mission or letters of marque for arming any ship or ships to act as privateers against the said United States, or against the said citizens, people or inhabitants of the said United States, or against the property of any of the inhabitants of any of them, from any prince or state with which the United States shall be at war.

"Nor shall any citizen, subject, or inhabitant of the said United States apply for, or take any commission or letters of marque for arming any ships to act as privateers against the subjects of his Catholic Majesty, or the property of any of them, from any prince or state with which the said King shall be at war. And if any person of either nation shall take such commissions or letters of marque, he shall be punished as a pirate."

When diplomatic relations between Spain and the United States, which had been suspended in 1808, were renewed in 1815, the Spanish minister addressed a note to the Secretary of State containing proposals as the basis of negotiation for the settlement of the various differences in dispute between the two countries.

American State

423. British State

The Chevalier de Onis mentions as one of the points on which an understanding was urgent, "That the President will be pleased to give the necessary orders to the collectors of customs not to admit into the ports Papers, vol. iv, p. of the United States vessels under the insurrectionary flag of Cartha- Papers. vol. iii, p. gena, of the Mexican Congress of Buenos Ayres, or of the other places 109. which have revolted against the authority of the King, my master, nor those coming from them, that they should not permit them to land, or to sell in this country the shameful proceeds of their piracy or atrocities, and much less to equip themselves in these ports, as they do, for the purpose of going to sea to destroy and to plunder the vessels which they may meet with under the Spanish flag. This tolerance, subversive of the most solemn stipulations in the treaties between Spain and the United States, and diametrically opposed to the general principles of public security and good faith, and to the laws of nations, produces the most melancholy effects on the interest and the prosperity of the subjects of his Catholic Majesty. Certain it is that neither Carthagena nor any other place in the Spanish dominions in this hemisphere, which has revolted, can be in communication with any power friendly to Spain, since neither on its part, nor on that of any other government, has their independence been acknowledged; and it is, consequently, an offense against the dignity of the Spanish monarchy, and against the sovereignty of the King, my master, to admit vessels from such places, manned and commanded by insurgents, and armed in the dominions of this confederation, particularly as they are all pirates who do not respect any flag, are justly considered the disgrace of the seas, and are execrated by all nations." (The Chevalier de Onis to the Secretary of State, December 30, 1815.)

Mr. Monroe replied, "With regard to your third demand, the exclusion

426. British State

of the flag of the revolting provinces, I have to observe that, in conse- American State quence of the unsettled state of many countries, and repeated changes Papers, vol. iv. P. of the ruling authority in each, there being at the same time several Papers, vol. iii, p. competitors, and each party bearing his appropriate flag, the President 119. thought it proper, some time past, to give orders to the collectors not to make the flag of any vessel a criterion or condition of its admission into the ports of the United States." And he added: "What will be the final result of the civil war which prevails between Spain and the Spanish provinces in America is beyond the reach of human foresight. It has already existed many years, and with various success, sometimes one party prevailing and then the other. In some of the provinces the success of the revolutionists appears to have given to their cause more stability than in others. All that your government had a right to claim of the United States was that they should not interfere in the contest, or promote, by any active service, the success of the revolution, admitting that they continued to overlook the injuries received from Spain, and remained at peace. This right was common to the colonists. With equal justice might they claim that we would not interfere to their disadvantage; that our ports should remain open to both parties, as they were before the commencement of the struggle; that our laws regulating commerce with foreign nations should not be changed to their injury. On these principles the United States have acted." (Mr. Monroe to the Chevalier de Onis, January 19, 1816.)

American State

On the 10th of June, 1816, Mr. Monroe forwarded to the Chevalier de Onis a copy of a report from Mr. Dick, attorney of the United States for Papers, vol. iv, p. the district of Louisiana, dated March 1, 1816, denying the chevalier's 431. allegations of the open enlistment of men and equipment of expeditions to serve against Spain. "A regard to truth makes it necessary to say that what is alleged respecting the arming and fitting out of vessels within the waters of Louisiana, to be employed in the service of the revolutionary governments against the subjects or property of the King of Spain, is unfounded. At no period since the commencement of the struggle between the Spanish colonies and the mother country have vessels, to be employed in the service, of the colonies, been permitted to fit out and arm or to augment their force at New Orleans or elsewhere within the State of Louisiana.

