henceforward reduce France to the pain of addressing new claims upon this subject."

(No. 6.) In the General Advertiser, published at Philadelphia on the 9th of June, 1796, may be seen the questions proposed by the President, on the 18th of April 1793, to the heads of the departments. The undersigned minister plenipotentiary contents himself with giving here

an extract.

Question 2. Shall a minister from the Republick of France be received?

Question 3. If received, shall it be absolutely, or with qualifications, and if with qualifications of what kind?

Question 4. Are the United States obliged by good faith, to consider thet reaties heretofore made with France as applying to the present situation of the parties-may they either renounce them or hold them suspended, till the government of France shall be established?

Question 12. Should the future regent of France send a minister to the United States, ought he to be received? (No. 7.) The French government, zealous of giving to the United States proofs of its attachment, had commenced negotiations with the regency of Algiers, in order to put an end to the war which that power was making on the commerce of the United States. The minister for foreign affairs, by a letter of the 5th January, 1794, instructed the predecessor of the undersigned to communicate to the federal government the steps which the French government had taken in this respect. The predecessor of the undersigned, in consequence, wrote to the Secretary of State, on the 16th Prairial in the 2d year, the following letter "I have already had the pleasure, sir, to inform you, verbally, of the interest which the committee of publick safety of the National Convention had in due season taken in the truly unhappy situation of your commerce in the Mediterranean."

"I now fulfil the duty imposed on me by the government, by calling to your recollection in writing, the steps which are to be taken by our agent with the dey of Algiers, for repressing this new manoeuvre of the British administration, which has put the finishing stroke to its proofs of malevolence towards free people. The despatch of the minister communicating this measure to me, is dated the 5th January, and did not come to my hands till fifteen

days ago; I do not yet know by what route; I could have wished it had been less tardy in coming to me, that I might sooner have fulfilled the agreeable task of proving to you by facts, the protestations of friendship of which I have so often spoken in the name of the Republick of France."

"The information which I shall receive from Europe in a little time, will doubtless possess me of the success of those negotiations which were to have been opened in January last. If the situation of your affairs is yet such with respect to that barbarous regency, as that our intervention may be of some utility, I pray you to invite the President to cause to be communicated to me the means that he will join to those of the committee of publick safety, for the greatest success of the measures already taken. It is in virtue of the express request of the minister, that I solicit of the President some communication on this subject: I shall be satisfied to be able to transmit it by a very early conveyance which I am now preparing for France."

The Secretary of State replied to him, on the 6th June, 1794, by a letter of which the following is an extract.

"Your other letter of the 4th of June, is a powerful demonstration of the interest which the Republick of France takes in our welfare. I will frankly communicate to you our measures and expectations, with regard to Algiers; but as you will so soon receive the detail of those measures, which your government have pursued in our behalf, and after the rising of Congress some new arrangement will probably be adopted by the Executive, it will be better perhaps to postpone our interview on this matter, until the intelligence, which you farther expect, shall arrive."

Then Mr. Jay was charged to negotiate with the British government-and the citizen Fauchet did not afterwards receive any communication on the subject.

(No. 8.) On the 13th Floreal in the third year of the Republick (2d May, 1794) the predecessor of the undersigned minister plenipotentiary expressed himself in these terms to the Secretary of State, upon the blockade of the French colonies.

"After so many useless attempts, sir, you must be sensible of the pain I experience in tracing this picture, so different from that which the French Republick gives whenever justice towards you is in question, even though

her interests are compromitted. It was when a terrible war was incessantly devouring her, that she rigorously fulfilled her treaties with you; in this instance she demands but justice, and cannot obtain it. On the contrary, she sees her enemies admitted to an intimacy with you, at the moment in which your commerce and your sovereignty are alike insulted by them: At the moment when adding derision to injustice they despoil you anew upon the seas, when they promise to indemnify you for former acts. This reflection, sir, becomes much more grievous when we see posted up under your eyes the official legalization of a proclamation, which prohibits your commerce with our colonies, and suspends to you alone the law of nations. I know, sir, what respect imposes on me as to what immediately interests your affairs, and your relations as a people. But I cannot entirely pass in silence transactions to which the Republick is no stranger, because they are directed against her; and that to subscribe by an excess of courtesy to such orders, were to quit the neutral position which the Americans profess. Examine, I pray you, sir, whether this neutrality can be said to exist when on the one hand you can no longer maintain your treaties, and on the other you are obliged to abandon your relations exclusively to the discretion of England, who doubtless will soon declare all the universe blockaded, except her possessions. What account do you conceive I can render to the French government, of the means you take for rendering your neutrality respectable? Yet on that my instructions insist, and it is on that more especially that France is uneasy."

