Title: To James Madison from Tench Coxe, 6 November 1803
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Madison, James

(private.)
Sir
Phila. Novr. 6. 1803
The great importance of the Florida and Louisiana Business has occasioned me to trouble you with some extracts from a considerable french Geographical work of 1741, which was reprinted in 10 or 12 Volumes 1767, after the French Cession of Louisiana. I believe the Spaniards in office here are very uneasy at the expressions in the report of the Comme. of the Reps. lately made public with respect to the acquisition of Florida by purchase or conquest—and that they couple with that the speech about the road to Mexico, on the floor, a year or two since. I am satisfied they are uneasy about the Situation of Cuba, if Florida becomes our property. They are also uneasy about other Boundaries. There are floating hints of our retiring from part of the West side of the Mississippi, and holding Louisiana and part perhaps all of Florida, and having the fifteen Millions reimbursed us. The importance of the Florida ports are said to be highly estimated in Spain and France. Tis hinted that France has sold her claim on the US. and does not concern herself about the delivery of the Country by Spain to her & her to us. This may be to induce us to make a treaty of Boundaries, cession and purchase with Spain, which will settle the whole matter satisfactorily.
These are loose and imperfect hints, which you will recieve as such, and they are the more freely thrown out because your body of information will enable you to check whatever in them may be erroneous or unfounded. I should not infer that there would be any difficulty as to New Orleans & the River.
The Situation of the Spanish Money at la Vera Cruz would induce them to pay largely in that Treasure for an Object they desired, if it were recd. there by us, and brought away at our expence & risk. It has occurd to me as a thing practicable in our frigates under insurance. I have the Honor to be, sir, yr. respectful h. Servant
Tench Coxe

   RC and enclosure (DLC). For enclosure, see n. 1.

   Coxe enclosed a three-page summary (docketed by JM: “boundaries of Louisiana”) of the boundaries of Louisiana as given in the seven-volume third edition of Nicolas Lenglet Dufresnoy’s Méthode pour étudier la géographie, published in Paris in 1741 and 1742. The ten-volume fourth edition was printed in Paris in 1768.

   For the 12 Jan. 1803 secret report on the bill authorizing an appropriation of $2 million “to defray any expenses which may be incurred in relation to the intercourse between the United States and foreign nations,” which discussed the acquisition of the Floridas, see Annals of CongressDebates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States … (42 vols.; Washington, 1834–56)., 7th Cong., 2d sess., 370–74. On 22 Oct. 1803 the House removed the injunction of secrecy and ordered the report printed (ibid., 8th Cong., 1st sess., 383–85).

   JM sent Jefferson the following undated note, presumably at this time: “7 vols. of the Statistical work on France referred to by Mr. C are in the office of State. No order of Aug. 26. 1793. has been found. Mr. C. probably mistakes for it, that of June 8 1793, which has been generally considered as the first sweeping order. There was an order of Aug. 6. 1794. which was of minor importance” (DLC: Jefferson Papers; filed at the end of 1794).


Title: From James Madison to Caesar A. Rodney, 7 November 1803
From: Madison, James
To: Rodney, Caesar A.

Dear Sir
Washington Novr. 7. 1803.
I have recd your note of the 4th. instant, to which I can only answer, that the form of procedure & the mode of proof observed by the Commissionrs under the French Convention, not having been particularly communicated to this Dept. it is to be presumed, that both are such as usage prescribes in similar cases. I inclose a copy of a document accompanying the Convention which enumerates the classes of claims meant to be covered by it. Very Sincerely & respectfully I am Dr Sir Yrs.
James Madison

   RC (DLC: Thomas and Caesar A. Rodney Papers). Enclosure not found, but see n. 2.

   Letter not found.

   Enclosure not found, but it was probably a copy of the account transmitted in Livingston and Monroe to JM, 16 May 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:4 and n. 1).


Title: From James Madison to James B. Richardson, 7 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Madison, James
To: Richardson, James B.

7 November 1803, Department of State. Encloses “documents [not found] involving an imputation against the official acts of James Bentham Esqr. an officer of the State of South Carolina.”

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, DL, vol. 14). 1 p.

   During the previous fifteen years, James Bentham had served as magistrate and notary public in Charleston (James W. Hagy, People and Professions of Charleston, South Carolina, 1782–1802 [Baltimore, 1992], pp. 10, 36, 50, 74, 93).


Title: To James Madison from Josiah Blakeley, 7 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Blakeley, Josiah
To: Madison, James

7 November 1803. Transmits (1) his letter to General Lavalette, (2) Lavalette’s answer, and (3) General Noailles’s letter to him. “To the last I returned no written answer but, told the bearer … ‘My power & nation being in a state of strict neutra⟨li⟩ty I neither could or should afford him the least assistance.’”

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Santiago de Cuba, vol. 1). RC 1 p.; written at foot of first enclosure. Undated; date assigned on the basis of Wagner’s docket on third enclosure.

   The enclosures are copies of (1) Blakeley to General Lavalette, commander of the French troops at Santiago de Cuba, 10 Oct. 1803 (2 pp.; marked “No. 1.”); (2) Lavalette’s 28 Vendémiaire an XII (21 Oct. 1803) reply (1 p.; in French; marked “No. 2”); and (3) Louis-Marie, vicomte de Noailles, general at Mole Saint-Nicolas, Saint-Domingue, to Blakeley, 1 Brumaire an XII (24 Oct. 1803) (1 p.; marked “No. 3.”; docketed by Wagner: “recd. in J. Blakeley’s 7 Novr. 1803”). The correspondence dealt with the complaint of Capt. Isaac Seymour that his ship, the John and Ruth of Charleston, had been forced to carry French troops to Santiago de Cuba and with Noailles’s request for assistance for the officer responsible for embarking French troops at Santiago for the mole.


Title: To James Madison from Daniel Clark, 8 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Clark, Daniel
To: Madison, James

8 November 1803, New Orleans. “In consequence of the representations made to the Governor on the 3rd. Inst., the Schooner Coquette was detained in spite of the opposition of the Prefect until yesterday, when she was permitted to sail before a Communication made to me, on his responsability that she should make no attempts on the Vessels of any neutral Nation during her Voyage. Whilst detained, a number of our Shipping who were fearful of her intentions availed themselves of a fair Wind to leave the River, and I apprehend no further danger from her. The delays and embarrassments experienced by the owners of this Schooner have disgusted the others who were inclined to fit out Privateers, and I flatter myself no more attempts of this kind will be made during the existence of the present Government.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, New Orleans, vol. 1). 1 p.; docketed by Wagner.

   See Clark to JM, 3 Nov. 1803.


Title: To James Madison from Robert W. Fox, 8 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Fox, Robert W.
To: Madison, James

8 November 1803, Falmouth. Sent a list of port charges at Falmouth and elsewhere on U.S. and other shipping, as well as a list of U.S. ships arriving in this district, in his last. “A great many Ships have arrived here from the United States and other parts and proceeded on their Voyage, the Seamen having been very rarely molested and many that have been impressed have on my claiming them been given up in a very handsome manner by the Regulating Captain. I hear that some American Ships that have called here for orders have been stopped by the French Government in Holland in consequence of their touching at a British port.” A brig carrying tobacco for Le Havre put into Falmouth after being informed by a British commander that Le Havre was blockaded. “Wheat continues to sell at 50/ à 60/ ⅌ Quarter; American Flour 30/ à 34/⅌ Barrel; Tobacco is in demand in London & Holland. American Shipping continue in demand and preferred to any other Neutral Ships.” The Admiralty ordered the immediate release of some captured Spanish vessels from South America “and in some instances the Commission taken from the Privateer and the Prize Master impressed.” The French army is reported to be “nearly ready for invading this Country and Ireland; but the inhabitants in general do not seem to fear the result, tho’ in Ireland many people are apprehensive if the French should succeed in landing a large Army there, it will be attended with great difficulty, expence and loss of Men to settle the business of that part of the Nation.” Adds in a postscript: “Since the foregoing there has been a very general press of Seamen from almost all protections.” Two seamen taken from a British privateer claim to be Americans. Fox requested their release, but the regulating captain refused, stating “that in future he can not attend to any Certificates given by the Consuls but only to those given in America.” One of the seamen “has a Certificate granted in America and the other from the Consul at Cowes.” Captain Norway of the Trump believes he had a right to detain the men, as they “had been some Months on board a Privateer.” Has written to Erving about the case.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Falmouth, vol. 2). 4 pp.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Fox; docketed by Wagner as received 21 Jan.

   Fox to JM, 9 Aug. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:290).


Title: To James Madison from William Willis, 8 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Willis, William
To: Madison, James

8 November 1803, Barcelona. Not having heard from JM on the subject of JM’s letter of 28 May and not having been arrested “gives me hopes that the president is sattisfied since that date of my innocence.” “My accusers appear to have formd a complot and agreed on a mode of ruining me, the most cruel and Vilanous that could be imagined, first to robb and destroy me with M[e]dicine in my food & drink and if that should fail try to make my life of little Value to me by destroying as far as in their Power my reputation. But the truth must one day appear, and these infamous Vilains be exposd in their true light, My fate is truly hard to have been serving my Country & Countrymen Gratis and after all to reap nothing but ruin & Calumny. But I am still officted in addition to this, to see Mr Leonard, place himself, under the direction of a Man, who has been trying to establish a demand against the United States for 350’000 dollars. This is Mr Walsh of this place who was the right hand man of Cabanyes who entered the suit against Mills of the Ship Catherine.
“My Health encreases, and it is at present much better than it has been since that poisonous medicine was given me.
“I remain here to know the will of the president whether it will be agreeable to him to name me for madrid or permit me to retain the consulate here. My Mercantile affairs will be soon brought to a close. The Consulate of Madrid will be most agreable to me as the salary annex’d to it will support me in the office.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Barcelona, vol. 1). 3 pp.; cover marked “(Private).”

   For JM’s purported letter to Willis of 28 May 1803, see Willis to JM, 9 Aug. 1803 (second letter) (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:291 and n. 1).

   For the beginning of Willis’s difficulties, see Willis to JM, 15 Sept. 1802 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 3:582–83 and nn.).

