Newspaper Page Text
SATURDAY, December 17, 1796.
THE AUGUSTA CHRONICLE
GAZETTE of the STATE.
£REED 0M of thi PRESS and TRIAL by JURY shall remain inyiolati. ' Confutation of Georgia • *
‘ ' """ ■ - - ■
A U G U S r A . Printed by JOHN E. SMITH, Printer to the State,* Ejjays, Articles of Intelligence , Advertisements »
' be gratefully received, and every kind of Printing performed . [Price Three Dollars per annum .J
. AUTHENTIC.
fr inflation of a Note from the Mimjler of
tiu french, Republic , to the SecrUarj of
Unite of the United States .
Legation of Philadelphia .
[Continuedfrom our lafl.\
What are we to think of these delays,
ui.e» we fee the officers of the govern
ment atiing with so much aClivity againlt
the French, on the flighcclt suspicion that
the> have violated tl:e - peutrality,--when
jo his letter ot 29! h April, 1794. the se
cretary of state answers the complaint? of
the Englifn minister—“ We have receiv
ed no intelligence of the particular fads
to which you refer; but to prevent all
cnr.ecdfcry circuity in fit ft enquiring into
them and next tranl'mittirg to this city
the result, the proper inftrudions will be
oiven to act without further directions.”
How did the federal government ccnduft
towards the autumn of 1794? The Eng
lish frigate Terpfrehore, took the priva
teer la Montague into the port of Nor
folk. The French vice-consul claimed
the execution ct the treaty, of the govern
or of Virginia : The governor anfwercd
lint, that he would have the necessary
investigation made, and would afterwards
take the proper measures. The [ tede
ceffor of the undersigned then interposed
with the federal government, and the se
cretary of state allured him, that he wrote
to the governor of Virginia to have jullice
rendered. But this jullice was limited to
investigation made with such flowntfs,
that £ months after, this affair was not
the 24th Feb. 1799, the
secretary of state contented himlelt with
fending to the predcctflbr of the under
lined, the of the lieutenant
governor, dated 10th C&ober 1794* by
which he announces, that he otdered the
commandant of the militia of Norfolk to
make the neceflary enquiries for enabling
the executive of Virginia, to render to
the republic the jullice it had a right to
expeft. The reiult of these enquiries is
cot known. However, rhe fad about
which the minister Fauchet complained
to the secretary of state was notorious and
painful refearchcs were not neceflary to
convince hjmfelt of it. Do we not find
in this proceeding a formal delire to elude
the treaties, and to favour the Englilh ?
If the government of the United States
had wilhed to maintain iifelfinthat im
partiality which its duties prescribed---it
it had wilhed freely to execute the trea
ties—-it would not have waited, every
time that the Enghlh infringed them, for
theminifters to Il licit its juiiice :--Should
it not have given inftruCtions so prccifc,
that the governors of rhe Hates and lub
altcrn officers of the federal government
roight know what duties they had to ful
fil, in order to maintain the execution of
treaties ? Why have the moll energetic
orders (such is the secretary of Hate,
Rardolph, mentions; been given, when
tne fnppoft of the neutrality inviolate in
favor ot the Englilh, came in queftton :
‘fthy have the measures taken by the fe
deral government operated with so much
ftcvvnefs when France was interested ?
Yrhy in fine have the multiplied claims of
fici ministers never produced the red refs
of the grievances of which they complain
ed ?
Y. hen the predecelfor of the undersign
ed minister plenipoten»iaiy claimed the
execution of the art. of the treaty
interdicting the entry into the American
forts of Englilh veffeis which fhoukl have
inane prizes upon the French when he
cited this fimpie and formal stipulation;
** Un the contrary neither asylum nor
refuge (hall be given in the ports or bar
bers of France or of the United States to
*?Uels which (hail have made prizes of
French"or Americans; and Ihould
*ky be obliged to eater by tempest cr
danger of the sea, all proper means (hall
be uled to make them depart as soon as
possible;” the secretary of state in order
to avoid (hutting the American ports
against the Englilh interpreted this article
in their favor. “ But it would be un
candid to conceal from you the construc
tion which we have hitherto deemed the
true one. The firft part of the 17th ar
ticle relates to French (hips of wai and
piivateers entering our ports with their
prizes ; the second contrails the situation
of the enemies of France, by forbidding I
such as (hall have made prize of the
French ; intimating from this connexion
of the two clauses, that the veffds forbid-'
den arc those which bring their prizes
with them. It has been cor.fidered that
this feftion of the treaty was impartially
destined to the withholding of orotedlion,
cr fuccour, to the prizes themselves; had
it been otherwise, it would have been
fupeifluous, to have prohibited from fel
ling what they have taken in the ports of
the United States.”
