by the licensed sea rovers of their enemies. This has swelled, on this occasion, the disadvantages of the general principle, that an enemy's goods are free prize in the vessels of a friend". But it is one of those deplorable and unforeseen calamities to which they expose themselves who enter into a state of war, furnishing to us an awful lesson to avoid it by justice and moderation, and not a cause of encouragement To expose our own towns to the same burning and butcheries, nor of complaint because we do not.-To GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. iv, 44. FORD ED., vi, 387. (Pa., Aug. 1793.) See ENEMY GOODS.

5837. NEUTRALITY, Fraudulent use of flag. As there appears * * * a probability of a very general war in Europe, you will be pleased to be particularly attentive to preserve for our vessels all the rights of neutrality, and to endeavor that our flag be not usurped by others to procure to themselves the benefits of our neutrality. This usurpation tends to commit us with foreign nations, to subJect those vessels truly ours to rigorous scrutinies and delays, to distinguish them from counterfeits, and to take the business of transportation out of our hands.-To DAVID HUMPIIREYS. iii, 533. FORD ED., vi, 205. (Pa., 1793.)

5838. It will be necessary for all our public agents to exert themselves with vigilance for securing to our vessels all the rights of neutrality.-To C. W. F. DUMAS. iii, 535. (Pa., 1793.) See FLAG.

5839. NEUTRALITY, The Grange capture. The capture of the British ship Grange, by the French frigate L'Embuscade, has been found to have taken place within the

*

*

jurisdiction of the United States

The government, is, therefore, taking measures for the liberation of the crew and restitution of the ship and cargo.-To GEORGE HAMMOND. iii, 559. FORD ED., vi, 253. (Pa., May 1793.)

5840.

The government deems the capture [of the Grange] to have been unquestionably within its jurisdiction, and that according to the rules of neutrality and the protection it owes to all persons while within its limits, it is bound to see that the crew be liberated, and the vessel and cargo restored to their former owners. * * I am, in consequence. charged by the President of the United States to express to you his expectation, and at the same time his confidence, that you will be pleased to take immediate and effectual measures for having the ship Grange and her cargo restored to the British owners, and the persons taken on board her set at liberty.-To JEAN BAPTISTE TERNANT. iii, 561. FORD ED., vi, 256. (Pa., May 15, 1793.)

5841. In forming these determinations [respecting Grange, &c..] the government of the United States has listened to nothing but the dictates of immutable justice; they consider the rigorous exercise of that virtue as the surest means of preserving perfect harmony between the United States and the powers at war.-To JEAN BAPTISTE TERNANT. iii, 562. FORD ED., vi, 257. (Pa., May 1793.) 5842. NEUTRALITY, Impartial.-Our conduct as a neutral nation is marked out in our treaties with France and Holland, two of the belligerent powers; and as the duties of neutrality require an equal conduct to both parties. we should, on that ground, act on the same

5844.

The line is now drawn

so clearly as to show on one side, 1. The fashionable circles of Philadelphia, New York. Boston and Charleston (natural aristocrats). 2. Merchants trading on British capital. 3. Paper men (all the old tories are found in some one of the three descriptions). On the other side are, 1. Merchants trading on their own capital. Irish merchants. 3. Tradesmen, mechanics, farmers, and every other possible description of our citizens-To JAMES MADISON. iii, 557. FORD ED., vi, 251. (May 1793.) 5845. I trust that in the readiness with which the United States have at

2.

tended to the redress of such wrongs as are committed by their citizens, or within their jurisdiction, you will see proofs of their justice and impartiality to all parties, and that it will ensure to their citizens pursuing their lawful business by sea or by land, in all parts of the world, a like efficacious interposition of the governing powers to protect them from injury, and redress it, where it has taken place. With such dispositions on both sides, vigilantly and faithfully carried into effect, we may hope that the blessings of peace, on the one part, will be as little impaired, and the evils of war on the other, as little aggravated, as the nature of things will permit; and that this should be so, is, we trust, the prayer of all.— TO GEORGE HAMMOND. iii, 559. FORD ED., vi. 254. (Pa., 1793.)

