The gazette. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1798-1799, 1798-05-28
MAMoRIAL g'tbs AMRElcAN ENvoYs
~ he FRENCH GOVERNMENT.
(cor5lvDSD FROM 4HE LAsr cAzE,rE.,


houd there be iuch; nv iprt or explanation re
manning doubts itated, and therefore well for
its contents the letter was believed to be entire "a
usaGory Mr. Adct, & it hoped that this govern
wei that Of America would conider the treaty
WHh Britain as an accommodation defirable by the u
nited States and not dil4dvanta9 eous to France.
Il not caiy expreis the ohagrin felt by the A
meTcan government learning that in this treaty the
Untcd States iuppoied have knowingly and
evidently iacrGced their connection with this rcpubc
and the moa efenta and lean contened prerogatves of
neutrality With tn hrnnrs Of CONTIGUOUS integrity
the United States that they nave never knowingly
tacrfced or impaired their connections with this repub-
hc The PTerogatves Of neutrality but that they have
according 70 their bea judgment, invariably fought to
Preierve both
The undersigned win endeavor faithfully to nate the
lmpreious OF the government they repreient this
intereng uhe6t. The objections made 10 this treaty
by your prediction il Office in his Mr. Munroe
dated 10th Ventofe 4h year Of the French republic one
and HdiviGbe 10Th March So are
ut That the United States, behdes having departed
from the principles eaabhed by the armed neutrality
have given England, 70 the detrment Of their rt al
hes the mon nrking mark Of an unbounded condecen-
ton, by abandoning the limits given contrAband by
the law Of nations by their treaties with al other ma
lions & by thoie Of England with the greater part
Of the maritime powers
cd. That they have coniented TO extend the denom-
nation of contrahand to provhons. Infead Of
pointing particularly all treaties do, the cafes of
the effective blockade Of place, alone forming an
exception the freedom Of this article they have tacty
ACKNOWLEDGED the preenlons rsiied by England
boCkades in the colonies, and even in France by
the force Of bare proclamation
Mr. Adet in his letter to Mr. Pick ring dated Brumarc
9Th year Of The French republic and ndiv6be 9Th
Nov 1890 has n peated the fame Objection and has
been plealed to fuperadd fome observations relative
the formation Of fuch atreaty generally and the circum
ances attending its negotiation, in have
md
friends Of the republic.
Thefe having been the only fpeciGc objections officially
made to the Treaty with Britain by the government Of
France either in Paris Philadelphia are necefariy
fuPpofed be the only objections which have occurred
They have often been dilcug-d the part Of the
csule although the unde gned may be unable uggel
any argument heretofore ured they re the
hope that attentive reconsideration Of hoe arguments
may give them fuccefs that has not yet attended
them
The firm objection may be ruppored to conGf of two
parts. Firm the abandonment Of the principle that
tra bottoms make neutral goods, objection rather
inhnuated than eKprefed and lccondy the addition
the catalogue Of contrabaud.
m on the FRI part Of the obje lion It ID obfervabe
that the Raement Of late minsr Of exterior relations
and Of Mr. Adet, feem admit, but certainly do
contrOvert the petition that previous the form alton
ct the armed neutraly beligerent power could right
fully take of the bottoms of neutral the goods of
ITS enemy This petition is believed TO be
veItabe; fome OF the arguments in fuPport Of it have
been already detailed, and il Is deemed unneceiiary
repeat add them To this principle Of the
ed neutrality, with departure from which the United
States eem 70 implicitly charged the note Of Mr. dc Ia
CroK does aign any obligation whatever does
he appear confder it having been engraft-d by
thar confederation the law Of nations On this point
Mr. Adet has not been more explicit He feeus have
been content with vague nhnuatons and not 10 have
been willing to commit hmlcf by orect averment that
IN conlequence Of the armed neutrality the law Of
tons on This lubje9 is changed. The underlined are
unwilling to combat al length proportion poftvey
advanced which they deem 70 clearly ndeenGble and
will therefore refer the brief obiervAtion already
made respecting it,
Il may not wever be improper here to notice that
in February 49, when the treaty between France and
the United States was entered into the armed neutrality
had been formed Of conequence the fate Of things
which that treaty operated regulated by the law
Of nations, it clearly eNitted previous the forma
ton Of the armed neutrality II fuppoled be adj
mItted that according 10 that fate Of things, neutral
bottoms could afford protection to the goods Of
enemy The pu alton then Of the article Of that treaty
underood At the time by the con ra6ing parties to
form reception to general rule which would
tain its litigation in all cafes where it was changed
IF then the contracting parties had deGgEed to impole
each other the neceity Of extending this exception
10 othsr nations, 70 into general rule
they would have expreed this intention il their con-
tract not having exPreed il they NUT be conhdercd
intending that this exception fould form rule as
between themlelvls while the general rule hoad gov
with other nations v no had conlented to
change it,
It IS ALTO worthy Of obfcrvatiou that when this treaty
was made the United States were At war, and France
peace with Britain In this ilate Of things, hich
might have continued had been declared hof
tities commenced by England, the bottoms Of France
would have protected from American cruilers Engh
property, While they wo1ld not have protected from
Brfh crlifers i,rfverfV. This the ne-
cefary reiult Of thar Gate II things under which the
treaty was formed America bad coniented TO it ard
neither could o. would have complained.
1t Is ado be noticed that before the negotiation
with England had commenced the government Of the
United States had openly ayowed that opinion on Ibis
fubea hitch its beR judgment dictated. This opinion
perfectly unconnected with that negotiation known
hy al 10 form and reanlate the BATS Of It's cnndnA