of a war between them, then the articles before provided for the regulation of their conduct during such a war, shall continue in force until the conclusion of the treaty which shall reëstablish peace, and that this treaty shall be ratified on both sides, and the ratifications exchanged within one year from the date of its signature.

REPORT OF JOHN JAY ON A PLAN OF A TREATY OF AMITY AND COMMERCE.

Office for Foreign Affairs, May 17, 1785. The Secretary of the United States for the Department of Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred the draft of a Treaty of Amity and Commerce, transmitted by the American Ministers, reports: That, in his opinion, a system for regulating the trade of the United States should be formed and adopted before they enter into further treaties of commerce; it appearing to him more wise that such treaties should be accommodated to their system, than that their system should be accommodated to such treaties.

That in forming this system many important questions will arise, such as whether American exports shall be wholly, or how far confined to American bottoms; whether any and what distinction shall be made in that respect between the vessels of one foreign nation and another; whether American exports, to whatever nation bound, shall be charged with any or the same, or what different duties; whether all foreign merchandizes, by whatever nation imported, shall be charged with the same imposts; whether any, and which species or denomination of foreign productions or manufactures shall be prohibited. These and other questions of the like nature will probably arise, and these treaties will anticipate, if not embarrass the discussion and decision of some of them.

As to the draft of a treaty referred to him, he thinks the policy of some of these articles in it questionable.

I. It appears to him inexpedient to make the conduct of the parties towards the most favored nations the rule of their conduct towards each other:

(1.) Because, as other nations have regulated their trade and we not, their systems cannot be deranged by it, but it may much perplex the formation of ours.

VOL. I.-34

(2.) Because the interchange of favors between us and a nation merely European, will probably be regulated by principles and considerations distinct in a certain degree from those which should regulate such an interchange between us and nations partly European and partly American.

(3.) Because it may give occasion to difficulties and disputes not easily to be settled.

(4.) Because the inducement to those favors may arise from advantages not in the power of the other to afford in kind, and the twenty-sixth article does not provide for an equivalent consideration, where it is not in the power of the party to grant a similar one. Besides, considerations may be exactly similar in kind, and yet very different in value, and the article in question does not seem to attend to that circumstance.

(5.) Because we may have reasons for freely granting to one nation what we may have no reason to grant to another.

(6.) Because as our trade is at present free to all, we have few favors to grant to any; whereas, their trade being charged with various duties and restrictions, they need only relax to have favors to grant.

He thinks it would be better, therefore, to let each party stand alone, without reference to or connection with any other.

II. Your Secretary doubts the expediency of agreeing absolutely that any foreign nation shall be at liberty to bring and vend in the United States all or any of their productions and manufactures without exception. Because it may be necessary, either for the purpose of checking the progress of luxury, or for the purpose of promoting our own manufactures, to prohibit the importation of certain merchandizes.

He thinks it a mistake that high duties can answer the purpose of a prohibition; because, if the obnoxious articles are permitted to be entered at all, it will be impossible always to decide whether their importation was regular or clandestine.

These objections cannot have equal force with other nations in their connections with us, because we have little or nothing to carry to them, which could either injure their manufactories or increase their luxury.

III. Your Secretary has doubts respecting the sixteenth article, which suspends laying embargoes.

To an European nation at war with an European nation, embargoes are of little consequence, because surrounding nations can and will supply to each party whatever they may want. But an European nation at war with us, can, by means of neutral vessels, obtain great supplies from us, which, under certain circumstances and in particular emergencies, they could not easily acquire elsewhere.

Your Secretary is of opinion that the duration of these treaties should be very limited, because the increasing importance, as well as the increasing experience of the United States, will almost from year to year increase their capacity of making such connections and compacts more and more correspondent to their views and wishes. All which is submitted to the wisdom of Congress.

JOHN JAY.

FROM THE COMMISSIONERS TO BARON THULEMEIER.

Sir,

Passy, November 10, 1784.

We received the letter your Excellency did us the honor of writing to us the 8th ultimo, together with the copy of your full power to treat with us. Mr. Adams had, as you suppose, preserved a copy of the project of a treaty that had been concerted between your Excellency and him, but having, by instructions from the Congress, our sovereign, certain new articles to propose in all our treaties with European Powers, which articles, if agreed to, would render some of those heretofore in use unnecessary, and judging also that some change in the order, by bringing together what relates to the same subject, would render the whole more clear, we have made a new draft of the project, adding the new articles, and send it herewith for your consideration.

