Relations with France. interval of time. There have resulted from this delay serious inconveniences, which would not have existed, if these acts had been promptly and officially communicated."] From these words it may be inferred, either that the United States have been habitually negligent in transmitting to me such of their acts as concern France, or that I have neglected to perform my duty, in not presenting those acts with sufficient promptitude. In looking back on the public measures of the United States, which in any way interest France, I find but the following, viz: 1st. An act prohibiting commercial intercourse between the United States and St. Domingo. 2d. An act laying an embargo on the ships or other vessels of the United States. 3d. An act prohibiting all commercial intercourse between the United States and France. 4th. An arrangement made between the Secretary of State of the United States, and the Minister of His Britannic Majesty at Washington; and, swer to my note of the 8th instant. To the question, whether we had anything to expect in reparation for past wrongs? they reply, that their act being of reprisal, the law of reprisal must govern: in other words, that, if you confiscate French property under the law of non-intercourse, they will confiscate your property under their decree of Rambouillet. The words underscored are the verbal explanation which accompanied the letter. I set out this day for Bordeaux, (on my way to the United States,) and hope to begin my voyage from that port on the 1st October next. [Referred to in Mr. Armstrong's despatch of Sept. The Duke of Cadore to Mr. Armstrong. PARIS Sept. 7. 1810. SIR: You have done me the honor to ask of me, by your letter of the 20th August, what will be the lot of the American vessels which may arrive in France before the 1st of November? 5th. The late act of the 1st of May. Now of these, all have been presented officially; and, makHis Majesty has always wished to favor the ing a proper allowance for the remoteness of the commerce of the United States. It was not withUnited States from France, with sufficient promp-out reluctance that he used reprisal towards the titude, excepting the last, which (from causes unAmericans, while he saw that Congress had orknown to me) did not reach Paris until yesterday.dered the confiscation of all French vessels which Your Excellency can at any time ascertain the might arrive in the United States. correctness of this statement by referring to the archives of your own Department. I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN ARMSTRONG. Extract-Mr. Armstrong to Mr. Smith. PARIS, Sept. 10, 1810. Since the date of my last despatch, (by Mr. Jarvis,) nothing has occurred worth communicating, until yesterday, when I received the letter from the Duke of Cadore, of which No. 1 (enclosed) is a copy. By this it will be seen that the decree of Rambouillet is not in operation, and that American ships, entering the ports of France before the 1st of November next, will be judged under the decrees of Berlin and of Milan. It appears that Congress might have spared to His Majesty and his subjects this mortification, (ce désagrément) if, in place of that harsh and decisive measure, which left to France no choice, they had used some palliative, such as that of not receiving French vessels, or of sending them away after a delay of so many days. As soon as His Majesty was informed of this hostile act, he felt that the honor of France, involved in this point, could not be cleansed (ne pouvait être lave) but by a declaration of war, which could not take place but by tedious explanations. The Emperor contented himself with making reprisals, and, in consequence, he applied to American vessels which came to France, or to the countries occupied by the French armies, word for word, the regulations of the act of Congress. be made known to you, that he anticipates that which may re-establish harmony with the United States and that he repeals his decree of Berlin and Milan, under the conditions pointed out in my letter to you of the 5th August. No. 2 is the copy of a note written to Mr. Cham- Since the last measures, by which that hostile pagny, with a view of drawing from him some-act is repealed, His Majesty hastens to cause it to thing explicit on the point of which it treats. The first of these may appear to have been useless, after the declaration of that Minister, that American ships, which will hereafter arrive in the ports of France, shall not be subject to confiscation; but understanding from the Council of Prizes, that, until some act be taken which had the effect of recalling by name the decree of the 23d March last, they must continue to consider it both as existing and operative, and of course, binding upon them, I hastened to present the subject again, and in a form which leaves no room for misunderstanding. SEPTEMBER 12. I have the honor to enclose copies of two letters from the Duke of Cadore, one of which is an an During this interval, the American vessels which shall arrive in France will not be subjected to confiscation, because the act of Congress which had served as a motive to our reprisals, is repealed; but these vessels will be subjected to all the effects of the Berlin and Milan decrees; that is to say, they will be treated amicably, if they can be considered as Americans, and hostilely, if they have lost their national character, (s'ils se sont laissé dénationalisés) by submitting to the Orders in Council of the British Government. Relations with France. I have the honor to renew to you, sir, the assu- | 1810, which ordered reprisals, in consequence of rance of my high consideration. CHAMPAGNY, Duc de Cadore. His Exc'y Gen. ARMSTRONG, &c. No. 2. [Referred to in Mr. Armstrong's despatch of Sept. 10.] General Armstrong to the Duke of Cadore. PARIS, Sept. 7, 1810. SIR: Your Excellency will not think me importunate, if I should employ the last moments of my stay in Paris in seeking an explicit declaration on the following points: the act of Congress of the 1st March, 1809, was repealed, as soon as we were informed of the re peal of the act of non-intercourse passed against France. On your second question, I hasten to declare to you, that American vessels, loaded with merchandise, the growth of the American provinces, will be received without difficulty in the ports of France, provided they have not suffered their flag to lose its national character, by submitting to the acts of the British Council: they may, in like manner, depart from the ports of France. The Emperor has given licenses to American vessels. 