The New Hampshire gazette — Portsmouth [N.H.], 1798-05-01 00:00:00, page 1

INSTRUCTIONS.
To Chazles Cotcfworth Pinckney, Fohn Mar-
Jhall, and Elbridge Gerry. Envaoys Extras
ordinary and Menifiers Plenipotentiary to
the French Republic.
[ Referred to in the Message of the
President of the United States of
the 3d ult.]
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
July 15, 1797
Gentlemen,
IT is known 10 you, that the people of
the United States of America enter
tained a 2 warm and sincere affettion for
the people of France, ever since their arms
were united in the war with Great Britain,
which ended ia the full and formal acknow-
Jedgment of the independence of thefle
States. It is known to you, that this affec
tion was ardent, when the French deter
mined to reform their government, and es
tablish it on the basis of liberty ; that li
berty, in which the people of the United
States were born, and which, in the conclu
sion of the war above-mentioned, was final
ly and firmly secured. It is known to you
that this aff:&ion rose to enthufialm, when
the war was kindled between France and
the powers of Europe, which were com
bined against her for the avowed purpose of
restoring the monarchy ; and every where
vows were heard for the fuccels of the
French arms. | Yer during this period,
France expreflecd no with that the United
States should depart fiom their neutrality,
Anrd while no duty requnired us to enter in
to the war, and our belt interests urged us to
remain at peace, the government determin
ed to takc a neatrai flanon ; which being
taken, the duiies of an impartial neatrality
became indifpenfibly binding. Hence the
government early proclaimed to our citi
zens, the nature of those duties, and the
consequences of their violation.
The minister of France, Mr. Genet, who
arrived about this time, by his public de
clarauon, confirmed the idea, that France
did not desire us to quit the ground we had
taken. li:s mealures, however, were cal
culated to destroy our necutrality, and to
draw us’into the war,
The principles of the proclamation of
neutralitv, founded on the law of nations,
which 1s the law of the land, were after
wards recognized by the national legiflatare,
and the oblervance of them enforced by
fpecific penaliics, in the a&t of Congrels,
pafled the sth of June, 1794. By thele
principles and laws, the afls of the execu
tive, and the decisions of the courts of the
United States were regulated.
A government thus fair and upright in
ats principles, and just and impartial in
its condufl, might have confidently hoped
to be secured againfl formal official censure :
but the Uni:ed States have not been so for
tunate. The afls of their government, in
its various branches, though pure in princi
le, and imparunal in operation, and con
gormablc to their indifpenfible rights of so
vereignty, have been assigned as the cause
of the off:nfive and injurious measures of
the French republic. For proofs of the
foimer, all the afts of the government may
be vouched : while the aspersions so freely
uttered by the French ministers, the refufal
to hear the minister of the United States,
specially charged to enter on amicable dis
cussions on all the topics of complaint, the
decrces of the Executive Direftory and of
their agents, the depredations on our com
merce, and the violences againfl the persons
of our citizens, are evidences of the latter,
These injuries and depredations will con
fitute an important fubjeft of your dilcul
fions with the government of the French
republic ; and for all these wrongs you will
seek redress,
In refpeft to the depredations on our
commerce, the principal objefts will bé to
agree on an equitable mode of examining
and deciding the claims of our citizens, and
the manner and periods of making them
compensation. As to the firft, the seventh
article of the British, and the twenty sirs
of the Spanish treaty present approved pre
cedents to be adopted with France. The
ropofed mode of adjusting those claims
gy commissioners appointed on each fide is
so perfefily fair, we cannot imagine that it
will be refufed. But when the claims are
adjufled, if payment in specie cannot be ob
tained, it may be found necessary to agree,
in behalf of our citizens, that they shall ac
cept pyblic securities, payable with interest,
at such periods as the slate of the French
finances shall render praflicable. Thele
: Eeriods you will endeavour, as far as pof
bﬁ. to shorten. ik &5
Not only the recent dépredations under
colour of the decrees of the Direflory of
the second of July, 1796, and the second
of March, 1797, or under the decrees of
their agents, or the illegal sentences of their
tribunals, but all prior ones not already fa
tisfaltorily adjusted, should be put in this
equitable train of fertlement.
