Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1835-11-10

Aas 20 the King on the LIST OF August, o22 takes
general view of the American claims. excluding the
combinations made in virtue of the Berlin aud Milan
decees ON the grounds that compe nsaon had been made
Tor then, IN the elects of the retalatory whcl,
the United States had adopted, in the place of aicabe
demands tor satisfaction. NJ dc hlonmorency however
acknowledged that the Americans aupeared 10 have
right to indemniiicaiion,
For tie scisarts made after N6renter l. 1910 mas
ne as the DEGREES having been snnullcd their effects
should also have ceased;
2for Me loss Of t reSses ,cca had been DESTROYED at
-
He even indicated third class: TO embrace probo,Iv
The vessels sequestered at Saint Sebasiians which are
mentioned in the report but omitted in the conclusions
Letter from Mr.. Brorn 10 Baron dc Dalnas of Dccen
Thus it is clear that NJ dc Montmorcncy ACKNOWLEDGE
ed the legitimacy of the principal ca,cgores of Amer
can claims. He even, i'm letter To Mr. C,Il,,;n Of
juno, lS2, expressed desire nave them all embraced
In denitvc arrangement. But he considered it most
proper to defer making final estimate of their amount
until after the conclusion of the Treaty of Navigation
then under negotiation at Washington, and which was
INTENDED to terminate the serious misunderstanding be-
tween France aud the United States.
MIR Galaiin complained of this new DELAY in his let
ter OF June IL, l2 to the Minister of Forrign Fairs
but cause OF pretext of the delay soon at am end
tor The Treaty of Navigation concluded at Wash
in9ton, ON tie gath of June, le22.
Gaiiatin shortly after august II, 1927 insisted
that the question OF decentralization should be BROUGHT
before the Kings Council NJ de- Yillele who was then
conducting the business in the absence Of NJ dc Mont
norency began september g. le22) by oe,rng The ne
cessiiy of collecting documents This was only a
means futile indeed, of gaining time he soon however
discovered more serious objection, which was used du.
ing demands of the United States
we have seen that by the 9Th article of the treaty of
cession OF Louisiana of April 30 sO3 France had st
pued that her vessels should forever after twelve years
De received IN the ports of the coded territory ON the
terms OF the most favored nation. BY the treaty of
peace concluded at Client the United States had
10 receive British vessels in all the ports of the Union
on The same terms American vessels on condition of
reciprocity They offered this same nd o.,
all nations, by act of Congress- March 3 1875 and
some accepted it, Thus, at the expiration of twelve
years following the conclusion of the treaty of 1903 the
al,
sana on the footing of perfect equality with those of
oil France IN the United Sutes had been charged To de-
mand tins treatment for French vessels i'm the Louisiana
ports lie did make the demand the l3d of Fe bruarv
IN letter to Mr. Adams, the Secretary of State of
the United States. After some objections by no means
compatible with the American character iustnes the
government of the United States alleged, that lin. re-
cepuon OF the British Prussian, and Dutch n the
ports OF The United States, the same footing with
American, favor but the result of recnroci
agreements and that the same terms France m%ht So
uc ioT her vessels Tie same treamentT Letter from
e. ;7dS"S to NJ de Neuci6e, IF March 29th 1881 1
Nj de Neuyille, in his letter MIR. Adams of Anril
~ lo2l, protested against this assimilation of France TO
o,eI Powers It's but just said he, that other nations
shouu return an equivalent for favor but how can am
e9uv1en, be now required of France when has been
already paid in the cesson of Louisana If French YES
seis were not TO be admitted into the Louisiana ports on
~ s"he terms WIN Amcrcan-even since the treaty of
cession except On condition of reciprocity why was il
us stipulated IN that treaty, since those terms was
already secured I" France by the treaty of 800?
rms was the subject Of the arguments ON this subject
presented each side in vouminous notes The d.
