Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub
[graphic]

tirely estranged a large number of his friends, who had for some time been disaffected toward him; among whom were Gen. Hamilton and Gouverneur Morris, and other men of distinction and influence. They professed to doubt the sincerity of the French government; and they considered it derogatory to the national honor to accept an offer to negotiate, until the decrees against our commerce should be repealed. Another ground of objection, it has been suspected, was the apprehension that the renewal of negotiations under existing circumstances, and without a direct proposal on the part of France to treat, would have an adverse effect upon the popularity of the party. But the president was averse to war. However cordially it might have been supported by his party, it would have encountered the opposition of the leaders, and perhaps of the mass of the party opposed to him. Besides, the large increase of taxation which it would require, he apprehended, might not be patiently borne. These were doubtless among the motives which induced the adoption of a more pacific policy.

Murray having, according to instructions, informed the French gorernment that the departure of Ellsworth and Davie would be delayed until positive assurances should have been given through the French minister of foreign affairs, that they would be duly received, Talleyrand promptly returned an answer from the executive directory, conveying “the frank and explicit assurance that it would receive the envoys of the United States in the official character with which they were invested ; that they should enjoy all the prerogatives which are attached to it by the law of nations, and that one or more ministers should be duly authorized to treat with them.” The very compliant and anxious minister added his “sincere regret, that Mr. Murray's two colleagues awaited this answer at so great a distance !!"

On the receipt of these assurances, the president, against the wishes of the majority of his cabinet, ordered the envoys to prepare for their departure, and directed the secretary of state to make a draft of instructions to them. By these instructions, the envoys were to demand, as indispensable requisites, compensation for all losses and damages sustained by our citizens from illegal captures or condemnations of their vessels and other property, to be settled by a board appointed for that purpose; the guaranties to France by the treaties of 1778, of her West India and other American possessions, and from which the United States considered themselves released by the aggressions of France, were not to be renewed; no aid or loan was to be promised; no engagement was to be made, inconsistent with the obligations of any prior treaty; and, as it respected our treaty with Great Britian, stipulations of the 25th article thereof must not be interfered with. By this article, the contracting

а

[graphic]

à

Lisbon, where they arrived the 27th, and were informed of the revolu. tion at Paris, by which Napoleon was placed at the head of the French government as first consul. Deeming it expedient to await further information before entering France, and being further detained by contrary winds, they did not leave Lisbon until the 21st of December, when they sailed for L'Orient; but on account of a long succession of storms, and the consequent impossibility of reaching that port, they put into Corunna, on the 16th of January, 1800. On the next day they addressed a letter to Talleyrand, who was continued minister of foreign affairs, expressing the hope that their letter of credence being addressed to the directory, would be no objection to their reception; and that, if the government should view the matter as they did, passports would be immediately sent to them, and one to Mr. Murray at the Hague. Talleyrand said in his answer, that the envoys had been “expected with impatience, and would be received with warmth," notwithstanding the form of their letters of credence; and passports were accordingly sent. They reached Paris the 2d of March, and found Mr. Murray, who had arrived the day before. The envoys were duly received; and three plenipotentiaries, Joseph Bonaparte, Fleurieu, and Roederer, were appointed to negotiate with them.

The negotiation was commenced with due promptitude, and continued until the 30th of September, when a treaty was concluded. A detailed history of the negotiation can not here be given. There was great difficulty in agreeing upon the terms of a treaty. The French ministers were unwilling to concede our claim for indemnity, or to consent to relinquish the old treaties. It will be recollected that, according to the instructions to our ministers, the old treaties were not to be renewed. They had been declared void by congress, having been dissolved by her aggressions upon our commerce; and being so considered, our government had, in article 25th of the treaty with Great Britain negotiated by Mr. Jay, agreed, that the ships of war and privateers of both parties should have permission to enter each other's ports with prizes without being subject to seizure or detention. And no shelter or refuge was to be given in their ports to such as had made prizes upon the citizens or subjects of either of the parties. A revival of the old treaties with France, would restore to her the priority of rights therein stipulated, in contravention of our engagements with Great Britain, which, however, might cease within two years after the close of the then existing war; but would cease, in any event, at the expiration of twelve years after the ratification of the treaty. Our ministers being bound to observe our engagements with Great Britain, and the ministers of France being unwilling to admit the nullity of the old treaty of 1778, which would exclude French privateers and prizes from the ports of the United States, an arrangement seemed impracticable.

[ocr errors]

a

France, having no money, was unwilling to pay indemnities; and if, as maintained by the American ministers, the old treaties were not in force, we had no lawful claim for indemnity. To have renewed the old treaty would have compelled us, if called on, to furnish her succors in time of war, or, if not furnished, our refusal would be made a pretext for her to withhold the indemnities. The French ministers at length proposed to stipulate for mutual indemnities, with a recognition on our part of the force of the old treaties; or to treat anew on reciprocal terms, without indemnities. As neither proposition could be accepted consistently with their instructions, our ministers must either quit France, leaving the United States in a serious difficulty, or else propose a temporary arrangement, reserving for definitive adjustment those points which could not then be settled.

To the adoption of some arrangement, there were several strong inducements. Our position toward France was little less than a state of War; while the successful operations of Bonaparte seemed to indicate a general peace in Europe; an event which would leave us alone in a contest with that power : Or, if the war should continue, an arrangement was necessary in order to relieve our commerce from exposure to the depredations of the French. Another object was to save a large amount of captured property not yet condemned: there being more than forty ships and cargoes, then pending for decision before the French council of prizes.

A treaty was at length concluded the 30th of September, 1800. Its principal provisions were the following: The binding force of the old treaties, and the mutual claims for indemnities, were reserved for future negotiation. All public ships, and all property captured by either party, and not yet condemned, were to be restored. All government and individual debts due were to be paid. The vessels of either party were to enjoy in the ports of the other equal privileges with those of the most favored nation. The provision of the old treaty that free ships should make free goods, was retained. Provision was also made for the future security of American commerce.

The article which allowed French privateers and prizes equal privileges with those of the most favored nation, was inserted by the French ministers after repeated declarations from our ministers that, agreeably to the rule of construction settled by the law of nations, this stipulation could have no effect as against the British treaty, unless derived from the former treaties, which, it was expressly agreed, were to be for the time without operation. This article was deemed of less consequence, as it was presumed the United States would soon be able to refuse the privateers and prizes of any nation an asylum beyond what the rights of humanity required

« PředchozíPokračovat »