   For Walsh’s background, see Willis to JM, 3 Sept. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:376). For Mills’s case, see John Graham to JM, 29 Nov. 1802 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:154–58 and n. 1).

   For Willis’s bankruptcy, see Charles Pinckney to JM, 28 Feb. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:356–57, 358 n. 4). For his request to be appointed to the consulate at Madrid, see Willis to JM, 3 and 7 Sept. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:376, 388).


Title: From James Madison to Robert R. Livingston, 9 November 1803
From: Madison, James
To: Livingston, Robert R.

Sir,
Department of State November 9th. 1803.
In my letter of the 22d ult, I mentioned to you that the exchange of the ratifications of the Treaty and Conventions with France had taken place here, unclogged with any condition or reserve. Congress have since passed an act to enable the President to take possession of the ceded territory and to establish a temporary Government therein. Other Acts have been passed for complying with the pecuniary stipulations of those instruments. The Newspapers inclosed will inform you of these proceedings.
By the post which left this City for Natchez on monday last, a joint and several Commission was forwarded to Governor Claiborne and Genl Wilkinson authorizing them to receive possession and occupy those territories, and a separate Commission to the former as temporary Governor. The possibility suggested by recent circumstances that delivery may be refused at New Orleans, on the part of Spain, required that provision should be made as well for taking as receiving possession. Should force be necessary, Governor Claiborne and Genl Wilkinson will have to decide on the practicability of a Coup de Main, without waiting for the reinforcements which will require time on our part and admit of preparations on the other. The force provided for this object is to consist of the regular troops near at hand, as many of the Militia as may be requisite and can be drawn from the Mississippi Territory, and as many volunteers from any Quarter as can be picked up. To them will be added 500 mounted Militia, from Tennessee, who it is expected will proceed to Natchez with the least possible delay.
Mr. Pichon has in the strongest manner pressed on Mr Laussat the French Commissary appointed to deliver possession, the necessity of cooperating in these measures of compulsion should they prove necessary by the refusal of the Spanish Officers to comply without them.
On the 8th of October it was not known, and no indications had been exhibited at New Orleans, of a design on the part of Spain to refuse or oppose the surrender of the Province to France, and thereby to us. With high respect & consideration &c
James Madison
P. S. The President approves of the individuals appointed as Commissioners to liquidate the claims payable under the Convention of the 30th of April last. But as it now appears that difficulties have arisen and are likely to increase respecting the true construction of that instrument, and especially as it seems more than possible that the 20 millions allotted for the payments to be made under it, may be insufficient to cover all which in equity and by a sound interpretation ought to be included, it is the desire of the President that you apply to the French Government for its consent to suspend the issuing of any drafts upon the awards which may be given until it is ascertained whether the 20 millions be sufficient or not and with a view to give time for such mutual explanations and arrangements as may tend to effectuate the true spirit and object of the Convention. In taking this step you will refer yourself to the further communications you are to expect from your Government upon the subject, the application you may make upon it to that of France being intended only as a preliminary to a further developement.

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, IM, vol. 6). Note at foot reads: “A copy of the above letter was also addressed, and forwarded to Mr. Pinckney, excepting the postscript.”

   Circular Letter to American Ministers, 22 Oct. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:562).

   JM referred to “An Act to enable the President of the United States to take possession of the territories ceded by France to the United States, by the treaty concluded at Paris, on the thirtieth of April last; and for the temporary government thereof”; “An Act authorizing the creation of a stock, to the amount of eleven millions two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, for the purpose of carrying into effect the convention of the thirtieth of April, one thousand eight hundred and three, between the United States of America and the French Republic; and making provision for the payment of the same”; and “An Act making provision for the payment of claims of citizens of the United States on the government of France, the payment of which has been assumed by the United States, by virtue of the convention of the thirtieth of April, one thousand eight hundred and three, between the United States and the French Republic” (U.S. Statutes at LargeThe Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America … (17 vols.; Boston, 1848–73)., 2:245–48).

   See JM to Claiborne, 31 Oct. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:589–92 and n.).

   On 31 Oct. Louis-André Pichon instructed Pierre Clément Laussat to warn the Spanish that any procrastination in surrendering Louisiana might cause Spain to lose the Floridas also (Kukla, Guide to the Laussat PapersJon Kukla, ed., A Guide to the Papers of Pierre Clément Laussat, Napoleon’s Prefect for the Colony of Louisiana and of General Claude Perrin Victor at the Historic New Orleans Collection (New Orleans, 1993)., pp. 86–87).

   For the provisional appointment of Isaac Cox Barnet, John Mercer, and William Maclure, see Livingston and Monroe to JM, 7 June 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:66–71).


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Jefferson, 9 November 1803
From: Jefferson, Thomas
To: Madison, James

Th: J. to mr. Madison.
Nov. 9. 1803.
I inclose you Clarke’s memoranda. The following articles seem proper for Executive attention.
An instrument vesting in the Collector of Natchez the powers of the Administrator, Treasurer & Contador.

Instructions to Claiborne
to suppress useless offices

to remove any existing officers.

to appoint others.

It would be well these could go by next post.
Would it not be well to send in what documents we have, and furnish what is not yet prepared, as well as what may come hereafter in a supplementary way from time to time as received.

   FC (DLC: Jefferson Papers). FC is a letterpress copy.

   For the enclosures, see JM to Jefferson, 5 Nov. 1803, n. 1.

   Contador: accountant.


Title: To James Madison from Charles Pinckney, 10 November 1803
From: Pinckney, Charles
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Escurial November 10: 1803
My last letters will have informed You of every thing to the present time—they contained duplicates of m: Cevallos’s last letter & reply on the subject of our claims which shew you how tenaciously this Court retain the opinion that they are not liable in the remotest degree to make compensation for the french condemnations in their ports, nor ought to be expected to arbitrate the same on which subject I have written you so fully & by so many Opportunities that I now wait your Opinions & further directions. This letter I write with a View to inclose you what has lately occurred between this Government & myself on the subject of Quarantine & the admission of our Vessels into Spanish Ports under the Circumstances therein detailed. By Mr Cevallos’s reply You will percieve the regulations he mentions & I hasten to transmit it to you by the route of Lisbon as it may be important to Commerce.
I am to acknowledge the receipt of your Dispatches of the 29th: of July & shall govern myself by them. Hitherto I have not heard from Mr: Monroe but shall certainly do so shortly or see him in Madrid. If I do not see him I shall write you soon again & fully by an Opportunity I expect of an American Gentleman going to Bourdeaux which will avoid the necessity of committing any thing to a Post Office.
Please present me to the President in the most respectful & affectionate manner & believe me always Dear Sir With regard Yours Truly
Charles Pinckney

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, DD, Spain, vol. 6A). RC docketed by Wagner as received 8 Feb. 1804. For enclosures, see n. 2.

   See Pinckney to JM, 2 and 30 Aug. and ca. 1 Sept. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:260–69, 358–59, 372–73).

   The enclosures are copies of Pinckney to Cevallos, 22 Oct. 1803 (2 pp.; filed with Pinckney’s letter to JM of 24 Jan. 1804), and Cevallos to Pinckney, 8 Nov. 1803 (1 p.; in Spanish; docketed by Wagner). In his 22 Oct. letter, Pinckney acknowledged receipt of a 14 Oct. 1803 letter from Cevallos (not found) announcing the reappearance of yellow fever in New York. Pinckney noted the appearance of the disease in Málaga also and suggested that both governments regulate the zeal of their health officials so that commerce would not be injured. He characterized the latest order of the Spanish board of health as too rigid but said he would not press for a repeal; he asked how long the order would be in force and what certificates would facilitate the entry of U.S. vessels. He reminded Cevallos of the losses suffered by U.S. citizens the previous year, when only Yrujo’s certificate of health was deemed sufficient, and suggested that certificates from consuls might be enough. In his 8 Nov. reply, Cevallos said he had requested clarification of the regulations from the president of the board and had been told that ships from U.S. ports other than New York would be admitted with a clean bill of health from a Spanish consul. Vessels from New York carrying a bill of health certifying that the epidemic had ceased and showing no signs of disease among the crew would also be admitted.

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:245–46.


Title: To James Madison from Daniel Clark, 10 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Clark, Daniel
To: Madison, James

10 November 1803, New Orleans. “Inclosed you have Copies of three Letters of the 7th. 9th. & 10th. Inst. which I have written to Governor Claiborne and supposing he would give you advice respecting them by Land I have for the sake of having another opportunity forwarded these by the Ship Patty via New York. The Marquis de Casa Calvo set out yesterday Evening on a shooting Party to the Parish of San Bernardo on the terre aux Boeufs about 5 leagues below the Town and will be absent till the 14th. On the 15th. or 16th. his projected trip for Barataria and from thence as he says to the Chafalaya [Atchafalaya River] ⟨is⟩ to take place, but against this I shall remonstrate if nothing else will stop him. The Prefect likewise set out Yesterday on an excursion up the River as far as Manchac and is not looked for till the 17th. when I shall apply to him as mentioned in my Letter to Govr. Claiborne, whose answer I shall wait for with impatience and whose directions if he communicates any I shall implicitly follow.”

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, New Orleans, vol. 1). RC 1 p.; torn. For enclosures, see n. 1.

   In his 7 Nov. letter (4 pp.), Clark told Claiborne of reports that Casa Calvo might have changed his mind about cooperating in the transfer of Louisiana because he did not think himself authorized to deliver up the province without further advice from Spain. Clark wrote that Laussat and his party would doubtless cooperate in any measures the Americans deemed necessary and that few people would oppose the combined French and U.S. forces. He advised Claiborne “to keep a watchful Eye on Minor & his Friends,” adding that Stephen Minor had written to the secretary of the Spanish government at New Orleans asking if property across the river from Natchez would be retained. He suggested that Claiborne keep the bearer of the letter, a free black named Thomas Bernard, secreted and his arrival unknown in Natchez until Claiborne sent his reply. A second copy (5 pp.) of this letter includes a postscript adding that Capt. John C. Carr had arrived on 6 Nov. with dispatches for Laussat. In his 9 Nov. letter (3 pp.; docketed by Wagner; printed in Carter, Territorial Papers, Orleans, 9:101–2), Clark wrote that he had spoken with Casa Calvo, who had indicated that he might cancel his hunting trip to await the American commissioners. In his letter dated 10 Nov. (4 pp.), Clark told Claiborne he had received further information that led him to believe the Spanish would attempt to delay delivery of the province. He proposed to ask the Spanish government for permission for two companies of mounted militia to accompany the U.S. commissioners through Spanish territory. He stated that the four companies of soldiers that were being sent would be insufficient and suggested that they be augmented by as many as could be spared from the Mississippi Territory, together with a draft of militia. He had told the local authorities that these soldiers would not require a passport, as they were coming by water. He suggested that Claiborne bring along a printing press to facilitate addressing the inhabitants. Clark said he would suggest to Laussat that an inventory and appraisal be made of stores, ammunition, and public buildings to avoid delay in compliance with the treaty.