He said, moreover, in his letter of the
29th of Mav, 17Q? “ But on the 3d.
of Augulf, the prelident declared his con
firuflion of that treaty to be, that no pub
lic armed veffcls was fherebv forbidden
fiom our waters, except those which
(hould have made prize of the people or
roperty of France coming with their
prizes.” But how is it possible to find,
in the stipulations of the treaty, the ferfe
given to them by the government of the
United States.? This expression of the .
treaty, “ which (hall have made piUfs/’*
is general, and applies to all capturing
veftcls, whether they enfer the ports of
the United States with prizes, or enter
them alone, after having made prizes.
It is evident, that the government adds
to the letter of the treaty in this circum
stance; and is it not aftoniftiing, that it
admits a conftruflion of the treaty, when
it expedls to find a meaning disadvantage •
ous to France, and in other inftanccs op
pofesall conftru&ion, when thiswoqM be
favorable to the republic. But has it the
right of construing the treaty, of chang
ing, of its own accord, the sense es a
clear and precise stipulation, without the
consent and concurrence of the other con
trading party ? Doubtless not, especially
when, by so doing, ir wounds her intcr
efts.
The secretary of state, by rhe 22d ar
ticle, pretends to support his conft ruclion
|of the 17th article. What does not this
22d article contain? A prohibition of
the enemies of France and of the United
States from arming in the refpedive ports
of the two powers, of felling their priz
es, or of difeharging all our part of their
cargo there. This article, therefore, ap
plies to the prizes; whilst the 17th ap
plies to the capturing velTels. Did it
not exist, the enemies of France, or of
the United States, migh fend their priz
es into the refpeefive ports of the two
powers, without conducing them there
themselves; the 17th article, containing
only a prohibitory arrangement for the
capturing velTels, could not prohibit
them from doing this. It was necetEry
then to have reconrfe to a formal prohi
bition: Besides, as the veffds which
have made prizes on the French or Ame
ricans, are admitted into the ports of
France or ot the United States, in cases
of tempest or dangers of the sea, they
might, in this case, have conceived them
selves aathnrifed to dispose of their pri
zes, to fell them, or to difeharge their
cargoes; it was neceflary therefore to take
this right from them in a politive man
ner, it was neceflary to prevent them
from benefiting by a stipulation- made if
favor of humanity; this is the end answer
ed by the 22d art. which is not fupetftu
oas as the secretary of state maintains,
bat, on the contrary, contains a diftiact
GEoYGj*sf.
stipulation from that of the 17th. It is
then evident from this, that in the cases
above cited by the undersigned, the sti
pulations of the 17th article have been vi
olated. They have been equally so, by
the admission, in sundry ports, of the
Thetis and Hussar frigates, which cap
tured la Prevoyante and la Raifon, French
flore-lhips, and by admitting in the last
instance this fame (hip la Raifon, prize
to the Thetis, into the ports of the U
nited States.
But admitting for a moment the con
ftrudion gratuitoully given by the secre
tary of state to rhe 17th article of the
treaty of 1778; this article has not the
less been violated, when the Argonaut,
which had quitted Hampton Roads in or
der to capture l’Efperance, was permitted
to enter with that prize ; when the Terp
sichore was fuffered to biing in the priva
teer la Montagne. In vain were fought
in the resources of a captious and falfe
logic, the means of excusing such con
dud. The fads speak ; and every up
right mind, not blinin-d by paflion, will
necessarily yield to their evidence. Yet
the prohibitory fti, ulation of the admiflion
of prizes made bv her enemies, is the on
ly advantage which France expeded to
enjoy, after having wrought and guaran
teed the indepeoMi«e of the United
States, at a time fUfUlhe might, as the
price of that very independence, have
granted them less liberal conditions.
These wrongs of the American govern
ment towards the re, uhlic, just dated by
the undtrligueu mmii'ef plenipotentiary,
will icon be aggravated by new ones.
It was a little matter only to allow the
Engiilh to avail thtmfeJves of the ad
vantages of our treat) ; it was neceflary
to alluie thitc to them by the aid of a
contract which might lerye at once as a
reply to the claims of France, and as
peremptory motives tor retufals, the true
cause of which it inceffantly
to disguise tc her undei Ipecious pretexts.
