The Patowmac guardian, and Berkeley advertiser — Shepherdstown, Va. [W. Va.], 1796-12-08 00:00:00, page 2

isVfr.ncilii’lrifl the duties of the f'offner with
'lh« obligiWWts'M U>c latter.
The government eery wellktfeW how to folicit
*b* law of the fib of-J title 1794, when that ;law *

jo bear oiftfsoce sfldhe.'when'it give to' the tri.
Initials a right wtlitli has ' been abuted, and hhch
enables ibemdO decide upon prizes r why, ou lee.
ing the iiiconaedient.ee oi ibis law, lias u not tn
'deavoured to remedy them i Should it wait to be
Iblicited Oh ibis head I should it not anticipate all
claims, and when thofe were prefented by the mi
nilters of the republic, Ihbuld it not do jultice ?
Befidea, "if government bad been impartial, as it
has pretended to be,it would not have adopted that
'■fi >w and circuitous mode, to fsvourable to the er.e
mies’of France, fShdeciding the cates relative lo'its
neutrality | it would have preferred the mealures
propofed by Mr. J ff rlon, on the ajrb of June, 93,
lo me milliner
were (im pie/they'were in .confonuir/with the du
ties of oetiiVality and the inierelis of The republic.
The federal government had decided queftions
" which intereftetf its neutrality, upon informations
fur'nithed hy the ftate governors and the agents of
the republics the prizes remained in the hardsv of
the French conful, until this deetfion todk'place;
the Itipulations rtn'theT tftb article of the treaty of
*78, were not violated; and tbe'gOverhtueht at the
fame time fatisfied the obligations of duty and juf
tice, in v^in would it fry, that it had not this pow
«r. Notwithstanding lhe law of5th June '94 giv
ing ro the fribunaI he right of taking cognizance
of cafe* in’which'neutrality had been violated, did
not the Prefident on the fcifl of June,^94, decide;
that the lliip. William, taken our of.the limits of the*
waters of the United States, (hould be delivered to.
thecaptof ; and on the'3d July, 94, did he not de -
cide that the Pilgrim had been taken in the waters
of the United States, and that of courle lhe lhould
he given up to the owners ? In thefe cafes the Prtfi
dent not ohly decided on matters, the cognizance
of which bail been cor.figncd to the tribunals, but
likewife gave a retrolpective effect- to his own deci
lion upon the protecting line of the United States,
which was not notified to the Miuifter of the Re
public, till tbegilfcot Nov.
Not fatikfhrd with permitting the 17th article of
the treaty to he violated by its agents and tribunals,,
the federal government llfo ftiffered the'Englilh to
avail thernfelves of advantages interdicted to them
hy tharartide. Tb^y Irmtd in the1 ports of the
United Slates ‘brought in, and repaired their pri
zes, and in t word found in thttfl'a certain afyltmi.
Thus the EngHlh privateer Trufty,' capr* Hall,
was armed at Baltimore to cruize againft the
French, and failed ubtwithliauding the complaints
of the conful of the Republic. At Charlefton, one
Bermudian vefsel, (cveral Englilh vefsels and one
Dutch vefsel, iroin the 24th ot May to the 6ih ol
June, '93, rook in cannon ft>r their defence, and
Jailed without"opp'ofition.
What anfwer did- the government give to the re
firefenrations of the minuter of the French repub
ic in this re I peer ? it faid that thefe vefsels failed
fo luddenly,It was not able to have them arrefted,
but the treaty was riot Mb violated Some inhabitants
of the'United States had aided in thefe illegal ar
maments What meafnt es were taken againlt them?
Was any iearch made to difeover them, to prole,
cute them ? Never, arid yet the government'of the
United States, no fooner learned that, in confe
’ quence of an rmplied Ttlpulation which the treaty ol
Verfairies feenitd to contain, the French were arm
ing In the porrs of ihe'Uimfd States, than the molt
energetic orders were lent for hopping thtle arma
ments. Even citizens of the United States were
imprifoned upon fulpicion rthat they had participa
ted in thrtn. The minifrer cannot omit citing here
the following pafsage of a letter from the fecreta.
ry of ftate, E limmcT Randolph, to Mr, Hammond,
dated 2d June, '94. On a luggeftiou that citizens
of the United Staus had taken part in the act [he
(peaks of the armaments in the United Slates] one
who was dtlignated, was hiltantly cdfnniiued to,
prilon for prol'ecut ion : one or two other's have
been line* named and commit tad ih like manner,
ami lhould it appear, that thdre Were kill others, -
no uualures would be fpared to bring them to juf
tice.V What more could the American govethhieut
do in favor of the Englilh, il they had a fimtlar
treaty to that With France, and had been foie pol
fetsorsof the advantages alsurid to her by pofitive
Itipulations ?
