended with
the consequence* suggested by the town.
If our vessels enter theii portion equal terms as
we permit their vessels to enter ours, it its hard to
conceive that we should he the losers—we make a
rule, which the treaty fuppufss more again ft them
than the rule by which they assess our reflels. It is
not probable that a nation of equal-power, would
consent to terms manifeftly unequal, neither is it
reconcileable with the common principles of equal
ity and justice, for a nation to object to that part
of the bargain, which reserves equal rights. At
any rate, it may be fairly stated, that it is no ob
jediion to the treaty, for it gives Oreat Britain, no
new powers on this fubjeft. She pofTcflet a right
of countervailing the difference meutioned, without
any aid of the treaty —and may exercise it when
ever (he pleases. By the treaty (he obligates her
felf to impafe no higher duties on cur veflels, than
fee does on those of all other Rations.
The 10th reason is, " bccaule although the terras
of said treaty appear to be reciprocal i 9 many in
stances ; yet fiom the local situation and circum
stances ofthe.United States, and the pacific system
of policy they have adopted, that reciprocity is
merely nominal and delusive."
The town leaves the world to conjecture what
are the eonfequences flowing from the local situa
tion and circumitanees of the United Stat«s, and
the pacific fyftemthey have adopted, that renders
the reciprocity purported by the terms of {aid trea
ty ; to be merely nominal and delutive. Perhaps
the President may fee them from the aflertion of
the town ; but surely it was due from the town to
the people of the United States, to point out'the
delusion which had been overlooked by the minis
ter and government of the United States. Not
being able to deteA this delusion without further
light, the writer mud pass over this reason, with
a requell to his readers, that they would not as
sent to this aflertion, without examining the treaty
for themselves, and at least, desiring the committee
or fele&ment of J3oSon| to expose the fraud before
they pafscenfure on their whole government, for
being deluded blockheads, or something worfc.
The fir it part of the nth reason is, " because
it prevents the United States frornr imposing a»y
further reftri&ionson British trade alone.
If it were not the town of Boston, so refpeftable
for wisdom and good sense, that offered this reason,
one would hardly fufpcdi that the reason originated
in any'thing, but a difgofition to prrvent all pacific
arrangements with that nation. For no one will
believe that Britain, or any other nation, who is not
an humble vanquilhed fupplia-nt ; would ever con
sent to make a trtiaty, by which {he fliould place
us on the fame teims, as the mod favored nations ;
and, we rcferve to ourselves the right to treat her,
011 terms left favorable than we do others. In
our treaty with France, the United Netherlands,
Sweden, and Prussia, we have reeiprocally agreed
to plac« each oth»r on such terms. It is uot won.
derfal that Mr. Jay could not' induce the Britifc
nation, to hind themselves to treat in, as well as
'fluy do otheis, and leave U9 at liberty to treat them
wotfc thpn we do others, when they giv« up p r R
vileges in Europe, equal to what we received from
nther powers, with whom vre had treaties, and
some veiy important ones, not teceived from tlicm ;
such as a trade with the Eafl-India lettleroepts, and
their colonies on tke American continent.
6th and 9th resfons and this part of the -eleventh,
may possibly serve as a crnrni ent on the loth.
Latest Foreign Intelugenc£.
MADRID, May 1
Ins report marie by the general it Catatonia, dated
the ith instant, it appears that fcveial Jkirmilhes ha«i
happened between the Spaniards and the French, at the
differeot pods on the mountains, particularly at the
Colle de Arras, the Torre dc Rite, and the himlet of
Nefol, in 911 which the Spaniards had been victorious y
and thit the latter affair which happened at ten at night
was very bloody. Three < ompani s oi' Spaniards nad
been sent by major-general Oquciidi, to aillodge the
French from this hamlet j the cammander 011 his arrival
fumxoned the French twice to turrendcr, threatening
in cafe of refwfal, no quarters ; this being of no
avail, he'fcomrrwnced the attack by three general dis
charges of artillery, and afterwards had itcourfe t»
ahn«, killing artddeflroying lu :h as choi'e to perifti
for the cante oflibeny. This ailion lalted half an hi ur.
Tht Eremh had fetentyrtwo killed, including the cap.
tain and lieutenant, and eight Were made prii.iners, four
of whom were terribly wotllldcd.-
The iofj •( the Spaniards u as one killed, four' flight- »
ty wounded, and a few «th»rfi dangeroully wounded.
