cial relations which exist between her and the United States; if by a perfidious condescension it permitted the English to violate a right which it ought for its own honour and interest to defend; if under the cloak of neutrality, it presented to England a poignard to cut the throat of its faithful ally; if, in fine, partaking in the tyrannical and homicidal rage of Great Britain, it concurred to plunge the people of France into the horrours of famine." For the sake of preserving harmony, silence was preferred to a comment upon these insinuations.

You are also pleased to refer to your letters of March and April last, relative to impresses of American seamen by British ships; and complain that the government of the United States had not made known to you the steps they had taken to obtain satisfaction. This, sir, was a matter which concerned only that government. As an independent nation, we were not bound to render an account to any other, of the measures we deemed proper for the protection of our own citizens; so long as there was not the slightest ground to suspect that the government ever acquiesced in any aggression.

But permit me to recur to the subject of the decree of the executive directory.

As before observed, we are officially informed, that the British government have issued no new orders for capturing the vessels of the United States. We are also officially informed, that on the appearance of the notification of that decree, the minister of the United States at Paris, applied for information "whether orders were issued for the seizure of neutral vessels, and was informed that no such order was issued, and further, that none such would be issued in case the British did not seize our vessels." This communication from the minister of the United States at Paris, to their minister in London, was dated the 28th of August. But the decree of the directory bears date the 14th Messidor, answering to the second of July. These circumstances, together with some observations in your note, leave the American government in a state of uncertainty of the real intentions of the government of France. Allow me then to ask, whether in the actual state of things, our commerce is considered as liable to suffer any new restrictions on the part of the French Republick? Whether the restraints now exercised by the

British government are considered as of a nature to justify a denial of those rights which are pledged to us by our treaty with your nation? Whether orders have been actually given to the ships of war and privateers of the French Republick, to capture the vessels of the United States? And what, if they exist, are the precise terms of these orders?

These questions, sir, you will see are highly interesting to the United States. It is with extreme concern that the government finds itself reduced to the necessity of asking an explanation of this nature: And if it shall be informed that a new line of conduct is to be adopted towards this country, on the ground of the decree referred to, its surprise will equal its regret, that principles should now be questioned which, after repeated discussions both here and in France, have been demonstrated to be founded, as we conceive, in the obligations of impartial neutrality, of stipulations by treaty, and of the law of nations. I hope, sir, you will find it convenient by an early answer, to remove the suspense in which the government of the United States is now held, on the questions above stated.

I shall close this letter by one remark on the singularity of your causing the publication of your note. As it concerned the United States, it was properly addressed to its government; to which alone pertained the right of communicating it, in such time and manner as it should think fit, to the citizens of the United States.

I am, sir, with great respect, &c.

TIMOTHY PICKERING.

No. 4.

TRANSLATION.

The Minister Plenipotentiary of the French Republick near the United States, to Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State of the United States. Philadelphia, 13 Brumaire, 5th year of the French Republick, one and indivisible (3d Nov, 1796, O. S.)

SIR,-I hasten to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated 1st November, which was delivered to me,

last night, and which I find this morning in the news

papers.

I shall have the honour in a few days of furnishing you with more ample information upon the object of which it treats; and I pray you will permit me to confine myself to remark to you that the article of the executive directory which I had the honour to notify to you, bears no mark of similitude with the supposed order in question in the letter from Mr. Monroe to Mr. Rufus King, which you cite, and which was made known to me by the newspapers.

Accept, sir, the assurance of my respectful esteem,
P. A. ADET.

No. 5.

Note from Mr. Adet, Minister Plenipotentiary of the French Republick, to Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State of the United States. Legation at Philadelphia.

THE undersigned minister plenipotentiary of the French Republick, now fulfils to the Secretary of State of the United States, a painful but sacred duty. He claims, in the name of American honour, in the name of the faith of treaties, the execution of that contract which assured to the United States their existence, and which France regarded as the pledge of the most sacred union between two people, the freest upon earth: In a word, he announces to the Secretary of State the resolution of a government terrible to its enemies, but generous to its allies.