However, ih contempt of thefe very fnpolatTons.
theArgonout, an Englilh Ihip of war, in January,
*95. conducted into Linnhaven bay, the- French
Corvette'!. Efperance, which ihe had taken upon
Thecoaft; lhe there had her rep-ired, in order 10
fend her on a cruife. Xetiers were In confluence,
written try ihe fecretary df'frate to the governor of
Virginia,tmd to Mr. Hithnft'dnd. Wbk was the
relult ? nothirtg. On the 2gth of’M *y, '95. the
Federal Government had not yet done any thing
pofitive ab to the acts Which produced ihe com
plaint of tne tr.inifter of the republic. The fecre
tary of ftate announced “ that thefe facts Ihall be
‘examined, and that it they are verified, the Federal
k Geeecninent will not he ifi the Fear of its o'oligati
jpO'** To that has the reparation dei&anded by the
•public been limned.
kWhat are we to think of tbefe delays, vfrhen sire
Jbe officers of the government adding Hriih to
^lictt^ky againft the French, on the flightelt
idom that tfcfcy have tfolated the neutrality*!—
P in his fetter of the a^h April "94, the fecre
ftate anCwers the compfaihti ot the EngKlh
We have received no intelligence of the
liar facts to which you refer ; but to prevent
■“icf»ry circui'.y ic firlt cr/^uirirg into them,
r»?St tranfniiuirig ih ibis ciiy the rfcfult) \Y% *
proper fcfuuctious will be given to act without
further directions. HoW did the federal govern
Dime conduce towards tlie autumn ftf *94 I
fcrtgiilb Irigarfe TerpftcbOre vttfdk fhijftjMitefr
'Nlontagne into the port of Norfolk. The French
vice confol claimed the execution ol the treaty, oi
the governor ofviaginia t The governor anlwiered
liiia,that he would have theneceHary inveltigation
made, and wouW fftefwafdatake the proJ>ermta
lures. The predeceisor'of the underfigneo then id
terpofed with the federal govettnneni 1 and -thele
cretary of ftate aiaured him, that he wrote tq the
goveriWr of V i rgiif «f ha v e ^a ft rc e’ r* rtd er e d. But
this iuliice wat limittedto inveftigations made with
fuchjflownetV, that five inonthi after, fhia iffair was
not taoilhed ; and on the 24th reb. 95, the fecreta
ry ot ltaie contented himiclf with ititding to the
predeeefsor of the Oudeifigned, the dilpatches of
the lieutenant governor, dated loth Oc. '94, by
which tie announces, that be ordered the command
ant of the militia of Norfolk td'make the necaftrfiy
enquiries Tor'eoaBling the executive of Virginia, to
render to the republic the juitice it bad a right to
*xptct. The rtiult of theie enquiries is not kpowm
However, the fact about which The'mini ft er Fau
<Thet complained'to the fccrttary’of ftate “was noto
rious, and painful'relearchea‘were not nccefaary to
convince hitnfelf of it. Do we not'find in thif pro
ceeding a formal defire toilude the treaties, and to
favour the'Erngittn r . > .
If the government of the Unitid Stages ha'd wifh*-.
ed to maintain itfclfin that impartiality which its
duties prelcribcd—if it. Bad *wilhed freely to exe
cute "the treaties, it would not have waited, every
time that the Englilh infringed them, for the m»
nilter to folicit ill;juftt$e» . Should It'hot fcave
given inftructtona fo precife; that the governors of
the fiates aod fubaltein cfficeVs of the federal go '
vernment might know wbat.duties they bad to ,ful
fil, in order to maintain the execution of treaties ? .
Why have the molt enefgietic orders (loch ai the fe
cretary of itate, Randolph mentions) been given, „
when the fupport of the neutrality inviolate in fa
vourof the Englilh, came in ^ueftion ? Why have
the meafures taken By the federal government ope
rated with fo much flowneft When France was in
terefted ? Why in fine baye tbe" multiplied claims of
her iriinifiers never produced the rildrCis of tht j
grievances of‘which they complained.