. . *?•
\ he cososoander in chief of the anny in Narvarre
and Guipul'coa, in a difpaich dated the 18th inttant,
ftfite» a nurftW of different attacks made by the Frtucli
between the 7th,and r 4 th, on the posts gf Sofiala, Af
carate, Mcu'nt Mulquiruckg and LarafcjncJa, msny »f
which theyjirt'poiftiS'on'df, but were dodged thro'
the-aftivitv of major-general Stephen Mire, and Don
brigadier Egnio,- aotwithflanding ike cntniy had up
wards of four thouland men.
The loss of the Spaniards in the dif&rcn fkirmifties on
thcfc occaHo.u, was a ierjejij'.t mi* (even pnvitcs ot the
regi <ient of Al»urii«, tbrnc of the regi(i tf nt of Jran,
three Bin-ay peafutts, ind one of Alv.t kil.c
oi Afjuri.is, two ol >~e. levcn volunteers ot
and nv« Biscay peasants wounded.
Capt. Don Ramon de Cacerai, and a Serjeant, both
of Guipufcoa, another sergeant of Alves's, thirteen
privates »f Aflur as one ~f Jean, frven of Oniyuiloa
fix Blfciy peafantj, and two of Alva priioners.
Il»< enemy Kid upwards of jioo 'kdied and wound*
ed, and the Spaniards took five of thcai puf.mers.
PAR I S, June 13,
Thecamp of Sablor.s was Ixuice 11 up tlie day be
fore jrcfteiday, and transferred to Ti.in d'K< cr.
Proccfs vcibal of the opening- «f the body si the
fori of the deceased Louis. Capet.
The Tower of the Temple, thf« nfl Prarfal,
(9th June, in the 3d year of the French re
public, one and ihdivifible j half palt -j 1 in
the morning.
"WE the un'lerfigned, Jean Bahtifle Eugene
Dumangin, phyiician in-chuf of the hospital of
Unity, and Pliilippe Joan Pel'etan, furgeo .-in-.
chief of the great hospital of Humaaity, accom
panied by the citizens, Nicolas Jc-anroy, fo :mc ,ly
profeflonrrthefchoolsof p! yfic ?t Fans, and Pierre
Laflus, proteSor of phylie in the fdrool* of health
at Paris, declare, that we afllmblcd in confcqucncc
of an arret of the committee of general fafetv of the
National Convention, dated vetterday, and
Bergemg, prelidtnt, Comois, Gautier, Piene
Guyomar, dire&ing us to affitt together in the
opening of the body of the fun ot the deceased
Lo«i» Cipet, and to declare the condition in *..i c h
we have found it, have a£ted at follows :
" We arrived at 1T in the merning at the out
ward gate of the Temple, and were received by
commiiianes, who introduced us into the Tower •
we were conceyed te the second ftoiy, and w t -,c
/hewn into an apartment, where we found lying ou
a bed the dead body of a child, who appeared to
us to have been-jbout ten years of age, which bo
dy the commiflaries-tleelared to be tht son of the
deceafcd Capet, and which two of u. knew to be
' 5 C l" ld W ' h " had k « n >11 for several days.
ill r j commiflanei declared to us that the
child died on the preceding evening at 3 o'clock •
upon which we proceeded to verify the figrs of
death which we found characterized by an tintvev
fnl paleness, a coldnels of the whole bodv, a ftiffnef#
of the members, a dulnefs „f the eyes, violet color
ed spots on the (kin of the body, a „d particularly
r,y a putvefaftion, which had begun at the bell/
the scrotum, and within fide the thighs.
" . y/e r / n ? a ' k , ( ' ,!, i bcforc - we proceeded to the
opening of the body, a general leanness, which,
proceed, from a mar a f mils . the b.lly was swelled :
in the inside of the right knee we remarked a fwd
lmg, which had not changed the colour of the H<i 0>
and another fuelling not so large •„ the os radius
near the righ, wnft. The swelling of the knee con
ained about two ounces of a greyilh coloured mat
ter pure and clear, situated between,the periofteua,
1 th f ! ■ the filing of the writt coutiin
ed matter .f the f, me kind but thinner.
" On opening the body a pint of purulent fetura.
flowed out yellow and extremely fetid ; the intef
unes which we opened were internally very found,
and contained a very small quantity of billioaa matl
W A f l " the fame ftatc 5 " ad-
ImSl all . , t ,c { H 7, 0U j ndln g was pale on the
ou&de, .ndfpnnkled wub lymphatic pimple,, ft..
I ? the of the intestine,. \he
internal membrane was found, as well as the pyfo
roasor lower onfice of the sUmach, and the pefo
phagus or windpipr ; the liver adhered by its c-v
vexity to the di.phr.gma, and byvts concavity the
. si? utl " °"? rCd ' ItS was found,
' 0 common. The gall bladd -r
was modtnUdy tilkd wuh a ail* oi a:greenifh col^r.
A FF.nF.RA 1 [ST.
A private