Russel & Davis' Republican gazetteer — Concord, N.H., 1797-03-07 00:00:00, page 1

DOCUMENTS, &c.
LETTER to Mr. PINCKNEY.
Utotinu/l.]
[, the ^h of September, 1793,
he Secretary of State thus ex
fed 10 the Bririfh Minister the de
termination of the Executive," ' The
public ships of war of both nations
[French and English] enjoy a perfeft
equality in our ports, ift, in cases of
urgent neceffity—zd,in cases of com
fort and convenience, and yd, inthe
time they choose r o continue, and
though the admission of prizes and
privateers of France is exclusive, yet
it is the effe& of treaty,' &c.
In support of our conftrudion of
the treaty, it has been observed that
*;+ the ;ft part of the 17th article
relates to French ffiips of war and
privateers entering our ports with
their prizes ; the zd, coatrafts the
fixation of the enemies of France,
by forbidding such as shall have made
prize of the French, intimating from 1
this connexion of the two clauses,
that rhofe forbidden, are those which
bring their prizes with them." To
th# e observations I will add ; —That
it the literal conttrudion contended
for by the French ministers were ad
milted, then although the publics
ships of war which had made prize of
french people or property, would be
excluded from our ports, yet the pri
zes of such public fh:ps might be re
ceived, and they might be fold too ;
~for she prohibitronin the zzd article
of the treaty, applies only to priva
teers and their prizes ; while the go
vernment of the United States judg
ed that the 17th article was intended
to exclude the prizes made on the
French by public Ships of war as well
as those made by privateers ; and
gave direaions accordingly to have
them excluded. Further, if it had
been intended to exclude from our
ports the public (hips of war of the
enemies of France, coming without
any prize, then they would doubtless
have been compr headed in one pro
vision with the privateers in the zzd
article : for privateers are thereby ex
cluded, whether they came with or
without prizes. But public ships of
war are not comprehended, or at all
referred to in the zzd article; whence
the conclusion is fair, that it was not
intended to forbid them coming alone
— and consequently that the exclu
sion provided in the 17th article ap
plies to them only when they would
come into our ports with their prizes
—this last clause of the fame article
being in its form opposed to the firft
claure which admits the entrance of
French ships with their prizes. Be
sides, if a public (hip of war of the
enemies of France comes into our
• ports without any prize, how is it to
De known whether she has or has not
made prize of the people or property
of the French ? Who is to createa
tribunal to investigate and pronounce
on the fad ? But if the comes with a
prize the case presents nodifficulty ;
file brings with her the evidence that
goes to the exclusion of her and her
prize.
I must now advert to some others
of Mr. Adet's charges against the go
vernment of the United States.
ift. "It [the Government of the
United States] put in question whe-
Q -1 ■.... , I
• State papers, p. 77.
, Secretary if State to Mr, Fauckii,
September 7, 1794.
NO. 16.]
~—- —- : • =_—c~pqq^^ — c™^*Q"!^=!!!^!^!*!!!*!!^!=y!!=^*=^2^^
RUSSEL & DAVIS'S
REPUBLICAN GAZETTEER.
CONCORD, [newh.] TUESDAY, March 7, <797.
|ther it should execute the treaties, or,
receive the agents of the rebel and
proscribed princes." And is there
any thing in this unjuftifiable or ex
traordinary ? Was it easy for a nation
distant as ours, to obtain promptly
such accurate information as would
enable it duly to estimate the varying
condition of France ? In 1791, the
constitution formed by the canftitu
ent assembly was accepted by Louis
the 16th ; it was notified to the Unit
ed States in March, 1792. Congress
desired the President to communicate
to the King of the French their con
gratulation, on the occasion. In Au-
Iguft, 1792, the King was suspended.
{ln September Royalty was abolished ;
and in January, 1793, Louis the 16th
tried and condemned by the Conven
tion, foffered death. Was it easy to
keep pace wi-hghe rapid succession of
such revolutionary events? And was
it unlawful for our government under
such circumstances even to deliberate ?
I do not find that information of the
deathof the king was received from
our Minister at Paris, until May ift,
>793- The news however had previ.
oufly arrived in such manner as to at
tra& the attention of government:
for in April the President had deter
mined to receive a Minister from the
French Republic. And it is remark
able that'this was before he knew that
a Minister had arrived in the United
States. This promptitude in decid
ing a leading question does not bear
any strong marks of hefit^rion. And'
was there no meri: in this ready de-J
termination to acknowledge the Fr.
