by the Secretary of State. By these it appears, that on the 13th of June, Mr. Adet arrived at Philadelphia. On the 15th Mr. Fauchet introduced him to the Secretary of State; on the 16th, Mr. Adet informed the Secretary, that he should the next day send him some act of the French government relative to commerce: but it was not sent. On the 22d of June Mr. Adet was reminded of the promised communication. He said it was copying, and gave reason to suppose that he should forward it on that day : but on that day nothing was received.

On the 29th of June, 1795, Mr. Adet had an interview with the Secretary of State : he observed that he brought with him the commercial decrees which Mr. Genet had formerly propounded to our government, and was instructed to negotiate a treaty of commerce upon their basis. He was asked whether he had any documents to communicate. He replied, that he would send them that day. He said he had to communicate some inquietudes respecting the late treaty between the United States and Great Britain. He observed that it was understood, that the United States had disabled themselves from entering into a new commercial treaty upon a liberal scale with France. The Secretary answered, that he had determined before he came, to ask the permission of the President, to communicate to him a copy of the treaty; and then he might say in what part he supposed that any impropriety with respect to France existed. The President having afterwards assented, the Secretary on the same day delivered to Mr. Adet a printed copy of the treaty, on which he promised to communicate his remarks.

These remarks dated June 30th, and the Secretary's answer dated July 6th, refuting the objections they contained, I have already noticed. The subsequent proceedings will show, either that those objections did not make any strong impressions on Mr. Adet's mind, or that the Secretary's answer had removed them.

On the 30th June, 1795, Mr. Adet communicated a part of his instructions relative to "A new commercial treaty, and a new consular convention, to be entered into between France and the United States." The instructions imported that he was only to "Prepare with the American government the means and arrangement" of these treaties, and then to communicate them to the committee of

publick safety. The object of the new treaty was declared to be "To found the commercial relations of the two republicks upon stipulations more reciprocally advantageous and more clearly worded than that of 1778, and the object of the consular convention to secure the execution of the commercial treaty."

The Secretary of State answered on the 1st of July, expressing the readiness of the government to open the proposed negotiation; and requested a communication of the dates of the decrees to which Mr. Adet's instruction referred.

On the 8th of July, 1795, Mr. Adet replied to the Secretary of State, "That he neither knew nor possessed any other decree relative to the new negotiation to be opened between France and the United States, than that of the 5th of February, 1793, communicated to us by citi zen Genet." This letter of the 8th was received the 12th, accompanied by a note of the latter date apologizing for the delay on account of sickness. On the 12th the Secretary of State had written to him, pressing him on the subject of the new negotiation.

On the 16th of July, 1795, the Secretary of State again wrote to Mr. Adet; and after informing him that as he was not clothed with any very formal authority upon this subject, the President of the United States had thought proper to place him (the Secretary of State,) upon the same, and no other footing,-the Secretary proposed that the negotiation should be conducted in writing, unless when either thought it expedient to have an interview on any particular difficulty. And then assuring Mr. Adet that no unnecessary procrastination should be found in the Secretary of State, further proposed, that Mr. Adet should state 1st. The parts of the treaty which he wished to be abolished: 2d. Those parts which he wished to be corrected: and 3d. Any additions which seemed to him desirable: But expressed the readiness of the Secretary to adopt any other better mode of conducting the negotiation, if such occurred to Mr. Adet.

On the 20th of July, 1795, Mr. Adet, mentioning his sickness which for fifteen days had obliged him to abstain

* Mr. Adet has since corrected this date, the decree intended being dated February 19, 1793. This is already published with the State Papers of that

year.

from business, replied on the subject of the negotiation in these words; "In a few days I shall have the honour of seeing you, and of taking the necessary measures in order to commence the business relative to the digesting of the new treaty and new consular convention."

From this detail, it must I conceive he no easy task to find any facts by which Mr. Adet's charge can be supported. What he affects to call "frivolous pretexts" are substantial reasons; and in respect to his own advances to treat, the conduct of our government manifests an eagerness to enter on the negotiation: certainly, you will discover in it no disposition to elude or to procrastinate.