"On the contrary, it is notorious that at no one point of duty have the civil and mili

tary authorities of the United States directed more strenuously, or it is believed, more successfully, their attention than to the discovering and suppression of all attempts to violate the laws in these respects. Attempts to violate them by fitting out and arming and by augmenting the force of vessels have no doubt been frequent, but certainly in no instance successful, except where conducted under circumstances of concealment that eluded discovery and almost suspicion, or where carried on at some remote point of the coast beyond the reach of detection or discovery. In every instance where it was known that these illegal acts were attempting, or where it was afterwards discovered that they had been committed, the persons engaged, as far as they were known, have been prosecuted, while the vessels fitted out, or attempted to be fitted out, have been seized and libeled under the act of the 5th of June, 1794; and when captures have been made by vessels thus fitted out and armed, or in which their force was augmented or increased within our waters, where the property taken was brought within our jurisdiction, or even found upon the high seas by our cruisers and brought in, it has been restored to the original Spanish owners, and, in some instances, damages awarded against the captors."

Mr. Dick appended a list, showing that during the year 1815 seven persons had been prosecuted and six vessels libeled under the act of 1796, (of which three were condemned,) and prizes restored to the Spanish claimants in nine cases.

365.

It does not appear, however, that the measures adopted by the officers of the United States government, referred to by Mr. Dick, were efficacious in preventing violations of British State the foreign enlistment act to the satisfaction of the Spanish minister, Papers, vol. v, p. for on the 2d of January, 1817, he addressed a further representation to the Secretary of State: "The mischiefs resulting from the toleration of the armament of privateers in the ports of this Union, and of bringing into them, with impunity, the plunder made by these privateers on the Spanish trade, for the purpose of distributing it amongst those merchants who have no scruple in engaging in these piracies, have arisen to such a height that I should be wanting in my duty if I omitted to call your attention again to this very important subject. It is notorious, that although the speculative system of fitting out privateers, and putting them under a foreign flag, one disavowed by all nations, for the purpose of destroying the Spanish commerce, has been more or less pursued in all the ports of the Union, it is more especially in those of New Orleans and Baltimore, where the greatest violations of the respect due to a friendly nation, and, if I may say so, of that due to themselves, have been committed; whole squadrons of pirates having been sent out from thence, in violation of the solemn treaty existing between the two nations, and bringing back to them the fruits of their piracies, without being yet checked in these courses, either by the reclamations I have made, those of his Majesty's consuls, or the decisive and judicious orders issued by the President for that purpose." M. de Onis complains in this note of the proceedings of several privateers at Baltimore, New York, Norfolk, and New Orleans.

368-379.

No answer seems to have been returned to M. de Onis's note.

British State In January, February, and March, M. de Onis sent in 12 other notes Papers, vol. v, PP. in the same strain, and on the 28th of March the acting Secretary of State informed him that inquiry would be made and "adequate redress and punishment enforced, should it appear that the laws have been infringed by any of the acts complained of."

State Papers, vol. v, pp. 380-397. sels as well as

Ibid., p. 398.

Ibid., pp.398-415.

American State

199.

Five more notes from M. de Onis followed, principally complaining of the captures effected by the Independencia del Sud and Altravida, (see case of Santissima Trinidad,) and the asylum afforded to those vesto the Congress, Mongore, and other privateers in American ports.

On the 22d of April the acting Secretary of State inquired whether M. de Onis had power to conclude a treaty, as, if not, it was "deemed improper to entertain discussions of the kind invited by" his late notes. M. de Onis continued his representations in eight more notes, in one of which, addressed to Mr. J. Q. Adams, dated the 2d of November, 1817, he says: 'It is very disagreeable to me to have to repeat to you, sir, what Papers, vol. iv, P. unfortunately I have been several times under the necessity of submitting to the President through the medium of your predecessors; namely, that the act of Congress of the 3d of March, 1817, has in nowise lessened the abuses by which the laws are evaded, and render entirely illusory the laudable purposes for which they were enacted. From the greater part of the ports of these States there frequently sail a considerable number of vessels, with the premeditated intention of attacking the Spanish commerce, which carry their armament concealed in the hold. It rarely happens that they can be arrested, inasmuch as the collectors of customs say that they have not at their disposition the naval force necessary to effect it; on the other hand, armed vessels, under the flag of the insurgents, enter into the ports of the Union, and not only supply themselves with all necessaries, but also considerably increase the means they already have of destroying the trade of Spain, as has recently been the case at New York, whereby the (so-called) privateers of his Majesty's revolted provinces, which are in reality nothing more than pirates, manned by the scum of all coun

