be taken that day. "Mischievous effects," he said "stared them in the face, look which way they would; for if they refused to carry the treaty into effect, evils might be dreaded; and if they carried it into effect, serious evils would certainly arise. The question was, to choose the least of the two evils. He himself was not determined, at present which was the least, for another days consideration."

and wished

The question was postponed until the next day, and decided in the manner before stated.

The delay occasioned by these debates was favorable to the treaty. It gave time for reflection among those opposed, and also, afforded an opportunity for others, who had hitherto been silent, willing to leave the decision with the constituted authorities, to express their sentiments. The great mass of the people began seriously to reflect, on the consequences of its rejection; nor could they be induced to believe that the president, who had once saved his country from the tyranny of Great Britain, had now sacrificed its best interests to the same power. During the discussion therefore, numerous petitions were presented to the house from different parts of the union, praying that the treaty might be carried into effect. This changed the votes, if not the opinions of some of the members.

Mr. Christie of Maryland, declared, he still considered it "as the worst of all hard bargains, yet, as he was satisfied that a large majority of his constituents wished it to be carried into effect, he should give his vote for that purpose, and leave the responsibility upon them."

This interesting session did not close, until the first of June. The final vote on the question of carrying the British treaty into effect, probably saved the United States, from being involved in the war, which then and so long afterwards desolated Europe.

CHAPTER XXV.

Conduct of France with respect to the British treaty-French government consider the treaty of 1778, at an end, after the ratification of the treaty with Great Britain— The ultimate measures of the directory not taken until the final vote of the house of representatives to carry it into effect-Directory require the aid of Holland and Spain in defeating the treaty-Conduct of these nations-Treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive, between France and Spain-Spain delays fulfilling her treaty with the United States-Attempts to induce the western people to form an independent empire-Instructions of the Spanish governor to his agent on this subject -France supposed to be concerned in this plan-General Washington declines being a candidate for the presidency-People divided with respect to his successorFrench minister supposed to interfere in the election---President Washington's last speech to congress---He recommends among other things, the establishment of a navy---Answers of both houses express great respect for his character, and a high sense of his eminent services---French depredations on American commerce---President submits to congress a review of the conduct of the French government towards the United States--- His farewell address on retiring from office.

THE two great belligerents, and particularly France, had viewed the contest in America, with respect to the British treaty, with peculiar solicitude. In its final ratification, the French government saw an end to all their hopes of "a family or national compact" with the Americans-and Great Britain could view its rejection, as only a prelude to war with the United States.

The jealousy of the rulers of France respecting the negocia tions of Mr. Jay, had been manifested in a variety of ways, from the commencement of his mission.

Mr. Munroe, as we have before stated, was instructed to solicit the aid of France, in securing the navigation of the Mississippi.

On the 25th of January, 1795, he submitted to the committee of public safety, the wishes of his government on this subject; and stated the importance of the navigation of that river to the United States. The answer of Merlin de Douay, one of the committee, shows, that the conduct of France would be governed by that of the United States, in regard to the treaty with England. In his note of the 22d of February, 1795, in answer to obser

vations on this subject, he said, "the ideas which they present are not new to me, nor to the committee of public safety; and I have reason to think they will be taken into profound consideration, in suitable time and place. I ought not to dissemble, however," he added, "that this may depend upon the conduct which the American government will observe in regard to the treaty which its minister Jay has concluded with England. You know, sir, in effect, that there ought to be a reciprocity of services and of obligations between nations, as between individuals. I speak, however, here as an individual."* The French government were soon after somewhat more explicit on this subject. About the 9th of March, Mr. Munroe was informed by one of the members of the diplomatic section of the committee of public safety, "that in confidence, Mr. Jay's treaty contained nothing which would give uneasiness here, they had expressly instructed their agent then negociating with Spain, to use his utmost efforts to secure the points in controversy between the United States and that power." On the 12th of September, 1795, the secretary of state informed Mr. Munroe, that the president had ratified the treaty, and also furnished him with his reasons for so doing, with a view, that they might be presented to the French government. France was at that time particularly engaged in forming a new constitution, which went into operation, on the 27th of October, 1795. The legislature was divided into two branches, and the executive power lodged with five persons called a directory. Soon after this, de la Croix was appointed minister of foreign affairs. In February, 1796, this minister informed Mr. Munroe, that the directory had determined how to act in regard to the American treaty with Great Britain. They had, he said, considered the alliance between France and the United States at an end, from the moment that treaty was ratified; and intimated that a special envoy would be sent to announce this to the American government. Soon after, he presented to the American minister, a summary exposition of the complaints of the French government against

