TO M. LA FOREST, Consul of France,
New York, August 30, 1790.
Sir,
I asked the favor of the Secretary of the Treasury to consider the fourth article of the consular convention, and to let me know whether he should conclude that Consuls not exercising commerce, were exempt from paying duties on things imported for their own use. I furnished him no explanation whatever, of what had passed on the subject at the time of forming the convention, because I thought it should be decided on the words of the convention, as they are offered to all the world, and that it would only be where these are equivocal, that explanations might be adduced from other circumstances. He considered the naked words of the article, and delivered to me as his opinion, that, according to these, the first paragraph, ‘The Consuls and Vice-Consuls, &c. as the natives are,’ subjected all their property, in whatever form and under whatever circumstances it existed, to the same duties and taxes to which the property of other individuals is liable, and exempts them only from taxes on their persons, as poll-taxes, head-rates for the poor, for town-charges, &c.; and that the second paragraph, ‘Those of the said Consuls, he or other merchants,’ subjected such of them as exercised commerce, even to the same personal taxes as other merchants are: that the second paragraph is an abridgment of the first, not an enlargement of it; and that the exemption of those, not merchants, which seemed implied in the words of the second paragraph, could not be admitted against the contrary meaning, directly and unequivocally expressed in the first.
Such, Sir, was his opinion, and it is exactly conformable to what the negotiators had in view in forming this article. I have turned to the papers which passed on that occasion, and I find that the first paragraph was proposed in the first project given in by myself, by which the distinction between taxes on their property and taxes on their persons, is clearly enounced, and was agreed to: but as our merchants exercising commerce in France, would have enjoyed a much greater benefit from the personal exemption, than those of France do here, M. de Reyneval, in his first counter-project, inserted the second paragraph, to which I agreed. So that the object was, in the first paragraph, to put Consuls, not being merchants, on the same footing with citizens, not being merchants; and in the second, to put Consuls, merchants, on the same footing with citzens, merchants.
This, Sir, we suppose to be the sense of the convention, which has become a part of the law of the land, and the law, you know, in this country, is not under the control of the executive, either in its meaning or course. We must reserve, therefore, for more favorable occasions, our dispositions to render the situation of the Consuls of his Majesty as easy as possible, by indulgences, depending more on us; and of proving the sentiments of esteem and attachment to yourself personally, with which I have the honor to be, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO WILLIAM SHORT.
New York, August 31,1790.
Dear Sir,
Since writing my letter of the 26th, it has been decided to commit to your care the transaction of very important money matters at Amsterdam. It is thought necessary that you should go there immediately, and remain there about three months, to possess yourself of the ground. The Secretary of the Treasury will detail to you the particulars requisite there.
With respect to our affairs at Paris, we trust, in your absence, to the friendship of the Marquis de la Fayette, for such things as are important enough to merit his attention. Two of the subjects lately given you in charge, are of this description. As to all others, do them by letter or otherwise, as you can. It will be necessary for you, doubtless, sometimes to ask the attention of the Marquis by letter; and where you think the moment requires essentially your presence, it is understood you will come to Paris express, returning again to Amsterdam as quickly as circumstances will admit. The facilities of travelling, in Europe, admit of this. Should you think it necessary, you may appoint a secretary during your absence, to remain at Paris and communicate with you, allowing him a salary of four thousand livres a year. If you think this not necessary, you of course will not make the appointment.
I am, with sincere and great esteem, Dear Sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO GOUVERNEUR MORRIS.
Philadelphia, December 17, 1790.
Since mine to you of August the 12th, yours of July the 3rd, August the 16th, and September the 18th, have come to hand. They suffice to remove all doubts which might have been entertained as to the real intentions of the British cabinet, on the several matters confided to you. The view of government in troubling you with this business, was, either to remove from between the two nations all causes of difference, by a fair and friendly adjustment, if such was the intention of the other party, or to place it beyond a doubt that such was not their intention. In result, it is clear enough that further applications would tend to delay, rather than advance our object. It is therefore the pleasure of the President, that no others be made; and that in whatever state this letter may find the business, in that state it be left. I have it in charge at the same time to assure you, that your conduct in these communications with the British ministers has met the President’s entire approbation, and to convey to you his acknowledgments for your services.
