preparations of those powers for war, became known, King Louis XVI. of France ordered fourteen sail of the line to be equipped for active service, in order to meet contingencies. He was, however, under the necessity of communicating this measure to the National Assembly, then in session, which seized the occasion to deprive the crown of one of its most essential attributes. On the 24th of May, a decree was passed by that body, establishing that the right to make war or peace belonged to the nation, and could only be exercised through the concurrence of the legislative and the executive branches of the government; and that no treaty with another power could have effect until it had been ratified by the representatives of the nation: a committee was at the same time appointed to examine and report upon all the existing treaties of alliance between France and other nations. These proceedings were equivalent to an annulment of the Family Compact between the sovereigns of the house of Bourbon: nevertheless, when the king of Spain found himself pressed by Great Britain to relinquish his exclusive pretensions with regard to America, he formally applied to his cousin of France for aid, agreeably to that compact, in resisting those demands; declaring, at the same time, that, unless the assistance should be given speedily and effectually, "Spain would be under the necessity of seeking other friends and allies among all the powers of Europe, without excepting any, on whom she could rely in case of need."

The letter of the king of Spain was submitted by Louis XVI. to the National Assembly, by which it was referred to the committee appointed to examine the existing treaties between France and other nations; and, in the name of that committee, the celebrated Mirabeau, on the 24th of August, presented a luminous report, including considerations of the character of the Family Compact and other engagements between France and Spain, and a view of the actual positions of Spain and Great Britain towards each other and towards France. The questions raised by this report were debated, with great display of eloquence and political wisdom, by Mirabeau, the Abbé Maury, Lameth, Barnave, and other distinguished members of the Assembly; and it was decreed that France, while taking proper measures to maintain peace, should observe the existing commercial and defensive engagements between her government and that of Spain; but that a new and national treaty should be immediately negotiated, wherein the relations of the two countries towards each other should be defined and fixed with precision and clearness, agreeably to the views of general

peace, and the principles of justice, which were, in future, to prevail in France; and that, taking into consideration the armaments then in progress throughout Europe, and the dangers to which the commerce and colonies of France might be exposed, the marine force of the kingdom should be increased, without delay, to fortyfive sail of the line, and a proportionate number of frigates.

Although this decree contained no direct promise of assistance to Spain, yet it showed that the French government penetrated the designs of the British, and considered them inimical to its own interests; while, at the same time, the report, on which the decree was based, evinced an ardent desire, on the part of the French reformers, to preserve peace. In the mean time, revolutionary principles were making rapid progress throughout Europe. The Dutch, who had engaged to assist the British with a fleet, in case of a war with Spain, found their forces necessary at home; Sweden having, much to the dissatisfaction of the court of London, made peace with Russia, the latter power was left at liberty to prosecute its schemes for the dismemberment of "England's old ally,' Turkey; and, in the East Indies, Tippoo Saib was beginning that war against the British power which he prosecuted so long and vigorously. Moreover, the expenses of the British armament had already amounted to more than four millions of pounds; and the financial condition of England was not such as to encourage her government to commence hostilities, which would, most probably, become general. Under these circumstances, the court of St. James was under the necessity of lowering its tone, and of receding from its first demands. The determination of lines of boundary to the Spanish American dominions in the north and in the south was no longer required; and it was admitted that the navigation and fishery of British subjects in the Pacific Ocean should not be carried on within ten sea leagues of any existing Spanish settlement, and that neither party should form settlements on the coasts of South America, south of those actually occupied by Spain. Mr. Pitt, moreover, knowing the intimate relations which still subsisted between the French and Spanish governments, commissioned a gentleman at Paris, upon whom he could rely, to sound Mirabeau, and other leaders of the National Assembly; and, having reason to believe them sincerely anxious to prevent hostilities, he instructed his agent to propose a secret negotiation, to be carried on through the medium of the French government, for the restoration of a good understanding between Great Britain and Spain.

In the letter of instructions from Mr. Pitt to his agent at Paris,* he declares it to be essential that "the French should not appear in the business as mediators, still less as arbitrators," and that no encouragement should be given to them to propose any other terms than those on which Great Britain had already insisted; that, "whatever confidential communications may take place with the diplomatic committee of the National Assembly, for the sake of bringing them to promote the views of Great Britain, no ostensible intercourse could be admitted, except through accredited ministers;" and especially that "no assurances be given, directly or indirectly, which go further than that Great Britain means to persevere in the neutrality which she has hitherto observed with respect to the internal dissensions of France, and is desirous to cultivate peace and friendly relations with that country." The agent, thus instructed, presented himself to the diplomatic committee of the National Assembly, which at once resolved to do all in its power to strengthen the relations with England, and to prevent a war, if possible; and, with this view, three of its most influential members, Fréteau, Barnave, and Menou, were deputed to conduct the business on its part. These members conferred with the British agent, and also with M. de Montmorin, the minister of foreign relations of France, who communicated directly with the Spanish government; and in this manner the controversy was brought to a close, by a convention signed, at the palace of the Escurial, on the 28th of October, by Mr. Fitzherbert, the British ambassador, and count de Florida Blanca on the part of Spain.