To cancel many or all of the last men.
tioned claims might be the effe&t of the de
cree of the Executive Direttory of the od
of March last, reviving the decree of the
oth of May 1793 : but this being an ex poss
Jaélo regulation, as well as a violation of
the treaty between the United States and
France, cannot be obligatory on the former.
Indeed the greater part, probably nearly all
the captures and confifcations in question,
have been ‘commimd in direét violation of
zt x.rn_.tif_'g'rﬁ tbef law ‘;f nations. But
‘mies ﬁogﬂ‘y ihpgtﬂcls‘of the g mtzd gzet
the jpjurics anling irom the capture of ene..
may not be very gxicnlive ; and if for such
Vol. XLlL.—Numb. 216 g.]
PORTSMOUTH: (New-Hamepsuire)— PusrLisuep eVERY WEDNESDAY MORNING BY JOHN MELCHER, PRINTER TO THE STATE, AT Hls OFFICE CORNER OF MARKET STREET
WHERE SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR THIS PAPER, ADVERTISEMENTS, AND ARTICLES OF INTELLIGENCE ARE THANKFULLY RECEIVED.
B e i i eo s g e PR TR RT T e T gTR
et Bampshive Gasette.
captured property the French government
- will, agreeably to the law of nations, pay
the freight and reasonable demurrage, we
~ shall not on this account any farther con
tend. But of ship timber and naval flores
taken and confifcated by the French, they
ought to pay the full value ; because our
~ ciuzens continued their traffic in those arti
cles under the faith of the treaty with
- France. - On these two points we ought to
- expeét that the French government will not
F refufe to do us jullice ;; and the more be
- cause it has not, at any period of the war,
~exprefled its ‘defire “that’ the commercial
~ treaty should in these refpeéls be altered.
~ Besides the claims of our citizens for de
- predations on their property, there are
many arising from express contralls made
~ with the French government or its agents,
or founded on the seizure of their property,
in Freoch ports, Other claims have arisen
~ from the long detention of 2 multitude of
~our veflels in the ports of France, - The
- wrong hereby done to our citizens was ac
knowledged by the French government,
and, in some, perhaps in most of the cases,
-small payments towards indemnifications
~ have been made ; the residue fill remains
~ to be claimed.
! All these just -demands of our citizens
- will menit your attention. The best pos
sible means of compensation must be at
tempted. These will deperd on what you
1 {ha!rdifcover to be prafticable in relation
1o the French finances. But an exception
must be made in refpe to debts due to our
citizens by the contrafls of the French go
vernment and its agents, if they are com
prehended in any fhipulation ; and an op
tion reserved them, jointly or individually,
either to accept the means of payment
which you shall flipulate or resort to the
French government, direftly for the fulfil
ment of its contralls.
Although the reparation for losses sustain.
~ed by the citizens of the U. S. in conse
quence of irregular or illegal captures or
condemnations, ot forcible seizures or de
tentions, is of very high importance, and is
to be prefled with the greatest earnefinefs,
yet it is not to be insisted on as an indifpen
- Jible condition of the proposed tresty. You
are not, however, to renounce these claims
of our citizens, nor to flipulate that they
be ‘aflumed by the United States as a loan
- to the French government.
In refpeét to the alterations ¢f the com.
mercial treaty with France, in the two cases
which have been principal fubje@s of com
plaint on her part, viz. enemics property in
neutral ships, and the articles contraband of
war ; although France can have no right to
claim the annuling of flipulaiions at .the
moment when by both parties they were
originally intended to operate ; yet if the
French government press for alterations,
the President has no difficulty in submitting
the principles of the law of nations as sla
ted in the 17th and 18th articles of our
commercial treaty with G. Britain, to those
of the 23d and 24th arucles of dur com
mercial treaty with France ; and in refpeét
to provisions, and other articles not usually
deemed contraband, you are to agree only
on a temporary ccmpromife, like that in
the 18th article of the British treaty, and of
the fame duration. If however, in order
to fatisfy France now she 1s at war, we
change the two important articles before
mentioned, then the 14th article of the
French treaty which fubjeéls the property
of the ngutral nation found on board ene
mies ships to capture and condemnation,
must of courle be abolithed.