5847.

It will never be easy to

convince me that by a firm yet just conduct in 1793, we might not have obtained such a respect for our neutral rights from Great Britain, as that her violations of them and use of our means to wage her wars, would not have furnished any pretence to the other party to do the same. War with both would have been avoided, commerce and navigation protected and enlarged. We shall now either be forced into a war, or have our commerce and navigation at least totally annihilated, and the produce of our farms for some years left to rot on our hands. A little time will unfold these things, and show which class of opinions would have been most friendly to the firmness of our government, and to the interests of those for whom it was made.-TO DR. JOHN EDWARDS. iv, 165. FORD ED., vii, 113. (M., Jan. 1797.)

5848. It is to be deplored that distant as we are from the storms and convulsions which agitate the European world, the pursuit of an honest neutrality, beyond the reach of reproach, has been insufficient to

secure to us the certain enjoyments of peace with those whose interests as well as ours would be promoted by it.-R. TO A. NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE. viii, 122. (1807.)

5849.

I verily believe that it will ever be in our power to keep so even a stand between England and France, as to inspire a wish in neither to throw us into the scale of his adversary. If we can do this for a dozen years only, we shall have little to fear from them.-To MR. COXE. v, 58. (W., 1807.) Neither belligerent pretends to have been injured by us, say that we have in any instance departed from the most faithful neutrality.-R. тo A. VIRGINIA ASSEMBLY. viii, 148. (1809.)

5850.

or can

5851. A law respecting our conduct as a neutral between Spain and her contending colonies was passed [by the late Congress] by a majority of one only, I believe, and against the very general sentiment of our country. It is thought to strain our complaisance to Spain beyond her right or merit, and almost against the right of the other party, and certainly against the claims they have to our good wishes and neighborly relations. That we should wish to see the people of other countries free, is as natural, and, at least as justifiable, as that one king should wish to see the kings of other countries maintained in their despotism. Right to both parties, innocent favor to the juster cause, is our proper sentiment.-To ALBERT GALLATIN. vii, 78. FORD ED., X, 90. (M., 1817.)

5852. NEUTRALITY, Markets and.If the new government wears the front which I hope it will, I see no impossibility in the availing ourselves of the wars of others to open the other parts of America [West Indies] to our commerce, as the price of our neutrality.-To GENERAL WASHINGTON. ii, 533. FORD ED., V, 57. (P., 1788.)

5853.

With England, I think we shall cut off the resource of impressing our seamen to fight her battles, and establish the inviolability of our flag in its commerce with her enemies. We shall thus become what we sincerely wish to be, honestly neutral, and truly useful to both belligerents. To the one, by keeping open market for the consumption of her manufactures, while they are excluded from all the other countrics under the power of her enemy; to the other, by securing for her a safe carriage of all her productions, metropolitan or colonial, while her own means are restrained by her enemy, and may, therefore, be employed in other useful pursuits. We are certainly more useful friends to France and Spain as neutrals, than as allies. To JAMES BOWDOIN. v, 18. (W., 1806.) See COMMERCE, MARKETS, and NAVIGATION.

6854. NEUTRALITY, Obligations of. Where [treaties] are silent, the general principles of the law of nations must give the rule [of neutral obligation]. I mean the principles of that law as they have been liberalized in latter times by the refinement of manners and morals, and evidenced by the declarations, stipulations, and practice of every civilized nation.To THOMAS PINCKNEY. iii, 551. FORD ED., vi, 243. (Pa., May 1793.)