Title: To James Madison from George W. Erving, 10 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Erving, George W.
To: Madison, James

10 November 1803, London. No. 27. Encloses the “Tables of Quarantine, Light-Money and other dues” [not found] that JM requested in his circular letter of 4 Apr. Trusts that these, “together with the Returns from our other Consuls,” will enable JM “to lay before the House of Representatives the Statements required by their resolution of the 3d. of March last.” Forwards “‘Mascalls Book of Customs’ lately published, which contains much valuable information respecting the Commerce of this Country.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, London, vol. 8). 2 pp.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Erving; docketed by Wagner as received 20 Feb. 1804.

   Circular Letter to American Consuls and Commercial Agents, 9 Apr. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:491–93).

   Edward James Mascall, A Practical Book of Customs upon All Foreign Articles Imported … (London, 1803).


Title: To James Madison from Vincent Gray, 10 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Gray, Vincent
To: Madison, James

10 November 1803, Havana. Reports the capture since his last [4 Nov.] of the schooner Harriot of Charleston, Joseph Hunt, master and owner, by the French privateer Eugénie, Jacques Hermand, commander. The Harriot was sent into Havana. Gray has satisfied the French commissary and the Spanish government “that she was realy and truly an American vessel, got her released; and given her such papers as required by your instructions of the first of augt: 1801, which will be sufficient to protect her to her destined Port: as the cause of detention alledged by the Captors, was the want of Lawful papers.” Hunt took in wood and water and procured seamen to replace the foreigners taken out by the privateer when the ship was captured. The ship “will get under way this forenoon for Charleston.” “I send you herewith enclosed a copy of the Document granted to her at Kingston Jamaica.”

   RC and enclosure (DNA: RG 59, CD, Havana, vol. 1). RC 1 p. For enclosure, see n. 2.

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 2:1–4.

   The enclosure is a copy (2 pp.), certified by Gray, of a 15 Oct. 1803 certificate signed by William Savage identifying Joseph Hunt of Boston, Massachusetts, as sole owner and master of the Harriot.


Title: From James Madison to Robert R. Livingston, 11 November 1803
From: Madison, James
To: Livingston, Robert R.

Dear Sir
Washington Novr. 11 1803
The Bearer Mr. Isaac Coles is about to visit England, and will probably see Paris before he comes back to this Country. He is a young gentleman who is represented to me from the best quarters as equally estimable for his talents & his dispositions, and has the better claim on my attentions, as his family is nearly related to that of Mrs. Madison. Permit me to make him known to you & to ask for him the civilities which I flatter myself you will find well bestowed on him. With great esteem & respect I am Dr. Sir Yrs.
James Madison

   RC (NHi: Livingston Papers). Docketed by Livingston.

   John Coles, the grandfather of Isaac A. Coles, and William Coles, the grandfather of Dolley Payne Madison, were brothers. In 1805 Isaac A. Coles (1780–1841) replaced William A. Burwell as Jefferson’s secretary. He filled the same role during JM’s presidency until his resignation in December 1809. He was succeeded by his brother Edward (William B. Coles, The Coles Family of Virginia [1931; reprint, Baltimore, 1989], pp. 36–37, 45–47, 93; Malone, Jefferson and His TimeDumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948–81)., 5:35; Isaac A. Coles to JM, 29 Dec. 1809 [PJM-PSRobert A. Rutland et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Presidential Series (4 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1984–)., 2:150–51 and n. 3]).


Title: To James Madison from John Robertson, 11 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Robertson, John
To: Madison, James

11 November 1803, Antwerp. Encloses (1) a “Triplicate of Mr. Barnet’s Accompt of Disbursments against the Ship Mac of Charleston and 9 Vouchers accompanying the same”; (2) a copy of Barnet’s account against the U.S. for $771.87 with three vouchers [not found]; (3) copies of Robertson’s letters to the minister of foreign relations and to the president of the tribunal of commerce of Antwerp; (4) a copy of Robertson’s 26 Sept. circular letter to U.S. consuls at Amsterdam and Rotterdam “relative to the late attempts of covering french Property”; and (5) a copy of his letter of 12 Oct. to the U.S. consul at Dunkirk with the reply. “By these last, You will observe, Sir, that I have taken upon my Self to Stop a passport from a pretended American Citizen who applied to this agency for an other, in doing which I was the more happy as I have since learned that three Englishmen have been arrested as Spies in Flushing with American or pretended American Passports. I am happy to say the Americans are duly respected in this Country, and am so persuaded the least indulgence or rather weakness, in a matter so important as that of Passports, should compromise the Protection they are entitled to, that I shall ever attend to it Scrupulously.
“The Dockyard commenced here in July last is now carried on with some activity. The Political horrison of this Country is still dark and menacing.” The French invasion of Great Britain “will most certainly be attempted, altho’ to this moment not appearing very probable.” Napoleon “will be again incessantly on the Coasts between Dunkerque and Boulogne where part of his Guards are already arrived,” and he is “expected to venture on this Descent personally.” “The Consequences, how terrible! What avails the progress of Science & Civilisation with men thus ready to destroy each other?” Looks with “envy and admiration at the humanity and wisdom which preside over the happy sons of Columbia among whom Humanity Peace & Happiness seem to have flown for Shelter.”

   RC, two copies, and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Antwerp, vol. 1). First RC 3 pp.; docketed by Wagner: “Isaac C Barnet.” Second RC docketed by Wagner as received 1 June. For surviving enclosures, see nn. 2–4.

   Enclosure not found, but for the case of the Mac and Isaac Cox Barnet’s expenditures, see Barnet to JM, 1 May 1803, John Bryant to JM, 30 May 1803, Barnet to JM, 13 June 1803, and Robertson to JM, 1 July 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:563–65 and n. 4, 5:44–45, 94–96, 139–40).

   The enclosures are (1) a copy of Robertson to Talleyrand, 5 Aug. 1803 (4 pp.; in French), conveying the complaints of American merchants that the 1 Messidor an XI (20 June 1803) arrêté was being interpreted in such a way as to seriously hamper American trade at Antwerp (for the arrêté, see Livingston to JM, 25 June 1803 [PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:119–21, 122 n. 2]), and (2) a copy of Robertson to Solvyns, president of the tribunal of commerce, 26 Prairial an XI (15 June 1803) (4 pp.; in French), regarding the dispute between Capt. Gabriel Ford of the Minerva, which arrived at Antwerp on 24 Mar. 1803, and his consignee at Antwerp, a British merchant named Wydown. Ford had asked Robertson to assist him in obtaining a speedy judgment on the case. For the history of Ford and the Minerva, see Barnet to JM, 1 May 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:563–65 and n. 4).

   The enclosure is Robertson’s 26 Sept. 1803 circular letter to U.S. consuls at Amsterdam and Rotterdam (3 pp.) warning them about American mariner John D. Gate, who had attempted to cover French property at Antwerp and was planning to go to the Netherlands to obtain U.S. papers for the French ship La Paix, owned partly by Ancelot Pearson, a British native who had become a French citizen, and partly by the commercial house of Coppens at Antwerp. Robertson had refused Gate, who was chief mate of the Phoebe Ann of Philadelphia, any papers except a passport allowing him to return to the U.S., but he doubted whether Gate had done so. Robertson also reported that the Clio of Martinique and another, American-built ship, both of which had been forcibly prevented from leaving Antwerp harbor the previous week, were reported to be fitting out for the Netherlands to obtain false papers. The ships “had procured all the Amn. crew they could get” and erased their old names. Robertson promised to transmit any further information he might obtain.

   The enclosures are copies of Robertson to Francis Coffyn, 12 Oct. 1803 (3 pp.; in French), enclosing a passport Coffyn gave Thomas Mumford based on one given Mumford by Samuel Williams, U.S. consul at London; and Coffyn to Robertson, 27 Oct. 1803 (2 pp.; in French), stating that he had issued the passport on 26 May 1801 on the strength of an oath made by American citizen Benjamin Heursey. Robertson had seized the passport after noting discrepancies between the written description and the physical appearance of the individual who came to him seeking a passport for the Netherlands. Coffyn agreed that the individual was probably attempting to perpetrate a fraud.


Title: From James Madison to Tench Coxe, 12 November 1803
From: Madison, James
To: Coxe, Tench

private
Dear Sir
Washington Novr. 12. 1803
I was duly favored with yours of the 6th. & thank you for the extract relating to Louisiana. It does not add much to the Stock of our information on that subject, but it is well to know all the sources which may strengthen our just pretensions. It seems pretty certain that the title conveyed by the Treaty to the U. S. will reach Eastwardly as far as the river Perdigo.
Most of the rumours You hint are founded more or less in error. It cannot be true that the sale of the Stock by France, should lessen her interest or inclination to see the U. S. in possession of the ceded territory, because she cannot claim the Stock till possession of the territory is given, & it is not probable that the buyers of the Stock will pay the money before they receive the Stock. I remain respectfully Yr. Obedt Hbe servt
James Madison

   RC (DLC). Docketed by Coxe.