As an attendance on this business must, at times, have interfered with your private pursuits, and subjected you also to additional expenses, I have the honor to enclose you a draft on our bankers in Holland for a thousand dollars, as an indemnificatian for those sacrifices.
My letter of August the 12th desired a certain other communication to be made to the same court, if a war should have actually commenced. If the event has not already called for it, it is considered as inexpedient to be made at all.
You will, of course, have the goodness to inform us of whatever may have passed further, since the date of your last.
In conveying to you this testimony of approbation from the President of the United States, I am happy in an occasion of repeating assurances of the sentiments of perfect esteem and respect, with which I have the honor to be, Dear Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
Philadelphia, December 17, 1790.
Sir,
Though not yet informed of your receipt of my letter, covering your commission as Consul for the United States in the port of London, yet knowing that the ship has arrived by which it went, I take for granted the letter and commission have gone safe to hand, and that you have been called into the frequent exercise of your office for the relief of our seamen, upon whom such multiplied acts of violence have been committed in England, by press-gangs, pretending to take them for British subjects, not only without evidence, but against evidence. By what means may be procured for our seamen, while in British ports, that security for their persons which the laws of hospitality require, and which the British nation will surely not refuse, remains to be settled. In the mean time, there is one of these cases, wherein so wilful and so flagrant a violation has been committed by a British officer, on the person of one of our citizens, as requires that it be laid before his government, in friendly and firm reliance of satisfaction for the injury, and of assurance for the future, that the citizens of the United States, entering the ports of Great Britain, in pursuit of a lawful commerce, shall be protected by the laws of hospitality in usage among nations.
It is represented to the President of the United States, that Hugh Purdie, a native of Williamsburg in Virginia, was, in the month of July last, seized in London by a party of men, calling themselves press-officers, and pretending authority from their government so to do, notwithstanding his declarations and the evidence he offered of his being a native citizen of the United States; and that he was transferred on board the Crescent, a British ship of war, commanded by a Captain Young. Passing over the intermediate violences exercised on him, because not peculiar to his case (so many other American citizens having suffered the same), I proceed to the particular one which distinguishes the present representation. Satisfactory evidence having been produced by Mr. John Brown Cutting, a citizen of the United States, to the Lords of the Admiralty, that Hugh Purdie was a native citizen of the same States, they, in their justice, issued orders to the Lord Howe, their Admiral, for his discharge. In the mean time, the Lord Howe had sailed with the fleet of which the Crescent was.
But, on the 27th of August, he wrote to the board of admiralty, that he had received their orders for the discharge of Hugh Purdie, and had directed it accordingly. Notwithstanding these orders, the receipt of which at sea Captain Young acknowledges, notwithstanding Captain Young’s confessed knowledge that Hugh Purdie was a citizen of the United States, from whence it resulted that his being carried on board the Crescent and so long detained there had been an act of wrong, which called for expiatory conduct and attentions, rather than new injuries on his part towards the sufferer, instead of discharging him, according to the orders he had received, on his arrival in port, which was on the 14th of September, he, on the 15th, confined him in irons for several hours, then had him bound and scourged in presence of the ship’s crew, under a threat to the executioner, that if he did not do his duty well, he should take the place of the sufferer. At length he discharged him on the 17th, without the means of subsistence for a single day. To establish these facts, I enclose you copies of papers communicated to me by Mr. Cutting, who laid the case of Purdie before the board of admiralty, and who can corroborate them by his personal evidence. He can especially verify the letter of Captain Young, were it necessary to verify a paper, the original of which is under the command of his Majesty’s ministers, and this paper is so material, as to supersede of itself all other testimony, confessing the orders to discharge Purdie, that yet he had whipped him, and that it was impossible, without giving up all sense of discipline, to avoid whipping a free American citizen. We have such confidence in the justice of the British government, in their friendly regard to these States, in their respect for the honor and good understanding of the two countries, compromitted by this act of their officer, as not to doubt their due notice of him, indemnification to the sufferer, and a friendly assurance to these States that effectual measures shall be adopted in future, to protect the persons of their citizens while in British ports.
By the express command of the President of the United States, you are to lay this case, and our sense of it, before his Britannic Majesty’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, to urge it on his particular notice by all the motives which it calls up, and to communicate to me the result.