5855. NEUTRALITY, Passage of troops. It is well enough agreed in the laws of nations, that for a neutral power to give or

refuse permission to the troops of either belligerent party to pass through their territory, is no breach of neutrality, provided the same refusal or permission be extended to the other party. If we give leave of passage then to the British troops, Spain will have no just cause of complaint against us, provided we extend the same leave to her when demanded. If we refuse (as indeed we have a right to do), and the troops should pass notwithstanding, of which there can be little doubt, we shall stand committed. For either we must enter immediately into the war, or pocket an acknowledged insult in the face of the world; and one insult pocketed soon produces another. There is, indeed, a middle course which I should be inclined to prefer; that is to avoid giving any answer. They will proceed notwithstanding, but to do this under our silence, will admit of palliation, and produce apologies, from military necessity; and will leave us free to pass it over without dishonor, or to make it a handle of quarrel hereafter, if we should have use for it as such. if we are obliged to give an answer, I think the occasion not such as should induce us to hazard that answer which might commit us to the war at so early a stage of it; and, therefore, that the passage should be permitted. If they should pass without having asked leave, I should be for expressing our dissatisfaction to the British court, and keeping alive an altercation on the subject, till events should decide whether it is most expedient to accept their apologies, or to profit of the aggression as a cause of war.OFFICIAL OPINION. vii, 509. FORD ED., V, 239. (1790.)

But,

5856. NEUTRALITY, Passports for vessels. The proposition to permit all our vessels destined for any port in the French West India Islands to be stopped, unless furnished with passports from yourself, is so far beyond the powers of the Executive, that it will be unnecessary to enumerate the objections to which it would be liable.-To E. C. GENET. iv, 88. FORD ED., vi, 460. (Pa., Nov. 1793.)

5857. NEUTRALITY, Preserving.Amidst the confusion of a general war which seems to be threatening that quarter of the globe [Europe], we hope to be permitted to preserve the line of neutrality.-To C. W. F. DUMAS. iii, 535. (Pa., March 1793.)

5862. No country, perhaps, was ever so thoroughly against war as ours. These dispositions pervade every description of its citizens, whether in or out of office. They cannot, perhaps, suppress their affections, nor their wishes. But they will suppress the effects of them so as to preserve a fair neutrality. Indeed we shall be more useful as neutrals than as parties, by the protection which our flag will give to supplies of provisions. In this spirit let all your assurances be given to the government [of France].-To GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. FORD ED., vi, 217. (Pa., April 1793.) 5863. If we preserve even a sneaking neutrality, we shall be indebted for it to the President, and not to his counsellors.— TO COLONEL MONROE. iii, 548. FORD ED., vi, 239. (Pa., May 1793.)

5864. NEUTRALITY, Profitable.-The great harvest for [the profits of navigation] is when other nations are at war and our flag neutral.-OPINION ON SHIP PASSPORTS. vii, 625. (1793.)

5866. NEUTRALITY, Provisions not contraband.-This article is so manifestly contrary to the law of nations, that nothing more would seem necessary than to observe that it is so. Reason and usage have established that when two nations go to war, those who choose to live in peace retain their natural right to pursue their agriculture, manufactures, and other ordinary vocations, to carry the produce of their industry for exchange to all nations, belligerent or neutral, as usual, to go and come freely, without injury or molestation, and, in short, that the war among others shall be, for them, as if it did not exist. One restriction on their natural rights has been submitted to by nations at peace; that is to say, that of not furnishing to either party implements merely of war, for the annoyance of the other, nor anything whatever to a place blockaded by its enemy. What these implements of war are, has been so often agreed and is so well understood, as to leave little question about them at this day. There does not exist, perhaps, a nation in our common hemisphere which has not made a particular enumeration of them, in some or all of their treaties, under the name of contraband. It suffices for the present occasion, to say, that corn flour and meal, are not of the class of contraband, and consequently remain articles of free commerce. A culture, which, like that of the soil, gives employment to such a proposition of mankind, could never be suspended by the whole earth, or interrupted for them, whenever any two nations should think proper to go to war.-To THOMAS PINCKNEY. iv, 59. FORD ED., vi, 413. (Pa., Sept. 1793.)