Title: To James Madison from Charles Pinckney, 12 November 1803
From: Pinckney, Charles
To: Madison, James

Letter not found. 12 November 1803. Enclosed copies of (1) Pinckney to Cevallos, 31 Oct. 1802 (DNA: RG 59, DD, Spain, vol. 6A; 3 pp.), requesting the release of the Mercury and other American vessels held at the Río de la Plata (another copy of this letter, dated 29 Oct. 1802, was enclosed in Pinckney to JM, 4 Nov. 1802 [PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:87–90 and n. 2]), and (2) Cevallos’s 20 Sept. 1803 reply (DNA: RG 59, DD, Spain, vol. 6A; 4 pp.; in Spanish). Both letters are docketed by Wagner as received in Pinckney’s 12 Nov. 1803 dispatch. Cevallos discussed the cases of the ships mentioned in Pinckney’s original complaint, the James, Montezuma, Washington, Alexander, Sally, Aurora, Three Sisters, Minerva, and America, as well as the Mercury, Success, and Phoenix, remarking that they either involved violations of Spanish regulations forbidding foreign trade with Spanish colonies or concerned private contracts to be settled judicially and not diplomatically. Cevallos added that although the cases had nearly proceeded to sentencing, the king, as a demonstration of his friendship toward the U.S., had decided to order the viceroy to terminate the cases with no further delay, applying the law to U.S. citizens with a mercy compatible with justice.


Title: From James Madison to William C. C. Claiborne, 14 November 1803
From: Madison, James
To: Claiborne, William C. C.

Sir.
Department of State. Novr. 14th. 1803.
You will herewith receive a supplimental commission extending your authority to certain cases which may not be embraced by that heretofore transmitted. You will find also herewith enclosed a copy of a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury to the Collector Mr. Trist, shewing the scope of his functions at New Orleans. In the infant & temporary arrangements required for Louisiana much is necessarily left to the discretion and friendly co-operation of those who are to carry them into effect; and who will I flatter myself amply justify the confidence which the President places in them. The two last letters of Mr. Clark are of the 6th. & 13th of October. The contents of them with the communications of the last date from Mr. Laussat to Mr. Pichon, strengthen our hopes that the opposition of Spain to the Treaty between France and the United States is limited to a diplomatic interposition, and that our possession will be effectuated without the disagreeable necessity of force. Mr. Laussat in a letter to Mr. Pichon takes a warm interest in behalf of a Russian, Mr. Molier who is now at New Orleans, and wishes some occupation that will support him there. He was heretofore appointed Consul of the United States at Coruna, but it seems declines that service. He is known to be a man of worth, and had very respectable recommendations to his Consular appointment. These considerations with the propriety of manifesting to Mr. Laussat a conciliatory respect for his wishes, will render some provision for Mr. Molier, if it can be conveniently made, agreeable to the President. Mr. Laussat suggests a place either in the Customs, the Post Office, or as a Notary. The last seems to be the most, perhaps the only practicable mode of providing for him, and the advantage will not escape you, of doing what is to be done with as little delay, and in as gratifying a manner as circumstances will permit. To pro[v]ide for such expences as your Administration in Louisiana may require, the President authorizes you to draw on the Dept. of State for a sum not exceeding 10,000 Dollars. According to an arrangement with the Treasury Department and the instructions of Mr. Gallatin to Mr. Trist, your bills will be paid out of monies collected at New Orleans. I am &c.
J. Madison

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, DL, vol. 14).

   In his 14 Nov. letter, Gallatin instructed Hore Browse Trist, collector for the Mississippi district, to proceed to New Orleans, leaving a deputy at Fort Adams, or to send a deputy to New Orleans, should Trist prefer to remain in Mississippi. Gallatin outlined Trist’s duties at New Orleans and noted that the Spanish schedule of duties and taxes was to be followed after the transfer of the territory to the U.S. (printed in Carter, Territorial Papers, Orleans, 9:106–7).

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:496–97, 515–16.

   Letter not found, but it apparently expressed Laussat’s willingness to cooperate in the transfer. Pichon replied on 13 Nov. 1803 (Kukla, Guide to the Laussat PapersJon Kukla, ed., A Guide to the Papers of Pierre Clément Laussat, Napoleon’s Prefect for the Colony of Louisiana and of General Claude Perrin Victor at the Historic New Orleans Collection (New Orleans, 1993)., pp. 89–90).

   For merchant Henry Molier’s appointment to La Coruña, see Molier to JM, 12 Jan. 1802 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 2:389 and n.). Claiborne appointed Molier as auctioneer and coroner at New Orleans (Carter, Territorial Papers, Orleans, 9:601, 602).


Title: To James Madison from Fulwar Skipwith, 14 November 1803
From: Skipwith, Fulwar
To: Madison, James

Sir,
Paris Novemr. 14th. 1803.
You have here a copy of my last Letter to you of the 13th. of Septemr. The Board, as I there informed you, Since Mr. M.clures accession to it, had thought proper to suspend granting their certificates for the final Liquidation of claims untill they Should hear of the Ratification of the Treaties, It was then my opinion, & is now, that they might with Safety & propriety have concurred with the french commission in Settling the Individuals claims, & have Kept back their final certificate from our Minister untill the doubts & difficulties operating on their minds in respect to their right of Acting at all, were removed, or even, indeed, untill they Should receive official notice of their appointments being regularly Confirmed by our Government, as well as of the Ratification of the Treaties: By this mode of proceeding, I always have Taken the liberty of urging to them, a considerable saving of Interest would be effected, Some Individuals Suffere[r]s here relieved, and Intrigue & Casualties, ever to be more or less apprehended on a theatre like this, would thereby have less hold upon their future conduct & progress in the business; while Mr. Marbois & Mr. Defermon retain their agencies, however, in the execution of the Convention, I am confident that no very Serious evil will arise from this temporary delay, but our Minister is [sic], and designing unprincipled, & Interested Individuals appear to me to have Succeeded in Magnifying his fears, and artfully to have Siezed the moment & the means of increasing his irritation not only against the measures, but the motives of some of the most valuable & enlightened members of the Commission.
The Minister though from the beginning disposed to Censure the Board for not going on to Settle finally the claims, remained officially silent toward them untill a fortnight ago, when he addressed them in a manner highly expressive of his disapprobation of their delay, & of his apprehensions of the mischievous Consequences that were likely to result. The Circumstance & subject of this letter were Known to Certain Individuals here at least as soon as they were to the Board. These men immediately employed themselves in endeavoring to convoke a meeting of all the Individuals Concerned in claims, whose number are not Short of Thirty—about fourteen American, Some Claimants, & some not, met two or three days after at the Boston Hotel. Mr. John Mitchell, who I believe holds a Small claim was chosen their chairman. Mr. Swan, Mr. Peter Livingston, Mr. Harry Grant, & Mr. Benjn. Lane, appear to have been the most prominent Personages of this assembly. Two of those Gentlemen Mr. Grant & Mr. Livingston do not, that I Know, pretend to be claimants. Mr. Swan & Mr. Lane Say they are, but having doubts of either been intitled to the benefit of the Convention, I leave this fact to be determined by Time, & our Commission, who I believe mean to execute the Convention with Justice & impartiality.
At this meeting the most inflamatory resolutions were proposed, & the most indecent & malicious charges were proffered by Mr. Lane against Mr. M. Clure, against whom neither calumny or Suspicion, in my opinion, ever before breathed a Censure. The resolutions however were not adopted, but an address, which I have not seen, was drawn & sent to the Minister by Mr. Mitchell & two of his Colleagues. The Minister has returned an answer, Said to be lengthy & Satisfactory to the meeting. To day the Board has received a Third letter from him transmitting one to him from Mr. Defermon, the Director General of the french council, and another to Mr. Defermon from Mr. Guillaume, the chief of the 4th. Division of that council, and the Same person mentioned in my Letter of the 10th. of October 1802. who with Swan were playing a game too gross to be misunderstood. Mr Guillaume is the Reporter on our claims to Mr. Defermon, and is the Agent to whom Mr. Swan is indebted for the Passing of all his accounts. They are both equally hostile to our commissioners, from whose investigation of Mr. Swans claims, they have each, in my belief, much to fear. To these two Gentlemen I am persuaded we Principally owe the criminal attempts which are making to lessen the weight of the Board, & to create very Mischievous Consequences. I have certainly exerted myself to put Mr Livingston on his guard. In due time I denounced to him the secret Springs & motives of a despicable set of men, whose sole object was to inlist him in obtaining the removal of one, if not two, of the Board, & in case of their failing in that, to disgust them by vile calumnies & aspersions So much as to induce them to ask themselves for the appointment of others in their Stead. In fact untill very lately the opinion Prevailed among them that the minister had the Power himself of displacing them, & the moment was arrived, when they thought he would not lac[k] the inclination. I have repeated to Mr. Livingston that admitting the Board to be ever so much in error in not proceeding, their motives were certainly Pure & ought at least to Place them, in his mind, beyond the reach of falsehood & Slander—that those very men (naming them) who were Practising upon his good Nature, were men whose objects he would soon be compelled by a Sense of duty & Justice to Support me, & the Board too, in exposing to the proper authorities of this Government. He appeared to agree with me in respect to the views of those Individuals, and from the force of Circumstances as well as from a Sense of propriety I Persuade myself I Shall find from him that Support. But Should it unfortunately prove otherwise, I Shall Continue to execute the Painful task I am engaged in with firmness & impartiality. In So doing I Shall derive ample Consolation in being instrumental in Procuring Justice to fair claimants & in feeling that I have discharged my duty with fidelity.
In a very few days I expect to have the honor of Sending you a tolerably accurate view of the mass of claims now before the french Commission, Together with a Statement of those I have prepared, reported, & Submitted to the Board. With great Respect & attachment, I have the honor to remain. Sir, your mo. ob. Servt.
Fulwar Skipwith

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Paris, vol. 1). Marked “(3ta.).”

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:406–8.

   For Livingston’s difficulties with the board of commissioners, see Livingston to JM, 31 Oct. 1803 (ibid., 5:594–96 and n. 1, 597 n. 2).

   Ibid., 4:13–15.


