2. That property captured, but not definitively condemned, or which might be captured before the exchange of ratifications, should be mutually restored on certain proofs of ownership (Article IV.).

3. That "debts contracted by one of the two nations with individuals of the other, or by the individuals of the one with the individuals of the other, shall be paid, or the payment may be prosecuted in the same manner as if there had been no misunderstanding between the two states," but that this clause should "not extend to indemnities claimed on account of captures or confiscations" (Article V.).

The convention also provided that free ships should make free goods, but that the enemy's flag should render the Other stipulations. goods of a neutral liable to confiscation, and that prizes should be adjudicated only by the established prize courts of the country. Article XVIII. of the treaty of amity and commerce of 1778 was renewed, with the proviso that its stipulations should not extend beyond the privileges of the most-favored nation. No limit was set to the operation of the convention. With this exception, and that of compensation for captures and condemnations, it substantially conformed to Pickering's ultimata."

ticle II.

с

The Senate approved the convention with the proviso that Article II. should be "expunged," and the duration of the Expunction of Ar- convention limited to eight years from the exchange of ratifications. The convention as thus amended was returned to Paris with a view to the exchange of ratifications. The French ministers refused to agree to an unconditional suppression of the second article, but insisted that, if it was stricken out, "the reciprocal pretensions" to which it related "should not be brought forward at any future period." Murray, being without authority to enter into an engagement to this effect, Bonaparte, as First Consul, ratifying the convention in the name of the French people, inserted in his act of ratification the proviso that by the expunction of the second article "the two states renounce the respective pretensions, which are the object of the said article." The ratifications were exchanged at Paris on the 31st of July, 1801. When the convention was sent back to the United States the President, in view of the form of the French ratification, deemed it "most safe, as a precedent, to ask anew the sanction of the Senate to the instru

a" Davie is here with the convention, as it is called; but it is a real treaty, and without limitation of time. It has some disagreeable features, and will endanger the compromising us with Great Britain. I am not at liberty to mention its contents, but I believe it will meet with opposition from both sides of the House. It has been a bungling negotiation." (2 Randall's Jefferson, 577.) Am. State Papers, For. Rel. VI. 148.

c Id. VI. 144–145.

ment, with that ingredient," though he did not regard “the declaratory clause as more than a legitimate inference from the rejection by the Senate of the second article." The Senate, on the 19th of December, declared that it considered the convention "as fully ratified," and returned it to the President for promulgation. proclaimed on the 21st of December.

Execution of the

convention.

It was

In returning the convention as amended by the Senate to the envoys in Paris the Acting Secretary of State, in March, 1801, said: "We are carrying the convention into execution in all its parts. All hostilities on the sea have been forbidden; our vessels are returning into port; the prisoners in our possession are in course of delivery to M. Letombe, former consul of France; he is notified that all those officers may resume their functions; commercial intercourse is restored; a number of our vessels actually cleared out and departed for France, and orders given for the restitution of vessels under the third article of the convention." On the 3d of January, however, Talleyrand had instructed the Council of Prizes "to adjourn to an indefinite period all decisions upon every kind of property seized under the flag of the United States," though he promised, as soon as the convention should be ratified on both sides, "to urge forward a decree of the consuls which shall replevy for the Americans all the prizes restitution of which has been engaged for." e

The restitutions claimed by the United States, as defined by Madison, embraced (1) cases of capture in which Nonexecution by there had been no judicial proceedings; (2) cases France. carried before the French tribunals, but not definitively decided on the 30th of September, 1800, and (3) captures made subsequently to that day. On the 10th of December, 1801, Chancellor Robert R. Livingston, who had become minister plenipotentiary to France, reported that "the Council of Prizes were still condemning in the very face of the treaty," and that the debts due to American citizens remained unpaid. In communications subsequently made to the French Government he complained (1) that the Government had omitted to take proper measures for the payment of debts; (2) that it refused to make compensation for vessels detained in French ports under general embargoes, or under other

a Am. State Papers, For. Rel. VI. 155. Am. State Papers, For. Rel. II. 345. Am. State Papers, For. Rel. VI. 149.

d Id. 151.

e Am. State Papers, For. Rel. VI. 149; Lawrence's Wheaton (1863), 712; 3 Phillimore's Int. Law (3d ed.), 228; 1 Lyman's Am. Dip. 38; 1 Randall's Jefferson, chap. xiv.

f Am. State Papers, For. Rel. VI. 154.

measures looking to the application of the cargo for the Government's advantage; (3) that it refused to restore property directly, without the intervention of the Council of Prizes, whose dilatory proceedings were ruinous to claimants; (4) that the Council of Prizes condemned property on grounds incompatible with the provisions of the fourth article of the convention; (5) that, even where a vessel was acquitted, the Council of Prizes, instead of awarding costs and damages, or even restoring the thing captured in the same condition as when taken, directed it to be restored as it was at the date of restitution, and charged the costs of detention, storage, and other expenditures to the captured, and (6) that the Government refused to restore captures made prior to September 30, 1800, even where they had not been finally decided on, on the ground that they fell under the second article of the convention. The last complaint Livingston afterward withdrew, saying that it could not be supported by the convention."

Retrocession of

France.

The negotiations in relation to claims soon underwent a great change. On the 1st of October, 1800, the day after Louisiana to the signature of the convention between the United States and France, a treaty was concluded between France and Spain at St. Ildefonso, by which Louisiana was retroceded to the former power. Though this treaty was kept secret and its existence persistently denied, within a year after its conclusion rumors of the transaction reached the United States. When Livingston arrived in France in November, 1801, he was privately assured that both Louisiana and the Floridas had been purchased by France. Talleyrand explicitly denied that anything had been concluded. On the 20th of November, however, Rufus King sent to Madison from London a copy of a treaty between France and Spain, signed at Madrid on the 21st of the preceding March, by which the retrocession of Louisiana was explicitly declared, and the details of the transaction fully set forth."