I have the honor to be, with great esteem, your most obedient, humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
Philadelphia, December 23, 1790.
Dear Sir,
The vexations of our seamen, and their sufferings under the press-gangs of England, have become so serious, as to oblige our government to take serious notice of it. The particular case has been selected where the insult to the United States has been the most barefaced, the most deliberately intentional, and the proof the most complete. The enclosed letter to you is on that subject, and has been written on the supposition that you would show the original to the Duke of Leeds, and give him a copy of it, but as of your own movement, and not as if officially instructed so to do. You will be pleased to follow up this matter as closely as decency will permit, pressing it in firm but respectful terms, on all occasions. We think it essential that Captain Young’s case may be an example to others. The enclosed, letters are important. Be so good as to have them conveyed by the surest means possible. I am, with great esteem, Dear Sir, you most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
Philadelphia, February 14,1791.
Sir, I now return you the papers you were pleased to put into my hands, when you expressed to me your dissatisfaction that our court of admiralty had taken cognizance of a complaint of some Swedish sailors against their captain for cruelty. If there was error in this proceeding, the law allows an appeal from that to the Supreme Court; but the appeal must be made in the forms of the law, which have nothing difficult in them. You were certainly free to conduct the appeal yourself, without employing an advocate, but then you must do it in the usual form. Courts of justice, all over the world, are held by the laws to proceed according to certain forms, which the good of the suitors themselves requires they should not be permitted to depart from.
I have further to observe to you, Sir, that this question lies altogether with the courts of justice; that the constitution of the United States having divided the powers of government into three branches, legislative, executive, and judiciary, and deposited each with a separate body of magistracy, forbidding either to interfere in the department of the other, the executive are not at liberty to intermeddle in the present question. It must be ultimately decided by the Supreme Court. If you think proper to carry it into that, you may be secure of the strictest justice from them. Partialities they are not at liberty to show. But for whatever may come before the executive, relative to your nation, I can assure you of every favor which may depend on their dispositions to cultivate harmony and a good understanding with it.
I have the honor to be, with great esteem, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO M. DE PINTO.
Philadelphia, February 21,1791.
Sir,
I have duly received the letter of November the 30th, which your Excellency did me the honor to write, informing me that her Most Faithful Majesty had appointed Mr. Freire her minister resident with us, and stating the difficulty of meeting us in the exchange of a chargé des affaires, the grade proposed on our part. It is foreseen that a departure from our system in this instance will materially affect our arrangements with other nations; but the President of the United States has resolved to give her Majesty this proof of his desire to concur in whatever may best tend to promote that harmony and perfect friendship, so interesting to both countries. He has, therefore, appointed Colonel Humphreys to be minister resident for the United States at the court of her Majesty. This gentleman has long been of the President’s own family, and enjoys his particular confidence. I make no doubt he will so conduct himself, as to give perfect satisfaction to her Majesty and yourself, and I therefore recommend him to your friendly attention and respect. Mr. Freire will have every title to the same from us, and will assuredly receive it. It is always with pleasure, that I repeat the homage of those sentiments of respect and esteem with which I have the honor to be your Excellency’s most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO WILLIAM SHORT.
Philadelphia, March 8,1791.
Dear Sir,
A conveyance offering by which we can send large packets, you will receive herewith the following articles.
1. The newspapers.
2. The acts of the second session of Congress.
3. A report on the fisheries of the United States. It is thought that this contains matter which may be usefully communicated. I am persuaded the better this subject is understood in France, the more they will see their interest in favoring our fisheries.
4. A letter from the President to the King, of which an open copy is enclosed for your information.
5. A letter from myself to the Count de Moustier, in answer to his to the President and myself, taking leave.
6. A letter from myself to the President of the National Assembly of France, in answer to his to Congress on the death of Dr. Franklin. Let it be understood, that Congress can only correspond through the executive, whose organ in the case of foreign nations is the Secretary of State. The President of the United States being co-ordinate with Congress, cannot personally be their scribe.
7. Some papers in a case interesting to Dr. M’Henry, of Baltimore. He at first sent them to me, with a desire to commit the subject of them wholly to you. I informed him, we could not consent that you should be used as the agent of private individuals, but that if he would provide an agent on the spot who would undertake the details of solicitation, management, correspondence, &c. I would desire you to patronize the measure so far as you should find it prudent and just. It is put on this footing, as you will see by his answer to me.