You will be pleased to observe, sir, that the letter from the Secretary of State to Mr. Adet explaining the manner in which they should proceed in the negotiation, is dated the 16th of July; and that Mr. Adet's answer, agreeing shortly to meet the Secretary, in order to take the necessary measures for commencing the business, is dated the 20th of July; yet in his note of November 15th, 1796, after having charged the government of the United States "with eluding all advances made by the Republick for renewing the treaties of commerce, and excusing itself on the most frivolous pretexts;" after acknowledging that the -President had authorized the Secretary of State to negotiate, and that the latter had explained the manner of proceeding, he asks, "But at what time? When the ratification of the treaty concluded between Lord Grenville and Mr. Jay, no longer permitted the undersigned to pursue that negotiation." I am sorry, sir, in this place to call your attention to dates. The British treaty was not rati fied until the 14th of August, 1795, that is, about a month after the plan of negotiating with Mr. Adet had been proposed to him by the Secretary of State, and twenty-five days after he had agreed to proceed in it. And if that ratification finally induced him to abandon the idea of negotiating a new treaty between France and the United States, it did not instantly produce this determination. He doubtless perceived that his own objections to the British treaty were obviated by the answer from the Secretary of State; and when he acknowledged the receipt of it, he had given up the right of judging of the treaty, whether it was good or bad." I shall," (says he, in his letter of July 20th, 1795) "transmit it (the Secretary's answer) to the French

government, together with my observations and the treaty. In such important circumstances, it is exclusively the province of my government to judge; and I cannot permit myself to decide at all." And then immediately adds"in a few days I shall have the honour of seeing you, and of taking the necessary measures in order to commence the business relative to the digesting of the new treaty and new consular convention." The British treaty then did not obstruct the negotiation; the principles of which might have been agreed on, and the articles drawn into form to be submitted to the respective governments: for that was all the respective negotiators were authorized to do.

WILL the ministers of the French Republick never cease to reproach us with "ingratitude?" If indeed "France wrought" as well as "guarantied the independence of the United States," as Mr. Adet asserts, "at a time when she might, as the price of that very independence, have granted them less liberal conditions," our obligations are greater than we have hitherto imagined. But it is time that these claims to our gratitude were investigated, and their extent ascertained. We have citizens yet alive, who were actors and witnesses of the declaration of our independence, and of the efforts to maintain it, with their effects, prior to our treaty with France. But laying no stress on our own recollections or consciousness, we will resort to the testimony of France herself.

France, by her minister the marquis de Noailles, having in the declaration of the 13th of March, 1778, which I have already quoted, announced to the court of London the treaty of friendship and commerce she had formed with the United States; and that to maintain the commerce of his subjects with them, which was the object of that treaty. his most christian majesty had "taken eventual measures in concert with the United States of North America ;" that court published a justificative memorial, to vindicate to the world the war she had determined to wage against France. In the observations of the court of France on this British memorial, we find the following declarations on the part of France.* "While the ambassador of England put the king's patience to the strongest proofs, and while the court of London was constantly repeating de

Obs. p. 60.

nials of justice to his majesty's subjects, at the same time that the British officers continued to desolate them on the sea, an event came to pass in America which essentially changed the face of things in that quarter of the world. This event was the defeat of the army under general Burgoyne. The news of this unexpected disaster, which arrived in Europe in Nov. 1777, astonished the British ministers, and must have the more sensibly affected them, as it overthrew the plan they had laid for the reduction of the colonies." The observations then suggest that this great event induced, in the British cabinet, the idea of conciliation with America, and of a coalition against the crown of France, in revenge for the supposed aid rendered by her to the United States; and to gratify " their most dear and constant wish-that of humbling France."* “It was natural for the British ministry, unable to subdue her colonies, to seek to be reconciled to them, and to engage them to espouse her resentment. They might so much the more flatter themselves that they should succeed herein, as the proceedings of France with regard to American privateers, and especially the dislike the king had at all times manifested to any engagement with the Congress, must have given disgust and dissatisfaction to their depu ties, and induce them, notwithstanding their well known aversion, to seek even in England, the safety of their coun try, when they failed to find it in France."

"The king, well informed of the plan of the court of London, and of the preparations which were the consequence of it, perceived that no more time was to be lost, if he would prevent the designs of his enemies: his ma jesty determined, therefore, to take into consideration, at length, the overtures of the Congress."

"The commissioners [from the United States] pro posed to the king a treaty of amity and commerce, and an alliance offensive and defensive, by which his majesty should engage not only to acknowledge simply and purely the independence of the United States, but also to guaranty and defend it by force of arms. The king ordered an answer to be given, that he could indeed look upon the independence of the United States as existing; but that it did not belong to him to acknowledge it, because he had not Obs. p. 67.

* Obs. p. 64.

+ Obs. p. 66.