quisitions thus made: and that treasonable revolt could not give rights greater than those of lawful war. Nor could the propositions which had been made by Great Britain for an accomodation with her revolted colonies be considered as a recognition of their independence de facto, such as would as would warrant the interference of a foreign power, since the very basis of the proposed reconciliation contemplated the re-establishment of the lawful authority of the mother country. It was added that no formal declaration of war on the part of Great Britain was necessary, inasmuch as hostilities had been actually commenced by France, in forming treaties of commerce and alliance with the revolted colonies, giving them aid and succour, and committing direct aggressions on British commerce.9 The court of France replied to these arguments by alleging the example of the conduct of Queen Elizabeth in recognizing the independence of the Netherlands when they revolted against Spain in the sixteenth century. After having made several secret treaties with England, the confederated provinces declared their independence in 1585, which was followed by a new treaty of alliance concluded in the same year. In order to justify this last treaty, Elizabeth published a manifesto, in which she set forth the cruelties committed by the Spanish governors in the Low Countries, and the design of the court of Madrid to deprive them of their ancient privileges. She, at the same time, declared her resolution to sustain the United Provinces in the defence of their liberties as the only means of preserving a free trade for her subjects with those provinces, and of preserving England from invasion by Spain, which would be greatly facilitated by their subjugation. It deserved to be remarked that the publication of this manifesto did not occasion any rupture between the two courts, and that in 1588 Elizabeth under 9 Memoire Justificatif pour servir de Réponse à l'Exposé des Motifs de la Conduite du Roi de France relativement à l'Angleterre. (Gibbon's Misc. Works, vol. iv. p. 246.) This memoir was drawn up by Gibbon. took at the request of Philip II, the office of mediatrix between that prince and the United Provinces. The court of France further stated, that its declaration to the court of London, of the 14th March, 1778, was founded on the incontestible fact that the Americans were in the public possession of their independence when the treaties of alliance and commerce were concluded on the 6th February, 1778; and upon the equally incontestable principle of public law that this fact was sufficient to justify the king in forming these engagements without examining the question of the legality of that independence. It sufficed that the British government had ceased to treat the revolted colonists as rebels; that it observed towards them the ordinary laws of war recognized between civilized nations; that American prisoners were regularly exchanged in virtue of cartels signed by commissaries of the Congress; that British troops had capitulated to those of the United States and their capitulations had been respected; and that the British government had recognized the authority of the republic in sending commissioners to treat for peace with the Congress. But whether the United States had, or had not, the right of abjuring the sovereignty of England; whether their possession of independence were legal or not it was not for France to discuss these ques tions. Neither the law of nations, nor treaties, nor morality, nor policy, imposed upon the king the obligation of becoming the guardian of the fidelity of English subjects to their sovereign it was sufficient for his majesty's justification that the colonies,-forming by their numbers and the extent of their territory a considerable nation, had established their independence, not merely by a solemn declaration, but also in fact, and had maintained it against all the efforts of their mother country. Such was the position of the United States when the king began to negotiate with them his majesty was free to consider them as an independent nation, or as subjects of Great Britain: he had chosen the first alternative, because his safety, the interests § 13. French Ordinance of free ships, free of his people, and above all the secret projects of the court of London imposed it on him as an imperious obligation. France was independent of the British crown: no engagement bound the king to maintain that crown in the integrity of its dominions, and still less to constrain its subjects to obedience so that his majesty had no duty to fulfil in favour of England in respect to her North American colonies. He was bound neither to assist England against the colonies, nor to repulse the colonies when they presented themselves to him as an independent people. He had a right to consider as such the united people of an immense continent, presenting themselves in that character, above all since their former sovereign had shown by long and painful efforts the impossibility of reducing them to obedience. By the treaty of amity and commerce of the 6th Febru1778 establish ary 