8. A correction of the report on weights and measures.
You are desired to have a medal of gold struck from the diplomatic die formerly ordered, and present it with a chain of gold to the Count de Moustier, who is notified that this will be done by you. I formerly informed you, that we proposed to vary the worth of the present, by varying the size of the Clinks of the chain, which are fixed at three hundred and sixty-five in number. Let each link, in the present instance, contain six livres worth of gold, and let it be made of plain wire, so that the value may be in the metal and not at all in the workmanship. I shall hope to receive the dies themselves, when a safe conveyance presents itself. I am, with great esteem, Dear Sir, your friend and servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF FRANCE.
Philadelphia, March 8, 1791.
Sir,
I have it in charge from the President of the United States of America, to communicate to the National Assembly of France, the peculiar sensibility of Congress to the tribute paid to the memory of Benjamin Franklin, by the enlightened and free representatives of a great nation, in their decree of the 11th of June, 1790.
That the loss of such a citizen should be lamented by us, among whom he lived, whom he so long and eminently served, and who feel their country advanced and honored by his birth, life, and labors, was to be expected. But it remained for the National Assembly of France to set the first example of the representative of one nation, doing homage, by a public act, to the private citizen of another, and by withdrawing arbitrary lines of separation, to reduce into one fraternity the good and the great, wherever they have lived or died.
That these separations may disappear between us in all times and circumstances, and that the union of sentiment which mingles our sorrows on this occasion, may continue long to cement the friendship and the interests of our two nations, is our constant prayer. With no one is it more sincere than with him, who, in being charged with the honor of conveying a public sentiment, is permitted that of expressing the homage of profound respect and veneration, with which he is, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
Philadelphia, March 12, 1791,
Sir,
I enclose you a statement of the case of Joseph St. Marie, a citizen of the United States of America, whose clerk, Mr. Swimmer, was, in the latter part of the year 1787, seized on the eastern side of the Mississippi, in latitude 34° 40’, together with his goods, of the value of nineteen hundred and eighty dollars, by a party of Spanish soldiers. They justified themselves under the order of a Mr. Valliere, their officer, who avowed authority from the Governor of New Orleans, requiring him to seize and confiscate all property found on either side of the Mississippi, below the mouth of the Ohio. The matter being then carried by St. Marie before the Governor of New Orleans, instead of correcting the injury, he avowed the act and its principle, and pretended orders from his court for this and more. We have so much confidence, however, in the moderation and friendship of the court of Madrid, that we are more ready to ascribe this outrage to officers acting at a distance, than to orders from a just sovereign. We have hitherto considered the delivery of the post of the Natches, on the part of Spain, as only awaiting the result of those arrangements which have been under amicable discussion between us; but the remaining in possession of a post which is so near our limit of thirty-one degrees, as to admit some color of doubt whether it be on our side or theirs, is one thing; while it is a very different one, to launch two hundred and fifty miles further, and seize the persons and property of our citizens; and that too, in the very moment that a friendly accommodation of all differences is under discussion. Our respect for their candor and good faith does not permit us to doubt, that proper notice will be taken of the presumption of their officer, who has thus put to hazard the peace of both nations, and we particularly expect that indemnification will be made to the individual injured. On this you are desired to insist in the most friendly terms, but with that earnestness and perseverance which the complexion of this wrong requires. The papers enclosed will explain the reasons of the delay which has intervened. It is but lately they have been put into the hands of our government.
We cannot omit this occasion of urging on the court of Madrid the necessity of hastening a final acknowledgment of our right to navigate the Mississippi; a right which has been long suspended in exercise, with extreme inconvenience on our part, merely with a desire of reconciling Spain to what it, is impossible for us to relinquish. An accident at this day, like that now complained of, would put further parley beyond our power; yet to such accidents we are every day exposed by the irregularities of their officers, and the impatience of our citizens. Should any spark kindle these dispositions of our borderers into a flame, we are involved beyond recall by the eternal principles of justice to our citizens, which we will never abandon. In such an event, Spain cannot possibly gain; and what may she not lose?
The boldness of this act of the Governor of New Orleans, and of his avowal of it, renders it essential to us to understand the court of Spain on this subject. You will therefore avail yourself of the earliest occasion of obtaining their sentiments, and of communicating them to us.