Those new articles are the 13th and the 23d. The first contains its own reasons, to wit: The prevention of difficulties and misunderstandings heretofore constantly arising with regard to merchandize called contraband in time of war. In support of the other, we offer a few reasons contained in a separate paper, to which we shall only add here, that the article being in favor of humanity, by softening and diminishing the calamities of war, we think it will be honorable to the first Powers who agree to it, and more particularly to his

Majesty the King of Prussia-if he, whose subjects are known to be so well defended by his power and abilities, as to make the stipulation of any favor for them during the war unnecessary, should be the foremost in setting the example of agreeing to such an article. The part, too, which engages not to commission privateers, nor make prize of merchant ships, will, we think, show the disinterestedness of the United States, since their situation is suited to prey with ease on the rich commerce of Europe with the West Indies, which must pass before their doors; while their own, consisting of lumber and provisions, is of so little value as that the loss in that kind of war is vastly inferior to the profit, which was demonstrated in their late contest with Britain, whose mighty fleets were insufficient to protect their trade from the depredations of a people as able and as expert seamen as themselves.

With regard to the manner of conducting this negotiation, we think it may continue to be by letters, till the articles are agreed on; after which, as the many affairs we have on hand make it inconvenient for us to leave Paris, we shall be glad to receive you here, or if that should not be suitable for you, to meet you in any intermediate place that you may nominate.

We send herewith the copy of our commission, and we are, with respect, &c.,

JOHN ADAMS,
B. FRANKLIN,

THOS. JEFFERSON.

Reasons in support of the new proposed Articles in the Treaties of Commerce, transmitted to the Baron de Thulemeier, in the letter addressed to him November 10, 1784, and enclosed with a copy of the said letter to Congress the next day.

By the original law of nations, war and extirpation were the punishment of injury; humanizing by degrees, it admitted slavery instead of death; a farther step was, the exchange of prisoners instead of slavery; another to respect more the property of private persons under conquest, and be content with acquired dominion. Why should not this law of nations go on improving? Ages have intervened between its several steps; but as knowledge of late increases rapidly, why should not those steps be quickened, why

should it not be agreed to as the future law of nations, that in any war hereafter the following descriptions of men should be undisturbed, have the protection of both sides, and be permitted to follow their employments in surety, viz:

1st. Cultivators of the earth, because they labor for the subsistence of mankind.

2d. Fishermen, for the same reason.

3d. Merchants and traders in unarmed ships, who accommodate different nations by communicating and exchanging the necessaries and conveniences of life.

4th. Artists and mechanics inhabiting and working in open towns. It is hardly necessary to add that the hospitals of enemies should be unmolested; they ought to be assisted.

It is for the interest of humanity in general, that the occasions of war, and the inducements to it, should be diminished.

If rapine is abolished, one of the encouragements to war is taken away, and peace therefore more likely to continue and be lasting.

The practice of robbing merchants on the high seas, a remnant of the ancient piracy, though it may be accidentally beneficial to particular persons, is far from being profitable to all engaged in it, or to the nation that authorizes it. In the beginning of a war, some rich ships, not upon their guard, are surprised and taken. This encourages the first adventurers to fit out more armed vessels, and many others to do the same, but the enemy, at the same time, become more careful, arm their merchant ships better, and render them not so easy to be taken; they go also more under the protection of convoys. Thus, while the privateers to take them are multiplied, the vessels subject to be taken and the chances of profit are diminished, so that many cruises are made wherein the expenses overgo the gains, as it is the case in other lotteries; though individuals have got the prizes, the mass of adventurers are losers, the whole expense of fitting out all the privateers during a war being much greater than the whole amount of goods taken. Then there is the national loss of all the labor of so many men, during the time they have been employed in robbing, who, besides, spend what they get in riot, drunkenness, debauchery, lose their habits of industry, are rarely fit for any sober business after a peace, and serve only to increase the number of highwaymen and housebreakers. Even the undertakers who have been fortunate are, by sudden wealth, led into