This convention, commonly called the Nootka treaty, contains eight articles, of which the substance is as follows:

With respect to the circumstances which occasioned the dispute, it was stipulated, by the first and second articles, that the buildings and tracts of land, on the north-west coasts of America, of which British subjects were dispossessed by a Spanish officer, "about the month of April, 1789," shall be restored; a just reparation shall be made for all acts of violence or hostility committed by the subjects of either party against those of the other, "subsequent to the month of April, 1789;" and, in case the subjects of either should have been, "since the same period," forcibly dispossessed of their lands, vessels, or other property on the American coasts, or the

The whole letter is given by Bishop Tomline, in his Life of Pitt, chap. xii. The name of the person to whom it is addressed does not appear; he is simply mentioned as "a gentleman resident at Paris, of considerable diplomatic experience."

adjoining seas, they shall be reëstablished in the possession thereof, or a just compensation shall be made to them for their losses.

For the future, it was agreed, by the third article of the convention, that the subjects of the two parties shall not be disturbed in navigating or fishing in the South Seas, or the Pacific Ocean, or in landing on the coasts thereof, in places not already occupied, for the purposes of settlement or of trade with the natives; the whole subject, nevertheless, to the restrictions specified in the three following articles, to wit:- that his Britannic majesty shall take the most effectual means to prevent his subjects from making their navigation or fishery in those seas a pretext for illicit trade with the Spanish settlements; with which view it is agreed that British subjects shall not navigate or fish within ten leagues of any part of the coast already occupied by Spain; that the subjects of both nations shall have free access and right of trading in the places restored to British subjects by this convention, and in any other parts of the north-west coasts of America, north of the places already occupied by Spain, where the subjects of either party shall have made settlements since the month of April, 1789, or may in future make any; and that no settlement shall in future be made, by the subjects of either power, on the eastern or the western coasts of South America, or the adjacent islands, south of the parts of the same coasts or islands already occupied by Spain; though the subjects of both remained at liberty to land on those coasts and islands, and to erect temporary buildings only, for the purposes of their fishery.

Finally, it was agreed, by the seventh article, that, in cases of infraction of the convention, the officers of either party shall, without committing any act of violence themselves, make an exact report of the affair to their respective governments, which would terminate such differences in an amicable manner. The eighth article relates merely to the time of ratification of the convention.*

The convention, together with the declaration and counter declaration preceding it, were submitted to Parliament on the 3d of December, unaccompanied by any other papers relative to the negotiation; and they became the subjects of animated debates, in which the most distinguished members of both houses took parts. The arrangements were extolled by the ministers and their friends in general terms, as vindicating the dignity of the nation, and

* The convention will be found at length among the Proofs and Illustrations, in the latter part of this volume, under the letter K, No. 1.

providing reparation for the injuries sustained by its subjects, and as securing to those subjects, in future, the rights of navigation and fishery in the Pacific and Southern Oceans, and of settlement on their unoccupied coasts, and establishing the long-discussed questions on those points, on such grounds as must prevent all further dispute. The opposition, on the other hand, contended that the reparation promised by Spain was incomplete and insufficient; that the arrangements for the prevention of future difficulties were merely culpable concessions to that power, whereby the rights of British subjects were materially abridged, and the Spaniards would be encouraged to commit further acts of violence; and, finally, that all the advantages which could be expected from the convention, even according to the views of the ministers, were far below the amount of the expense at which they had been obtained.

It was noticed by Mr. Charles Fox, as a curious and inexplicable incongruity in the treaty, that "about the month of April, 1789," should have been inserted as the date of what was known to have taken place, agreeably to all the evidence produced, in May of the same year; and that, although, by the first article, the lands and buildings declared to have been taken from British subjects by a Spanish officer, "about the month of April, 1789," were to be restored, yet, by the second article, the lands, buildings, and other property, of which the subjects of either party had been dispossessed "subsequent to the month of April, 1789," were to be restored, or compensation was to be made to the owners for the losses which they might have sustained. Upon this point, it will be seen that, if the word "or," in the concluding part of the second article, were replaced by and, the incongruity would disappear; but then, also, the first article would become entirely superfluous. It would, however, be idle to suppose that any error could have been committed with regard to matters so essential, or that the want of accordance between the different provisions of the convention, noticed by Mr. Fox, should have been the result of accident or carelessness. The ministers, when pressed for explanations on this head, answered, indirectly, that the Spanish government would make the restitutions as agreed in the first article.

It may here be observed, that no notice whatsoever of a claim, on the part of British subjects, to lands or buildings on the northwest coast of America, appears either in the king's message to Parliament, communicating the fact of the seizures at Nootka, or