Title: To James Madison from Albert Gallatin, 15 November 1803
From: Gallatin, Albert
To: Madison, James

Sir
Treasury Dept. 15th Nover. 1803
It appears by a letter from Messrs. Baring dated 9th Augt. last that they were in advance for St. 4263.12.5. on account of the British treaty fund. This arose from a considerable payment made by those gentlemen to defray the one half of the contingent expences of the board of Commissioners. I wish to be informed whether it is your intention that measures be taken to remit that sum to them, or whether you think it more eligible to wait some time under an expectation that the British Govt. will repay there the half of the expences incurred under the 6th Art. of the treaty which have been advanced at Philada. by the Government of the United States. I have the honour to be with sentiments of the highest respect Sir Your obedt. Servt.
Albert Gallatin

   RC (DNA: RG 59, ML).

   In their 9 Aug. 1803 letter, the Barings also noted that they were debtors to the U.S. for over £880 on the diplomatic, Barbary treaty, claims prosecution, and seamen’s fund accounts (Papers of Gallatin [microfilm ed.], reel 8).

   For the issue of payment of the expenses of the commissioners under the Jay treaty, see JM to Christopher Gore, 6 Apr. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:483–84 and n. 4).


Title: To James Madison from Levi Lincoln, 15 November 1803
From: Lincoln, Levi
To: Madison, James

Sir
Washington Novr 15. 1803.
In despair of being able to form a decided opinion or one perfectly satisfactory to myself, from the facts or principles of which I am possessed, respecting the submitted question, I can only state the course and result of certain reflections on the subject. The several articles of the convention obviously designed to designate the same demands, as those which the U. States are held to satisfy, being indefinite in themselves, expressed in varied terms, and not according with the expressed intent of preceeding articles, and preceeding treaties to which they refer occasions the perplexity. From the evident marks of hurry impressed, in some instances, on the face of our late negotiations with France, it is not to be presumed that the negotiators attached precise ideas to all the principal terms which they made use of. It is clear, that the same terms, as used in different articles, will not admit of the same construction.
For the purpose of ascertaining their meaning, it seems necessary to consider, as parts of one intire instrument, the treaty of cession, & the two Conventions, as they refer to, and a [re] dependent on each other, and were made at the same time, in pursuance of one intire agreement, however, independent they may be of each other in their execution.
The 2d Art. of our treaty with France Sept. 30th. 1800 which the late convention refers to as containing some of the objects to be provided for at present, mentions indemnities generally as [‘]due, or claimed,’ & which were to be the subject of a future adjustment.
The 5th article of the same treaty provides for the payments of ‘debts contracted,’ by the French Govt., with the individual citizens of the United States, saving indemnities claimed on account of captures or confiscations.
The makers of the treaty of 1800 comprized in the terms “debts contracted” and “indemnities due or claimed” all the demands which they then meant to provide for, or to reserve for a future adjustment. Had that treaty have been ratified, in all its articles, and the payments of debts have been made, as provided for in the 5th. and as therein, & in the 2d. they are distinguished from indemnities, no after demands, but those comprized under the term indemnities could have been made, on the French Govt. Considering these articles connectedly, & in connection with other parts of this treaty, there can be but little doubt of its having been the intention of their framers to include all just demands, as well for freight, as for other causes within the general description of the debts mentioned in the 5th, and the indemnities excepted therefrom, & reserved, in the 2d. Article. No reason can be assigned, why a claim on account of freight should not be considered, as within the terms, or the meaning, of one or the other, of those articles—within the first, when founded on any contract, & within the last, if resulting from capture, or any transaction, without an agreement, or the consent of the claimant.
The 9th Art. of the treaty of the 30th of April 1803 expressly declares it to be object of the Convention of the same date “to provide for the payment of debts due to the citizens of the U. S. by the French Govt. prior to the 30th of Sept 1800.” The first Art; of the Convention securing a payment to the F. Govt. mentions another Convention also which shall fix the sum, “for the payment of the debts due by France to the citizens of the U. States.”
To provide for the payment of these debts, is the avowed object of last mentioned Convention. In the first Sec, it is said, that it is “to secure the sum due by France to the citizens of the U. S.,” in compliance with the 2d & 5th articles of the treaty of the 30th of Sept. 1800. that the respective ministers had been appointed, who had agreed to the following articles.
1st. That, ‘the debts due’ by France to citizens of the U S. before Sept 30th 1800 shall be paid according to certain regulations. This last term may possibly refer to the qualifications of the debts, as well as to the mode of payment.

“The sum due,” and ‘the debts due by France’ as expressed in the above mentioned article & Section, are to be paid, in compliance with the 2d. & 5th articles of the treaty of 1800—that is, so paid, as would be in compliance with them, was this 2d article in force; or, in compliance, with the principles therein expressed. An execution of this 2d. article, or a payment in pursuance of its provisions, would be one in consequence of a ‘negotiation,’ or an ‘adjustment’ by the two nations respecting ‘indemnities.’ The convention is such an adjustment by the two nations, by which it, is determined on what account there shall be indemnit[i]es, & in what instances the U S. shall be held to satisfy them, and the other demands, under the term debts, as described in the said 5th article.
It does not appear that accounts and vouchers for freight were among those mentioned in the first article of the convention, as presented to the French Govt., or that debts for freight were among those, whose result was comprized in the conjectural note mentioned in the 2d. Article. If they were not, it is conclusive agt. the demand in question, but if they were, no conclusion results therefrom in support of the claim if it is within the subsequent exceptions.
The 4th Art of the Convention confines the demands which the United States are held to pay, to such debts as are due, for supplies, for imbargoes, or for prizes made at sea, in which the appeal has been properly lodged within the time mentioned in the Convention of 1800. The mistake in there being no such time mentioned, will probably not alter materially the effect of this article.
An execution of that convention, being an express object of the late one, this last, particularly refers to the 2d. Article of the first respecting indemnities, and to its 5th respecting debts, but so confounds & limits these terms, as to render their meaning in some instances to a degree doubtful, & in others, very circumscribed. The “debts contracted” of this 5th Art. are by the 4th as above stated, confined to those for supplies, at least so far as they are tran[s]ferred to the U S. for payt. Debts, or demands for the freight in question, cannot be considered, on any principles, as included in this description. The “indemnities claimed on account of captures or confiscations,” and “indemnities due or claimed” as mentioned in the above rd. 5th & 2d Article, are confined in like manner, to indemnities for imbargoes, & prizes made at sea. A demand, on account of an imbargo, detaining both vessel & cargo, or the vessel alone, can in no sense of the word, be considered as including a demand for the vessel, having transported the cargo, which is the ground of a claim for freight.
Are then, ‘debts,’ or rather demands, on account of freight, in cases of capture, as distinguished from “debts due for supplies” or “for imbargoes,” provided for under the terms “debts due for prizes made at sea?” The positive effect of these terms, is to include only such demands as are in consequence of captures made at sea, but not, necessarily, all such. The next article of this Convention, therefore limits the demand on account of captures, to such, as had been or should be ordered to be restored, and in cases of the insufficiency of the captors, & expressly excepts demands, on account of prizes, whose condemnation had been, or should be confirmed. These limitations, being inconsistent with the idea of a payment of freight in some instances in which it may be clearly due from the French Govt. or the captors & not very congenial with such an idea in others, conclude with great strength in favor of excluding it in all cases, as a demand transferred to the United States.
Demands for freight where individuals may have transported articles, for the French Govt. or for its citizens if such have existed, as they are within no positive provision of the convention, they are out of the question. In such cases there was a voluntary credit, which if misplaced, as it was the creditor’s folly, so it will be his loss: the U S., in no event and on no principles, being bound to protect or pay such claims, they not being debts, for supplies as before stated, or on account of captures at sea, as above expressed.
A decree, or an order for ‘restitution’ or condemnation is, either of the vessel & cargo—or, secondly a condemnation of the vessel where the cargo is restored, or, 3dly. a condemnation of the cargo, where the vessel is restored. In the two first cases on general principles there may be a demand for damages, but its only in the last that there can be a demand for freight against the captors; As, then, this order of ‘restitution,’ is of such a kind, as devolves the obligation of making the payment mentioned in the convention, on ‘account of captures at sea,’ and as it is only an order of condemnation of cargo, that can devolve the obligation of the payment of freight, It is to be presumed that the convention meant to provide for the payment or restitution of the vessel or cargo, only, which are due from the captors, on an order of restoration; and not for the payment of freight which is due only in the event of a condemnation of the cargo and this, with some exceptions. If the condemned cargo is contraband; if the vessel is coasting from one port of the enemy to another; if she is engaged in a trade between the mother country & her colonies not allowed of in a time of peace, or in any other was departs from the principles of a neutral conduct, freight is usually denied. These deviations altho they may not expose the vessel to confiscation, have been considered, by the usages of nations, as sufficient to forfeit the right to freight.
It may be difficult to reconcile the provision in the convention for the payment of debts thus narrowed down & confined, to demands for supplies, for imbargoes, & for vessels or cargos ordered to be restored, with its more inlarged professions, and its repeated reference to the two articles of the treaty of 1800. Yet I am inclined to think such ought to be its construction, and that the opinion of the two commissioners is correct. To extend the provision further, would, I think, be unauthorized by the articles themselves, or the rules of construction. The creditors, for freight have no cause for complaint against the U S. There demands were against the French Govt. And if the Convention have not transferred them, they still remain good as they were, against their original creditors. The Commissioners who are made the judges, are of the opinion, that debts for freight are not tran[s]ferred. But if they were doubtful, the effect ought to be the same. They could never decide that an instrument of a doubtful, or fairly capable of a different construction, had charged the American nation with the debts of the French. The Convention supposes, by its expressly reserving to the French Govt. the right of deciding on such claims, as shall be so rejected as to exempt the United States from their payment that there may be some which they may be bound to satisfy. Among those may be the demands for freight. To charge the sum mentioned in the Convention with these kind of debts, if they are not fairly chargeable on it, would be not only injurious to the United States, but injustice to the indisputable convention debtors in the event of that sum’s being insufficient. The foregoing opinions, altho’ repeatedly reviewed, are submitted to your consideration, with real diffedence. I have the honor to be Sir most respectfully your most obt Servt.
Levi Lincoln

   RC (DNA: RG 59, LOAG). Docketed by Wagner: “Whether freights are included in the French Convention.”

   See JM to Lincoln, 4 Nov. 1803.