I have the honor to be, with great esteem, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO WILLIAM SHORT.
Philadelphia, March 12,1791.
Dear Sir,
The enclosed papers will explain to you a case which imminently endangers the peace of the United States with Spain. It is not indeed of recent date, but it has been recently laid before government, and is of so bold a feature, as to render dangerous to our rights a further acquiescence in their suspension. The middle ground held by France between us and Spain, both in friendship and interest, requires that we should communicate with her with the fullest confidence on this occasion. I therefore enclose you a copy of my letter to Mr. Carmichael, and of the papers it refers to, to be communicated to Monsieur de Montmorin, whose efficacious interference with the court of Madrid you are desired to ask. We rely with great confidence on his friendship, justice, and influence.
A cession of the navigation of the Mississippi, with such privileges as to make it useful, and free from future chicane, can be no longer dispensed with on our part: and perhaps while I am writing, something may have already happened to cut off this appeal to friendly accommodation. To what consequences such an event would lead, cannot be calculated. To such, very possibly, as we should lament, without being able to control. Your earnestness with Monsieur de Montmorin, and his with the court of Spain, cannot be more pressing than the present situation and temper of this country requires. The case of St. Marie happens to be the incident presenting itself in the moment, when the general question must otherwise have been brought forward.. We rely, on this occasion, on the good offices of the Marquis de la Fayette, whom you are desired to interest in it.
I am, with sincere and great esteem, Dear Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO WILLIAM SHORT.
Philadelphia, March 15, 1791.
Dear Sir,
In mine of January the 23rd, I acknowledged the receipt of your letters from No. 29 to 48 inclusive, except 31, 44, 45, 46. Since that, I have received Nos. 45 and 50, the former in three months and seven days, the latter in two months and seventeen days, by the English packet, which had an uncommonly long passage. Nos. 31, 44, 46,47, 48, 49, are still missing. They have probably come through merchant vessels and merchants, who will let them lie on their counters two or three months before they will forward them. I wrote you on the 8th and 12th instant, by a private hand, on particular subjects. I am not certain whether this will be in time to go by the same conveyance. In yours of December the 23rd, you suppose we receive regularly the journals of the National Assembly from your secretary at Paris, but we have never received any thing from him. Nothing has been addressed to him, his name being unknown to us.
It gives great satisfaction, that the Arrêt du Conseil of December, 1787, stands a chance of being saved. It is in truth the sheet-anchor of our connection with France, which will be much loosened when that is lost. This Arrêt saved, a free importation of salted meats into France, and of provisions of all kinds into her colonies, will bind our interests to that country more than to all the world besides. It has been proposed in Congress to pass a navigation act, which will deeply strike at that of Great Britain. I send you a copy of it. It is probable the same proposition will be made at the next Congress, as a first step, and for one more extensive at a later period. It is thought the first will be carried: the latter will be more doubtful. Would it not be worth while to have the bill now enclosed, translated, printed, and circulated among the members of the National Assembly? If you think so, have it done at the public expense, with any little comment you may think necessary, concealing the quarter from whence it is distributed; or take any other method you think better, to see whether that Assembly will not pass a similar act. I shall send copies of it to Mr. Carmichael, at Madrid, and to Colonel Humphreys, appointed resident at Lisbon, with a desire for them to suggest similar acts there. The measure is just, perfectly innocent as to all other nations, and will effectually defeat the navigation act of Great Britain, and reduce her power on the ocean within safer limits.
The time of the late Congress having expired on the 3rd instant, they then separated of necessity. Much important matter was necessarily laid over; this navigation act among others. The land law was put off, and nothing further done with the mint than to direct workmen to be engaged. The new Congress will meet on the 4th Monday in October. Their laws shall be sent you by the first opportunity after they shall be printed. You will receive herewith those of their second session. We know that Massachusetts has agreed to the amendments to the constitution, except (as is said) the first, second, and twelfth articles. The others, therefore, are now in force. The articles excepted, will depend on the other legislatures. The late expedition against the northern Indians having been ineffectual, more serious operations against them will be undertaken as soon as the season admits. The President is just now setting out on a tour to the southern States, from whence he will not return till June. The British packet being the quickest mode of conveyance, I shall avail myself of that, as well as of the French packet, to write to you. Are the letters which now pass through the French post-offices opened, as they were under the former government? This is important for me to know.
