Washington sentinel., 1855-02-20

The coaJcctural note tal annexed 10 the present
conventions, aud which with the interest cannot
exceed the su.:l 81 iNrut, mlllicns OF francs The
claims comprised - III said note which fall
within ia. cAcepllone ~ The following articles
shall not be admitted % the benefit Of this pro.
vision.
ART. Nv. :. II expressly agreed that the pre-
ceding articles shall comprehend no debts but
such as are due 10 citizens of The United States,
VINO nave been and are yet creditors OF France
for supplies, for embargoes, and prizes made al
sea, IN which the appeal has been properly lodged
within the time mentioned in the said conven-
1900
ART. V. "The preceding article. shall apply
only-lst, 10 captures of which the council Of
prizes shall have ordered restitution II being well
understood that the claimant cannot have recourse
70 the United States, otherwise than he might have
had to the government Of the French republic, and
only in of nsuificiency of the captors; ed the
debts mentioned in the said fifth article Of the con-
vention contracted before the Sth Vendemaire, an
., go September, lS0O) the payment OF which has
been heretofore claimed of the actual government
OF France, and for which the creditors have right
to the protection of the United States; the said
nth article does not comprehend prizes whose
condemnation has been or shall be confirmed II
Is the express Intention of the contracting parties
not 10 extend the benefit of the present convention
TO reclamations Of American citizens who shall
have established houses of commerce in France
England, or other countries than the United
States, in partnership with foreigners and who by
| that reason, on the nature Of their commerce,
ought 10 be regarded domiciliated in the places
where such houses exist All agreements aud
bargains concerning merchandise, which shall not
be the properly OF American citizens, are equally
excepted from the benefit of the said convention
saving, however, to such persons their claims in
ike manner as II this treaty had not been made
ART. XII. "In case of claims for debts con-
tracted by The government of France with citizens
| OF the United States since the Sth Vendemaire
ninth year, 80 September 1S00.) not being CON.
prsed IN this convention, may be pursued and the
| payment demanded in the same manner as if il
had not been made"
Other articles OF the treaty provide for the ap-
| pointment OF agents 10 liquidate the claims in
tended TO be secured, and for the payment ofthem,
as as allowed, at the treasury of the United States.
The following the concluding clause of the tenth
article:
| The rejection of any claim shall have no other
effect than 10 exempt the United States from the
payment OF il, the French government Jeserving
10 itself the right 10 decide definitely on such claim
go far as II concerns itself"
( Now, from the provisions Of the treaties thus
coilated, the following deductions undeniably fol-
| low, namely:
First. Neither the second article of the conyen-
ton OF 1900 it originally stood nor the re,rench.
ment ofihat article, nor the provlso in the ra,6ca
ton ny the First Consul the action of the Sen
| ale Of the United States thereon was regarded by
either France or the United States as the renounce.
ment OF any claims Of American citizens against
i France.
Second. On the contrary, in the treaties of 1903
| the Two governments took up the question pre-
/ cisely where II was left on the day Of the sigma
ture of that of 1900, without suggestion on The
part oi France, that the claims four citizens were
| excluded by the retrenchment Of the second arti
Gle, or the note ofthe First Consul and proceeded
TO make ample provision for such as France could
| be induced 10 admit were Justly due and they
were accordingly discharged in full, with interest,
| py Inc United States in the stead and behalf OF
| France.
Third. The United States, no, having admitted
in the convention of 1900 that they were under
| any obligations TO France by reason of the abro.
gallon of the treaties ofl77S and l7SS, perse yered
In this view Of the question BY the tenor OF the
| treaties OF lSO3, and therefore had no such ma
lonal obligation 10 discharge and did not, either
In purpose or in fact, any time undertake 10 dis.
| charge themselves from any such obligation at
the expense and with the property Of individual
citizens of the United States.
Fourth. BY the treaties of 1903, the United
States obtained from France the acknowledge
! ment and payment as part of the indemnity for
the cession of Louisiana, of claims of citizens of
the United States for spoliation so far as France
would admit her liability in the premises but,
even then the United States did NOT reliuouisb
any claim OF American citizens not provided for
by those treaties; so far from it, to the honor of
France be II remembered, she expressly reserved
TO herself the right TO reconsider any rejected
claims of citizens OF the United States
Fifth. As 10 claims OF citizens Of the United
States against France, which had been the subiec,
| OF controversy between the two countries prior
| 10 theslgnature The convention of 1900 and the
further consideration Of which was reserved for a
more convenient time by the second article OF that
convention for these claims, and these only pro-
vision was made in the treaties Of ls03-all other
claims being expressly excluded by them from
their scope and purview.
II is not 10 be overlooked, though not necessary
| TO the conclusion. that by the convention between
France and the United States of the 4th of july.
1891, complete provision was made for the lia nj
dation, discharge, and payment on both sides of
all claims OF citizens Of either against the other
ior unlawful seizures, captures, sequestrations,
\ or distractions OF the vessels carpoes or other
properly, without any limitation OF time so as in
terms 10 run back 10 the date OF the last preceding
settlement, at least 10 that OF 1S03 if not 10 the
commencement Of our national relations with
| France.
| The review ofthe successive treatie. between
| France and the United States has brought INV
mind 10 the undoubting conviction that while the
| United States have in the most ample and the
compctest manner discharged their duty towards
such oil their citizens as may have been Of any
time aggrleved by acts Of the French government
so, also, France has honorably discharged herself
| OF all obligations in the premises towards the
United States. To cencede what this bill assumes
would be to impute undeserved reproach both TO
France and 10 the United States.
4 am oil course aware that the bill proposes only
TO provide indemnifcation for such valid claims
OF citizens Of the United States against France as
shall not have been stipulated for and embraced
in any OF thetreat enumerated, But in exclud.
ing all such claims, excludes all in fact for which
during the negotiations France could be persuaded
to agree that she was in any wise liable 10 the
United States or our citizens. What remains 2
And for what is five millions appropriated? In
view OF what has been said, there would seem 10
be no ground on which to raise a liability of The
United States, unless IL be the assumption that
the United States are 10 be considered the insurers
and the guarantor OF all claims Of whatever nature.
which any individual citizen may have against a
foreign nation.
FRANKLIN PIERCE.
WAsmNeToS, February II, 1855.