   See Miller, TreatiesHunter Miller, ed., Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America (8 vols.; Washington, 1930–48)., 2:458–59.

   See ibid., 2:462.

   See ibid., 2:504.

   Underlined twice in RC.

   Underlined twice in RC.

   Underlined twice in RC.

   Underlined twice in RC.

   Lincoln doubtless meant to write “way.”


Title: To James Madison from Robert R. Livingston, 15 November 1803
From: Livingston, Robert R.
To: Madison, James

No 90
Sir
Paris 15 November 1803
I have only within these few days been honoured by your letter to me of the 29th July by way of Hamburgh together with one of the Same date to Mr Monroe, which I have Sent to him by Mr  an American Gentleman, by the way of holland; none more direct offering from here as the intercourse is very Strictly forbidden. I Shall make the communication you direct of Mr Pichon’s note & your reply relative to the flag of the Italian Republic: it appears to me however that this notice rather recommends than Supercedes the propriety of a direct recognition of the First Consul & the compliment of a commission upon the principle I have mentioned; But of this the President is the best judge. The letters you have received Since the date of yours, you will find have anticipated your direction relative to information on the Subject of West Florida Since they refer to documents, & historic facts that it will be easy to adduce: as I presume you will have no trouble on this ground, I do not think necessary to put you to the expence in procuring original papers; Should it happen otherwise, I Shall obey your orders, & if any negotiation is necessary at Madrid I Shall transmit to Mr Pinkney all the proofs I can collect—& I think they will be too numerous to admit of doubt, especially taken in connection with the letter of the Spanish Minister to Mr Pinkney of which a copy has been transmitted to you. The moment is So favorable for taking possession of that country that I hope it has not been neglected even tho a little force should be necessary to effect it your minister must find the means to justify it.
I have Seen as you mention a publication of my Memoire on the Subject of Louisiana; But as it is not an official paper as it is not Signed or delivered in my public character, I do not See it can ever be noticed on this Side of the water as Such. Besides that there is nothing in it relative to Britain that has not been told them officially by our Government & by almost every Maritime power in Europe on the Subject of their vexations at Sea. Nor can they blame any endeavour of mine to effect the objects of my country by Such arguments as I thought would have weight here. It could hardly be expected that this paper could be Secret, Since as I informed you at the time I had delivered printed copies of it not only to the First & other Consuls, and to the French Ministers, but to most of these persons who I believed would be consulted upon the occasion, a few were also Sent to America with injunctions however not to publish them. I am very Sorry a bad translation of it has found its way into the papers tho’ it may Serve in Some measure to justify the President’s appointment of me by Shewing that I had not been inattentive to the great interests of my country. The zeal of our friends often carries them too far, Some of them finding that Mr Monroe was appointed, (thro’ circumstances which you have done me the honor to explain, but which they could not know[)] with a higher grade than myself seeing him only mentioned [in] the [American] paper[s] as the acting minister an[d] finding some endeavour [used] here to impress a belief that he was the principal agent i[n] treating with France it was natural that they should feel some mortification and endeavour to do me the justice they know I was entitled to. This may apologize for. I mean not by it to justify their imprudence. There is another on the part of Mr Monroe’s friends which I Should not mention, but that it carries with it a circumstance for which I may be under the necessity of apologizing to the President, Should my private letter to Mr Monroe have reached the United States Since it argued a difference of Sentiment upon an important point which, I fear, will be laid hold of by our common ennemies. I have in my former letter[s] informed you of Master [Ta]llerands calling upon me previous to the arrival of Master Monroe for a proposition for the whole of Louisiana [&] of his afterward trifling with me and telling me that What he had Said was unauthorized. This circumstance for which I have accounted to you in one of my letters, led me to think (tho’, as it afterwards appeared without reason[)] that Some change had taken place in the determination which I knew the Consul had before taken to Sell. I had just then received a line from Mr Monroe, informing me of his arrival; I wrote to him a hasty answer under the influence of these ideas excited by these prevarications of the Minister, expressing a hope that he had brought information, that New Orleans was in our possession; that I hoped our negotiation might be Successful but that I [feared war] alone would render them so but inviting him to come on that I had paved the way for him. This letter is very imprudently Shewn & Spoken of by Mr Monroe’s particular friends as a proof that he had been the principal [agent] in the negotiation so far as it may tend to this object it is of little moment because facts & dates are too well known to be contradicted. For instance it is known to every body here, that the Consul had taken his resolution to Sell previous to Mr Monroe’s arrival. It is a fact well known that Mr Marbois was authorized informally to treat with me by the First Consul before Mr Monroe reached Paris: that he actually made me the very proposition we ultimately agreed to before Master Monroe had seen a minister except Mr Marbois for a moment at my house where he came to make the proposition, Mr Monroe not having been presented to Mr Talleyrand to whom I introduced him the afternoon of the next day. All then that remained to negotiate after his arrival was a diminution of the price, & in this our Joint mission was unfortunate, for we came up, as Soon as Mr Monroe’s illness would Suffer him to do business, after a few days delay, to the Minister’s offers. There is no doubt that Mr Monroe’s talents & adress would have enabled him, had he been placed in my circumstances to have effected what I have done. But he unfortunately came too late to do more than assent to the propositions that were made us, & to aid in reducing them to form. I think he has too much candour not to be displeased that his friends Should publicly endeavour to depreciate me by speaking of a private letter hastily written under circumstances of irritation with which Mr Monroe is fully acquainted, a letter too which may contribute in two ways to advance the views of the ennemies of the administration. It is in this light only that it gives me pain. First it Shews that it was my Sentiment founded upon the knowledge I must have been Supposed to possess, of the temper of this Court & the State of things here that we Should have availed ourselves of the circumstance of the denial of the right of Depôt to possess New Orleans. That this was my Sentiment I confess, & You have found by my notes that I laboured to impress this Government with a belief that it would be done, & I have every reason to think, that the Treaty would have been concluded in March, had not Mr Pichon’s letter at the moment contradicted my Suggestion on this Subject. As the President’s views have been happily more correct than mine, as he had effected without this harsh measure his great object, it certainly is not adviseable to publish that we differed in Sentiment & introduce discussions on the comparative advantages that might be derived from the one or the other mode of proceeding. The next point in which the letter may do harm is in authorizing an opinion which the ennemies of the administration are most zealous in promoting to wit that no credit is due either to the president or his ministers since the war only produced the measure the war doubtless had it[s] effect upon the first consul. But it is equally true that every person he consulted had long before been convinced, & even the Consul’s opinion Shaken, & I will venture to Say, by my means of the little advantage France could derive from the possession of that country, & he had even, as I have before informed you, thro’ Joseph Bonaparte given me assurances that Such arrangements Should be made, as we Should approve. The not selling was a sort of personal point of honor particularly as he was bound by the express stipulations of his treaty with Spain not to do so. Nor till he found himself hampered by another personal consideration to wit his promise to pay the American claims which I had purposely published could he bring himself to take the step which the proposal of war & the Spirited measures of our own Government, among which I number the Special mission of Mr Monroe gave him the Strongest apology for doing. Particularly as in case of war he had no other means of keeping his word with us. Thus Sir, you See that it is very difficult for the most prudent man to restrain the ill judged zeal of his friends, & I dare Say that Mr Monroe will as Sincerely lament that of his friends, who indeed ought not to have Seen a mere private letter, as I do that of the Gentn that I Suspect to have occasioned the publication which you Justly blame. Having had the goodness, Sir to correct one of the errors of the Clerk that gave me Some cause of complaint I must notice another which added to my doubts of Success. At the moment I wrote to Mr Monroe in the copy of our joint instructions which you had forwarded to me the ultimatum that we were limited to was 30 millions out of which the American claims were to be paid, nor I was Satisfied that if Mr Monroe on his arrival Should adhere to this that our prospect of Success was not very great, Since ten millions in cash to the Government was an object of but little moment, a more might have been got from Spain by a transfer. On looking over however the original instructions of which Mr Monroe was the bearer, I found that we were authorized to give fifty millions for New Orleans & Floridas So that we could without too extraordinary an assumption of powers go to the price they expected for Louisiana.
I have applied to Master Taller[and] on the subject of East Florida thinking the moment favorable for making the acquisition I have endeavoured to al[arm] him and Spain about the dangers that will result [to] Spain and France if England take possession of the port on the gulph and I have obtained from him a positive promise that this government shall aid any negotiation th[at] may be set on foot for its purchase I have written on this sub[ject] to Master Pinkney and advised him to open his negotiation [by] reiterating this argument and by making some offer of payment in American [claims] and shall inform Mr Monroe of these circumstances, & will forward for him any instructions he may chuse Send to Mr Pinkney. The Spanish Ambassador is So ill, that no business can now be done thro’ him but if (as is expected) this court will name who they please for hi[s] successor had no special commission existed I would have endeavoured to get this business effected here where if at all it would be done in half the time that it can be at Madrid.
I have not repeated my request to return because it is impossible to foresee what the present critical moment may produce. And I believe I possess advantages here that will take & much expence in a new Minister to establish two of the ministers are my most intimate friend[s] with the minister of exterior relations also I stand at present upon the best ground and have all the consideration and confidence at court that our government can wish under these circumstances I feel myself bound to make Some personal Sacrifices for the present. But I have a thousand motives for returning the moment I think I can be conveniently Spared. It is for this reason, that I wish the President would So far indulge me if he does not appoint me a Successor in the Spring as to Send me a blank Commission for a Secretary & Chargé des affaires. I Shall be careful not to fill it with any person that he Shall not approve, & I Shall give him Sufficient time before I quit this to Supply my place either before I leave this or in a Short time after.
This will enable me to avail myself of circumstances & So to act as will be more advantageous to the country, at the Same time consist with my private wishes.
I Shall do myself the honor to answer your letter to Mr Monroe & myself to morrow.
Commodore Prebble writes that peace is made with Morocco on the ground of the Treaty of 1786. I am Sir With the highest & most respectful attachment Your most obt hum: Servt
Robt R Livingston

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, DD, France, vol. 8A); draft (NHi: Livingston Papers); letterbook copy (NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 1); letterbook copy of enclosures (NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 5). RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by Livingston; marked “Copy”; docketed by Wagner as received 8 Mar. Unless otherwise noted, italicized words and letters are those encoded by Livingston’s secretary and decoded here by the editors or supplied within square brackets from the draft (for the code, see PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 2:304–5 n.). RC decoded interlinearly by Wagner. For enclosures (docketed by Wagner as received in Livingston’s 15 Nov. 1803 dispatch), see n. 28.

