article of the 4th of May, 1796, which is added to the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation of 1794, with Great Britain but it is equally true that this contains no new stipulation, that it recognizes the principle that no subsequent treaty can make void prior engagements (and, therefore, that this explanatory article of 1796, cannot in the smallest degree affect the prior treaty of 1795 with Spain) and that British subjects, the citizens of the United States, and the native Indians, shall enjoy full liberty of passage, intercourse and commerce with each other, "according to the stipulations of the third article of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation." So that this explanatory article goes not beyond, but is positively confined within the limits of the third article of the treaty of 1794; which, preceding, in order of time, the treaty with Spain, by more than eleven months, and being also at the conclusion of the Spanish treaty perfectly well known to its government; it cannot, consequently, afford to Spain the slightest ground of complaint.

pass unnoticed your lengthy quotation from the opinion of Mr. Randolph, attorney general of the United States in 1793, and your observations upon it; because neither one nor the other touch the essential point in dispute be

tween us.

As to the question in the last paragraph of your letter, I am authorized to say, That the United States are not concerned to vindicate the claim of Great Britain to the navigation of the river Mississippi. What was said on this subject of my letter of the 17th of May, was in consequence of your having entered into an examination of the British title to this navigation; and I said expressly, that I did not conceive it essential to the subject we were then discussing: I merely followed you. Our stipulation amounts only to this, that the United States shall not obstruct the navigation of the river by British subjects. If Great Britain demands and obtains it; or if Spain admits her claim, as she has reserved the right to do, in the 4th article of her treaty with the United States, the latter cannot oppose it; and if the British vessels and boats do navigate the Mississippi, we are bound to admit them into our ports on the eastern bank of that river. Whether this admission would be advantageous or injurious to the United States, it belonged to them only to judge: they have not asked,

nor will they have occasion to ask Spain to be the guardian of their rights and interests on the Mississippi: they only desire, in this respect, that she would faithfully perform her own engagements sanctioned by a solemn treaty. I am, sir, &c.

TIMOTHY PICKERING..

No. 19.

Extract of a Letter from Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State, to Mr. Ellicott, dated Department of State, July 14,

1797.

"On the 8th of June I received by Mr. Knox your despatches dated the 14th of April, which were laid before Congress on the 12th of June, and on the 29th of June, I received by captain Hunter, your despatches dated the 10th of May, which on the 3d of July, were also laid before Congress, together with the despatches from captain Pope to the Secretary of War. These communications to Congress appear in the enclosed pamphlets.

With respect to the important business with which you are charged, the repeated promises, followed by as often repeated failures to enter upon it, by the Spanish governours, with other circumstances, afford too much reason to believe that there is an intention to postpone it. Nevertheless, the President is of opinion, and directs that you should remain at the Natchez, and always hold yourself in readiness to commence the running of the boundary line between the territories of the United States and of his catholick majesty. You will endeavour, in concert with governour Gayoso, or other proper officer of his catholick majesty, to fix a time when this work of ascertaining the boundary line shall commence. This endeavour may be renewed as often as you shall think fit. Great care should be used to give no just cause of offence to the Spanish government. What will be the final result of its measures is uncertain; but if war should follow, it will be of the last importance that the United States should not be the aggressors. The President, therefore, desires that your conduct should be perfectly guarded, moderate, and prudent.”

No. 20.

Extract of a Letter from Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State, to Mr. Ellicott, dated Department of State, Philadelphia, August 30, 1797.

"YOUR expresses, Mr. Bean and Mr. Robins, arrived here on the 24th instant, and delivered me your two letters of June 27th. The same day I received your letters of May 27th and June 4th and 5th.