We have witnessed so many eroncous con
firuttions of the treaty with France, even in
its plainest parts, it will be necessary to exam
ine every article critically, for the purpose
of preventing, as far as human wisdom can
revent, all future misinterpretations. The
Eind ol documents necessary for the pro
te&ion of the neutral veflels, should be e
numerated and minutely described ; the
cases in which a sea letter thould be requir
ed may be fpecified ; the want of a sea-let
ter should not of itfelf be a cause of con
fifcation, where other reasonable proof of
property is produced ; and where such
proof is furnifhed, the want of a sea-letter
thould go no furtber than to save the cap
tor from damages for detaining and bring
ing in the neutral veflel. The proportion
of the vessel’s crew which may be foreiga
~ ers, {hould be agreed on. ’
~_ Perbaps it may be expedient to introduce
divers other regulations, conformably tothe
- marine laws of France. Whenever thele
- are to operate on the commerce of the U,
~ S. our fafety requires, that as far as possible,
they be fixed by treaty.—And it will be
desirable to flipulate against any ex pef? fac
' to laws, or regulation, under any pretence
whatever. - A
Great Britain has often claimed a right
and prattifed upon it, to prohibit neutral
nations carrying on a commerce with her
enemigs which bhad not been allowed in
time of peace. On thié head it will be de
~ firable to come to an explicit underfland
~ ing with France, and if Kaﬂ'xble, to obviate
~ the claim by an express stipulation. .
’ Such extensive depredations have been
committed on the commerce of neutrals,
- and especially of the U. S. by the citizens
~ of France, under pretence that her enemies
(particularly G. Briuin) have dooe the
~ {ame things, it will be desirable to have it
~explicitly stipulated, that the condu& of an
; coemy towards the neutral g.ower%ﬂ;_aﬂ not
_authorize or excuse the other belligerent
~ power in any departure from the law of na
. tions or the fipulations of the treaty ; efpgs.
~ cially that the vellels of the peutral nation
~ fball never be captured or detained, or theit
— OUR COUNTRY’s GOOD OUR CONSTANT AIM —
TUESDAY, May 1, 17¢8.
. property cohfilcated or injured, because
bound to or from an enemy’s port, except
the case of a blockaded port, the entry into
{ which may be preveoted accordiog to the
i koown rule of the law of mations, "And e
. may be expedient todefine ablockaded place
or port to be one aflually invested by Jand
or naval forces, or both, and that no dec/s.
ratéion of a blockade shall have any effeq
without such aftual inveflment. And oo
commercial right whatever, thould be aban.
doned, which 1s secured to neutral powers
by the European law of nations.
The foregoing articles being those which
the French government has made the often.
fible grounds of its principal complaints,
they have naturally been the firft brought
into view. But the proposed alterations
and arrangements suggest the ;ropriety' of
revising all our treanes with France. In
such revision the firß objeft that will at.
traft your attention is the reciprocal gua
ranty in the 11th anticle of the treaty of
alliance. This guaranty we are perfellly
willing to renounce. ~The guaranty by
France of the liberty, sovereignty, and in
dependence of the U, S. will\add nothing
to our security, while, on the contrary, our
guaranty of the pofleflions of Frnce in A
| merica, will perpetually expose us to the
rifque and expense of war, or © disputes
and questions concerning our natisnal faith,
When Mr. Genet was sent as he minis
ter of the French Republic to the U. S. its
fitvation was embarrafled, and the success
of its measures problematical. Infuch cir
; cumflances it was natural that France should
i turn her eye to the mutual guaranty ; and
. accordingly it was required, in Mr, Gener’s
l inftrutions, to be ¢ ap eflential clause in
! the new treaty,”” which he was to propose ;
and on the ground, *¢that it nearly con
_cerned the peace and prosperity of the
French nation, that a people whose resour
ces. increase beyond all calculation, and
whom nature had placed so near her rich
| colonies, should become interefied, by their
own engagements in the prefervanon of
those lflands.”” But at this time, France,
powerful by her vi€ories, and secure in her
triumphs, may less regard the reciprocal
guaranty with the U, 8. and be willing to
relinquish it. Asa substitute for the reci
procal guaranty may be proposed a mutual
renunciation of the fame territories and pof
feflions, that were fubjefls of the guaranty
and renunciation of the sixth and eleventh
articles of the treaty of alliance. ' Such a
renunciation on our part would obviate the
reason afligned in the inflruflion to Mr.
