afay be outraged. I know therefore that it is the province of their government alone to decide and to act, and that that government would justly have reason to be hurt at the representations of a foreign minister, from his information and the nature of things, on an object which interested the American nation, or its government alone; but, sir, if at the present juncture the interests of the United States are in question, those of France are also, and I should betray my duty if I were for a moment to forget them.

It is not the first time that the English have given to the world the scandalous spectacle of their contempt for the rights of nations. It is not the first time that the American government has had occasion to complain, and has been apprehensive of seeing their neutrality compromitted. So long ago as 1793, the cabinet of St. James ordered the arrestation and seizure of American vessels laden for the ports of France. This conduct which violated every principle, and which injured the interests of the Republick, obliging the convention to imitate it: but its views were very different from those of the British government, as by that means she sought to support, though indirectly, the rights of neutral nations; she ought to be entirely justified by the 5th article of the decree, declaring that it shall cease to have effect when the combined powers shall have acknowledged, agreeably to the law of nations, provisions, found on board of neutral vessels, as not liable to seizure: Although the coalesced powers are far from admitting these principles sacred to every honest government, the national convention has not thought proper longer to follow their example, and the committee of publick safety has exhibited in its arret of the fourteenth last Nivose, its love for justice and the sentiments of France for the United States.

You know, sir, as well as I do, that the war, which exists between two powers, cannot alter in any manner the rights of the United States, who wish to remain at peace; and that their relations with those belligerent powers are the same as before the declaration of war. These conditions constitute the state of neutrality. As soon as the relations change-when one of the belligerent powers is more favoured than another by the state which has not taken part in the war, the neutrality of that state.

ceases to exist. If therefore one of the belligerent states seeks to obtain from the neutral nation an advantage not enjoyed by its enemy, the neutral state should, if she wish to remain at peace, oppose its pretensions by all the means in her power, or she should, in order to keep the balance in equilibrium between both enemies, allow them to participate in the same advantages if her interests permit, otherwise that nation would discover a partiality, which cannot accord with the state of neutrality. These are evident truths, and are generally received.

Besides, in every war, neutral nations have armed in defence of their neutrality-and we accordingly see at the present moment, Sweden and Denmark uniting their fleets for the purpose of protecting their commerce and supporting their neutrality-likewise did the United States in 1793 strongly complain against the arrestation of their vessels by the ships of war of the English. Permit me, sir, to cite here, in support of this assertion, the following lines from a letter of Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Pinckney, dated the 7th September, 1793.

"This act, too, tends directly to draw us from the state of peace, in which we are wishing to remain. It is an essential character of neutrality, to furnish no aids (not stipulated by treaty) to one party which we are not equally ready to furnish to the other. If we permit corn to be sent to Great Britain and her friends, we are equally bound to permit it to France. To restrain it would be a partiality which might lead to war with France, and between restraining it ourselves, and permitting her enemies to restrain it unrightfully, is no difference. She would consider this as a mere pretext, of which she would not be the dupe, and on what honourable ground could we otherwise explain it? Thus we should see ourselves plunged by this unauthorized act of Great Britain into a war, with which we meddle not, and which we wish to avoid, if justice to all parties, and from all parties, will enable us to avoid it. In the case, where we found ourselves obliged, by treaty, to withhold from the enemies of France the right of arming in our ports, we thought ourselves in justice bound to withhold the same right from France also, and we did it. Were we to withhold from her supplies of provisions, we should in like manner, be bound to withhold them from her enemies also, and thus

shut to ourselves all the ports of Europe, where corn is in demand, or make ourselves parties in the war. This is a dilemma, which Great Britain has no right to force upon us, and for which no pretext can be found in any part of our conduct. She may, indeed, feel the desire of starving an enemy nation; but she can have no right of doing it at our loss, nor of making us the instrument of it."

This quotation I conceive is the development of the principles which I have laid down, and when it contains the sentiments and opinion of the American government itself, it would be unnecessary to enter into an ulterior discussion.