When the predeteTsor of ttie under figned mini Iter !
plenipotentiary claimed the execution of the i^fh
article pf the treaty interdicting the fntfy into the j
American ports of Englilh vefsels Which ihould J
have hiade prizes upon the French; when he cited ]
this finiple and formal flipulaiion : “ On the con :
trary.'neitber afylum nor rduge fball be given in 1
the ports or harbors oftrarice or of the United J
States io vefsels which lhall have made'prizes of the j
French or Americans’} and fhotlld they be obliged
to enter by tempeft, or danger, of the fea, all pro
per means Thall be Vfed 10 make them depart as
loon as pofstble;" the fecretary of ftate in order ro
avoid ihurting the American'ports a gain ft the En
gltih, interpreted this article in their favor. “ But
it would be uncandid to conceal from you the con
ftruction which we have hitherto deemed the true
one. Tlu fir ft part o( the 17th article related to
French ihips of War and privateers entering our
ports with their prizes ,* the fccond contracts the
lituation of the eneitiies of France, hy forbidding
fuch as I hall have made prizes of the frenchinti
mating from thisto'nnrction of the two claufes, that
the vciscls forbidden are thole Which bring their
prizes with them. It has beeri confidercd that this
lection of the treaty was impartially ‘deftined to the
withholding of protection or fuccour, to the prizes
themtelves : ha-d it been.otherwife, It would have
been TnpeiHuoos, to have prohibited from failing
wbar they have taken iu the pons of the United
S rates.
He laid, moreover, in his letter of the 29th of
—“ But on 1 hr 3d of Auguft, the Prdidcnt
de^Hfcd hisconlcruction of that treaty to .be, that
no^Klic aimed ve'.sel were thereby forbidden frofn
uui^Pacers, except ihote which fhould have fnr.de
prize.*? of the people or property of France coming j
with their prizes But how is it polsible to find, !
in the tiipuiatidns of the treaty, the fenie given to
ih .tn by the go\ ernmenr of the United States ? 7 his
txprelsicn of the treaty, *• which fhall have made
prizes,” is general* and applies to all captured vef
Uls, whether they, enter the ports of the United
States with prizes, or enter them alone, after hav- ;
ihg made prizes. It is evident, that the govern- 1
incut adds to the letter of the treaty in this circum- :
Itance } and is it not aftonilhirg that it admits a
conftrncrion of the treaty , w hm it expects to find ■
a meaning diladvantageous to France, and in other !
inftances oppofes all conlttuciion, when it Would
he favourable to the Republic* But has it the !
right of conhrocting the treaty, of changing of its
own accord, the fenie of a clear and precifc ftipu
lation, without the coofent and concurrence of the
other contracting party ? fX.ubilels not, efpecially :
when, by fo doing, ij wounds her interefts.
The lecretary of ftate, by the lad article, pre- ;
tends to fuppbrt his cohftroction of the 17th arti- |
cle. What dbes this 22d article contain ? A pro
hibhioft of the enemies of France and of tbe United
States frofn aiifninc in the relpective ports of the
two power#, offefFing their prized, or of difeharg
ittg ail or part of their eargoe s there. 1fhis article,
therefore, applies to the prizes ; whifit the 17th
applies to the capturing velsels *-Did it not exift,
thy enemies of France, or of the United' States,
mrgbt fend their prizes into the refpective parts of
tbe two powers, without conducting them there
themfelves : the 17th article, containing Only a pro
hibiiary arrargtaient for the capturing vefeeis,
h'bi itirfn from dmi-g this. }■ *,J
_ ary lbc»\> base rc.outic to luinial prohibi
U0u : bifid. s, aa the velstls w hich have made pri*
rltt on ihe Frenchfir Americans, are admitted iota
the pbrts qt trahteVcT ci ibt United States, in c,
lea ofiempelt or dangers ol the lea, they might
this cale, have conceived themfelves authorized’ t0
diipofe ol their prizes, tn left them, or to dilcbaroe
their cargoes’, it was uecetsary iherelote to take
this right front them in a poittive manner, it wa,
Itecelsaiy to pretent ihtm ticm benefiting by a i,i.
pul a; ion made in favour of humanity : this is t|w
end anlwertd by the zttd article, ttltithis not 1«.
pet ducts, as the lecteury M Kate maintains, tot
. n the contrary, contains a diltiitct lt.pulaiion fit ,a
that ol the 17th. It is then evident fiolu this, th,t
in the calcs at o>e cited by the underhgt.ed, the hi.
potations of the 17th artitlehave been violsird.^.
They have been equally I'o, by the srinihfion in lta.
dry ports, of the Thetis and Hulsatfrigates, which
captured La Frevoyante and La Ration, Trench
fiore Ihips, ar.d by attnitiing in the lalt inlTanCe
thifi fame (hip La Ration, prize to the Thetis lit,
to the ports of the United Mates.
