The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-01-13 00:00:00

MESSAGE. OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE

UNITED STATES.

FELLOW CITIZENS OP THE SENATE, AND HOI;SE OF REPRE-
SENTATIVES.

In performing my duty at the opening of your present session,
it gives me pleasure to congratulate you again upon the pros-
perous condition of our beloved country. Divine Providence
has favoured us with general health, with rich rewards in the
fields of agriculture, and in every branch of labour, and with
peace to cultivate and extend the various resources which em-
ploy the virtue and enterprise of our citizens. Let us trust that
in surveying a scene so flattering to our free institutions, our
joint deliberations to preserve them may be crowned with suc-
cess.
The-question of the northeastern boundary is still pending
with Great Britain, and the proposition made in accordance
with the resolution of the senate for the establishment of a line
according to the treaty of 1783. has not been accented by that
government. Believing that every
.disposition is felt on both
sides to adjust this perplexiug question to the satisfaction of all
the parties interested in it, the hope is yet indulged that it may
be effected on the basis of that proposition. - •
It becomes my unpleasant duty to inform you, that this pacific
in
clude
those gratifying picture of our foreign relations does not
those with France at 'this time. It is not possible that any go-
vernment and people could he more sincerely desirous of concie
Hating a just and friendly intercourse with another nation, than
are those of the United States with their ancient ally and friend.
This disposition is founded, as well on the most grateful and
honourable recollections, associated with 'our struggle for inde-
pendence, as upon a well-grounded connexion that it is conso-
nant with the true policy of both. The people of the 'United
States could not, therefore, see, without the deepest regret, even
a temporary interruption of the friendly relations between the
two •countries—a regret which would, I am sure, be greatly
aggravated if there should turn out to be any reasonable ground
for attributing such a result to any act of omission on our part.
I derive, therefore, the highest satisfaction 'from being able to
assure you that the whole course of this government has been .
characterised by a spirit so conciliatory and forbearing as to
make it impossible that our justice and moderation should he
questioned, whatever may be the consequences of a longer per-
severance on the part of the French government in her omission
to satisfy the conceded claims of our citizens.
The history of the accumulated and unprovoked aggressions
upon our commerce, committed by authority of the existing
bovernments of France, between the years 1890 and 1817, has
een 'rendered too painfully familiar to Americans to make
its repetition either necessary or desirable. It will be suf-
ficient here to remark, that there has, for many years. been
scarcely a single administration of the French government by
whom the justice and legality of the claims of our citizens to,
indemnity, were not, to a 'very considerable extent, admitted ;
and yet near a quarter of a century has been wasted in in-
-effectual negociattous to secure it.
Deeply sensible' of the injurious effects resulting from this
state of things upcM the interest and character of both nations,
I regarded it as anionr, my first duties to cause one inoreeffort
to be made to satisfy France, that a just and liberal settlement of
our claims was as well due to her own honour as to their•tticon-
testible Validity. The negociation for this phrpose was coin-
' menced -with the late government of France, and was prosecuted
with such successes to leave no reasonable ground to doubt
that a settlement of a character quite as liberal as that 'which
was subsequently made would have been effected, had not the
revolution, by..which the negociatiou was cut off, taken place.
The discussions were resumed with the present government,
and the result showed that we were wrong in supposing that
an event by which the two governments were made to approach
each other so much nearer in their political principles, and by
which the motives for the most liberal and friendly intercourse
were so greatly multiplied could exercise no other than a salu-
tary influence upon the negociatiou. After the most deliberate
and thorough examination of the whole subject, a treaty be-
tween the two governments was concluded and signed at Paris
on the 4th July, 1831, by which It was stipulated that " the French
government, in order.to liberate itself from all the reclamations
perferred against it by the citizens of the United States, for
unlawful seizures, captures, sequestrations, confiscations, or
destruction of their vessels, cargoes, or other property, engages
to pay a sum of twenty-five millions of francs to the United
States, who shall distribute it among those entitled iu the man-
ner and according to the rules it shall determine;" and it was
also stipulated on the part of the French government, that this
twenty-five millions of francs should " be paid at Paris in six
annual instalments of four millions one hundred and sixty-six
thousand six hundred sixty six francs and sixty six centimes
each, in the hands of such person or persons as shall be
authorised by the government of the United States to receive
it." The first instalment to be paid "at the expiration of one
year next following the exchange of the ratihcations of this
convention. and the others at successive intervals of a year,
one after another, till the whole shall- be paid. To the amount
of each of the said instalments shall be added interest of four
per centum thereupon, as upon the other iustalments then
remaining unpaid, the said interest to he computed from the day
of the exhange of the present convention."
This treaty was duly ratified in the manner prescribed by the
constitutions of both countries and the ratification was ex-
changed at the city of Washington on the '2d of February,
1832. On account of its commercial stipulations it was, in five
days thereafter, laid before the Congress of the United States,
which proceeded toeuact such laws -favourable to the commerce
of France as were necessary to carry it into full execution; and
France has, from that period to the present, been in the unre-
stricted enjoyment of the valuable privileges that were thus se-
cured to her. The faith of the French nation having been thus
solemnly pledged, through its constitutional organ, for the li-
quidation and ultimate payment of the long deferred claims of
our citizens, as also fur the adjustment of other points of great
cud- reciprocal benefits to both countries, and the United States
having with a fidelity and promptitude by which their conduct
will, I trust, be always characterized, done everything that was
necessary to carry the treaty into full and fair effect on their
part, counted with the most perfect confidence on equal fidelity
and promptitude on the part of the French government. In
this reasonable expectation we have been, I regret to inform
you, wholly disappointed. No legislative provision has been
made by France for the execution of the treaty, either as it
respects the indemnity to be paid, or the commercial benefits
to be secured to the United States, and the relations between