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:236–37, 240–44.

   Blank left in RC; draft has “Mr ⟨F⟩oley”; letterbook copy has “Mr Foley.”

   For Livingston’s earlier suggestions regarding U.S. recognition of Napoleon’s election to the presidency of the Italian Republic, see Livingston to JM, 22 Mar. 1802 and 18 Feb. and 17 Apr. 1803 (ibid., 3:61–62, 4:328–31, 524–27).

   See Livingston to JM, 20 May 1803, and Livingston and Monroe to JM, 7 June 1803 (ibid., 5:18–20, 66–71).

   For Cevallos to Pinckney, 4 May 1803, see Pinckney to JM, 4 May 1803 (ibid., 4:571–72 and n. 2).

   Interlinear decoding has “that I hope that it not been neglected.”

   Miscoded “mentioned is the among n paper”; interlinear decoding has “mentioned it the among-n-paper.”

   Miscoded “500,” which has no equivalent; interlinear decoding has “to.”

   Draft has “Tho this may appologize for, I mean not by it to justify their imprudence.”

   See Livingston to JM, 11 and 13 Apr. 1803 (ibid., 4:500–502, 511–15).

   Miscoded “rollerands”; interlinear decoding has “Talleyrand’s.”

   Miscoded and interlinearly decoded “is.”

   The remainder of this sentence is not encoded and is underlined in the RC.

   Miscoded “I felt was alone”; interlinear decoding has “I felt was all one.”

   Interlinear decoding has “by.”

   Miscoded and interlinearly decoded “af.”

   Interlinear decoding has “indeed.”

   See Livingston to JM, 24 Mar. 1803 (ibid., 4:447–48).

   Draft has “now.”

   Miscoded “talleras”; interlinear decoding has “Talleyrand.”

   Miscoded “alas”; interlinear decoding has “(alarm).”

   Miscoded “subitaly”; interlinear decoding has “subject.”

   Miscoded and interlinearly decoded “hopes.”

   Draft inserts “he shd die” here.

   Draft has “that it will take some time.”

   Livingston did not reply to JM’s 29 July 1803 letter to Monroe and himself until 23 Nov. For JM’s letter, see ibid., 5:238–40.

   See Miller, TreatiesHunter Miller, ed., Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America (8 vols.; Washington, 1930–48)., 2:185–219.

   Livingston enclosed copies of his correspondence with the American claimants at Paris regarding the delay in processing their claims. Livingston wrote that he had always endeavored to keep them fully informed and that the commissioners believed their powers were effective only after ratification of the convention; the claimants expressed their appreciation for his zeal (John Mitchell, Samuel Hawkins, James Swan, Benjamin Lane, and twelve others to Livingston, 4 Nov. 1803 [3 pp.; printed in ASPAmerican State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States … (38 vols.; Washington, 1832–61)., Foreign Relations, 6:180]; Livingston to the American creditors, 5 Nov. 1803 [3 pp.; printed ibid., 6:180–81]; John Mitchell and Benjamin Beale, Jr., to Livingston, 7 Nov. 1803 [6 pp.]; Mitchell, Lane, and Hawkins to Livingston, 7 Nov. 1803 [3 pp.]).


Title: To James Madison from John Gavino, 15 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Gavino, John
To: Madison, James

15 November 1803, Gibraltar. No. 136. Refers to his last letter, no. 135, which enclosed a copy of a 14 Sept. 1803 letter from O’Brien. Lear left for Algiers on 13 Nov. in the Constitution, accompanied by the Nautilus. The Argus sailed the same day for Leghorn with two ships under convoy. On 14 Nov. the Enterprize, Capt. [Stephen] Decatur, sailed for Syracuse “with the Victualler ship Traveller, for the use of the Squadron.” “A few days ago four Spanish Ships the Line past this from the East, two got to Cadiz, the others Supposed to have gone for Ferol.
“The Contagiouse Disorder still Continues at Malaga, & altho one half the Inhabitants quited The Town, and the Governour Suspended all Communication with the Mole & Harbour, 70 to 100 were by our last Accounts of 8th. Inst: carried off daily.” The governor of Gibraltar “admits no Vessels to anchor in his Bay from the intermediate Coast of Spain, between Alicante & Cadiz.” Ships from those cities and the ports beyond are quarantined in conformity to the latest accounts of public health received at the health office. For news of “Barbary Occurrencys,” refers JM to the enclosed letter from Simpson. On 2 Nov. the Old Tom, Captain Cornick, arrived from Norfolk “with Stipulations for Algier.” Having no bill of health, the ship was quarantined; it left on 6 Nov.
“A few days ago arrived a Convoy from England with Stores for this Place and Malta.” Nelson is off Toulon with eleven sail of the line “and many frigates, three of the former now here for Provisions & Stores, one is Stationd off Cadiz.” British consul Falcon, “who was sent away from Algiers some time ago,” has been ordered by his government to join Nelson, “who is to return him there, and if refused has (it is sayd) Discretional orders to act as may think best for the honour of the Nation; the Admiral owes that Regency an old Grudge.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Gibraltar, vol. 2). 3 pp.; docketed by Wagner: “Recd. 20 Jany. / Extract to be made.” Printed in Knox, Naval Documents, Barbary WarsDudley W. Knox, ed., Naval Documents Related to the United States Wars with the Barbary Powers (6 vols.; Washington, 1939–44)., 3:222–23.

   Gavino to JM, 18 Oct. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:550).

   Gavino probably enclosed Simpson to JM, 15 Oct. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:533).

   For Falcon’s expulsion by the dey and his instructions to join Nelson, see O’Brien to JM, 28 Apr. 1803, and Gavino to JM, 29 Aug. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:559–60 and nn. 2 and 3, 5:355). In January 1804 Nelson sent Falcon to Algiers on board HMS Superb, having given Capt. Richard Keats orders to insist on his acceptance, but the dey refused to yield (Carola Oman, Nelson [Garden City, N.Y., 1946], pp. 545, 549–50, 552–53).


Title: To James Madison from George Madison, 15 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Madison, George
To: Madison, James

15 November 1803, Frankfort. “The Treaty lately made with France … respecting the Louisiana Country, will necessarily require the appointment of a number of our Citizens to fill and discharge the ⟨duties⟩ of the Various Offices which are indispensable in regulating the police of that Country.” Considers the post of collector at New Orleans “not only as a very important but a very profitable appointment” and one that would suit his “Genius and inclination.” “I refer you to Mr John Breckinridge and Brown and the rest of the Representation from Kentucky for any information you may wish respecting my Integrity, capacity & fitness for such an Appointment.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, LAR, 1801–9, filed under “Madison”). 2 pp.; docketed by Jefferson.

   George Madison (1763–1816), brother of Bishop James Madison and JM’s second cousin, was born in Rockingham County, Virginia. After moving to Kentucky, he was appointed auditor of public accounts in 1796, a position he held until shortly before his death. A major in the Kentucky volunteers during the War of 1812, he was captured during the Battle of Frenchtown on the Raisin River and held prisoner at Quebec. Elected governor without opposition in 1816, he took the oath of office on 5 Aug. 1816 but died two months later (Lowell H. Harrison, ed., Kentucky’s Governors, 1792–1985 [Lexington, Ky., 1985], pp. 18–19).


Title: To James Madison from James Monroe, 16 November 1803
From: Monroe, James
To: Madison, James

No. 17.
Sir
London November 16th. 1803.
Within a few days past I have received your letters of the 29. of July, the first addressed to Mr. Livingston & myself, the second to me singly, with seperate letters to him & Mr. Pinckney, & also your letter to me of the 29. of september. These are the only communications that I have recd. from you since my arrival in this country. The letters to Mr. Livingston & Mr. Pinckney shall be immediately forwarded to them. Your last letter to me I have decyphered; the first is not yet finished. Being yet alone, Mr. Purviance not having not joined me, and other business pressing me, will probably put it out of my power to do it before this is forwarded, tho’ I perceive by the last letter that it is not very material at this moment, since its contents are applicable to our interests in another quarter. I see very clearly the propriety of the injunction not to proceed to Spain till I receive the further order of the President so to do. I could not pursue the object depending with that power, with advantage, till the affair with France is completely adjusted, & the assurance of h⟨er⟩ government given to support the negotiation. There seems also to be a propriety in my remai⟨n⟩ing here steadily some months longer to give this government a suitable impression of th⟨e⟩ just views & correct policy of our own. If I pa⟨ss⟩ over to the continent at this time or shortly i⟨t⟩ might excite suspicions here, which could no⟨t⟩ be advantagious to us with this government, whose situation makes it alive to every incident of the kind. It is also possible that circumstances may occur, after our treaty with Fran⟨ce⟩ is known to invite explanations on topicks connected with it that may be necessary and useful. I flatter myself that by the Spring ou⟨r⟩ affairs will stand with both these powers, on that amicable footing, that each will chearf⟨ul⟩ly instruct its minister at Madrid to give what aid he can in support of our pretentio⟨ns⟩ with the court of Spain. The interval wil⟨l⟩ enable you to decide with greater satisfacti⟨on⟩ whether, and when I ought to proceed ther⟨e⟩ and what ought to be the precise objects a⟨nd⟩ conditions of any treaty which might be for⟨med⟩ with that power.
Since my last I have conferred with Mr. Addington & Mr. Yorke generally on the subject of our relations with this country, on which occasions I have endeavord to impress them with just sentiments of the amicable policy of our govt. towards G. Britain. I have gone into no particulars, such as the conditions on which our treaty ought to be renewed, whether it is considered as expiring with reference to the preliminary or definintive [sic] articles of the late treaty of peace, or indeed any other precise objec⟨t⟩ of the kind. I expressed the desire of our government to be, to preserve by a fair & impartial conduct towards this & other powers, perpetual peace & amity with this nation. I assured them that that relation would never be disturbed by any improper act on our part; & while I acknowledged in suitable terms the general conduct of his Majesty’s government towards the UStates as being amicable & satisfa⟨c⟩tory, I took occasion to intimate that some outrages had been committed by the impressme⟨nt⟩ of our seamen, which I was persuaded the go⟨v⟩ernment would see the propriety of enquiring into, & would give such orders as would prevent the repetition of. Those gentlemen assured m⟨e⟩ that thier government was disposed to do everything in its power to satisfy our just claims ⟨in⟩ that & every other respect. I am assured thro’ an⟨o⟩ther channel that orders have been issued fr⟨om⟩ the Admiralty in conformity with the sentim⟨ents⟩ which they thus expressed.
You will observe by the papers which acco⟨m⟩pany this that it is reported here that a negotiation is depending between the UStates & G: Britain for the renewal of the treaty of commerce of 1794. which is represented to be conducted in a high tone on my part. This report has produc’d much sensation in the commercial world, and furnishes proof that any collision with us, would be deemed a real misfortune to the nation at this epoch. I have taken no notice of it, otherwise than by remarking that nothing had ever passed between this govt. and m⟨y⟩self, that was not on both sides, of the most friendly & conciliating nature; and that I was persuade⟨d⟩ nothing would occur to disturb the harmony & good understanding subsisting between the two powers. I am Sir with great respect & esteem your Very obt. servant
Jas. Monroe