The Secretary of State replied on the 29th May, 1795, to this passage of citizen Fauchet's letters in the following

manner :

"The predicament of a neutral nation is always peculiar and delicate, and eminently so, while it defends itself against charges of partiality from one of the warring powers, lest it should seem to palliate the misdoings of another.. But you are not to infer from any justification of the Execu tive, that the validity of the proclamation of blockade is assented to. We did read on the 10th of April, 1795, a publication from his Britannick majesty's consul general for the middle and southern states of America, giving pubhick notice that he had received official communications

that the islands of Guadaloupe, Marigalante and Desiradé were by proclamation issued by his Britannick majesty's general and vice admiral, commanding in the West Indies, declared to be in an actual state of blockade; and that neutral vessels were by that proclamation prohibited from attempting to enter any of the ports or places of the said islands, with provisions or supplies of any nature or kind whatsoever, under the penalty of being "dealt with confor-mably to existing treaties, and as warranted by the established laws of nations." So highly valued has the West India commerce always been, that this exclusion was often revolved in the mind of the Executive. It was acknowledged that neutrals are interdicted by the law of nations from a blockaded port. From some quarter or other the blockade must be notified; or else neutrals would be a constant unsuspecting prey; not being in a condition to collect this information for themselves. Who then are to notify the military investment of a place? Surely not the besieged; but the besiegers, whether we consult principle or practice. The check which neutrals have upon a wanton and false parade of a siege, is the same with the check upon any other groundless pretence. We might indeed have remonstrated; but with what colour may well be imagined, when this department was unprovided with any document upon which the rescinding of that edict could have been urged. If rumour were a fit guide, who can pronounce on which side rumour preponderated, when stripped of the exaggerations, which a host of passions had gathered together? We had, it may be said, one effort remaining: which was to promulge to the citizens of the United States, that the proclamation was null and void as to them. If after this defiance of that act, any American vessel had risked, and incurred confiscation, the government would have been importuned for something more than the general protection, which is the birth right of all our citizens. The clamour would have been for a special indemnity; and under such a cloak, frauds innumerable might have

been covered."

(No. 9.) The citizen Genet, one of the predecessors of the undersigned, notified the Secretary of State on the 23d May, 1793, that he was empowered to renew the existing treaties between the French Republick and the United States. The Secretary of State replied to him.

that the Senate not being assembled, it was impossible to meet his overtures, because that body were, according to the constitution, to participate in the consummation of treaties.*

On the 30th of September, 1793, citizen Genet renewed the subject; the Secretary of State, in acknowledging the receipt of that letter, informed him that he had laid it before the President, and that it will be taken into consideration with all the respect and interest that such an object requires.

The Senate assembled, and the treaty was never again brought in question.

The predecessor of the undersigned, in his verbal communications with the Secretary of State, expressed the desire which the Republick had of renewing her treaties. He received only evasive answers.

The undersigned minister plenipotentiary, charged to prepare with the federal government the plan of a new treaty of commerce, communicated to the Secretary of State, on the 30th June, 1795 (O. S.) that part of his instructions which authorized him to open this negotiation.

On this subject the President gave the necessary authority to the Secretary of State, who explained to the undersigned the manner in which they could proceed in it. But at what time? When the ratification of the treaty concluded between lord Grenville and Mr. Jay no longer permitted the undersigned to pursue that negotiation. At Philadelphia, the 25th of Brumaire, in the 5th year of the French Republick one and indivisible (15th November, 1796, O. S.)

P. A. ADET.

[For Nos. 6, 7, and 8, containing Proclamation of Neutrality, and Instructions to Collectors, see preceding vol. p. 44—48.]

* Letter from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Morris, dated 23d August, 1793, vol. i. P. 156-Message from the President, 3d Dec. 1793, vol. i. p. 39.