Republic ? Had it been before ac
knowledged by any power on the
globe ? How long did France befitate
to acknowledge the Republic of the
United Stares ? A year and a half.
And under what circumstances was
the acknowledgement finally made ?
After the capture of a whole British
army appeared to have established
our Independence. But of this more
hereafter.—ln matters of importance
(and what could be more important
than the decision of a neutral and al
lied nation on questions perhaps in
volving war or peace ?) is it the part
of wisdom to rejed all deliberation e
ven on points which do not obvious
ly prefair difficulties ? Will not pru
dence didate to him who is to decide
great national questions, rather to de
liberate long, than to rifle the conse
quences of hasty decisions ?
2. " It made an infiJious procla
mation of neutrality."
- I have already remarked that this
proclamation received the pointed
approbation ofCongrefs ; and Insight
truly add, of the great body of the
Citizens ofthe United States. And
what was the general object of this
approbation? Te preserve us in a
state of peace. And have not the min
isters of France declared that their
Government did not desire us to en
•ter into ttye war ? And how was peace
te be preserved? By an impartial
neutrality. And was it not then the
duty of the Chief Executive to pro
claim this to our Citizens, and to in
form them what ads would be deem
ed departures from their neutral du
ties ? This was done by the procla
mation. It declared it to be the duty,
interest and disposition of the United
States to adopt and pursue a cond a&
friendly and impartial toward the bel
ligerent powers : it warned the Citi
zens to avoid all a&s which might
contravene that disposition : It de
clared that whosoever of the citizens
Should render himfelf liable to pun
ishment or forfeiture under the law
of nations, by committing or abett
ing hostilities against any of those
powers, or by carrying to any of them
; articles deemed contraband of war,
would not receive the proteaion of
the United States against such pon
iftnent and forfeiture; and that the
President had given inftrudions to
the proper officers to prosecute all
Iperfons who should violate the law of
nations with refpeft tothe powers at
war or any of them. To what in all
thi^ can the epithet i%fidious be appli
ed? Onihe contrary, is not the whole
tranfadion stamped with cawder and.
geod faith ?
,d. " By its cbicantriet, it abandon
ed French privateers to its courts of
Justice." Abandoned to its courts °f]uf
tia / Sir, you know many of thejudg
es personally, and all of them by rep
utation, and that their charadeis
need no vindication from such an in
sinuation. They are judges with
whose administration ot justice oarl
own citizens are fatisfied ; and wel
believe that they may challenge the |
world to furnish a proof that they
h^e not administered justice with e
qual impartiality to foreigners. I will
only add here one remark, that the
correfporidencies with the French
Ministers formerly published, joined
to those now furnifhed you with the
other documents accompanying them
will show how loudly they can com
plain of the proceedings in our courts
ran'a^t the fame time with hew little
justice.
4th. " It eluded the amicable me
diation of the Republic for breaking
the chains of its citizens at Algiers"
We did not entertain any doubt of the
friendly disposition of the French Re
public to aid us in this bufiaefs. But
what was really done we have never
known. You will find herewith Mr
Fauchet's letter of Jone 4th, 1794,
and the answer of the Secretary of State
on the 6b, to «u)bt<b Mr. ata refers.
The information on tbefubfahvbicb Mr.
Fanebet exptßed " in a little time from
Europe" probably n^ver arrived: dt
least it was never communicated to our
government. There is Ja-ely in tbe jecre
tary's answer no evidence that our gov
ernment were unwilling to accept the me
diation of the Republic. On the contra
ry, we bave relied upon it to aid our ne
gotiations with tbe Barbary powers.—^
Accordingly, when Col. Humphreys went
from bonce in I 795, cloatbed with powers
for negotiating peace with theftfates, be
i was particularly infrubhd to solicit the
mediation of the French Republic ; and
; for that purpose only, be went from Lis
bon to Paris, where, through our Minij- §
ter, the Committee of Public Safety men- j
ifeSeatbeir dijpefition to contribute to the^
"face, of bis mission. But Col. Humph
reys was at the fame time autborijed to de- }
,ute ff<pb Donaldson, Ejq. (who bad|
been appointed Consul of the United States
for Tunis and Tripoli, and who went
with Col. Humpbreys from America) to
negotiate immediately a treaty, with Al
giers : for in a country where a negotia- i
tion depended on jo many contingencies, it t
was of the last importance to be ready to\
seize the favorable moment to effia a peace!
whenever it foould offer. Such a moment
presented on Mr. DonaidJon's arrival at
Algiers. He bad not been there fort, tight }
hours before the treat, was concluaed. It
is also a fad that it was effiaed without
the aid of the French Conjul at that place.