Papers, vol. vi, p. 225.

tries, enjoy greater privileges than the vessels of independent powers." In May, 1818, M. de Onis, referring to a French expedition prepared at Philadelphia under General Lallemand, and which was supposed to be intended to operate against Mexico, stated to Mr. Adams, "I would have considered myself dis- British State pensed from the necessity of again pressing this subject on your attention if it had appeared possible for me to restrain these armaments by the employment of judicial means; but unfortunately the act of Congress of the 20th of April last, for preserving neutrality with foreign nations, and others already in force, although highly judicious, are easily eluded; and although these practices are public and notorious throughout the whole Union, his Majesty's consuls advise me that through a deficiency of evidence they cannot be restrained by a regular application of the law." (The Chevalier de Onis to Mr. Adams, May 7, 1818.)

On the 9th of June, 1818, M. de Onis represented that there were then at Baltimore four privateers-the Independencia del Sud, the Mongore, the Republicano, and the Alerta, three of which were notoriously fitted out there, and the fourth was a schooner captured from Spanish owners. All these vessels were commanded by Americans, and manned, with scarcely an exception, by American crews; that, however clear the facts might be to everybody, it was in vain to seek evidence to prove them, "as a great portion of the commercial people pers, vol. vi, p. 226. of Baltimore being interested in the cases which produce my present

British State Pa

reclamations, no one is willing to come forward and offer testimony against what is termed the general interest."

M. de Onis continued his complaints during the summer of 1818, and called attention particularly to the purchase and equipment of two privateers at New York. Mr. Adams at length replied as follows:

Ibid., vol. vi, p. 262.

"I have received your letters of the 27th ultimo and 5th instant, with their respective inclosures, all of which have been laid before the President. With regard to the two vessels alleged to have been equipped at New York for the purpose of cruising under the flag of Buenos Ayres against Spanish subjects, the result of the examination which has taken place before a judge of the Supreme Court of the United States has doubtless convinced you that no prosecution commenced by the government of the United States against the persons charged with a violation of their laws and their neutrality could have been necessary or useful to you, no transgression of the law having been proved against them.

*

*

"I am further instructed by the President to assure you of the satisfaction with which he has seen, in the last paragraph of your letter, your expectation of being speedily enabled to make proposals containing the bases of a treaty which may adjust, to mutual satisfaction, all the existing differences between our two nations, and his, earnest hope that this expectation, in the fulfillment of which this government have confided, and adopted measures corresponding with it, may be realized at an early day."

M. de Onis to Mr.

Adams, October 24,

1818.

State Papers, vol. v, p. 265. Ibid., pp. 267-277.

Negotiations were shortly afterwards set on foot for the conclusion of a treaty between the two countries, for the settlement of the differences which had so long existed between them, and among the proposals put forward by the Spanish government were a mutual renunciation of "all claims for damages or injuries which they themselves, or their respective subjects or citizens, may have suffered," and the adoption of such laws or measures as might be required "to remedy and cut up by the roots the abuses which, contrary to the law of nations, and contrary to what is expressly stipulated in the treaty of 1795, above cited, daily occur in some ports of this Union, in consequence of the vague and arbitrary interpretation which it seems the measures. until now adopted are susceptible of, and by which means the law is eluded." (Mr. Adams to the Chevalier de Onis, October 24, 1818.)

British State Pa.

The United States government assented to the mutual renunciation of claims, but refused the other proposal, as they considered there was pers, vol. vi, p. 281no occasion for any new laws or declarations. "Of the many com

plaints which you have addressed to this government in relation to alleged transactions in our ports, the deficiency has been, not in the meaning or interpretation of the treaty, but in the proof of the facts which you have stated, or which have been reported to you, to bring the cases of complaint within the scope of the stipulations of the treaty." (Mr. Adams to M. de Onis, October 31, 1818.)

To this the Spanish minister rejoined:

British State Pa

pers, vol. vi, p. 285.