   RC (DNA: RG 59, DD, Great Britain, vol. 12); letterbook copy (DLC: Monroe Papers). RC docketed by Wagner as received 20 Feb. 1804.

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:238–40, 240–44, 236–37, 245–46.

   Monroe referred to JM’s second letter of 29 Sept. (ibid., 5:471).

   Letterbook copy has “yet” here.

   Monroe to JM, 22 Oct. 1803 (ibid., 5:562–64).

   Charles Philip Yorke (1764–1834) had been secretary at war under Addington from 1801 until August 1803, when he was named home secretary. He served in the latter position until the return of Pitt’s ministry in May 1804 (Thorne, History of Parliament, 5:665, 667–68).

   On 12 Nov. 1803 the London Courier, and Evening Gazette reported that “The American Government is said to hold the most lofty and menacing language respecting their just pretensions” in the treaty negotiations and that Monroe was supposed to have received instructions to press the point of U.S. trade with the British East and West Indies “with every possible urgency.” On 14 Nov. 1803 the London Morning Herald also reported that the Americans were contending their points “In very high language.”


Title: To James Madison from James Markham Marshall, 16 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Marshall, James Markham
To: Madison, James

16 November 1803, Alexandria. “As it is not convenient to me any longer to perform the duties of an assistant Judge for the District of Columbia, I must request that you will inform the President … that I from this day resign my office.” Does not have his commission with him but will transmit it to JM if “it is material.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, LRD). 1 p.; docketed by Jefferson.

   James Markham Marshall (1764–1848), the brother of Chief Justice John Marshall, had been appointed to the circuit court for the District of Columbia in 1801 (PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (1st ser., vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77, vols. 11–17, Charlottesville, Va., 1977–91)., 14:176–77 and n. 1; Johnson et al., Papers of John Marshall, 6:91 n. 5).


Title: To James Madison from Fulwar Skipwith, 16 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Skipwith, Fulwar
To: Madison, James

16 November 1803, Paris. “To day I have been fortunate enough to have a long & very Satisfactory conference with Mr. Defermon, who has more than confirmed my Suspicions that Mr. Guillaume, his chief had prompted him to write to the minister of the U. S. from other motives than those of Public good. Mr. Defermon to the Credit of us all, Knew nothing of the misunderstanding between the minister & the Board, nor of the dirty Intrigues upon the Carpet. He observed that Mr. Guillaume had reminded him of the interest which was daily accumulating to the Prejudice of the french Government on the American claims, from the delay of the Board, & that the Business when it did begin, would Consequently, press in Mass upon his Bureaux, & thereby embarrass him, & greatly interfere with other business equally pressing. This Mr. Defermon added was his Sole motive in writing to the Minister. On my explaining to him the real motives which had given rise to this delay, & how Soon it might be expected to be removed by the Knowledge of the Ratificatio⟨n⟩ of the Treaties, he was perfectly Satisfied, & assured me that the Board & myself might implicitly Confide in his Cordial Support & Concurrence in the execution of the Convention on each Particular principle indeed that I myself had Suggested to him in a former communication. In short I have every reason to think that I shall continue to find in him & in Mr. Marbois an equal disposition to Support our Board in rendering Justice & in defeating fraude and when these things come to the Test I doubt not of finding the Same Support from our Minister, whose irritation & free communicatio⟨n⟩ with Some men I cannot help blaming, but the purity of whose motives I am incapable of Suspecting.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Paris, vol. 1). 2 pp.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Skipwith. Addressee not indicated. This letter was probably intended as a postscript to Skipwith to JM, 14 Nov. 1803, with which it is filed.


Title: To James Madison from John Street, 16 November 1803 (Abstract)
From: Street, John
To: Madison, James

16 November 1803, Fayal. On 3 Oct. 1803 received JM’s circular letters of 26 Aug. 1802 and 9 Apr. 1803, forwarded by Brown at Oporto and Jarvis at Lisbon. Replies to the first of these: “I never made any charge to Government of any expenditure whatever for provision for our distressed Citizens. Within, very near fourteen years that I am in Office, there has been severall, at different times left under my care, and have provided for them out of those very perquisites that are allowed me.” Had he charged his expenses to the U.S., he would have done so according to the act of 1792 mentioned in the 26 Aug. 1802 circular, as he never received the acts of 18 Apr. 1798 and 19 Feb. 1799 “authorising the reimbursement of reasonable expences beyond the sum estipulated by that Act.” Should it be necessary in future to charge expenses, “though contrary to [his] wishes,” he will behave in compliance with the act of 28 Feb. 1803 subjoined to JM’s 9 Apr. circular. Requests that JM forward the circular letter of 1 Aug. 1801, which he never received. “I was much pleased to find myself empowered to demand the Vessels’s Papers as by that means, I can give an exact account of them, and their proceedings as required, which heretofore I was not able to do.
“In my District, there is neither Lights or Buoys, simply all Vessels pay half a Dollar Anchorage. Quarantine was never put in force in these Islands.” Commerce with the U.S. “for some years past, has diminished much.” Great Britain has “exported large quantitys of Wines for their Navy and Army in the West Indies, having found them much preferable, both in quality and price to any others for the preservation of their healths.” Should JM want to do the same, he will communicate “every information about the different qualitys and prices &ca.”; will be happy to render JM “any service in these Islands.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Fayal, vol. 1). 3 pp.; docketed by Wagner as received 26 Mar.

   See Gallatin to JM, 16 Aug. 1802 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 3:489–90 and n. 5).

   Ibid., 4:491–93.

   Street had been appointed vice-consul at Fayal by George Washington in 1790 (Senate Exec. ProceedingsJournal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United States of America (3 vols.; Washington, 1828)., 1:54, 56).

   For the 1798 “Act authorizing an expenditure, and making an appropriation for the reimbursement of monies advanced by the Consuls of the United States, in certain cases,” see U.S. Statutes at LargeThe Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America … (17 vols.; Boston, 1848–73)., 1:551.

   For the 1799 “Act to authorize the reimbursement of monies expended in rendering aid to sick and destitute American Seamen, in foreign countries,” see ibid., 1:617.

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 2:1–4.


Title: To James Madison from George Davis, 17 November 1803
From: Davis, George
To: Madison, James

Sir,
Tunis Nov. 17th 1803.
On the evening of the 13th. instant, a Courier arrived from Tripoly, who reported that an American Frigate, had run on Shore at that place; and was captured by the Gunboats of the Regency—most of the Consuls, had letters, but no mention was made of the circumstance. On the following morning, I was at Bardo, with Mr. Nyssen, who informed me, that no doubt could be entertained of the fact, in as much, as he had seen the Bashaw’s letter, to His Excellency the Bey. I immediately dispatched a Courier for Tripoly, with the enclosed letters. This morning, another Courier has arrived who brings a confirmation of the report. She proves to be the Philadelphia, Commanded by Wm. Bainbridge Esq., mounting 42 guns with a Crew of 307. men, 29 officers included—grounded on the morning of the 30th. ultimo, in chase of a Corsair. No detail has been received of the number of men killed, or wounded—an express, departs at this moment for Algiers. I am not ignorant that Mr. Nissen, His Danish Majesty’s Consul, was charged with our Affairs by Mr. Cathcart; but as his Govt. was fearful that their affairs, might be embroiled in consequence of the information, he might give of the Bashaw’s movements; the only communication I have ever received from that Quarter, was his regrets at not being able to fulfill the Charge. It is also of importance that our Officers, shoud be placed under the Protection of Such a Representative, as is Respected, and fear’d; and as Commode. Morris’s personal safety was guaranteed by the French Commissary; it is to be hoped, that the measure I have taken, will meet your full approbation. With great Respect & Consideration I have the honor to be Sir, Your Most Obedt. servt.
George Davis

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Tunis, vol. 2, pt. 2). RC marked “Triplicate”; docketed by Wagner as received 7 June. For enclosures, see n. 1.

   Davis enclosed copies of his 14 Nov. 1803 letter to Bonaventure Beaussier, French commissary general at Tripoli (1 p.), requesting Beaussier’s protection for the crew of the captured American frigate; his 14 Nov. 1803 letter to Capt. William Bainbridge of the Philadelphia (1 p.) telling him that Beaussier’s aid had been requested and recommending Bainbridge “to the mercy of God, and the … exercise of … fortitude”; and his 17 Nov. 1803 letter to Robert R. Livingston (2 pp.) notifying him of the capture and enclosing a copy of the letter to Beaussier. Davis told Livingston he had sent the letter through Marseilles “in order that the Speediest information may be given to the Government.”

   For a detailed account of the capture of the Philadelphia and its crew, see Kitzen, Tripoli and the U.S. at War, pp. 93–101.