Claims and New
Orleans.

When Livingston became convinced that the retrocession had been made, he was not slow to perceive its possible effects on the relations between France and the United States, and he set himself to work to obtain the cession of New Orleans to the United States. As an argument for this purpose he pressed the American claims. Tested either by the advantages received by the debtor, or by the loss sustained by the creditor, no claims could, he declared, stand on stronger ground than those of American citizens against France. They were "chiefly

a Am. State Papers, For. Rel. VI. 156, 157, 159, 161, 164.

Adams' History of the United States, I. 409.

c Am. State Papers, For. Rel. II. 511.

founded upon contracts, for articles of the first necessity, furnished when the want of them would have plunged France in the utmost distress." Moreover, it was, he said, to be remembered that while Great Britain was "of late, very amply compensating by full payment of principal, interest, and damages, for any illegal capture made during the war; while compensation for those which fell under that description in France have in a great measure, been given up by the late convention; and that due for the remaining few, which ought to have been satisfied by that treaty, have been eluded by some very extraordinary decisions of the Council of Prizes, or by that delay which all the claims of American citizens have hitherto met with." a

In January, 1803, Monroe was joined with Livingston in the mission to France. Before he reached Paris Bona

Louisiana cession. parte, who desired funds for the approaching war with Great Britain, had determined to sell not only New Orleans, but the whole of Louisiana. Monroe arrived in time to participate in the final negotiations, which were protracted by discussions as to the price to be paid for the cession. On the 30th of April, 1803, a "treaty" and two "conventions" were signed. The treaty ceded Louisiana to the United States. One of the conventions provided for the payment by the United States to France of the sum of 60,000,000 francs; the other, for the payment by the United States of "debts” due by France to citizens of the United States, to an amount not to exceed the sum of 20,000,000 francs.

"The report to which it refers, that the British Government had cautioned ours not to pay the money for Louisiana, for that they meant to take possession of it, is utterly destitute of foundation. The British Government has, on the contrary, expressed its satisfaction with the cession, and, although the terms of it might not at the time be particularly known, yet as a price was to be presumed, and as the bargain was made bona fide, and even communicated prior to the commencement of hostilities, there can be no pretext whatever for complaint, nor is there the least ground for supposing that it will take place."

Mr. Madison, Sec. of State, to Mr. Paine (unofficial), Aug. 20, 1803, 2
Madison's Works, 185.

Much unpublished correspondence in August and September, 1803, be-
tween Mr. Monroe and Mr. R. R. Livingston, in regard to the nego-
tiations then pending with France, is in the Department of State
among the Madison and Monroe papers; and also a series of private
letters from Mr. Livingston to Mr. Madison, as to the differences

a Am. State Papers, For. Rel. II. 538.

b Id. 475.

c Adams History of the United States, II. chap. 1.

between Mr. Livingston and Mr. Monroe and other circumstances
of the negotiations.

See, as to the acquisition of Louisiana, supra, § 101; Hunt's Life of
Livingston, 305.

As to the distribution of the French indemnity, in connection with the
Louisiana purchase, see Moore, Int. Arbitrations, V. 4399 et seq.
For the discussion as to the most-favored-nation clause in the Louisiana
treaty, see supra, § 765.

A convention of navigation and commerce was concluded between the United States and France June 24, 1822.

Message of President J. Q. Adams, Dec. 10, 1822, Am. State Papers, For.
Rel. V. 149.

By the treaty of July 4, 1831, "France was to pay 25,000,000 francs in full satisfaction of the American claims; the United States were to pay 1,500,000 francs in satisfaction of certain French claims; the United States were to reduce the duties on French wines; and France, in consideration of the latter agreement was to relinquish its claims and reclamations respecting the 8th article of the treaty of cession of Louisiana."

Davis, Notes, Treaty Volume (1776–1887), 1310.

For the history of the treaty of 1831, and of the distribution of the in-
demnity thereunder, see Moore, Int. Arbitrations, V. 4447 et seq.

The following matters in relation to France may be noticed:
The Universal Exposition of 1900, President McKinley, annual messages,
Dec. 6, 1897; Dec. 5, 1898; Dec. 3, 1900.

Trade relations with France under the reciprocity arrangement of May
28, 1898, President McKinley, annual message, Dec. 5, 1898; S. Doc.
346, 56 Cong. 1 sess.

Unratified reciprocity convention of July 24, 1899, S. Doc. 225, 56 Cong. 1 sess.

Admission of foreigners into French government schools, For. Rel. 1897, 173.

Burial place of Paul Jones, For. Rel. 1899, 276–279.

Lafayette statue, provided by contributions of American school children and an appropriation by Congress, unveiled at Paris, July 4, 1900, For. Rel. 1900, 456. See, also, id. 468.

Laying of corner stone of monument to Marshal Rochambeau, at Vendôme, France, For. Rel. 1900, 471.

Condolences on the assassination of President Carnot, President Cleveland annual message, Dec. 3, 1894.

2. TREATY DECISIONS.

§ 822.

Under Article XIX. of the treaty of commerce of 1778, a French privateer has a right to make repairs in our ports, as the replacement of her force is not an augmentation.

Moodie . The Phoebe Anne, 3 Dall. 319.