Genet, before ¢ited, of future danger from.
the rapidly growing power of the U. S.
But 1f France insists on the mutual guaranty
t it will be meceflary to aim at some modifi
cation of it.
The existing engagement is of that kind
which by writers on the law of nations, is
called a general guaranty ; of course the
! cafus federis can mnever occur except in a
| defenfive war. The nature of this obliga.
! tion 1s understood to be, that when a war
| 7eally and truly defenfive exists, the enga
' ging nation is bound to furnifh an effe&ual
! and adequate defence in co-operation with
| the power attacked ; whence 1t follows,
. that the nation may be required, in some
{ circumfitances, to bring forward its whole
force. The nature and extent of the fuc
cours demandable not being afcertaified, en
gagements of this kind are dangerous on
account of their uncertainty ; there is al.
ways hazard of doing too much or too lit
tle, and of course of being involved in in.
voluntary rupture,
Specific fuccours have'the advantage of
certainty, and are less liable to occasion
war. On the other hand a general gua
rantee allows a Jatitude for the exercile of
5 judémcm and discretion.
] n the part of the U. S. instead of troops
| or ships of war, it will be convenient to fli
pulate for a moderate sum of money or
quantity of provisions, at the optien of
France, the provisions to be delivered atg
our own ports, in any futyre defeofive wars,
The sum of money or its value in provisions,
ought not to exceed 200,000 dolls, a year
during any such wars. The reciprocal fli
pulation on the part of France may be to
. furpifh annually the like sum of money or
an equivalent io military flores and cloath
ing for troops, at the option of the U. S.
to be delivered in the ports of France.
Particular caution, however, must be u
{ed in discussing this fubje&t,notto admit any
claims on the ground of the guaranty in re
lation to the existing war as we do not al
low that the cafus faderis applics to it.—
And if the war thould continue after your
arrival in France, and the question o¥ the
« guaranty should not be mentioned on her
part, you may yourselves be silent on the
fubje&, if you deem it most prudent. -
It will be proper here to notice such ar
ticles of the treaty of amity and commerce
between the U.S.and France, as have
been differently confirued by the two go
veroments, on which it may be expedient
to amend or explain.
. Art. 2. The assent of the U. S. in their
treaty with G. Britain, to the doftrine of
the law of nations refpefting’ enemies’ pro
perty in neutral {hips, and ship timber and
naval stores, and in some cases provisions,
as contraband of war, the French govern
ment has chosen to confider as a voluntary
grant of favors, in refpe& to commerce
and navigation, to G. Brtain, and that con
fcquend; the fame favors have become com
mon to Fraoce. This conftrution is so fo
reign from our ideas of the memu:geud
(k‘gn of this article, that it shews the ne
‘e-flity of reviewing all the articles, and
¥ wever clear they may appear, of atigmpts
ing to obviate future mifconftru@ions by
declaratory explanations or a ‘change of
terms,
Art. 5." France has repeatedly contended
that the imposition of 50 cents per tan on
French veflels arriving in the U. S. is con
trary to the sth article of the treaty. The
arguments in support of this pretension are
unknown ; but'it is presumed to be un.
founded. The reciprocal right of laying
*¢ duties or imposts otP what nature soever,”
equal to those imposed on the most favored
nations, and without any other reftrifions,
seems 10 be clearly fettled by the 3d and
ﬁth articles, The sth article appears to
ave been intended merely to define or
}uahfy the rights of American vessels in
rance. It is however desirable that the
queition be understood and all doubt con
cerning it removed. But the introdu&ion
of a Frinciplc of dilerimination between the
veflels of different foreign nations and in de
rogation of the powers of Congrels to raise
revenue by uniform duties on any objefls
whatever, cannot be hazarded. The na
turalization of French veflels will of course
be considered as inadmissible.
Art, 8. The flipulation of doing us good
offices to secure peace to the United States
with the Barbary powers, has never yet
procured us any advantage. If therefore
the French Government lays any firefls on
this stipulation, as authorifing a ¢hlim for
some other engagement from us in FTavour
of France it may be abandoned ; and efpe.
cially if its abrogation can be applied as a
set off against {ome existing French claim.