I am, with great and sincere esteem, Dear Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
P. S. 1 omitted to draw your attention to an additional duty of one cent per gallon on rum, by name. This was intended as some discrimination between England and France. It would have been higher, but for the fear of affecting the revenues in a contrary direction. T.J.
Philadelphia, March 17,1791.
Sir,
The term of the first Congress having expired on the 3rd instant, they separated on that day, much important business being necessarily postponed. New elections have taken place for the most part, and very few changes made. This is one of many proofs, that the proceedings of the new government have given general satisfaction. Some acts, indeed, have produced local discontents; but these can never be avoided. The new Congress will meet on the 4th Monday of October. Enclosed is the copy of an act reported by a committee to the late Congress, who, not having time to go through the subject, referred it to me, to be examined and reported to the next Congress. This measure, therefore, will be proposed to them as a first and immediate step, and perhaps something further at a more distant day. I have sent copies of this act to Mr. Short and Colonel Humphreys, and I enclose this to you, that you may communicate it to the court of Madrid, as a measure in contemplation with us. How far such an one may be politic to be adopted by Spain, France, and Portugal, is for them to consider. The measure is perfectly innocent as to all nations except those, or rather that, which has a navigation act; and to that it retorts only its own principles. Being founded in universal reciprocity, it is impossible it should excite a single complaint. Its consequences on that nation are such as they cannot avoid; for either they must repeal their navigation act, in order to be let in to a share of foreign carriage, or the shipping they now employ in foreign carriage will be out of employ, and this act frustrated, on which their naval power is built. Consequently, that power will be reduced within safer limits, and the freedom of the ocean be better secured to all the world. The more extensive the adoption of this measure is, the more irresistible will be its effect. We would not wish to be declared the exciters of such a concert of measures, but we have thought it expedient to suggest informally to the courts of France, Spain, and Portugal, the measure we propose to take, and to leave with them to decide, on the motives of their own interest, how far it may be expedient for them to adopt a similar measure. Their concurrence will more completely insure the object of our act, and therefore I leave it to yourself to insinuate it with all the discretion and effect you can.
Your letter of May the 6th, 1789, is still the last we have received, and that is now near two years old. A letter from Colonel Humphreys, written within twenty-four hours after his arrival at Madrid, reached us within two months and ten days after its date. A full explanation of the causes of this suspension of all information from you, is expected in answer to my letter of August the 6th. It will be waited for yet a reasonable time, and in the mean while, a final opinion suspended. By the first vessel to Cadiz, the laws and gazettes shall be forwarded.
I have the honor to be, with great esteem, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO WILLIAM SHORT.
Philadelphia, March 19, 1791.
Dear Sir,
Your letter of November the 6th, No. 46, by Mr. Osmont came to hand yesterday, and I have just time before the departure of Mr. Terrasson, the bearer of my letter of the 15th instant, and despatches accompanying it, to acknowledge the receipt, and inform you that it has been laid before the President. On consideration of the circumstances stated in the second page of your letter, he is of opinion, that it is expedient to press at this moment a settlement of our difference with Spain. You are therefore desired, instead of confining your application for the interference of the court of France to the simple case of St. Marie, mentioned in my letter of the 12th, to ask it on the broad bottom of general necessity, that our right of navigating the Mississippi be at length ceded by the court of Madrid, and be ceded in such form, as to render the exercise of it efficacious and free from chicane. This cannot be without an entrepôt in some convenient port of the river, where the river and sea craft may meet and exchange loads, without any control from the laws of the Spanish government. This subject was so fully developed to you in my letter of August the 10th, 1790, that I shall at present only refer to that. We wish you to communicate this matter fully to the Marquis de la Fayette, to ask his influence and assistance, assuring him that a settlement of this matter is become indispensable to us; any further delay exposing our peace, both at home and abroad, to accidents, the results of which are incalculable and must no longer be hazarded. His friendly interposition on this occasion, as well as that of his nation, will be most sensibly felt by us. To his discretion, therefore, and yours, we confide this matter, trusting that you will so conduct it as to obtain our right in an efficacious form, and at the same time, to preserve to us the friendship of France and Spain, the latter of which we value much, and the former infinitely.