"Whatever may be the forecast, wisdom, and justice conspicuous in the laws of the United States, it is universally notorious that a system of pillage and aggression has been organized in several ports of the Union against the vessels and property of the Spanish nation; and it is equally so, that all the legal suits hitherto instituted by his Catholic Majesty's consuls in the courts of their respective districts, for its prevention, or the recovery of the property when brought into this country, have been, and still are, completely unavailing. The artifices and evasions

by means of which the letter of the law has on these occasions been constantly eluded are sufficiently known, and even the combination of interests in persons who are well known, among whom are some holding public offices. With a view to afford you and the President more complete demonstration of the abuses, aggressions, and piracies alluded to, I inclose you correct lists, extracted from authentic documents deposited in the archives of this legation, exhibiting the number of privateers or pirates fitted out in the United States against Spain, and of the prizes brought by them into the Union, as well as of those sent to other ports, together with the result of the claims made by the Spanish consuls in the courts of this country. Among them you will find the case of two armed ships, the Horatio and Curiazo, built at New York, and detained by his Majesty's consul there on the ground of their having on board 30 pieces of cannon concealed, with their carriages, and a crew of 160 men. On which occasion it was pretended that it could not be proved that these guns were not an article of commerce, and they finally put to sea without them, the extraordinary number of officers and crew passing for passengers. The number of privateers or pirates fitted out or protected in the ports of this republic, as well as of the Spanish prizes made by them, far exceeds that contained in the within lists; but I only lay before your government those of which I have certain and satisfactory proofs. The right of Spain to an adequate indemnity for all the spoliations committed by these privateers or pirates on the Crown and subjects of his Catholic Majesty, is undeniable; but I now submit it to your government, only to point out the extreme necessity of putting an end to these continued acts of hostility and depredation, and of cutting short these enormous and flagrant abuses and evils, by the adoption of such effectual precautions and remedies as will put it out of the power of cupidity or ingenuity to defeat or elude them. In vain should we endeavor amicably to settle and accommodate all existing differences, and thus establish peace and good understanding between the two nations, if the practice of these abuses and the course of these hostilities and piracies on the commerce and navigation of Spain should, as heretofore, continue uninterrupted in the United States." (The Chevalier de Onis to Mr. Adams, November 16, 1818.)

State Papers, vol. vi, p. 291.

The Secretary of State, in reply, expressed the readiness of his government to continue the negotiations, provided the Spanish minister would consent to waive a certain portion of his proposition, (relating to the transactions in Florida and the western boundary,) but added, that if he did not feel at liberty to proceed with the negotiations on those terms, he (Mr. Adams) was ready to exchange with him the ratifications of the convention of 1802. (Mr. Adams to M. de Onis, November 30, 1818.)

On the 22d of February, 1819, a treaty of amity, settlement, and limits was concluded at Washington between the United States of America and his Catholic Majesty, and the following is a statement of the claims which each party consented to renounce:

ARTICLE IX. "The two high contracting parties, animated with the State Papers, vol most earnest desire of conciliation, and with the object of putting an viii, p. 530. end to all the differences which have existed between them, and of confirming the good understanding which they wish to be forever maintained between them reciprocally, renounce all claim for damages or injuries which they themselves, as with as their respective citizens and subjects, may have suffered until the time of signing this treaty.

"The renunciation of the United States will extend

"1. To all the injuries mentioned in the convention of 11th August, 1802.

"2. To all claims on account of prizes made by French privateers and condemned by French consuls within the territory and jurisdiction of Spain.

"3. To all claims and indemnities on account of the suspension of the right of deposit at New Orleans in 1802.

"4. To all claims of citizens of the United States upon the Spanish government, statements of which, soliciting the interposition of the government of the United States, have been presented to the Department of State, or to the minister of the United States in Spain, since the date of the convention of 1802, and until the signature of this treaty.

"The renunciation of his Catholic Majesty extends

"1. To all the injuries mentioned in the convention of 11th August, 1802.

"2. To the sums which his Catholic Majesty advanced for the return of Captain Pike from the Provincias Internas.

"3. To all injuries caused by the expedition of Miranda, which was fitted out and equipped at New York.

"To all claims of Spanish subjects upon the government of the United States arising from unlawful seizures at sea or within the ports and territorial jurisdiction of the United States. "Finally, to all the claims of subjects of his Catholic Majesty upon the government of the United States, in which the interposition of his Catholic Majesty has been solicited before the date of this treaty, and since the date of the convention of 1802, or which may have been made to the department of foreign affairs of his Majesty or to his minister in the United States.

