Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.

DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 555 JANUARY, 1835.] French Spoliations prior to 1800. [SENATE. 3. That the treaty of 1800 reserved and pro- dated the 6th of February, 1778. Several of vided for certain portions of the claims; that the articles of this treaty, connected with these payment, according to such reservations, was claims had just been read by his friend from made under the treaty of 1803; and that it is New York, (Mr. WRIGHT.) The article most at least doubtful whether the payment thus material he (Mr. K.) read. It is as follows: made did not cover all the claims ever admitted "ART. 23d. It shall be lawful for all and singular or ever intended to be paid by France; for the subjects of the Most Christian King, and the which reason the expunging of the second arti- citizens, people, and inhabitants of the said United cle of the treaty of 1800 by the Senate of the States, to sail with their ships with all manner of United States, in all probability, released noth- liberty and security, no distinction being made who ing which ever had, or which was ever likely are the proprietors of the merchandises laden thereto have, value. on, from any port to the places of those who now Mr. W. said, if he had been successful in es- are or hereafter shall be at enmity with the Most tablishing either of these positions, there was an Christian King or the United States. It shall likeend of the claims, and, by consequence, a defeat wise be lawful for the subjects and inhabitants of the bill. aforesaid to sail with the ships and merchandise Mir. KING, of Georgia, said: What was the aforementioned, and to trade with the same liberty proposition, by the establishment of which the and security, from the places, ports, and harbors advocates of the bill sought to enforce upon of those who are enemies of both or either party, the Senate the propriety of its passage? If he without any opposition or disturbance whatsoever, understood it, it was this: that France on the not only directly from the places of the'enemy understood it, it wa s.this that France, on the aforementioned to neutral places, but also from one 30th of September, 1800, was indebted to citizens place belonging to an enemy to another place beof the United States (the claimants) at least five longing to an enemy, whether they be under the millions of dollars. That the United States jurisdiction of the same prince, or under several. were at the same time under treaty stipulations And it is hereby stipulated that free ships shall give to France, onerous to them, and valuable to a freedom to goods, and that every thing shall be France; and that the United States, having deemed to be free and exempt which shall be found charge of the claims of their citizens, released on board the ships belonging to the subjects of these claims to France, in consideration of a either of the confederates, although the whole ladrelease of their own treaty stipulations to that ing, or any part thereof, should appertain to the nation. Hence it was contended that the United enemies of either, contraband goods being always States are liable to their own citizens for their excepted. It is also agreed, in like manner, that claims on France, upon the same principle that the same liberty be extended to persons who are an agent is liable 7 to h is principal if bhle appro-on board a free ship, with this effect, that, although an a.gent is liable to his principal if he appro- they be enemies of both or either party, they are priates the effects of the latter to his own use. not to be taken out of that free ship, unless they The doctrine was sound enough, if the propost- arc soldiers, and in actual service of the enemies." tion were established. But, in prosecuting an inquiry into the truth of the proposition, he Another article in the treaty provided that a should inquire, and, if possible, ascertain- sea letter of a particular form, specified in the 1st. Whether, in point of fact, the Govern- article, should, on being exhibited, determine ment of France was, according to the existing the neutral or friendly character of the vessel. rules of national law, indebted to the claimants This article was violated in the most flagrant five millions, or any other sum, on the 30th manner, by an unexpected decree, requiring September, 1800? what they called a "role d'equipage," which 2d. Whether, in point of fact, the United took hundreds by surprise, who had prepared States were, at the same date, bound by treaty themselves with a letter in the form prescribed stipulations, onerous to them, and valuable to by the treaty. In short, France first violated France, which would afford a consideration for the treaty, as seemed on all hands admitted, the release of the claims? and continued her depredations from 1793 till And it might not be unimportant to inquire, the treaty of 1800. Nor was our Government in the third place, whether, if these claims once remiss in attention to the claims of its citizens. existed and were released by the acts of our Every effort was made to recover indemnity for Government in its regular administration, any them. Envoy after envoy was sent to the responsibility should attach to the Government French court to negotiate on this subject; but for obeying the necessary exigencies of State they were subjected to the most degrading conpolicy? ditions as the price of the privilege of negotiaMr. K. returned to the'first inquiry. Was ting, and treated with a contempt only equalled France, indebted to the claimants on the 30th by that which was paid to our flag; and at September, 1800? That France had corn- last virtually kicked out of the country. These mitted spoliations which made her liable at indignities were submitted to until-nay, long one time to claimants, was not disputed on after-forbearance ceased to be a virtue; and, either side, but insisted on by both. The finding negotiation hopeless, we determined to claims, he said, arose as well by a reckless resort to force. violation of the laws of nations as by repeated Mr. K. insisted that the spoliations which and sometimes admitted infractions of the were the subject of the bill had caused a war treaty of commerce between the two countries, between the two countries-a war, to be sure,