It would have been pleasing to the undersigned minister plenipotentiary to have only to express, on the present occasion, the attachment which his government bears to the American people, the vows which it forms for their prosperity, for their happiness. His heart therefore, is grieved at the circumstances, which impose upon him a different task. With regret he finds himself compelled to substitute the tone of reproach for the language of friendship. With regret also his government has ordered him to take that tone; but that very friendship has rendered it indispensable. Its obligations sacred to men, are as sacred to governments; and if a friend offended by a friend, can justly complain, the government of the United

States, after the undersigned minister plenipotentiary shall have traced the catalogue of the grievances of the French Republick, will not be surprised to see the executive directory, manifesting their too just discontents.

When Europe rose up against the Republick at its birth, menaced it with all the horrours of war and famine; when on every side the French could not calculate upon any but enemies, their thoughts turned towards America: A sweet sentiment then mingled itself with those proud sentiments which the presence of danger, and the desire of repelling it, produced in their hearts. In America they saw friends. Those who went to brave tempests and death upon the ocean, forgot all dangers, in order to indulge the hope of visiting that American continent, where, for the first time, the French colours had been displayed in favour of liberty. Under the guaranty of the law of nations, under the protecting shade of a solemn treaty, they expected to find in the ports of the United States, an asylum as sure as at home; they thought, if I may use the expression, there to find a second country. The French government thought as they did. Oh hope, worthy of a faithful people, how hast thou been deceived! So far from offering the French the succours which friendship might have given without compromitting it, the American government, in this respect, violated the letter of treaties.

The 17th article of the treaty of amity and commerce of 1778, states, that French vessels of war, and those of the United States, as well as those which shall have been armed for war by individuals of the two states, may freely conduct where they please, the prizes they shall have made upon their enemies, without being subject to any admiralty or other duty; without the said vessels, on entering into the harbours or ports of France, or of the United States, being liable to be arrested or seized, or the officers of those places taking cognizance of the validity of the said prizes; which may depart and may be conducted freely and in full liberty to the places expressed in their commissions, which the captains of said vessels shall be obliged to show: And that on the contrary, no shelter or refuge shall be given to those who shall have made prizes upon the French or Americans; and that if they should be forced by stress of weather or the danger of the sea, to enter, they shall be made to depart as soon as possible.

In contempt of these stipulations, the French privateers have been arrested in the United States, as well as their prizes; the tribunals have taken cognizance of the validity or invalidity of these prizes. It were vain to seek to justify these proceedings, under the pretext of the right of vindicating the compromitted neutrality of the United States. The facts about to be stated, will prove that this pretext has been the source of shocking persecutions against the French privateers, and that the conduct of the federal government, has been but a series of violations of the 17th article of the treaty of 1778.

On the 4th of August, 1793, a circular letter of the Secretary of the Treasury, was sent to all the collectors of the customs. It accompanied regulations adopted by the President, prohibiting all armaments in favour of the belligerent powers. These regulations immediately acquired the force of law, and the agents of the government, and the tribunals, concurred in their execution. They gave them a retrospective effect, and caused to be seized in the ports of the United States, the armed vessels and prizes which had come in prior to that time. But even before these regulations, adopted by the President, had established any rule whatever upon the prohibition of armaments, the tribunals had already, by order of the government, assumed the cognizance of prizes made by French vessels, (No. 1.) One of the predecessors of the undersigned, protested against this, but in vain. The tribunals still continued their prosecutions.

On the 3d of December, 1793, the President asked of Congress, a law confirming the measures contained in the letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, above mentioned (No. 2.) This law was passed the 5th June, 1794. What was its result? In consequence of this law, the greater part of the French privateers have been arrested, as well as their prizes; not upon formal depositions, not upon established testimony, not upon a necessary body of proofs, but upon the simple information of the consul of one of the powers at war with the French Republick; frequently upon that of sailors of the enemy powers; sometimes according to the orders of the governours, but often upon the demand of the district attorneys, who assert, upon principles avowed by the government, (No. 3.) that their conviction was sufficient to authorize them.