"And the high contracting parties respectively renounce all claim to indemnities for any of the recent events or transactions of their respective commanders and officers in the Floridas.

"The United States will cause satisfaction to be made for the injuries, if any, which by process of law shall be established to have been suffered by the Spanish officers and individual Spanish inhabitants by the late operations of the American army in Florida."

This treaty concludes the published correspondence respecting the Spanish claims. The correspondence between Portugal and the United States will be found in a convenient shape for reference in the appendix to the "Alabama" papers, republished by Messrs. Longmans, Green & Co., in 1867.

It was laid before Congress on the 4th of February, 1852, together Executive Docwith the correspondence relating to the claims of United States citizens uments, House of Representatives, in Portugal arising out of the case of the General Armstrong. No. 53, 32d ConSee also British State Papers, vol. 222. The following is the succinct gress, 1st session. account of this correspondence, given in Lord Russell's note to Mr. Adams of the 30th of August, 1865, (Parliamentary paper, North America, No. 1, 1866, p. 26.)

"The correspondence to which I refer began in December, 1816, and closed with a letter of the Portuguese minister in November, 1850. It cannot be pretended that the reclamations of a friendly power extending over 34 years did not receive the gravest attention of the American government.

"In his first letter, the Portuguese envoy at Washington complains that Mr. Taylor, of Baltimore, an American citizen, had directed Captain Fish, of the Romp, an American ship, to cruise as a privateer under the insurgent colors of Buenos Ayres against the subjects of Portugal.

"He adds, "The 18th of last month (November) the frigate Clifton, Captain Davis, armed with 32 guns of various calibers, and a crew of 200 men, sailed from Baltimore for Buenos Ayres. This ship anchored below that port, where it has remained for about a fortnight or more waiting for the American ship Independence of the South, armed with 16 guns, and for the ships Romp, Tachahoe, Montezuma, and Spanker, and two others newly constructed, which were fitting with great activity and which had not yet got names. All were to sail together, to cruise in the eastern and western seas of South America, under the insurgent colors of Buenos Ayres. No doubt can be entertained of their instructions being the same as those of Captain Fish, and that they will act hostilely against Portuguese ships.'

"The Portuguese envoy, Joseph Correa de Serra, prays for an amendment of the law of the United States with a view to render it more efficient in such cases. A law having been passed by Congress for this purpose, the Portuguese envoy, in May, 1817, requests that the President will desire the United States officers on the outposts to use greater vigilance.

"In March, 1818, he complains that three Portuguese ships have been captured 'by privateers fitted in the United States, manned by American crews, and commanded by American captains, though under insurgent colors.'

"In October of the same year the Portuguese envoy complains that a Portuguese prize is fitting in the Patuxent, to cruise against Portuguese commerce.

"In November of the same year the Portuguese minister states to Mr. Adams that, obliged by his duty to inquire into the nature of the armed ships that had of late insulted the flag of his sovereign and committed incalculable depredations on the property of his subjects, he had found, to his sorrow, multiplied proofs that many of them were owned by citizens of the United States, and had been fitted in the ports of the Union. He goes on to complain of the difficulties in the way of prosecution, but compliments the President on his 'honorable earnestness.'

"In December of the same year the Portuguese minister complains of the armed vessel Irresistible, which had been committing 'depredations and unwarrantable outrages on the coast of Brazil.' He says, it is proved by depositions that John Daniels, the commander of the ship, is an American, and all the crew are Americans. He prays that, if the ship should come into an American port, means may be taken to bring the said captain and crew within reach of the laws made to punish such scandalous proceedings.

"In March, 1819, M. Correa de Serra states, as minister of his sovereign, that Artigas, whose flag is frequently waving in the port of Baltimore, and which is carried by Portuguese prizes in the ports of the Union, has been expelled far from the countries which could afford him the power of navigating, and has not a foot length of sea-shore in South America where he can show himself. He prays that the Artigan flag may be declared illegal.

"In November, 1819, after expressing his gratitude for the proceedings of the Executive, the same minister complains that the evil is rather increasing. He is in possession of a list of fifty Portuguese ships, almost all richly laden, some of them East Indiamen, which had been captured during a period of profound peace. One city alone.