The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-02-12

our minister IN SPAN MI. Pinckney) Ia 1904,
says that " The claims from which France was
released were admitted by France, and the re-
lease ieds TOR catasabie consideration, in cor
respondent release Of the United States from
ceriain claims ON them"
/ And Sl more recently we learn ty Gour-
gaud's Memoirs, that The Emperor Napoleon,
who, while First Consul, signed the Conven-
ton OF 1900, IN abiding 10 the events Of those
days while in exile al 81. Helena remarked that
s. the suppression Of The second article of the
convention put end 10 tue privileges which
France possessed by the treaties of 1888, and
annulled he just claims which America might
hare made for injuries done ia time Of peace"
That The suppression of that article was re-
garded al The time as an assumption by ihe
American Government, is very much strength
ened by conlemporaneous events. IL was not
until the latter part Of 1901 hat The treaty was
promulgated, and as early as January, 1902, pc
llions for indemnify at the hands Of this Gov
eminent were presented by the sufferers, and
referred, IN the House Of Representatives, 10
committee consisting OF Giles, Of Virginia
Mitchell Of New York; Lowndes, of South
Carolina Milledge, of Georgia; Tsllmadge, OF
Connecticut Williams, of North Carolina
Davis. of Kentucky and Gregg Of Pennsylva-
MIA. This committee made special report IN
April following, submitting the whole question
to the House, and although The House resolved
TO take up The report, by vote Of 60 10 20, In
| February, 1908 yet ii was given the ego by"
aud was not again disturbed until December 26,
| 1906, when it was referred to committee con-
sisting of Marion, Of South Carolina Eppes
of Virginia; George Clinton, jun, Of New
York TaiImadge, Of CONNECTICUT; Cuts OF
Massachusetts Dickson, of Tennessee; Bount,
of North Ccrollna; Findley, of Pennsylvania,
and Tanney, Of New Hampshi e.
The committee reported, February Is, 1907
as follows:
From a mature consideration Of this subject and
from The best judgment your committee have been
able TO form the case, they ale of opinion that
this q. vernmen by enpunging the second article Of our
contention cith France Of the 3Oh September lsOO, De-
bound TO ind mnty the meoriass for those just
claims which they otherwise would have rshlfully
had ON the Government of France, fol the spolIa-
tons committed on their commerce by the illegal
captures made by the cruisers and oih,r armed vcs-
sells of that power in violation of the law OF ma
TONS and in breach Of treaties Then existing be-
tween the two nttions; which claims they were, by
the lection of the second article of the convention,
forever barred fiou preerrng TO the Government of
France tor compensation
Some fifteen or sixteen reports. founded in
similar reasoning, have been presented since
that period, to either branch of the National Go
verument; and on one occasion bill appropria-
ting five millions Of dollars, in salsfac ion Of
these claims, passed the Senate, but was not
acted on in the House in time 10 become law.
These reports were prepared by statesmen OF
high rank IN our country, as amongs them we
6nd Livingston, of Louisiana; Webster and
Everett of Massachusetts Wilkins, of Penn
sylvania Chambers and Howard of Mary land
and we confess that our wonder at the want OF
: final action increases as we recapitulale these
evidences of thorough investigation by so many
men Of high inlell,cl, of all political parties, and
all arriving at the same result.
The only exceptions to the long lists OF the
advocates Of the claim, are TWO reports IN 1910,
by Mr. Roberts, Of the Senate, and in 1922, by
Mr.. Russell, Of the House: two minority state
menis or reports, by Mr.. Cambreeng and Mr..
Pickens; and the speech of Mr.. Wright, 10
which we have already allud, d. This latter
gentleman has in,boded in that speech all the
serious objections TO the claim, and We shall
lher, fore meet them all in answering those
raised by him.
Tie opposition 10 The application rests, main
Iy, on the argument that this country, IN seJ king
TO prevent or redress those aggressons OF France,
became involved IN with that nation, and
that state Of war, In itself, extinguishes all pre-
existing obligations between The belligerents.
There are other incidental objections, such as
that, in many instances, the claims have pass,d
into the hands of spectators, and that The lapse
of time has weak, ned, if not discharged them,
&c.-but we attach but little weight 10 such ar
guments. The lapse of tune is not the fault of
he plundered aud poweHess petitioners who,
Tor more than forty years, have b sieged the
halls of Congress for relief; and #, by such de
lay, The value Of the claims has diminished, and
the necessities Of some Of The claimants have
forced Them TO part with them for mere pit
lance, il is more the fault of The debtor, who has
caused this sacrifice, than of the creditor, whose
necessities have forced them TO submit to them.
Moreover, the bill iulroduc, d last winter, by
Mr.. Gushing, pad quite as much respect 10 this
objection it deserved (even if II did not more)
IN It's provision, that all holders of claims
through assignment from original holders should
receive only The sums actually paid by them.
The denial Of the liability Of the American
Government TO make restitution 10 the claimants
for these losses, rests therefore, manly, n not
solely, ON the grcuad which was the chief topic
of Mr.. Wrigh' Argument, namely, that hsy-
ing rrsoried TO 'Ae last argument OF nations
that of waging var with the aggressors-and
having cone uded treaty Of peace without slip
uaing for The adjustment Of the claims Of either
nation they have become absolutely null and
void,
A, general proposition, We believe II Is ad
miited that when Two nations enter into a state
of open war with each other, and when such
war is again terminated by a treaty Of peace,
which y silent as 10 the causes which bad led TO
the war, such causes become absolutely extinct
so far as concerns any right to individual redress
This should be so on the clearest principles
The nation is bound to protect us citizens, or
compel The agercssor TO redress the grievances.
Ii II IN good faith exhaust all efforts TO do both
these things, no further obligation remains In
common justice theGovernment cannot be called
upon both 10 fight and TO pay II, then, the Ame-
ricap Government did exhaust all Efforts IN us
power TO obtain redress from Frsnce-if
satisfied of lis impotence 10 obtain justice
for its citizens, 1t taci,ly, on the cUnclu-
sion OF the strife, renounced its demands,
these claimants WOULD, IN our judgment be
with ut relief. Their misfortune would not be