GGSsion produced no results; the Convention of 1922
it u,setued, and even Gnmentioncd, difficulties which
could not solve Letter from ~ de Nenuine To Baron
Pdsquter, q .9Hgust 21h, 1921
Nj. de Vlele in his letter to Mr.. Gallatn of Noycm-
Der 10 S22, proposed the consideration of
inns SUBJECT aud TO include in the same negotiation the
Aimefcln claims and the French claims for a part of
cd the grounds. 'O''"
This proposition rejected by Mr. Gaatin Az
Ter so many solicitations which had been eyaded after
50 many adJournments without reason, now that the
opening oil regular negotiation could longer be re-
fused, he could not, lie said allow il 10 lac aooi1 cIa
ny the eoduon OF question which foreign to il
aud which had already been discussed MIR GaiIotjn'
letters to ~ dc patele Of horemGsr u, lc22 and Fc.
truary %, 1923
The question from this moment became altered I'm,
he feoeral Government long resisted its transportation
10 the new ground On which France wished TO Mace i,
An offer made TO the United States to neqotate So
pnrntey on the Louisiana Treaty but they refused TO adj
mt INTO the same discussion, claims different their
nature and so inferior in iportance for they contend
ed, the decentralization demS by France was based
upon The pretended nonexecution of treaty the sense
OF winch was disputed, whilst that demanded bv the
Americans was strictly just, as it was founded on The
loss oil property which had been seized on DESTROYED bv
force, and without any right
A long controversy ensued which WINS not ,,orr,,
ca by The changes either in the French Ministry or in
tr american Legationl Leue,s IF Mr. SheidOn Charge
intSttr u Foreign Affairs Of fTanee of October III
80; q Mr. Broom, Minister PieniPotentj0ry of the
Of Jea Sf@ts a. dc Cheean65and, Of % 2s is24j
e. o. nc Chdtea"Gr'and 10 Mr. BrOaen Of Mag 7M 1924;
81 Mr. Bro'en to Baron de Da,aas of OctoJy 2SN 1901;
"iQIM zen, 1910, dpd September 81 1921
Baron de Damas after having been about one wear
munster oil f"reigh Affairs undertook answer the
principal argument of The Minister of the United States
VINO mad become more active and pressing In his letter
Oh november 10Th 1925 he insists that The legality of
we American claims was by uncontescd-
INC ming, said ne, sin returning TO the throne could
not take, and had taken upon himself the engage
nent to satisfy all the claims which might be presented
on account Of the acts of violence conn
United by the Government of the Usurpcr and antic
Patng Tie objection which might be made on the score
OF me treaties OF Pars he explained the responsibility
when rance mad then taken upon herself by saving
The Powers which had united against that
and winch after having overthrow it, occnped tie ca
Ptai 0nd greater part Of the territory of Fance tgci
ca rom her on the restoration of peace MS uIedye or
general reconcllaon the admission of certain claims
winch their subjects had preferred"
ne Baron nus thought proper to invoke the re verses
rather than the good faith Of France and in order IN
avoid the admission that she had paid her debts he chose
10 acknowledge that she had paid her no nsom lie how,
cVcF paced but little confidence i'm this ARGUMENT az
noh-ae'hSsiop winch was so strongly opposed by the
american Minister, IN his letter of November 2G Is23.
Ip ne continued TO ohcr negotiation for claims Of every
nature, American aud French aud in rcpo,t IN lie
king, OF July . 1925 he admitted two classes Of Amcri
can Claims including those for vessels burnt al seaand
Tor vessels seized since tie LIST Of November 1910 Az
Ter long resistance, the United States consented To- a
genera negotiations but they oresaw that the two Co
SInehts Wond not agree, they proposed 10 refer the
decision OF the question 10 the arbitration Of third Co
vefnment 10 this proposition, Baron dc Dumas gave |
a peremPtory refusal lNotcs at Baron de Dona0s oc
2fPieWter aud Norember ~ lS2z: and teller from M
b'0oH Of Dfcenber 10. 1877 This proposal was agnin
ai,rf ~ DC IA Fcrronays, became Minister of Fn
ie<o ne Count made other reply respcctine the |
american claims, than that they had been brought for
ward rather too late, and that tiey should have been
presented WIN those OF the allied powers before the eva