the United. States and that power, in consequence thereof, are
placed in a situation threatening to interrupt the good under-
standing which has so long and so happily existed between the
two nations.
Nut only has the French government been thus wanting in
the performance of the stipulations it has solemnly entered into
with the United States, but its omissions have been marked by
circumstances which would seem to leave us without satisfactory
evidences that such performance will certainly take place at a
futuee period. Advice of the exchange of ratifications reached
P,aris prior to the Bth April, 1832. The French chambers were
then sitting and continued in session until the 21st of that
month, and although one instalment of the indemnity was pay-
able on the ZI of February, 1833, one year after the exchange
of ratifications, no application was made to the chambers fer
the required appropriation, and in consequence of no appro-
priation having been made, the draft of the United States go-
vernment fur that instalment was dishonoured by the Minister
of Finance, and the United States thereby involved in much
controversy. The next session of the chambers commenced on
the 19th November, 1832,-and continued until 25th April, 183.3.
Notwithstanding the omission to pay the first instalment had
been made the subject of earnest remonstrance on our part, the
treaty with the United States, and a bill making the necessary
appropriations to execute it, were not laid before the Chamber
of Deputies until the sth of April, nearly five months after its
Meeting, and only nineteen days before the close of the session.
The bill was read and referred to a committee, but there was no
farther action upon it. The next session of the chambers com-
menced on the 26th of April, 1833, and continued until the 27th
of June following. A new hill was introduced on the 11th of
June, but nothing important was done in relation-to it during
the session. In the month of April, 1831, nearly three years
after the signature of the treaty, the final action of the French
chambers noon the bill to carry the .treaty into effect was ob-
tained, and-resulted in a refusal of the necessary appropriations.
The avowed grounds upon which the -bill was rejected are to be
found in the published debates of that body, and no observations
of urine can be necessary to satisfy congress of their utter in-
sufficiency. Although the gross amount of the claims of our
citizens is probably greater than will be ultimately allowed by
the commissioners, sufficient is, nevertheless, shown, to renderit
absolutely certain that the indemnity fills far short of the actual
amount of our just claims, independently of the question of da-
mage and interest for the detection. That the settlement in-
volved a sacrifice in this respect was well known at the time—a
sacrifice which was cheerfully acquiesced in by _the different
branches of the federal government, whose action upon the
treaty was required, from siucere desire to avoid further collision
upon this old and disturbing subject, and in the confident ex-
pectation that the general relations between the two countries
would be improved thereby.
The refusal to vote. the-appropriation, the news of which was
received from our minister in Paris, about the 15th day of May
last, might have been considered the final determination of the
French government not to execute the stipulations of the treaty,
and would have justified an immediate communication of the
facts to congress, with a recommendation of such ultimate mea-
sures as the. interest and honour of the United States might
seem to require. But with the news of the refusal of the cham-
bers to make the appropriation were conveyed the regrets of
the King, and a declaration that a national vessel should be
forthwith scut out, with instructions to the French minister to
give the most ample explanations of the past, and the strongest
assurances of the-future. After a long passage the promised
despatch-vessel arrived. The pledges given by elm French
nituister, upon receipt of his instructions, were, that as soon
after the election of the new members as the charter, ,would per-
mit, the legislative chambers of France should hascalleet to:
gethtr, and the proposition for an appropriation -laid before
them; that all the constitutional powers of the 'King -and his
cabinet should be exerted to accomplish the object; and that
the result should be made known early enough' to be communi-
cated to congress at the commencement of the present session.
Relying upon these pledges, and not doubting that the acknow-
ledged justice of our claims, the promised exertions of the King
and his cabinet, and, above all, that sacred regard for the
national faith and honour for which the French character has
been so distinguished, would secure an early execution of the
treaty in all its parts, I did not deem it necessary to call the
attention of congress to the subject at the last session.
I regret to say, that the pledges made through the minister
of France have not been redeemed. The new chambers
met on the 31st of July last, and although the subject for fulfil-
ling treaties was alluded to in the speech from the throne, no
attempt was made by the King or his cabinet to procure an ap-
propriation to carry it into execution. The reasons given for
this omission, although they might be considered sufficient in
an ordinary case, are not consistent with the expectations
founded upon the assurances. given here, fur there is no consti-
tutional obstacle to entering into legislative business at the first
meeting of the chambers. This point, however, might have
been overlooked, bad not the chambers, instead of being called
to meet at so early a day, that the result of their deliberations
might be communicated' to me before the meeting of congress,
been prorogued to the 29th day of the present month, a
period so late that their decision can scarcely be made known
to the present congress prior to its dissolution. To avoid this
delay, our minister in Paris in virtue of the assurance given
by the French minister in the 'United States, strongly urged the
convocation of the chambers at an earlier day, but without
success. •
The executive branch of this government has, as Matters
stand, exhausted all the authority upon the subject with which
it is invested, and which it had any reason to believe could be
beneficially employed.
The idea of acquiescing in the refusal to execute the treaty
will not, I sin confident, be for a moment entertained by any .
branch of this government, and further negot iatiou is equally
out of the question. s
If it shall be the pleasure of congress to await the further ac-
tion of the French chambers, no further consideration of the
subject will, at this season, probably be required at ynur hands.
But it, from the original delay in asking for an appropriation,
from the refusal of the chambers to grant it when asked, from
the omission to bring the subject before the chambers at their
last session—from the fact that., including the session, there
hive been five different occasions when the appropriation might
have been made; and from the delay in convoking thei cham-
bers until some weeks after the meeting of congress, it was
well known that a communication of the whole subject lo con-
- ' areas M the last session skits provvitod by assurances that it