Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1835-01-10

Was there any thing this opinion n sustain the ob
cctons of the opponents Of the appropriation Their
allegation was, tllt the stipulated by tho Treaty
was great deal o sgbcic To pay the just claims
OF the American merchants But Mr.. Rives opinion,
thai IT might be sufficient certainly authority
support am allegations that II great deal more than
ssNcicnt
Those who, in their cogcrncss to crininate their own
government ON every occasion would iain have it be-
lieved that the refusal OF the Ch,mbcr OF Deputies at
their session in April last. provide for the execution of
the Treaty owing TO something in MIR. Rives d,s-
patches, choose TO tar the history ofthis uiiar-Ticy
choose t. forget, that after the ratification this Treaty
and befors the publication Of Mr. Rivcs dispatches
there had becn stated by the President in his late
Message 10 Congress, three distinct sessions of the
Chamber of Deputies when the appropriation for carry
ing into effect might and ought TO have been made by
thcm but was not. How do these gentlemen explain
these several failures to provide for the fulmcnt Of the
Treaty. We've Mr. Rivcs dispatches still the of
them when those dispatches had not yet been published
in this country, and of course when nothing of tlc
contents could have been known in Francc'
The truth is, the difficulty which has arisen the
result OF prcudccs which have long existed in France
against claims-prcjudiccs, which have been pain
fully and laborously overcome with the government of
France before they could be cxtinguishcd with the
ton and its Representatives, One would suppose that
the force of these prudccs had been sufficiently attest
CD by the Intellectual efforts of negotiation. for
quarter oil century, to procure recognition of our
rights Many circumstances cvncing the strength and
prevalence of these uniavorabe prepossessons with
gard to our claims in the public mind of Franco. are
disclosed in the official correspondence of Mr.. Rives
brief summary of them is given in the following
from article published en- the 4th of June last
in the Official Journal at Washington:
" Our claims always unpopular in France, par
ticnlary with the liberal parlya thing which seems
never to have been understood in this country but is
rendered manifest by the fact of the hitter oppos
ton OF Bignon Manguin, Savcrte &c, the Leading
members OF that party. When the treaty concluded
II was denounced by many of the journals of that party
the Temps the Courier Francois, the Tribune, &c cx-
tracts OF which, in that spirit to Mr. Livngs
ton at the time. The treaty was declared by them 10 be
'Pure sacrifice the part France ssrcslt made TO
the United States an ''dbasc, the result of intrigue &c
report had been made by Commission in the time
a that o;rbf,u
the United States could claim; another Commission after
the revolution, reported that t'cetrc millions of francs
would be the amplcst allowance for our claim In this
way The opinion had grown up and become general in
France that the twenty-five millions, stipulated by the
treaty, was an extavagant concession and shameful
cshcc made by the ministers OF Louis Philippe I'm
der these circumstances the appearance of the cores
pandcnce between the American Government and its
Minister, at when there was supposed here TO
be no longer the smallest motive for reserve lifting the
ven OF diplomatic mystery from the whole transac-
ton and exposing il. in the broad daylight of his
torica truth, showing the negotiation to have been
conducted throughout high national considera-
IONS without any of that low intrigue, which, in Eu-
rope is so generally suspected TO mnge in such
actions, and evincng that in the sincere conviction of
the American Government it had obtained more than
twas Justly entitled to demand. if much and Lat
too, without the interest might we'll have insisted on as
incident to the principal of the clans-such an expo
sure could have had other than highly sautary and
useful effect in couneracng the preudice dstrust and
erroneous opinion with which the public mind filed
in France"
With very edfying assumption of dclicacy on the
r..
because in his despatch to his government transmitting
the Treaty he expressed the opinion that the amount of
indemnity stipulated by it might probably be sufficient
10 pay the just claims of citizens and that the ar
rangcment he had made was in other respects such as
ought be accepted by the country Lett be recocct
ed, that Mr Rvcs had concluded this Arrangement ON
his responsibility His instructions fixed no amount
which he authorized to accept in satisfaction of
American Claims, nor the sum he to allow for
french claims. The reduction of duties French
wines c'drration of the Abandonment of the claims
under the 9Th article OF . Ibuisiuna Treaty and all
the details connected with it, were, manner ar
ranged by himon his responsibility In Acquiring him.
sen OF tins responslhy-no very light one, when the
magnitude and delicacy of the interests involved ale
consideredwas he not to be permitted, in communi-
eating the result of his labor his own government
to state facts and observations which he believed TO be
weiliounded and true, in justification OF himself for the
ceiyed IN this spirit and other-that il contains
especially no boast of ore'reaching, unless spulac
Tor what 1T was believed, might be "safcirat to paw
gust claims, but not than sufficient is ACCORDING
10 the system OF ethics proessed by the modern Wings
TO orTeacThat such is the character and spirit of
Mr.. hives despatch, no candid man, who will read it.
can fail to perceive or hesitate TO admit
AS to the merits OF this arrangement embracing COM
phcaed ana important national interests, though the pc
cuniary stipulation should by possibility fall short of the
J'u payment of antquaed claims over which as many as
four Revolutions in France had already passed and of
winch the claimants themselves had well nigh despared
Mr. iives may safely leave them to be Judged of by his
country Whether the stipulated be adequate to the
payment OF the Just claims of citizens is after all
matter OF oP"0a and involves many nice and difficult
questions OF public law and national Justice That il
"i NC adequate, or nearly If the claims should be
properly sed and settled correct principles many
reasons of great force, drawn apparently from minute
and careful investigation of the whole subject were OIL
Ven IN your paper of the 9th June last At all events
inc opinion expressed by Mr. Rves does stand alone
IL Is supported by authority, than which, none higher
certainly can be appealed TO this Qucson-that of Mr.
S'allatn--wo, both as Minister in France and as Sc
crctary OF the Treasury at the time that our commerce
suffered the injuries in question: has had the best oppor-
luntes OF approaching their Just amount. Mr. Rives
opinion was, IN fact, founded that of Mr. Gaatin as
VIII he seen by reference to the despatch Which has been
the subject OF 80 much misrepresentation As notwith-
standing tis however, MIR. Gaatins opinion has been
sc9niousy Kept out Of view by the Opposition press
VIII mere give 1t TO your readers expressed by himself
IN letter from him To the Secretary of State dated the
l1th January, 1922, while he Minister at Paris
writing Of our claims France he the following
language s
Although have enumerated all the cases within my
knowledge, where actual condemnation had not taken
place. must add that it possible that some vessels cap
turcd and probably that burnt at sea whilst Berlin
and Milan DEGREES in force have not vet been deGn
tYely condemned But there be no expectation that
indemnity viii crer he obtained either for those or i'm any
OF the cases where there has been such cOndetaRaton
From all the documents which have yet seen do not
believe that the tOt0 of this last
after deductng the where the destination of the yes
scls was concealed cnemys property covered or which
might generally afford plausible grounds of cordemna-
lio exceed fTo millions Of dollars in value The Danish
prizes, ana the vessels and caTgoes seized Naples arc
not included IN that estimate. The of sequcssrn
hois 0nd rcsscts bt1 at where condemnation has
tahcR Paec may be estimated at about Mree millions of
douaTs Inns last estimate he far from the truth
since we know the of tile two LARGEST claims the
St Sebastian and the Antwerp scqucsraiions The an
bWer Whch TINS Government may give to my last note
w show whether we have any thing to expect from its
justice IN any case Whatever for if the Antwerp claim
10 Hntna tod