1st. Has the decree of His Majesty of the 23d It is the only flag which has obtained them. In of March last, enjoining acts of reprisal against this His Majesty has intended to give a proof of the commerce of the United States, on account of the respect he loves to show to the Americans. their late law of non-intercourse, been recalled? If he is somewhat dissatisfied (peu satisfaite) that 2d. What will be the operation, on the vessels they have not as yet been able to succeed in of the United States, of His Majesty's decrees of causing their flag to be respected, at least he sees July last, forbidding the departure of neutral ships with pleasure that they are far from acknowledfrom ports of France, unless provided with im-ging the tyranical principle of English legislation. perial licenses? Are these licenses merely sub- The American vessels which may be loaded on stitutes for clearances; or do they prescribe reg-account of Frenchmen, or on account of Ameriulations to be observed by the holders of them cans, will be admitted into the ports of France. within the jurisdiction of the United States? As to the merchandise confiscated, it having been confiscated as a measure of reprisal, the principles of reprisal must be the law in that affair. Do they confine the permitted intercourse to two parts only of the said States; and do they enjoin that all shipments be made on French account exclusively? Is it His Majesty's will, that the seizures made in the ports of Spain, and other places, on the principle of reprisal, shall become a subject of present or future negotiation between the two Governments; or, are the acts already taken by His Majesty to be regarded as conclusive against remuneration? I need not suggest to your Excellency the interest that both Governments have in the answers that may be given to these questions, and how nearly connected they are with the good understanding which ought to exist between them. After the great step lately taken by His Majesty, towards an accommodation of differences, we are not at liberty to suppose that any new consideration will arise, which shall either retard or prevent the adoption of measures necessary to a full restoration of the commercial intercourse and friendly relations of the two Powers. I cannot omit expressing, on this occasion, the sense I shall carry with me of the many obligations I am personally under to your Excellency, and of the very high consideration with which I have the honor to be, your most obedient and very humble servant, I have the honor to renew to you, sir, the assurance of my high consideration. CHAMPAGNY, Duc de Cadore. His Exc'y Gen. ARMSTRONG, &c. General Armstrong to Mr. Pinkney. BORDEAUX, September 29, 1810. SIR: Your letter of the 3d instant found me at this place, and on the point of embarking for the United States. I hasten, therefore, to give to it an immediate answer. There was no error in my representation to you, nor in your representation to Lord Wellesley, of the words, or of the meaning, as I understand it, of the Duke of Cadore's note to me; nor, indeed, do either of these appear to be readily susceptible of mistake. The former, no doubt, retract, in the most positive terms, the Berlin and Milan decrees, and, of course, the principles on which these decrees were founded; and, in doing so, assuredly give us a fair claim on His Britannic Majesty for a fulfilment of the promise made by his Minister Plenipotentiary to our Government the 23d of February, 1808. It would, however appear, by Lord Wellesley's letter to you of the 31st ultimo, that the British Cabinet has given a new version to this promise of His Majesty, and that, as a preliminary to its execution, it is now had rendered necessary the British system should required, not merely that the principles which be retracted, but that the repeal of the French decrees should have actually begun to operate. SIR: I have received your letter of the 7th and the commerce of neutral nations (generally) September. That which I wrote to you the same should have been restored to the condition in day answered the first of the questions you put to which it stood previously to the promulgation of me. I will add to what I have had the honor to these decrees. It would also appear, from differwrite to you, that the decree of the 23d Marchent passages in your letter, that this deviation JOHN ARMSTRONG. His Exc'y the DUKE OF CADORE, &c. [Referred to in Mr. Armstrong's despatch of Sept. 10.] The Duke of Cadore to Mr. Armstrong. PARIS, Sept. 12, 1810. do Relations with France. Extract of a letter from Mr. Pinkney to Mr. Russell. It may not be amiss to mention that, as it will be obviously prudent, even if it be not absolutely necessary, to furnish me with all such further evidence as can conveniently be gained, confirmatory of our expectation that the French repeal of the Berlin and Milan decrees will take effect on the 1st of November, I beg you to transmit me such evidence if, and as soon as it shall be gained. It may be yet more important to send me, with as little delay as possible, after the 1st of November, the most decisive proof in your power that the repeal has taken effect, at least an official letter from you to me stating that fact. Extract-Mr. Smith, Secretary of State, to General DEPARTMENT OF STATE, from the original promise of His Majesty grew out of a supposition that the recall of the French