Mr. Carmichael is instructed to press this matter at Madrid; yet if the Marquis and yourself think it could be better effected at Paris, with the Count de Nunez, it is left to you to endeavor to draw it there. Indeed, we believe it would be more likely to be settled there than at Madrid or here. Observe always, that to accept the navigation of the river without an entrepot would be perfectly useless, and that an entrepot, if trammeled, would be a certain instrument for bringing on war instead of preventing it.
I am, with great esteem, Dear Sir, your most obedient humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
TO MR. OTTO.
Philadelphia, March 29, 1791.
Sir,
The note of December the 13th, which you did me the honor to address to me, on the acts of Congress of the 20th of July, 1789, and 1790, fixing the tonnage payable by foreign vessels arriving from a foreign port, without excepting those of France, has been submitted to the government of the United States. They consider the conduct of his Most Christian Majesty, in making this the subject of fair discussion and explanation, as a new proof of his justice and friendship, and they have entered on the consideration with all the respect due to whatever comes from his Majesty or his ministers, and with all the dispositions to find grounds for an union of opinion, which a sincere attachment to your nation and a desire to meet their wishes on every occasion, could inspire. But the fifth article of the treaty of amity and commerce is not seen here exactly in the point of view, in which your note places it.
The third and fourth articles subject the vessels of each nation to pay in the ports of the other, only such duties as are paid by the most favored nation; and give them reciprocally, all the privileges and exemptions in navigation and commerce, which are given by either to the most favored nations. Had the contracting parties stopped here, they would have been free to raise or lower their tonnage, as they should find it expedient; only taking care to keep the other on the footing of the most favored nation.
The question then is, whether the fifth article, cited in the note, is any thing more than an application of the principle comprised in the third and fourth, to a particular object: or whether it is an additional stipulation of something not so comprised.
I. That it is merely an application of a principle comprised in the preceding articles, is declared by the express words of the article, to wit, dans l’exemption ci-dessus est nommément compris, &c: ‘In the above exemption is particularly comprised the imposition of one hundred sols per ton, established in France on foreign vessels.’ Here then is at once an express declaration, that the exemption from the duty of one hundred sols is comprised in the third and fourth articles; that is to say, it was one of the exemptions enjoyed by the most favored nations, and, as such, extended to us by those articles. If the exemption spoken of in this first member of the fifth article was comprised in the third and fourth articles, as is expressly declared, then the reservation by France out of that exemption, (which makes the second member of the same article) was also comprised: that is to say, if the whole was comprised, the part was comprised. And if this reservation of France in the second member, was comprised in the third and fourth articles, then the counter reservation by the United States (which constitutes the third and the last member of the same article) was also comprised. Because it is but a corresponding portion of a similar whole, on our part, which had been comprised by the same terms with theirs.
In short, the whole article relates to a particular duty of one hundred sols, laid by some antecedent law of France on the vessels of foreign nations, relinquished as to the most favored, and consequently as to us. It is not a new and additional stipulation then, but a declared application of the stipulations comprised in the preceding articles to a particular case, by way of greater caution.
The doctrine laid down generally in the third and fourth articles, and exemplified specially in the fifth, amounts to this. ‘The vessels of the most favored nation, coming from foreign ports, are exempted from the duty of one hundred sols: therefore, you are exempted from it by the third and fourth articles. The vessels of the most favored nations, coming coastwise, pay that duty: therefore, you are to pay it by the third and fourth articles. We shall not think it unfriendly in you, to lay a like duty on coasters, because it will be no more than we have done ourselves. You are free also to lay that or any other duty on vessels coming from foreign ports, provided they apply to all other nations, even the most favored. We are free to do the same, under the same restriction. Our exempting you from a duty which the most favored nations do not pay, does not exempt you from one which they do pay.’
In this view, it is evident, that the fifth article neither enlarges nor abridges the stipulations of the third and fourth. The effect of the treaty would have been precisely the same, had it been omitted altogether; consequently, it may be truly said that the reservation by the United States, in this article, is completely useless. And it may be added with equal truth, that the equivalent reservation by France is completely useless, as well as her previous abandonment of the same duty: and in short, the whole article. Each party then remains free to raise or lower its tonnage, provided the change operates on all nations, even the most favored.
