the continuance of the existing war between the United States and England, that then his Majesty and the United States would make it a common cause, and aid each other mutually with their good offices, their counsel, and their forces, as was becoming to good and faithful allies. [Art. 2.] That the essential and direct end of their defensive alliance was to maintain effectually the liberty, sovereignty, and independence, absolute and unlimited, of the United States of America, as well in matters of government as of commerce. [Arts. 3 and 4.] That each party should make every effort to attain that end; and that they should, in every possible way, act in concert, and with promptness and good faith. [Arts. 5, 6, and 7.] That France renounced, in favor of the United States, conquests that might be made by the allied armies, except the British islands in or near the Gulf of Mexico. [Arts. 8 and 9.] That neither party should conclude a truce or peace without the other's consent; and that neither party should demand any com-, pensation from the other. [Art. 11.] The two parties guarantied mutually, from the date of the treaty, forever against all other powers, to wit:-the United States to his Most Christian Majesty the then existing possessions of the crown of France in America, as well as those it might acquire by the treaty of peace. And his Most Christian Majesty, on his part, guarantied to the United States their liberty, sovereignty, and independence, absolute and unlimited, and also their possessions, and the additions or conquests that the confederation might obtain during the war, conformably to the 5th and 6th articles. [Art. 12.] In order to fix more precisely the application of the preceding article, the contracting parties declared that, in case of a rupture between France and England, the reciprocal guaranty declared in that article should have its full force and effect the moment such rupture should break out; and if such rupture should not take place, the mutual obligations of the said guaranty should not commence until the moment of the cessation of the war then existing between the United States and England should have ascertained their possessions.

Thirdly. The Treaty called the Consular Convention, concluded on the 14th of November, 1788, containing the following articles:

"ART. 8. The consuls or vice-consuls shall exercise police over all the vessels of their respective nations; and shall have, on board the said vessels, all power and jurisdiction in civil matters, in all the disputes which may there arise. They shall have an entire inspection over the said vessels, their crews, and the changes and substitutions therein to

be made; for which purpose they may go on board the said vessels whenever they may judge it necessary."

66

ART. 12. All differences and suits between the subjects of the Most Christian King in the United States, or between the citizens of the United States within the dominions of the Most Christian King, and particularly all disputes relative to the wages and terms of engagement of the crews of their respective vessels, and all the differences, of what ever nature they be, which may arise between the privates of the said crews, or between captains of different vessels of their nations, shall be determined by their respective consuls. The officers of the country, civil or military, shall not interfere therein, or take any part whatever in the matter; and the appeals from the said consular tribunals shall be carried before the tribunals of France or of the United States."

The French Revolution began in 1789, and in 1793 it became a general European war, in which France, while treading continually upon the fiercest internal fires, bared her head to all the thunder bolts of despotism.

Washington, by the serene tranquillity and majestic justice of his character, repressed the sympathies of the United States for France and the republican cause, and sent forth his memorable proclamation: "Whereas," said the President, "it appears that a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands, of the one part, and France, on the other, and the duty and interest of the United States require that they should, with sincerity and good faith, adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial towards the belligerent powers, I have therefore thought fit, by these presents, to declare the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct aforesaid."

No less a character than Washington could have assumed neutrality in such a crisis. Nor could even he protect it in that fierce conflict of armed opinion which raged throughout Europe, as if all its separate and widely different states had been one entire yet distracted commonwealth. The cost of supplies rose two, three, and four-fold, under the demands of the belligerent nations. The United States put in motion, for once, and all at once, the three wheels of industry-Production, Manufacture, and Exchangeand wealth flowed in upon them like a spring-tide. The combatants, relapsing into the morality of the Barbary powers, seized and confiscated neutral ships and their cargoes. American commerce was thus suddenly checked, and the revenues it yielded rapidly declined. Jefferson, then Secretary of State, met the emergency with a declaration—

"I have it in charge from the President to assure the merchants of the United States concerned in foreign commerce or navigation, that attention will be paid to any injuries they may suffer on the high seas or in foreign countries, contrary to the law of nations

or to existing treaties; and that, on their forwarding hither well-authenticated evidences of the same, proper proceedings will be adopted for their relief."

The American merchants, thus stimulated, prosecuted more diligently than before a trade which yielded enticing profits, while its risks seemed to have been underwritten by their country. The maritime injuries suffered by Americans at the hands of France in the course of the war, were at the time classified as follows:

First. Spoliations and mal-treatment of the vessels of American citizens at sea, by French ships of war and privateers.

Second. A long and distressing embargo, which detained many American vessels at Bordeaux in 1793 and 1794.

Third. The dishonor of bills and other evidences of debt due to American citizens for supplies furnished, at the request of France, to herself and to her West India Islands, in a period of famine and civil war.