5867.

consequently, the assumption of it will be as lawful hereafter as now, in peace as in war. No ground, acknowledged by the common reason of mankind, authorizes this act now, and unacknowledged ground may be taken at any time and all times. We see, then, a practice begun, to which no time, no circumstances prescribe any limits, and which strikes at the root of our agriculture, that branch of industry which gives food, clothing and comfort to the great mass of the inhabitants of these States. If any nation whatever has a right to shut up to our produce all the ports of the earth except her own, and those of her friends, she may shut up these also, and so confine us within our own limits. No nation can subscribe to such pretensions; no nation can agree, at the mere will or interest of another, to have its peaceable industry suspended, and its citizens reduced to idleness and want. The loss of our produce, destined for foreign markets, or that loss which markets, is a tax too serious for us to acwould result from an arbitrary restraint of our quiesce in. It is not enough for a nation to say, we and our friends will buy your produce. We have a right to answer, that it suits us better to sell to their enemies as well as their friends. Our ships do not go to France to return empty. They go to exchange the surplus of our produce, which we can spare, for surpluses of other kinds, which they can spare, and we want: which they can furnish on better terms, and more to our mind, than Great Britain or her friends. We have a right to judge for ourselves what market best suits us, and they have none to forbid to us the enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts which we may obtain from any other independent country.-To THOMAS PINCKNEY. iv, 60. FORD ED., vi, 413. (Pa., Sep. 1793.)

5868.

This act, too, tends directly to draw us from that state of peace in which we are wishing to remain. It is an essential character of neutrality to furnish no aids (not stipulated by treaty) to one party, which we are not equally ready to furnish to the other. If we permit corn to be sent to Great Britain and her friends, we are equally bound to permit it to France. To restrain it, would be a partiality which might lead to war with France; and, between restraining it ourselves, and permitting her enemies to restrain it unrightfully, is no difference. She would consider this as a mere pretext, of which she would not be the dupe; and on what honorable ground could we otherwise explain it? Thus we should see ourselves plunged, by this unauthorized act of Great Britain, into a war with which we meddle not. and which we wish to avoid, if justice to all parties, and from all parties, will enable us to avoid it. In the case where we found ourselves obliged, by treaty, to withhold from the enemies of France the right of arming in our ports, we thought ourselves in justice bound to withhold the same right from France also, and we did it. Were we to withhold from her supplies of provisions, we should, in like manner, be bound to withhold them from her enemies also; and thus shut to ourselves all the ports of Europe, where corn is in demand, or make ourselves Great Britain has no right to force upon us. This is a dilemma, which and for which no pretext can be found in any part of our conduct. She may, indeed, feel the desire of starving an enemy nation; but she can have no right of doing it at our loss, nor of making us the instruments of it.-TO THOMAS PINCKNEY. iv, 61. FORD ED., vi, 414. (Pa..

Sep. 1793.)

5869. NEUTRALITY, Public vessels.The public ships of war of both nations [France and England] enjoy a perfect equality in our ports; first, in cases of urgent necessity; secondly, in cases of comfort or convenience; and thirdly, in the time they choose to continue; and all a friendly power can ask from another is, to extend to her the same indulgences which she extends to other friendly powers.TO GEORGE HAMMOND. iv, 66. FORD ED., vi, 423. (Pa., 1793.) See ASYLUM.

5871.

Mr. Thornton's attempt to justify his nation in using our ports as cruising stations on our friends and ourselves, renders the matter so serious as to call, I think, for answer. That we ought, in courtesy and friendship, to extend to them all the rights of hospitality is certain; that they should not use our hospitality to injure our friends or ourselves is equally enjoined by morality and honor. After the rigorous exertions we made in Genet's time to prevent this abuse on his part, and the indulgences extended by Mr. Adams to the British cruisers even after our pacification with France, by ourselves also from an unwillingness to change the course of things as the war was near its close, I did not expect to hear_from that quarter charges of partiality.-TO JAMES MADISON. iv, 501. (M., Aug. 1803.)

5873.

