Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1826-11-07

n notwithstanding the objections prey ous!y urged
against restitution OF the value of the property seized
at Antwerp the Justice of tie claim was fully admitted
by the Vscount Montmorcncy, when Minister of Fo
reign Affairs.
Mr., Gaiatn, in his despatch 10 the Secretary of
State, dated Paris, April %, 1929, says
"In several conversations had with Viscoun, Mont
morenoy, on the subject of the Antwerp cases, ne al
ways evinced of tic inslice of the claim and
disposition that an indemnity should be madc.n
In fact during thai Minister'S administration, there
was every prospect of this claim heirg PAID and tie
principal motive tleu assigned for not disclarpinp il
was, that there money al the disposal Of minis
ters without applying TO Il Legislature for an appro
pratiOn
In the mean time, the proceedings OF the Allied Soy.
eregns at the Congress OF Verona during the summer
OF 1879 led 10 the resignation Of the Viscoun Mont
norency and with his retirement, the best hopes of the
claimants disappeared.
The French ministry afterwards assumed new
ground, and refused TO treat upon tie subject of our
claims, unless would fist consent to admit Of their
construction o! the treaty of Louisiana the French
government still persist iii i5 refusal, and the mego
'Iatlons an the subject Of orr claims thereby su,ucn
ded, shall briefly the ground uDon which t!cr
build this unoundcd preiensiun
By the 9Th article OF the treaty Of Louisiana il is sti
puiated, that French ships and French good, shall he
admitted INTO the ports OF Louisiana for twelve years
upon paying the charges and duties as Amer ican
shIp5, or merchandise imported therein Mud the 81,
article othe treaty further declares that after TIC ex-
PiratiOn OF the said twelve Years French sbips and
goods shall be admitted the ports Of Louisiana mon
the footing of the mast (aU0rrCd nuhon.
By our treaty of Commerce with Great Britain as
well as with several CHER powers we have agreed TO
admit their ships and goods into the ports Of the United
States upon the footing as our own--they grant
ing IN return, 10 our ships and goods, their ports; lie
like privileges.
Now the French government contend, fha as British,
ships admitted into TIC ports OF Ioriisiana fa nne
OF the United states on tie same footing American
vessels that French ships ought by virtue Of the treaty
to enjoy the same privilege 'cjto granting ony c7u-
This never could have been the intention OF the par
ICES at the lime offraming tue treaty IT. quite cu,to
mary ioiosert provision ia catics cUc1 rsa there is
10 territory cdcj that The ships of each nation shall
ENJOY N tc ports Of the other the privileges of The
mast J1rourcd 1dion. The usual acceptation lcn of
such terms IS all the trainers Of the treaty could lave
intended, for treaty by which any one Slate would be
entitled 70 privileges another, would be direct
violation Of the constitution IF lie United States which
expressly declares, at enc preference shall be given
by any regulation Of commerce orrevenue TO Tie ports
OF one state, over those Of another.n
The Preiension therefore SCI up, by the French 20
vernmen IS wholly insdmissibIc, and only be con
Just debt.