Such was the*objsd of Mr. Jay’s mis
sion t*> London, luch was the objed of
a negotiation .enveloped from its origin
in the shadow or mystery, aud covered
with the veil of dilfimutation. Could
the executive diredory have any other
idea of it, on examining its iflue, on
feeing all the efforts made by the Ame
rican government to conceal the secret
from every eye.
Ir. his meliage to the senate of the 16th
April, 1794* the prrfideiit decla r ed that
Mr. Jay was sent to London only to ob
rain a redress of the wrongs done to the
United States; at the fame time the fe
cretaiy of date communicated to the pre
decessor of the undersigned, a part of
the inftrudions to Mr. Jay, reminding
him of the intention of the American go
vernment not to deviate from its engage
ments with the republic oj France. The
French minister, deceived by this com
munication, contributed ingeniously to
deceive his government. The Ameri
can miniifet in France removed the fears
of the French government as to the mis
sion of this envoy extraordinary, and re
prefenred it as the only means of obtain
ing indemnification tor the losses which
the American cooimere had sustained.
What has this negociation produced? A
treaty ot amity and commerce which de
prive- France of all the advantages ftipu
latcd in a previous treaty.
In faft, all that could render the neu
trality profitable to England and injuri
ous to Fiance is combined in this treaty.
Her commercial relations with the U
niied States are entirely broken, by the
abandonment of the modern public law
on contraband, a law which England had
•consecrated in elevea treaties, and which
the Americans had also consecrated in
rheir treaties with France, Holland,
Sweden and Ptuffia. From the new ar-
[Vot. XI. No. $3a.J
rangemcnts adopted by the United States
with regard to England, the free carri
age of the articles tor the equipment and
armament of velTels, is granted exdufive
ly to that power*
By the 23d article of the treaty of
Versailles, the United Statesjflhvt the li
berty of freely carrying on commerce
with the enemies of France. The 24th
article of the treaty “with Holland, the
ioth article of the treaty \vith Sweden ,
and the 13th article of the treaty with j
Prussia, contain the fame ftipulatios-Jfl
This lad article gives even more exte£»fl
five rights to the United Stares, by pet-1
mittlng them to carry to the enuwt oC
this power all the articles enuraiflßi inK
the lid of such as are
without their being hable to
tion. But by the 18fh article of th® &
treaty or London, the articles for
ing and equipping veflels are declared
contraband of war. The government of
the United States has therefore by this w
dipulation, granted to the English a \
right which they had refufed, in conse
quence of the modern public law, to
other nations with whom they have made
treaties; that of seizing on board their
veflels, articles proper tor the construc
tion and equipment of veflels. The En
glifli then, according to that, enjoy the
exclusive commerce of articles proper for
the conftruftion of veflels; yet prior to
the treaty concluded between John Jay
and lord Grenville, the United States
had the right of carrying on commeiOS
with every power; the Mtiiality oljht i
American government in favor of Eng
land, has therefore been such that not
only the intereds of France bnt also
those of other date* have been facrifieed
to her.
In vain will it be obje&ed that Francs
having the right by her treaty of 2788,
to enjoy all the advantages in commerce
and navigation, which the United Statea
have granted to England, is mot injured
by the dipuiations of the treaty of 1794*
relative to the contraband of war, aa
they become common to her. But the
right secured to her by the second ar
ticle of the treaty of 1778, does not at
all extend to the allies whom the fucceis
of her arms, and the just resentment,
inspired by the ambition of England,
have definitively given and (hall give te
her in Europe. These difpofitiona
change, during the course of the war,
the situation of the United States, to
wards England and the belligerent pow
ers allied to Fiance; the intareft of these
powers is common to France; and from
the moment that is injured, France is
injured also.
After having allured to the English the
carriage of naval stores, the federal go
vernment wished to allure to them that
of meals; in a word it desired to have
commerce only with Englaad. Thus, •
it stipulates by the 18th article, that the
American veflels laden with grain, may
be seized under the frivolous pretext,
that it is extremely difficult to define
the cases wherein provisions,, and other
atticles which are generally excepted,
could be clafled in the lift of contraband
of war; thus it stipulates ia article 17,
that the American veflels may be arrest
ed upon the (ingle suspicion, eirher that
they have merchandise belonging to the
enemy, or that they carry to fh-'m arti
cles contraband of war. The United
States in their treaty with France, have
made flipulatinns entirely oppefite to
these just cited; whilst her veflef* of
war, are bound to refpeft the American
flag g°ing t" English , ofleffions, the En-.
glillidrag into their ports American vefi
fejs going to the ports of France; fobjeft
them to decisions more or less arbitrary ;
?nd often condemn them on acccortt of
the came a!sue cf their owners. By