Art. 14. If the alterations already propo
sed are made in the 23d and 24th articles,
then this 14th article as before observed,
must be abolished.
Art. 17. The conftruftion put on this
article by the government of the United
States, is conceived to be reasonable and
jut ; and is therefore to be infiled on.—
The tribunals of the refpetive countries
will consequently be juftified in taking cog
nizance of all captures made within their
refpe@ive jurifdiflions ; or by illegl pri
vateers ; and those of one country will be
deemed illegal which are fitted out in the
country of the other remaining neutral :
feeing to permit such arming would violate
the neutral duties of the larter.
It will be expedient to fix explicitly the
reception to be given to public ships of
war of all nations. The French ministers
have demanded that the tgublic ships of the
enemies of France, which at any time, and
in any part of the world, had made prize
of a French vessel, should be excluded from
the ports of the United States, although
they brought in no prize with them. In
opposition to this demand, we have con
tended that they were to be excluded only
when they came in with French prizes.—
And the kind of asylum to be afforded in
all other circumstances is described in Mr.,
Jefferfon’s letter to Mr. Hammond, dated
the gth of September, 1798, in the follow
ing words : ¢“Thus thep the public ships of
war of both nations (English & French) enjoy
a fperfc& equality in our ports ; Ift, in cases
of urgent neceflity ; 2d, in cases of comfort
or convenience ; g3d, in the time they
choose to continue.” And such shelter and
accommodation are due to the public‘thips
of all pations on the principles of hospitality
among friendly nations. |
- It will also be expedient explicitly to de
clare that the right of asylum stipulated for
the armed veflels of France and their prizes
gives no right to make sale of thole prizes. |
But when prize ships are so disabled as
to be incapable of putting to sea again, unril
refitted, and when they are utterly disabled, |
some provision is necessary relative to their |
cargoes. Both cases occurred last - year.—
The Government permitted, though with
hesitation and caution, the cargoes to be un
loaded, one of the vessels to be repaired,
and part ofghe prize goods fold, to “}:ay for
the repairs, and the cargo of the veflel that
we found unfit ever to go to sea again, was
allowed to be exported as prize goods, even
in neutral bottoms. The doubts on these
occasions arose from the 24th article of the
British Treaty, forbidding the sale of the
prizes of privateers, or the exchange of the
fame inany manner whatever. Butas French ’
prizes were entitled to an asylum in our |
ports, it was conceived to be a reaflonable
conftrulion of it to allow of such proceed
ings as those above mentioned, to prevent
the total loss of veflels and cargoes. The
25th article of the Britith Treaty, demands
attention ; as it is therein flipulated, that
no future Treaty shall be made that shall ‘
be inconsistent with that or the e4tharticle.
Another doubt arose, whether the Britith
Treaty did not in good faith, require the
rohibition of the sale of prizes made by the
fﬂatioml ships of France, as well as of those
made by her privateers ; elpecially feeing
our Treaty with France gave her no. right
to fell any prizes whatever : but upon the
whole it was conceived that the United
States having before allowed the sale of {uch
prizes, and the prohibition in the 24th arti
cle of the Treaty being diftintly pointed a.
gainft the {ale of the prizes of privateers, it
was thought proper to permit the former
ra@ice to continue, until the Executive
ﬁwuld make and publifth a prohibition of
the sale of all prizes, or that Congress
should pass a prohibitory law.
Art. g2d. Ifin new modeling the Trea
ty with France, the total probibition of the
sale of prizes in the ports of the party re
maining neutral should not be agieed op, at
Teaft the right of cach power to make at i
pleasure such prohibition, whefbe’t.thi& y are
- prizes o!mbgul thips or privateers {i ouid
L acknowledged, for the realon more than
[ One Dollar & half pr. Annum,
once suggested, to prevent a repetition of
claims upon untounded conftrultions ; such
as under the present article, that a prokdb;.
tzon to an ememy of either party is a grant
-to the other of the thing forbidden.
Art, 23d and z4tb.ngl‘hcfc have been al.
ready considered, and the alterations propo
{ed have been mentioned.