The Baron de Carondelet's proclamation of the 24th of May, inclosed in your letter of June 4th, abandons almost all the former pretences for retaining the posts, which he says "is occasioned only by the imperious necessity of securing Lower Louisiana from the hostilities of the English, who have set on foot (without regard to the inviolability of the territory of the United States) an expedition against Upper Louisiana." By my former despatches covering the printed reports and documents, you will have seen that this expedition had never any existence. This is more fully shown in my letter of the 8th instant, to the chevalier de Yrujo, now enclosed. And my answer to him about the navigation of the Mississippi, and the articles of our treaties with Great Britain concerning it, also among the printed documents, demonstrates that in those stipulations we have not departed from the strictest line of good faith towards Spain; that we have granted nothing in respect to the navigation of the Mississippi, to Great Britain; and that the ideas the United States entertained on that subject, were perfectly known and understood by the government of Spain, when our treaty with Spain was concluded; and that there is nothing contradictory between the two treaties, the British and Spanish.

As therefore the Baron de Carondelet has not a shadow of foundation to suspect an expedition by the British against Upper Louisiana, as the American government has formally declared to the British minister, for the information of his government, that we will suffer the march of neither British nor Spanish troops through our territory, for the purpose of hostility of one against the other; as, finally, the British themselves (as you will see in Mr. Liston's letter among the printed documents) declare they never had formed such a plan of an expedition, and ac

knowledged that its execution would violate our territorial rights-for these reasons, on the principles of his proclamation the Baron ought immediately to evacuate the posts and territory of the United States.

These observations will also apply to the Baron's proclamation of the 31st of May, in which, however, he takes somewhat new ground. What "security" can the United States give, or rather what will the Baron deem a rity" against a descent of the English by the Mississippi? If the facts and assurances already stated and given on the part of the United States do not satisfy, nothing can. With respect to any hostile intentions of the United States towards Spain, as intimated by the Baron in this last proclamation, nothing is more unfounded. The march of the troops to Tennessee from the Ohio, is for the sole purpose of establishing a force in that country to restrain the inhabitants or other citizens from aggressions against the Cherokees, and especially to prevent a forced settlement, which was threatened, on the Indian lands, and any orders to the Cumberland militia to hold themselves in readiness, can be only for the object of preventing encroachments on the Indian lands, and to preserve peace. If we meditated an attack against the Spaniards on the Mississippi we should certainly contemplate an easier route than by a wilderness of many hundred miles in extent, through which the transportation of stores and provisions would be impracticable; or of such extreme difficulty and boundless expense, as folly alone would attempt.

I have now only to notice the general commotion at the Natchez, among the inhabitants, against the Spanish government, which seems to have been quieted very much by your prudent management. This line of conduct, caution, prudence, moderation-so as by all means to avoid the possibility of a charge of aggression against the United States-you will see in my letter of the 14th of July, was specially enjoined by the President. And a perseverance in the same course I trust will eventually issue in a peaceable adjustment of the disputes now subsisting, respecting the posts, the country where they are situated, and the navigation of the Mississippi. The pacifick views of the United States and their good faith are not to be doubted, and it is clear as demonstration can make it, that the Baron has nothing to apprehend from the British from Canada:

and consequently that he has now no cause or pretence for retaining the posts, or for delaying to run the boundary Tine."

MESSAGE

FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO CON

GRESS. FEB. 5, 1798.

I HAVE received a letter from his excellency Charles Pinckney, Esq. governour of the state of South Carolina, dated on the 22d of October, 1797, enclosing a number of depositions of witnesses to several captures and outrages committed within and near the limits of the United States by a French privateer, belonging to Cape Francois or Monte Christo, called the Vertitude or Fortitude, and commanded by a person of the name of Jordon or Jourdain, and particularly upon an English merchant ship, named the Oracabissa, which he first plundered and then burned, with the rest of her cargo of great value, within the territory of the United States, in the harbour of Charleston, on the 17th day of October last; copies of which letter and depositions, and also of several other depositions relative to the same subject, received from the collector of Charleston, are herewith communicated.

Whenever the channels of diplomatical communication between the United States and France shall be opened, I shall demand satisfaction for the insult, and reparation for the injury.

I have transmitted these papers to Congress, not so much for the purpose of communicating an account of so daring a violation of the territory of the United States, as to show the propriety and necessity of enabling the executive authority of government to take measures for protecting the citizens of the United States, and such foreigners as have a right to enjoy their peace and the protection. of their laws within their limits, in that as well as some other harbours, which are equally exposed. JOHN ADAMS.