Without undertaking to affirm, we may obviously conjecture, that this article has been inserted on the part of the United States, from an over caution to guard, nommément, by name, against a particular aggrievance, which they thought could never be too well secured against: and that has happened, which generally happens; doubts have been produced by the too great number of words used to prevent doubt.
II. The court of France, however, understands this article as intended to introduce something to which the preceding articles had not reached, and not merely as an application of them to a particular case. Their opinion seems to be founded on the general rule in the construction of instruments, to leave no words merely useless, for which any rational meaning can be found. They say, that the reservation by the United States of a right to lay a duty equivalent to that of the one hundred sols, reserved by France, would have been completely useless, if they were left free by the preceding articles, to lay a tonnage to any extent whatever; consequently, that the reservation of a part proves a relinquishment of the residue.
If some meaning, and such a one, is to be given to the last member of the article, some meaning, and a similar one, must be given to the corresponding member. If the reservation by the United States of a right to lay an equivalent duty, implies a relinquishment of their right to lay any other, the reservation by France of a right to continue the specified duty, to which it is an equivalent, must imply a relinquishment of the right on her part, to lay or continue any other. Equivalent reservations by both, must imply equivalent restrictions on both. The exact reciprocity stipulated in the preceding articles, and which pervades every part of the treaty, ensures a counter right to each party for every right ceded to the other.
Let it be further considered, that the duty called tonnage, in the United States, is in lieu of the duties for anchorage, for the support of buoys, beacons, and light-houses, to guide the mariner into harbor and along the coast, which are provided and supported at the expense of the United States, and for fees to measurers, weighers, guagers, &c, who are paid by the United States; for which articles, among many others (light excepted), duties are paid by us in the ports of France, under their specific names. That government has hitherto thought these duties consistent with the treaty; and consequently, the same duties under a general instead of specific names, with us, must be equally consistent with it: it is not the name, but the thing, which is essential. If we have renounced the right to lay any port duties, they must be understood to have equally renounced that of either laying new or continuing the old. If we ought to refund the port duties received from their vessels since the date of the act of Congress, they should refund the port duties they have received from our vessels since the date of the treaty, for nothing short of this is the reciprocity of the treaty.
If this construction be adopted, then each party has for ever renounced the right of laying any duties on the vessels of the other coming from any foreign port, or more than one hundred sols on those coming coastwise. Could this relinquishment be confined to the two contracting parties alone, its effect would be calculable. But the exemption once conceded by the one nation to the other, becomes immediately the property of all others who are on the footing of the most favored nations. It is true, that those others would be obliged to yield the same compensation, that is to say, to receive our vessels duty free. Whether France and the United States would gain or lose in the exchange of the measure with them, is not easy to say.
Another consequence of this construction will be, that the vessels of the most favored nations, paying no duties, will be on a better footing than those of natives, which pay a moderate duty: consequently, either the duty on these also must be given up, or they will be supplanted by foreign vessels in our own ports.
The resource, then, of duty on vessels, for the purposes either of revenue or regulation, will be for ever lost to both. It is hardly conceivable that either party, looking forward to all these consequences, would see their interest in them. So that on the whole, Sir, we consider the fifth article of the treaty merely as an illustration of the third and fourth articles, by an application of the principles comprised in them to the case stated in that, and that a contrary construction would exceedingly embarrass and injure both the contracting parties. We feel every disposition on our part to make considerable sacrifices, where they would result to the sole benefit of your nation: but where they would excite from other nations corresponding claims, it becomes necessary to proceed with caution. You probably know, Sir, that the general subject of navigation was before our legislature at their last session, and was postponed merely for the want of time to go through it, before the period arrived to which the constitution had limited their existence. It will be resumed at the meeting of the new legislature, and from a knowledge of the sincere attachment of my countrymen to the prosperity of your nation, and to the increase of our intercourse with it, I may safely say for the new legislature, that the encouragement of that intercourse, for the advantage of both parties, will be considered as among the most interesting branches of the general subject submitted to them. From a perfect conviction of the coincidence of our interests, nobody wishes more sincerely to cultivate the habit of mutual good offices and favors, than he who has the honor to be, with sentiments of the greatest respect and esteem, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.