It cannot now, therefore, be doubted by any man, who will discard prejudices, love, hatred, and in a word all the passions, which lead the judgment astray, that the French Republick have a right to complain, if the American government suffer the English to interrupt the commercial 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 to defend for its honour and its interest: if under the cloak of neutrality it presented to England a poignard to cut the throat of its faithful ally-if in fine, participating in the tyrannick and homicidal rage of Great Britain, it concurred to plunge the French people into the horrours of famine.

But I am convinced this will not be the case-the American government is too much attached to the laws of an exact neutrality-it knows too well that the cause of freemen is interwoven with that of France, to allow the English to usurp a right injurious to the interests of the Republick.

It is under this conviction that I have written to you this letter, persuaded that it is perhaps superfluous to address to you these reclamations. I do not doubt but that the American government will prove to all Europe its intention of maintaining the most exact neutrality with regard to the belligerent powers, that it will compel England no longer to violate the rights of nations, and that it will henceforward relieve France from the unpleasantness of addressing new complaints on this subject.

Accept, sir, &c.

P. A. ADET.

No. 124.

TRANSLATION.

The Minister Plenipotentiary of the Republick of France, near the United States, to Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State of the United States. Philadelphia, 9 Germinal, 4th year of the Republick, one and indivisible, (March 29, 1796, O. S.)

SIR, On the 7th Vindemiaire last, I had the honour of writing to you, relative to the arrest of American vessels laden with provisions for France. I flattered myself with receiving from you an answer which might prove to my government that the United States, faithful to the neutrality which they have imposed on themselves, neglect no means of repressing every infringement made on it by any of the belligerent parties to the detriment of its enemy.

Near six months ago, I sent a copy of my representation to my government, and at the expiration of that term, I was under the necessity of informing it that I still expected a solution of this important object.

Now, sir, I complain upon a point infinitely more essential, and which does not to me appear susceptible of delay: I mean the impressments exercised by the English on board of American vessels.

For some time each successive vessel arriving from the colonies brings, in this respect, more frightful accounts than the former, and I have just received from the vice consul at Alexandria, a letter of 4th Germinal, relative to the impressment used by the English ship Swan and the frigate Success upon the crew of the brig Fair Columbian from Alexandria, freighted on account of the English by Messrs. Patterson and Taylor.

It is not then sufficient for the English to purchase a number of vessels, which they load with all sorts of provisions, to navigate their vessels under your flag, to carry horses for remounting the cavalry, to enrol grooms for this military service, but they must also take by force the American crews in order to make them serve on board their vessels of war, to the ruin of our colonies.

You must be sensible, sir, that simple and ordinary measures are insufficient in such circumstances-we have neither the right nor desire of interfering in your interior

administration, but when hostilities are in question, France may request an account of the measures you have taken for putting a stop to them, and repairing the damage they already have caused or may hereafter do.

Permit me, sir, to repeat to you, they should be prompt and efficacious. Would representations to the court of London, which in the course of six months perhaps might put a stop to these odious attacks, if at the end of that time they are no longer necessary, be sufficient in the existing circumstances?

The English division in the colonies is entirely recruited by mariners taken from on board your vessels. It is by their means that they block up the Republican ports, it is to their succour we ought to attribute the loss of these immense possessions, if the American government should not take the step which the duty of neutrality dictates to it. Accept, sir, &c.

No. 125.

TRANSLATION.

P. A. ADET.

The Minister Plenipotentiary of the French Republick, near the United States, to Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State of the United States. Philadelphia, the 19 Germinal, 4th year of the French Republick, one and indivisible (the 8th April, 1796, O. S.)

SIR, I have the honour to send you herein enclosed, the letter which you requested on the 7th of April, in favour of Mr. Henry Alexander, detained at Petit Goave.

I have still reason to hope that the former which I wrote to general Rigaud on the 6th Pulviose last, will have the effect desired by the family of the young man whose liberation you claim.

Accept, sir, the assurance of my respect,
P. A. ADET.

P. S. Permit me to remind you of my letters of 21st and 25th Ventose, and 9th Germinal, to which I expect your answer.

P. A. A.