Bur admitting for a ntotr.ehr theconftroonor® grj
tuuoifly given by the lecretary of Hate to the jjifj
article of the treaty ot ’78, this article has rot . bte
lefs been violated, when the Argomur, which bad
quitted Hampton Roads in ordtr to capture LE'pe
rance, Was permitted to enter With that prize';
when the Tcrpfichorc Was feffered to bring m the
privateer la Montagne. Th vain Were fought, in ife
relources of a captious and falle logic, the meant of
excbiirfg fetch conduct. The facts Ipeak ; and every
uptight mind, not blinded by pi-Hion, Will necelsa
riiyyieldto tbeir evidrr.ee. Vet the prohibitory
ftlpujation of the adxn iKort of prizes fn-de by htt
enelnies,V$ the only advantage which France expect
ed to enjoy, after having wrought and guaVamced
the Independence of fhe United Stairs, at a time
when ifie might, is the price of that veiy indeptiuf.
epee, tave granted them IeTs liberal conditions.
TUefewrongs of the American govefament towards
the Republic, jult Itattcrby the undeiligned MioiU
ter'PLnipoteiuiai y will foo'n be aggravated by new
ones. It was a little frialie> only to allow the fcn
glilh to avail iluSnielves of the advantage* of our
treaty, it^was necefsary to afsore th'ele to tl.etn hy
the aid of a. coni ract wbich’might ferve at once as
a reply to the claims of France, and as peremtery
motives of refulai, the true caufe of which it wa*
rrqotfire incelsantly to ditguife to her under fpeci
ou5 pretexts. . .. ^ .
Outn wat. the obj'ct of Mr. jay’s misfion to Lon
don, fuch was the object of a nrgociat »or. enveloped
from its origin in the fhadqw of "h,ill try, and co
vered with the veil of disiimolat ion. Could me
Executive Directory have any other ide'a of it, ou
examining its »Tst»e, on feeingall the efforts wade by
the American government to conceal the Jecrec
froTri e'very eye. r
in his uiel3a'ge to the Senate pf the i6;h of Aptil
’94 the President declared that Mr. la) was lent t<»
London or.iy to obtain a red refs of the wrong? done
to the United States j at the fame time the iccrcta
r'y of Itate c ernmonicattd to the predecelsnr of ti e
underfighed, a part of the ihfnactions' to Mr. Jay,
reminding him of the intention of the /jmericuirgo-vftn
mrnt not to de'Viatt ftom its tvgagcmetiti nxuh the l<cul':t
of France. The French tuiiiilter, dccei^td by U s
communication, contributed ingenuonfly to deceive
his government. The American fninitierin Franco
removed the fears of the French government as to
the mislion of this Envoy Extraordinary, and re*
prefenttd it as the only means of obtaining indent*
niheation for the foises which the Airierican com
merce has fuftainc'd. What has this negociatic.it
produced ? a treaty of amity and commerce which
deprives France of all the advantages itipulaud in
a previous treaty.
In tact all that conic! render the neutrality prom-,
able to England and injurious to France is combined
in this treaty. Her commercial relations with thd
United State are entirely broker, by the abandon
ment of the modern public law on contraband, a
law which England had conlecraced ib eleven trea
ties, and which the American?, had alio eonfecraud
in their treaties with France, Holland,Sweeten ai d
Prusfia. From the new arrangtntenis adopted by
the United States with rtgjrd to England* the tree
carriage of the articles tor the i qmpment and arma
ment of vclsels, is gi anted exduiively to that pow
er.
By the 23d article of the treaty ot Verfailles the
United Slides have the liberty ol freely caryit'g on
commerce with the cuttiiies ot France, 'ihe
art iile of the treaty with Holland the ioih article
of the treaty with Sweden and the 131 h article of the
treaty with Prnffia, contain the lame itipulation.
This !:*tt article gives even more eXter.five rights to
the United States by permit ting them to carry to
the entmieSof this power, all the articles enumera
ted, in the Hit of loch a* are contraband of war
without their being liable to cot.frfcaiion. But by
the j8th article of the treaty of London, the articles
for arming and equipping velsels are declared con
traband of war. 'Ihe government of ihe United
States has therefore by this Itipulation, granted s i
the Englifh a right which they had refuled, in cot
fequence ot the modern public law, to other nation*
•with whom they have made treaties : that of feizing
on board their vtfsels, articles proper for the con
ftructron and equipment of velsels. 'TheEnglillt
then according 10 that, enjoy the exclufive com
merce of articles proper for the conltruciieD of va
lets f yer prior to the treaty concluded be. ween John
jay and Lord GrenvilTe, the United States bad the
right of carrying on commerce with every power :
the partiality of the American government in favour
•f England* has therefore been luch that not ou>y