1778, between France and the United States, it had ing the rule of been stipulated that free ships should make free goods. goods. The French government issued an ordinance, on the 26th July, 1778, extending the benefit of this stipulation to all neutral powers. By the 1st article of this ordinance, the French cruizers were prohibited from seizing neutral vessels, even if bound from one enemy's port to another, unless actually blockaded, beseiged, or invested. Neutral vessels, laden with contraband of war, were still subjected to capture, and the contraband articles to confiscation but the vessel and the residue of the cargo were to be restored, unless the contraband amounted to three-fourths in value of the cargo, in which case both the vessel and the entire cargo were liable to confiscation. But his majesty reserved the faculty of revoking the freedom granted by this article unless the enemy should within six months from the date of the ordinance grant a similar concession. The ordinance contained several other provisions respect • Observations sur le Memoire justtficatif de la Cour de Londres. Flassan, tom. iii. p. 174. ing the proofs of proprietary interest to be required from neutral vessels, and in other respects confirmed the dispositions of the title of prizes in the marine ordinance of Louis XIV, 1681." In the meantime Spain had been drawn into the war as an ally of France under the family compact of 1761, and Great Britain had demanded in vain from Holland that assistance which the republic was bound to render by the subsisting treaties of alliance and guarantee between the two countries. Indeed appearances indicated that Great Britain was soon to encounter an enemy in her ancient ally. Her naval, commercial, and colonial superiority were thus threatened by a formidable confederacy of the maritime powers of Europe combined with the youthful energies of her own revolted colonies. In this extremity, the British cabinet turned its attention to Russia, as a power whose friendship and aid might be secured by the application of suitable means. Sir James Harris, (afterwards Lord Malmsbury,) was instructed to sound the disposition of the Empress Catharine, and for this purpose addressed himself to Panin, chancellor of the empire, and Potemkin, the reigning favorite of that princess. The former was unfavorable to the views of the British cabinet; but the latter opened to their ambassador the means of secret conference with the Empress, who consented to offer her armed mediation in the war between Great Britain on the one side, and France, Spain, and the United States on the other, as an equivalent for Russia being allowed to prosecute her designs on the Turkish empire. But the inclinations of the Empress were still resisted by Panin, who endeavoured to convince her that the true interests of the Russian state would not be promoted by such an alliance; and an official answer was accordingly returned declining the British overtures. Harris was disconcerted by this unexpected result, • Code des Prises, tom. ii. p. 671. but received assurances from Potemkin, in the name of the Empress, of unchanged good will,-and an expression of the hope that circumstances would soon enable her to conform her conduct to her wishes. An incident now occurred which seemed to favor the designs of the British negotiator. Two Russian vessels laden with corn, and bound to the Mediterranean, were seized by Spanish cruizers upon the ground that they were intended to supply the fortress of Gibraltar. The Empress instantly demanded satisfaction from the Spanish court, and was persuaded by Potemkin to order, without consulting Panin, the equipment of a fleet at Cronstadt, which was destined to co-operate with Great Britain against Spain and her allies, in case redress should be refused. The fitting out of the fleet could not long be concealed from Panin, nor did he doubt its destination. But he determined to carry into effect his own views by appearing to forward those of his rival. Far from appearing to oppose the designs of the Empress, he declared that he himself participated in her indignation at the conduct of Spain, and entirely approved of her determination to require satisfaction for the injury done to the neutral navigation of her subjects engaged in a lawful commerce. He would even go further: he would exhort his sovereign to seize this opportunity of solemnly announcing to Europe that she would not suffer the wars waged by other powers to affect injuriously the accustomed trade of Russia. He represented that such a course would secure the friendship and co-operation of all the neutral powers, and would compel Spain to grant complete satisfaction for the injury she had committed. The true principles of neutrality, sanctioned by the natural law of nations, had been hitherto too little respected in practice. They had hitherto wanted the support of a sovereign uniting sufficient power, wisdom, and benevolence to cause them to be respected. These requisites were now united in Catharine, and she had an opportunity of acquiring new titles to glory, of becoming a lawgiver to the high seas, of |