New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-01-25

barge at Bordeaux and Mr.. Monroe began us
patch with announcing that a satisfactory ar
rangement Of the claims for spoilations was at
hand But be closed the Communication with a
statement that the ground thus happily gained
had been suddenly lost, by reason Of rumored
stipulations injurious to France In the british
treaty just then signed at London.
A cloud Of political mystery gathered upon
this compact from the day Of its execution the
10Th Of November 1871, until 1t was hnauy pro-
mulgsted on the 9th of May, 1896. France com,
planned of this concealment as disingenuous ana
she ever afterward maintained that the Unlted
States bad not merely violated their engagements
with her, but had abandoned, also, their pro-
fessed neutrality, by relinqushlng the princlpie
that free ships made free goods, and by giving 20
England a too favorable standard OF contraoand.
She therefore pursued her depredatlOns more
recklesslv than before, and with the avowed pur'
pose of compelling the United States to break
their new engagements with Great Britain, her
ancient and most inveterate enemy. ,
Mr.. Monroe wasreplaced by Charles CotesWorIu
Pinckney, but France now refused to receive or re-
cognise a Minister. new and august commits
sion was constituted, consisting OF Mr. Plnckney'
John Marshall, and Elbridge Gerry, who after en-
during many insults and battling many lntrgues'
returned to the United States. Inc OnlIso
apprehending war with not only France, but Great
Britain also, laid the foundations Of their present
systems ofrnitary and naval defense; and the con-
tToversv with the former Power ripened into resls-
lance reprisal and retaliation After two years
thus passed. and the French Directory mad con-
sented to negotiate, Oliver Ellsworth, William
r. Davie and William Vans Murray, proceeded
to Paris as ambassadors. They found France Just
entering the fourth act OF the drama OF her hevo-
luton, the Consulate of the youthful Conqueror
Of Italy. The American ministers demanded IN
IDENTITIES for the spoiations, as sine qua n0n'
The French ministers, at whose head was Joseph
Bonaparte readily yielded this condition, but
insisted at the same time on recognition and
renewal of the ancient treaties, with national
damages for the violation of them, as a stne qua
non on their part. The Americans, declining
in every case 10 continue the ancient urea
ties, proposed TO purchase exemption from their
most embarrassing stpulatons They offered ten
millions Of francs for a release from the article OIL
guaranty, and three millions of francs tor reduc'
ton ofthe privileges granted to France by the 18th
article ofthe Treaty of Commerce, to such as were
allowed by the United States to the most favored
nation. France rejected all such overtures, and
the Commissioners, respectively recedlng from
their extreme demands, concluded an accommo-
datiOn by which the United States received COM
pensation for the plumber of vessels not yet con.
demned, together with payment Of the claims
founded upon contracts, and also satisfactory
designation of articles contraband OF war. The
claims for spOliatiOns in cases where condemna
ton had not yet passed. the original sine qua non
on part together with the reciprocal claims OF
France for indemnitieB, and for a recognition and
qua non on the part of France, were reserved by
the following article:
art q The Ministers Penpotentsry ofthe two parties
Alliance of The 9Th of February l778 the Treaty of Ay
and Commerce OF the date and the Convention of the
l4h OF November 1885, nor upon the ndemnities mutually
dne or claimed the parties will negotiate further on these
subjects at convenient time: and until they may nave
agreed upon these points the said Treaties and Conven'
countries shall be regulated as follows"
The United States amended the new compact
by striking out this second article altogether and
by adding q new one, which limited its duration
to eight years.
Bonaparte, First Consul, accepted the amend
ments with an explanation in these words:
"Pyopided That by this retrencancnt the two States
nouuce their respective Petensons which are the ooecs
Of the said second article"
The United States assented, and the compact
was ratified as thus mutually amended.
This is the Convention of 1900. 1.-THE preten-
sions' which France thus relinqushed were
claims for indemnites for violations of the ancient
treaties by the United States, together with
continuance and renewal of those treaties; and
the "pretensions'' which they thus renounced
were the claims for indemnities for spoliations
upon the property Of American merchants, which
are the subjects ofthe bill now before the Senate
of the United States.
Mr. President, this review discloses
First: That on the 9th day of February, Tvs,
and on the l4th of November, 1885, the United
States and France entered into reciprocal political
and commercial engagements mutually beneficial
Secondly: That previously to the 3Oth of Sep
TENDER, 1900, France violated her engagements
by committing depredations in which merchants
citizens of the United States, sustained damages
to the amount OF 500 900, OF which, alter allow
ing all claims adjusted, there still remains the
sum of SlO,OOO,O 900, exclusive of interest.
Thirdly: That the United States negotiated
with france for payment of those damages ana
also for release from their ancient obligations
and that France conceded the claims for damages,
but demanded national indemnities for violation
ofthe treaties by the United States and also con-
tinuance and renewal of them.
F0unhly: That the United States renounced
their claims for damages, in consideration OF re-
lease by France of the treaties, and Of her claims
for damages.
FTflhly: That thus the United States coniscat
ed ten millions Of private property Of their mer-
chants, and applied it to the purchase OF national
benefits under a Constitution which declares that
private property shall not he taken for public uses
| without lust compensation to its owRers.
Ii seems to result from these facts, that the
| United States became Immediately liable to pay
| TO the American merchants the sums before due
| to them by France and, as this obligation was
assumed BY the United States in lieu of their an.
cient engagements with France, undertaken to
secure the establishment Of the national liberty
and independence, it becomes in equity invested
with their sacredness and sanctions and therefore
ought to be regarded a debt incurred for the at
tainment OF the sovereignty, liberty and lndepend'
ence Of the United States
Why then, Mr. President, shall not this debt
so ancient and apparently so sacred and so lust,
be discharged
proceed to review the reasons whichhaye been
at various times assigned.
First: The intrinsic justice IF the claims has
| 6eeR questioned
The very learned and Justly distinguished Sem
stor from Missouri Mr.. Benton il G former de-
bate stated that France had justified these spolis-
tons on the ground that the ships seized were IN
part laden with goods belonging to Englishmen,
who had borrowed the names OF Americans.
have not been able to find evidence to support
such pretsnsion. On the other hand the diplo-
matte language Of the United States constantly
claimed that the sufferers were American citi.