* Munroe's Views, p. 139. † Do. p. 133.

the United States. The British treaty was the most prominent subject of complaint; by which, he said, the United States had knowingly and evidently sacrificed their connection with the republic, particularly in abandoning the principles established by the armed neutrality, that free ships should make free goods, and in making articles necessary for the equipment and construction of vessels, and even provisions, contraband of war. Mr. Munroe gave the same answer, that the American government had always given to complaints of this kind, that the treaty had not in these particulars violated or changed the law of nations. That the principles of the armed neutrality had never been recognized by Great Britain-that every article in the list of contraband, was warranted by the law of nations; and as to provisions, they were not made contraband in any case, where they were not so before, by the existing law. Though the French government had announced to the American minister, that the British treaty had put an end to the alliance; their ultimate measures in consequence of it, were delayed, until it should be known, whether congress, particularly the house of representatives would by their acts carry it into effect. The directory were no doubt well informed of the proceedings in America, and were led to believe that the house, at least, would refuse its assent to such acts. The final vote of the house on this question disappointed their expectations, and measures of retaliation were immediately taken. On the 25th of June, 1796, the French minister inquired of Mr. Munroe, whether the intelligence contained in the American gazettes, was true, that the house had consented to carry the treaty into effect. "After the chamber of representatives," he added, "has given its consent to this treaty, we ought no doubt, to consider it in full force and as the state of things which results from it, merits our profound attention, I wish to learn from you what light we are to consider the event, which the public papers announce, before I call the attention of the directory to those consequences which ought specially to interest this republic." Although the American minister was unable to give any official information on the VOL. II.

61

subject; yet, no doubt, informed by their own minister in the United States, that the intelligence was true, the directory at once took those measures of retaliation they had contemplated; and on the 2d of July, issued their celebrated decree, that "all neutral or allied powers shall, without delay, be notified, that the flag of the French republic will treat neutral vessels, either as to confiscation, as to searches, or capture, in the same manner as they shall suffer the English to treat them."

In the preamble to this decree, the executive directory declared, that "if it becomes the faith of the French nation to respect treaties or conventions which secure to the flags of some neutral or friendly powers, commercial advantages, the result of which is to be common to the contracting powers; these same advantages, if they should turn to the benefit of our enemies, either through the weakness of our allies, or of neutrals, or through fear, through interested views, or through whatever motives, would in fact warrant the inexecution of the articles in which they were stipulated." Rumors, indeed, had before this reached the United States, that measures hostile to American commerce, were contemplated by the French government. To ascertain the truth of these rumors, Col. Pickering, secretary of state, as early as the first of July, 1796, addressed a note to Mr. Adet, inquiring whether the government of France, had decreed any new regulations or orders relative to the commerce of the United States, and if so, what they were.*

Mr. Adet, in his answer of the 14th of the same month, declared he was ignorant of the nature of the orders which might have been given by the government of France, to the officers of the ships of war of the republic, or what conduct it had prescribed to them to hold with regard to neutral vessels trading with their enemies.

Secret orders to capture American vessels, had probably been sent to the West Indies previous to this; as in June preceding, a valuable ship called the Mount Vernon, was captured off the

* American State Papers, vol. 2, pp. 475, 476.