Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1847-09-11
COMMUNICATION.
FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES DURING
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.-No. Ill.
TREATY OF PEACE.

the alliance. and indicating treacherous design
10 sacrifice the interests of the United States. This
charge, under various forms, has been wrought into
The history of the country. The writer of the Pa
ris letter, after attempting to show that Count de
Vergennes would have dispensed with the defni-
tive acknowledgment of independence, says:
II we now pass the authentic memorials Of the treaty
Of peace discover that the French would have left
the United under other and disadvantages,
condition still straitened and precarous No doubt
was left in the minds Of the American negotator that it
The OF the French court deprive them Of the
regions and the northern fisheries and impose the stpu
aton large indemnity for the American loyalists"
Before discussing these topics it is proper 10 re-
cur again to the treaty of alliance. Does this treaty
guaranty the fisheries or any specific boundaries /!
Does il promise that the French court will be of
The same opinion Congress at the end of the war
respecting the oyalists, and will act at all events
against the demands of England The trraty does
not even touch upon any one of these topics. The
only article relating the territorial limits of the
United States, 10 be settled at the peace is that
in which " His most Christian Majesty guarantees
their possessions and the additions or conquests
that their Confederation may obtain during the
from any of the dominlons now or heretofore pos
sessed by Great Britain in North America the
whole, their possession, shall be affixed and as
sured 10 the said States the moment of the
hon OF their present war with England" From
the very tenor of this article, as well as from the
nature of things, II is evident that the preliminary
question, What were the possessions of the said
States al the time of the peace must first be set
tied BY the parties; and difference of opinion
might assuredly exist on this head without any i'm
parchment OF the good faith or honesty of either
party.
Ii must be considered also that the French had
the most lusthable reasons for rigid construction
of this as well the other articles of the treaty.
In regard to possessions, every instance Of broad
construction would act against them. Schemes of
conquest and growing claims might prolong the
till the OF France absolutely ex-
hausted and she would be left to the mercy of her
enemies. Her fears early alarmed by the
spirit manifested in Congress, where projects for
conquering Canada, Nova Scotia and the Floridas
were discussed, and plans partially matured, on the
basis OF the cooperation of France. Every such
conquest would throw a new obstruction in the
way OF peace. 1t was the natural and avowed po-
hey OF France, therefore, TO incucate moderation,
and TO prevail on the United States TO be contented
with the possessions they already held.
II was IN conformity with this principle that she
regarded the western limits. The war of 1856 had
IN great part grown out of the dispute between
England and France concerning the territory be-
tween the Allegheny mountains and the Mississippi
By the treaty of peace il was confirmed to Eng
land with the right of navigating the Mississippi
and shortly afterwards Louisiana was coded to
SPAN. Congress now claimed right to this terri
tory as part of the United States and also to the
navigation of the Mississippi in consequence Of its
having been open to the Americans while subjects
of the British crown. They also cited the old
charters which carried back the limits of several
The States TO the South Sea.
The French court looked upon these claims al
not well founded. The proclamation of the King
OF England soon after the peace for establishing
three new Governments in America prohibited the
governors from granting lands beyond the Allegha
MES. That proclamation, it was said cut off the
territory beyond the mountains from the provinces
at the East, and il could longer be considered as
part of them. Other arguments were used which
need here be repeated for the design was not to
gain any thing for France, but 10 moderate the
views and demands of Congress in reference to the
eventual treaty. Congress desisted from the claim
OF right to navigate the Mississippi, and endeav-
ored to procure II by treaty from Spain; and il
should be remembered that the Court of France ia
vored this measure. An official memoir contains
The following paragraphs
Till the commencement Of hosities between Spain and
England this latter Power had the right Of navigating the Mis-
ssPp English vessels without paying duty or being board
ed, could pass from the mouth 10 the source Of that
Spain would gain much II the Americans ure 10 take The
ptdce ~ he Engh, since they would hold a
with Europe through the Gulf Of Mexico and consequently
they would bring conaband goods along the shores o. the
CALF Moreover, if the Americans allowed an establish
al New Orleans other place on the river il
would give great impulse commerce. the principal benefit
Of which would result to the Spanards who would have the
navigation to Europe either propretors agents II ap
pears therefore, that the Spanards may, without
nence, accord to the Americans commercial establishment
free port on the lower waters Of the Mississippi"
As to the fisheries there never was any degree Of
unanimlty on this subject in Congress. 1t gave
rise 10 many debates while the terms Of peace were
under discussion. The Eastern States were siren.
uous for making the possession of the fisheries, as
they existed under the British Government, con-
dltion of peace that is the right of fishing on all
the coasts belonging to the English in Newfound-
land, Nova Scotia, and the Gulf of St Lawrence :
while the Southern States, having no advantage
from the fisheries, Indifferent to this right and
were opposed to making it turning point of peace
or continuance of the war. II was natural that
the French should see the matter in the same light
az a large minority in Congress- and for the same
reason. Ii was novel case in the history Of ne.
gotiations. BY the law Of nations the right TO fish
on coast belongs exclusively to the proprietor Of
the territory, and the Use of such fisheries by other
nations is always granted BY treaties The ques-
lions TO be settled were, first, whether the
Americans, after having thrown off their allegiance
-