*

* *

Several French vessels of war, disabled from keeping the sea, put into the harbors of the United States to avoid the danger of shipwreck. The minister of their nation states that their crews are without resources for subsistence, and other necessaries, for the reimbursement of which he offers bills on his government, the faith of which he pledges for their punctual payment. The laws of humanity make it a duty for nations, as well as individuals, to succor those whom accident and distress have thrown upon them. By doing this in the present case, to the extent of mere subsistence and necessaries, and so as to aid no military equipment, we shall keep within the duties of rigorous neutrality, which never can be in opposition to those of humanity. We furnished, on a former occasion, to a distressed crew of the other belligerent party, similar accommodations, and we have ourselves received from both those powers, friendly and free supplies to the necessities of our vessels of war in their Mediterranean ports. In fact, the governments of civilized nations generally are in the practice of exercising these offices of humanity towards each other. Our government having as yet made no regular provision for the exchange of these offices of courtesy and humanity between nations, the honor, the interest, and the duty of our country require that we should adopt any other mode by which it may legally be done on the present occasion. It is expected that we shall want a large sum of

money in Europe, for the purposes of the present negotiation with Spain, and besides this we want annually large sums there, for the discharge of our installments of debt. Under these circumstances, supported by the unanimous opinion of the heads of Departments,

* * *

* *

and firmly trusting that the government of France will feel itself peculiarly interested in the punctual discharge of the bills drawn by their Minister, I approve of the Secretary of the treasury's taking the bills of the Minister of France, to an amount not exceeding sixty thousand dollars.-To ALBERT GALLATIN. v, 35. (W., Jan. 1807.)

5874. Armed vessels remaining within our jurisdiction in defiance of the authority of the laws, must be viewed either as rebels, or public enemies. The latter character' it is most expedient to ascribe to them; the laws of intercourse with persons of that description are fixed and known. If we relinquish them we shall have a new code to settle with those individual offenders, with whom self-respect forbids any intercourse but merely for purposes of humanity.-To GOVERNOR W. H. CABELL. V, 170. (M., 1807.)

5875. NEUTRALITY, Rights.-The doctrine that the rights of nations remaining quietly under the exercise of moral and social duties, are to give way to the convenience of those who prefer plundering and murdering one another, is a monstrous doctrine; and ought to yield to the more rational law, that "the wrongs which two nations endeavor to inflict on each other, must not infringe on the rights or conveniences of those remaining at peace". FORD TO ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON. iv, 410. ED., viii, 90. (M., 1801.)

5876. It would indeed be advantageous to us to have neutral rights established on a broad ground; but no dependence can be placed in any European coalition for that. They have so many other bye-interests of greater weight, that some one or other will always be bought off. To be entangled with them would be a much greater evil than a temporary acquiescence in the false principles which have prevailed.-To WILLIAM SHORT. iv, 414. FORD ED., viii, 98. (W., 1801.)

5877.

With respect to the rights of neutrality, we have certainly a great interest in their settlement. But this depends exclusively on the will of two characters, Bonaparte and Alexander. The dispositions of the former to have them placed on liberal grounds are known. The interest of the latter should insure the same disposition. The only thing to be done is to bring the two characters together to treat on the subject. All the minor maritime powers of Europe will of course concur with them. We have not failed to use such means as we possess to induce these two sovereigns to avail the world of its present situation to declare and enforce the laws of nature and convenience on the seas. But the organization of the treaty-making power by our Constitution is too particular for us to commit the nation in so great an operation with all the European powers. With such a federal phalanx in the Senate, compact and vigilant for opportunities to do mischief, the addition of a very few other votes, misled by accidental or imperfect views of the subject, would suffice to commit us most dangerously. All we can do, therefore, is to encourage others to declare and guarantee neutral rights, by excluding all intercourse with any nation which infringes them, and so leave a niche in their compact for us, if

our treaty-making power shall choose to occupy it. To THOMAS PAINE. FORD ED., viii, 437. (W., March 1806.)

5878.