Fourth. The seizure or forced sales of the cargoes of American vessels, and the appropriation of them to public uses.

Fifth. The non-performance of contracts for supplies, made by the French authorities with American citizens.

Sixth. The condemnation of American vessels and cargoes under marine ordinances of France incompatible with treaties.

Seventh. Captures, in violation of the provisions of the commercial treaty, of American vessels laden with provisions, bound to the ports of the enemy.

To elucidate the nature of these injuries:

On the 9th of May, 1793, France authorized armed vessels and privateers to arrest and bring into her ports neutral ships, laden wholly or in part either with provisions belonging to neutral nations and destined to an enemy's ports, or with merchandize belonging to an enemy, and declared that such merchandize should be lawful prize, while such provisions should be paid for according to their value at the place of destination, and just indemnification should be made for the freights and the detention of the ships. This decree was alternately rescinded as to the United States, restored, rescinded again, and finally restored and left in full effect.

American vessels known and confessed, but found without passport or certificate, in the exact form prescribed by the 22d article

of the Treaty of Amity and Commerce, were, by a decree of the 3d of March, 1797, declared lawful prizes.

On the 2d of July, 1796, France decreed that she would treat neutral vessels, either as to confiscations, searches, or captures, in the same manner that they suffered the English to treat them-a decree that punished with violence the endurance of aggression committed by another, while it confided in the discretion of the second corsair to determine who, by having become victims of the first, had offended against so extraordinary a code.

On the 29th of October, 1799, France decreed that any native of an allied or even of a neutral country, found wearing a hostile commission, or serving in an enemy's crew, should suffer as a pirate, without being allowed to allege duress, by violence, menace, or otherwise.

Besides one hundred and three vessels which were detained by the embargo at Bordeaux, there is a list of six hundred and nineteen which were captured and plundered before 1800. The true number of spoliations is said to have been three times greater. Cotemporaneous expositions by the authorities of the United States placed the aggregate of damages sustained by the merchants at more than twenty millions of dollars. Of these damages, portions amounting to about ten millions of dollars, were adjusted and paid chiefly under the convention of 1800, finally carried into effect by the Louisiana treaty in 1803. The exact amount of damages due, however, is not now in question. The bill before the Senate confines itself to unadjusted claims to be actually proved, and awards only five millions, without interest, in satisfaction of all that shall be established.

The United States diligently prosecuted the claims from 1793 to 1800, but France did not so long remain a mere respondent.

Edmund C. Genet, her minister, claimed, and actually assumed to fit out privateers in American ports, to cruise against British vessels. Under the 22d article of the Treaty of Amity and Commerce, he demanded what, in fact, were admiralty powers, for French consuls in American ports, by virtue of article 8th of the Consular Convention; while, under color of the 17th article of the Treaty of Amity and Commerce, he insisted that French vessels had a right to sell their prizes free from all duties in American ports; and, finally, he complained that British ships were permitted to take French goods out of American vessels, while a

reciprocal right was denied to the French marine. All these complaints, however, were disallowed, upon grounds which will not now be questioned.

Nor were the relations between the United States and Great Britain less disturbed. Besides having offended earlier and more flagrantly than France against our neutrality, Great Britain still, in violation of the Treaty of Independence, held the military posts on our western frontiers, and through them, the control of the disaffected Indian tribes; nor did she seem unwilling, amidst our domestic distractions, to provoke a new trial of our ability to maintain the independence she had so reluctantly confessed. While John Jay opened negotiations with Great Britain, at London, James Monroe, at Paris, assured the French Directory that Mr. Jay's object was to obtain compensation for spoliations, with an immediate restitution of the western posts; and that he was positively forbidden from weakening the engagements existing between the United States and France. These assurances were effectual. Early in 1795 the French Directory decreed that the Treaty of Amity and Commerce should thenceforth be strictly observed, and provided for indemnifying those who had suffered by the embargo at Bordeaux; and Mr. Monroe began a dispatch with announcing that a satisfactory arrangement of the claims for spoliations was at hand. But he closed the communication with a statement, that the ground thus happily gained had been suddenly lost, by reason of rumored stipulations injurious to France in the British treaty just then signed at London.

A cloud of political mystery gathered upon this compact from the day of its execution, the 19th of November, 1794, until it was finally promulgated on the 9th of May, 1796. France complained of this concealment as disingenuous; and she ever afterwards maintained that the United States had not merely violated their engagements with her, but had even abandoned, also, their professed neutrality, by relinquishing the principle that free ships made free goods, and by giving to England a too favorable standard of contraband. She therefore pursued her depredations more recklessly than before, and with the avowed purpose of compelling the United States to break their new engagements with Great Britain, her ancient and most inveterate enemy.

Mr. Monroe was replaced by Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, but France now refused to receive or recognize a minister. A new