There have been so many unjull csufes
and pretences afligned for capuring and
confilcating American veflels, 3t may per
‘baps be impossible to guard agsinft 2 rep--
tition of them in any Treaty which can be
devised. To state the causes and pretences
that have been already advanced by the
Government of France, its agents and tri
bunals, as the grounds of the capture and
condemnation of American veflels and car
goes would doubtlels give pain to any man
of an ingenious mind who should be em.
ployed on the part of France to negociate
another Treaty, or a modification of the
Treaties which exist. It is not desired,
therefore to go farther into detail on these
matters than shall be peceffary to guard by
explicit stipulations, against future mifcon.
ftru@ions and the mifchicfs they will naty
rally produce.
Under pretence that certain ports were
surrendered to the English, by the treachery
of the French and Dutch inhabitants, ViQor
Hughes and Lebas, the special agents of the
Executive Dire&ory at Guadaloupe, have
declared that all neural veflels, bound to of
from such ports shall be good prize,
* Under the pretence that the British were
taking all neutral vessels, bound to or from
French gom, the French agents at St. Do
mingo, Santhonax and others, decreed that
all American veflels bound to or from Ep.
ﬁla“h ports, should be captured ; and they
ve since declared such captured vessels to
be good prize. The French Consuls in
Spain, have on the fame ground, condemn
ed a number of American vellels, merely
because they were deflined to or coming
from an Englith port.
Under the pretence, that the sea-letters
or paflports prescribed by the commercial
treaty, for the mutual advantage of the mer
chants and navigators of the two nations, to
save their veflels from detention and other
vexations, when met with at sea, by prefenta
ing so clear a proof of the property, are an
indifpenfible document to be found on boa: dy
the French confifcate American vessels des
titute of them, even when they acknowledge
the property to be American.
Because horses and their military furnie
ture, when deflined to any enemy’s port,
are by the 24:h article oiy the commercial
treaty declared contraband, and as such by
themselves only liable to confifcation,w=
Hugues and Lebas decreed all neutral vef=
Jels having horses or any other contraband
goods on board should be good prize ; and
they accordingly condemned vefels and
cargoes,
The ancient ordinances of the French
monarchs required a variety of papers to
be on board neutral vessels, the want of any
one of which is made a cause of condemnae
tion, although the 25th article of the come
mercial treaty mentions what cerrificates
shall accompany the merchant vessels and
cargoes of each party, and which by every
realonable conftru@ion, ought to give them
proteélion,
It will therefore be advisable to guard
against abuses by descending to particulars 3
te describe the ships papers which shall be
required, and 10 declare that the want of
any other shall not be a cause for confifca
tion ¢ to fix the mode of manning vessels,
as to the officers, and the proportion of the
crews who shall be citizens ; endeavouring
to provide, in refpeét to American vessels,
that more than one third may be foreigners,
This provision will be important to the
Southern States, which have but few native
seamen.
The marine ordinances of France will
shew what regulations have been required
to be observed by allied as well as neutral
powers in general to ascertain and secure
the property of neutrals. Some of these
regulations may be highly proper to be ae
dopted ; while others may be inconvenient
and burdensome. Your aim will be, to
render the documents and formalities as few
and as simple as will confilt with a fair and
regular commerce.
Arts. 25 and 97. Thele two articles
should be rendered conformable to each
other. The 27th fays, that afier the exhie
bition of the passport, the veflel shall be ale
lowed to pals without molestation or search,
without giving her chafe or forcing her to
quit her intended- course. The ¢sth re.
quires that besides the passport, veflels shall
be furnifhed with certain certificates, which
of course must also be exhibited. 1t will be
expcdicnt to-add, that if in the face of such
evidence, the armed veflel will carry the
other into port, and the papers are found
conformabg: to treaty, the captors shall be
condemned in all the charges, damages apd
interefls thereof, which they shall have cause
ed. A provision of this nature is made in
the eleventh article of our treaty with the
United Netherlands,
‘Art. 28. The prohibited goods here
mentioned, have no relation to contraband 3
but merely to such as by the laws of the
country are forbidden to be expgigd.‘: ‘ Yet
in the case of cxp‘ortin% horses Wom Vire
ginia, which no law prohibited, in the wine
ter of 1706, this article was applied by the
French !ainiﬂer to ' horses, ‘which by the
‘French treaty are contraband of war. And
~a letter from the Minister to ViQtor Hugues
~and Lebas, informing themm, that the Ame. -