However with rejpea to Mr Donaldson's
negotiation, we are well informed that
" His not conferring with the Consul of
t/PQ&ltoteQ^tfMtLJ^Mte^Lrzatt^b^cifo^^w-.f. t
I France was not his fault ; and if be bad/
£done it, that it would have injured hie
\cauje ; neither the Republic nor her Con-'
\jul enjoying any credit with the D,."=
^ But we are at she fame time informed that
the cau/c of this was trarfitory, and ought
J not to binder us from endeavoring to cn^
I g c ge her interest for other places and in
ybat place for future sectfan. Agreeably
E to this idea the Agent of the United States
l applied to the French Consul, Herculais,
latI at Algiers, the lag Ipring, to recommend
ajuicable person to negotiate a treat,' with
ITunis.1 Tunis. Tbeperjon recommended was em
lployed, and we have been informed, bad
! in part jucceeded, and was ixpeaed to
complete a treat, of peace. This informa
.tion was communicated to our minister at
sParis in a letter dated 30th of Augufi last
I from the French minder of foreign affairs,
r accompanied by an extract of a titter from
Ithe Canful Hirculais.
I In cli tbefe tranfaaions, far from dif
!covering a trace of evidence to jupporf
1 Mr. Ada's charge, the reverse is muni.
If'fb proved.
yb. " Notwitlftsndirg treat,flipu.
!ulattons, it allowed so be arrefad vOTXs 1
lofthe State.''
While we admit the faß that French
vffb have been arrfhd, we den, tbut
the arrets have infringed any treat, flip
ulations. 'The details in this letter and
the documents referred to appear to us ex
tirel, to exculpate tbe government. And if
neither the Executive tier our tribunals
<ould in any case take cegnifance of cap
tures which the French privateers called
prizes, then they might take our own vef
fols in our rivers ana barbers and our
citizens be without redrejs. But " *it
is an ffutial attribute of the jurijdiaim
of ever, country to preserve peace, to pun
ifo aas in breach of it, and to refers
propert, taken by force within its limits.
Were then armed vtfls of an, nation to
cut away one of our ownfrom the wbar-ve
of Philadelphia, and to choose to call it 6
prize, would this exclude itsfrom the right
of redressing the wrong ?" Hire it the
v oel 6 f another nation, are we not equal,
I, bound to prated it, while within our
limits ? Were it seized in an, other wa
ters or on thefares of the United States,
the right of redressing is fill the fame t ang
bumble indeed would be our condition
were due obliged to depend for that on the
will cf a foreign Cor.ful, or on negotia
tion with diplomatic agents.
The fame reasoning will apply to cap.
tures made b, illegal privateers ; that is,
by fueb as were armed and equipped in
[the ,rts of the United States ; for it be
^"g 6, the law cf nations the right four
government, and as a neutral power, its
duty to prevent such armaments, it must
also be its right and duty , by all means in
'its power, to refrain the aßs of such ar
maments done in violation of its rights and
!in defiance of its authority. And Jude
I were the armaments made by French peo
{ple in the,arts of the United States. And
§ the mo, effiaual means of defeating their
(unlawful prodlices was the seizing cf
their prizes when brought within ourju
risdiaion. It is suer, ,ffible, indeed, that
in Jems cases the irritated fubjeas or pub
lic agents of nations whole property was
taken by French privates, might <om
t mence vexatious prosecutions ; but this is
I no more than happens frequently among our
t own citizens; andin ever, natron in the
world; and the only rtfraints on the
! vindictive paffons ofmea, in fueb cases,
,which the policy of free government, has
;impofed, are the damages which tke cotfte
; compel the malicious projector to ,9 to.
i&irjured party, if, as Mr. Ado aG
^Letter freonFe^ecretary of State
'to Mr. Morris, August 16, 1793—
^State Papers p. Cz.
[vol. 1.