The license to four British vessels to sail to Lima proves that belligerents may, either by compact or force, conduct themselves towards one another as they please; but not that a neutral may, unless by some express permission of the belligerent.-To ALBERT GALLATIN. FORD ED., viii, 466. (M., Aug. 1806.) 5879. It is all important that we should stand in terms of the strictest cordiality with France. In fact, we are to depend on her and Russia for the establishment of neutral rights by the treaty of peace, among which should be that of taking no persons by a belligerent out of a neutral ship, unless they be the soldiers of an enemy.-TO JAMES BowDOIN. V. 64. FORD ED., ix, 40. (W., April 1807.) 5880. The instructions given to our ministers [to England] were framed in the sincerest spirit of amity and moderation. They accordingly proceeded, in conformity therewith, to propose arrangements which might embrace and settle all the points in difference between us, which might bring us to a mutual understanding on our neutral and national rights, and provide for a commercial intercourse on conditions of some equality. After long and fruitless endeavors to effect the purposes of their mission, and to obtain arrangements within the limits of their instructions, they concluded to sign such as could be obtained, and to send them for consideration, candidly declaring to the other negotiators, at the same time, that they were acting against their instructions, and that their government, therefore. could not be pledged for ratification. Some of the articles proposed might have been admitted on a principle of compromise, but others were too highly disadvantageous, and no sufficient provision was made against the principal source of the irritations and collisions which were constantly endangering the neace of the two nations. The question, therefore, whether a treaty should be accepted in that form could have admitted but of one decision, even had no declarations or the other party impaired our confidence in it. Still anxious not to close the door against friendly adjustment, new modifications were framed, and further concessions authorized than could before have been supposed necessary; and our ministers were instructed to resume their negotiations on these grounds. On this new reference to amicable discussion, we were reposing in confidence, when or the 22nd day of June last, by a formal order from the British admiral, the frigate Chesapeake, leaving her port for distant service, was attacked by one of those vessels which had been lying in our harbors under the indulgences of hospitality, was disabled from proceeding, had several of her crew killed, and four taken away.-SEVENTH ANNUAL MESSAGE. viii, 83. FORD ED., ix, 150. (Oct. 27, 1807.) See CHESAPEAKE.

*

See

5883. NEUTRALITY, Sale of arms.— The manufacture of arms is the occupation and livelihood of some of our citizens; and * it ought not to be expected that a war among other nations should produce such an internal derangement of the occupations of a nation at peace, as the suppression of a manufacture which is the support of some of its citizens; but if they should export these arms to nations at war, they would be abandoned to the seizure and confiscation which the law of nations authorized to be made of them on the high seas.-To E. C. Genet. iv, $7 FORD ED., vi, 460. (Pa., Nov. 1793.)

BELLIGERENTS.

*

*

See

5884. NEUTRALITY, Treasury Department and.-Hamilton produced [at a cabinet meeting] the draft of a letter by himself to the collectors of the customs, giving them in charge to watch over all proceedings in their districts, contrary to the laws of neutrality, or tending to infract our peace with the belligerent powers, and particularly to observe if vessels pierced for guns should be built, and to inform him of it. This was objected to. 1. As setting up a system of espionage, destructive of the peace of society. 2. Transferring to the Treasury Department the conservation of the laws of neutrality and peace with foreign nations. 3. It was rather proposed to intimate to the judges that the laws respecting neutrality being now come into activity, they should charge the grand juries with the observance of them; these being constitutional and public informers, and the persons accused knowing of what they should do, and having an opportunity of justifying themselves. E. K. [Edmund Randolph] found a hair to split, which, as always happens, became the decision. Hamilton is to write to the collectors of the customs, who are to convey their information to the attorneys of the district to whom E. R. is to write to receive their information and proceed by indictment. The clause respecting the building vessels pierced for guns was omitted, for though three against one thought it would be a breach of neutrality, yet they thought we might defer MADISON. iii, 556. FORD ED., vi, 250. (May giving a public opinion on it as yet.-To JAMES 1793.)

5885.

I have been still reflecting on the draft of the letter from the Secretary of the Treasury to the custom house officers, instructing them to be on the watch as to all infractions or tendencies to infraction of the laws of neutrality by our citizens, and t communicate the same to him. When this paper was first communicated to me, though the whole of it struck me disagreeably. I did not in the first moment see clearly the improprieties but of the last clause. The more I have reflected, the more objectionable the whole appears. By this proposal the collectors of the customs are to be made an established corps of spies or informers against their fellow citizens, whose actions they are to watch in secret, inform against in secret to the Secretary of the Treasury, who is to communicate it