decrees implied a contemporaneous cessation of the British Orders in Council of November, 1807, and a repeal before the 1st day of November next of all proclamation blockades of France, &c. &c. Than this construction nothing can, in my opinion, be more erroneous. Were the repeal of the French decrees dependent alone on what Great Britain may do, the supposition would have in it some color of reasonableness; but as the conditions of it present an alternative, one side of which depends, not on the will of His Britannic Majesty at all, but altogether on that of the United States. and which cannot be adopted by them until after the 1st of November next, it necessarily follows that the conditions are not precedent, as has been supposed, but subsequent, as I represent them. This reasoning will receive illustration from a plain and unsophisticated statement of the Duke of Cadore's declaration, viz: that the Berlin and Milan decrees will cease to operate after the 1st November 2, 1810. day of November next, on one of two conditions; You will herewith receive a printed copy of either that Great Britain shall revoke her Orders the proclamation, which, conformably to the act in Council, so far as they violate the maritime of Congress, has been issued by the President on rights of the United States, or that, refusing to the revocation of the Berlin and Milan decrees; the United States shall revive towards her you will, however, let the French Government certain sections of their late non-intercourse law, understand that this has been done on the ground conformably to an act of Congress of the 1st May that the repeal of these decrees does involve an last. In this we find nothing of a contempora- extinguishment of all the edicts of France acneous cessation of the French decrees and Brit- tually violating our neutral rights, and that the ish Orders in Council, nor that the blockades of reservations under the expression it being unFrance must be recalled before the 1st day of No- derstood," are not conditions precedent, affecting vember next; indeed, the very reverse is to be the operation of the repeal; and on the ground found there; for it contains an express engage-also that the United States are not pledged against ment the decrees shall cease, if the United States the blockades of Great Britain, beyond what is do a certain act, which all the world knows they stated in my letter to you of the 5th July. It is cannot do till after that day. These remarks to be remarked, moreover, that in issuing the procmay derive some additional force from the con-lamation it has been presumed that the requisitents of my letter by Mr. Masson, which will, Ition contained in that letter, on the subject of the hope, show that the concessions made by France sequestered property will have been satisfied. to the United States are at least sufficiently sub- This presumption is not only favored by the natstantial to invite from Great Britain some mea-ural connexion of the policy and justice of a resures of a character equally conciliatory, and that, versal of that sequestration with the repeal of the "earnestly desiring to see the commerce of the decrees, but is strengthened by concurrent acworld restored to that freedom which is necessary counts, through different channels, that such proto its prosperity," and no more hesitating to fol-perty as has been sequestered has been actually low the good than she has done to follow the bad example of her neighbor and rival, she will go on to declare that her Orders in Council, &c. shall cease after the 1st day of November next, on condition, either that France shall have actually withdrawn her offensive decrees on that day, or that, if she refuse to do so, the United States shall proceed to enforce against her their late non-intercourse law. In view of the subject, nothing short of this can be considered a sufficient pledge on the part of the British Government, which, unlike that of France, presents no alternative in the conditions on which her Orders in Council shall be repealed,. and which, of course, in no way makes that repeal to depend on an act which would be altogether that of the United States. I have, &c. JOHN ARMSTRONG. His Exc'y WILLIAM PINKNEY, &c. restored. The enclosed copy of my last letter to Mr. Pinkney of the 19th ultimo, will afford you a distinct view of the line of conduct presented to him. in relation to the British orders and blockades. This despatch will be delivered to you by one of the officers of the United States' frigate Essex, who will have orders to return to his ship as soon as he shall have received such despatches as you may deem it necessary to transmit to this Department. Mr. Smith to General Armstrong. Department of STATE, November 5, 1810. SIR: As the ground on which the French Government has deemed it expedient to place the Relations with France. revocation of its decrees may suggest to it the Gen. JOHN ARMSTRONG, &c. R. SMITH. Mr. Russell to the Secretary of State. ceased to operate. I know, indeed, of no better evidence than this, which the negative character of the case admits, or how the non-existence of an edict can be proved, except by the promulgation of its repeal and its subsequent non-execution. Our attention here is now turned towards England and the United States. The performance of one of the conditions on which the revocation of the decrees was predicated, and which is essential to render it permanent, is anxiously expected; and it is devoutly to be wished that England, by evincing the sincerity of her former professions, may save the United States from the necessity of resorting to the measures which exclusively depend on them. I need not suggest to you the importance of transmitting hither, as early as possible, any information of a decided character which you may possess relative to this subject, as an impatience is already betrayed here to learn that one or the other of the conditions has been performed. I am, sir, with great respect, &c. JON. RUSSELL. His Exc'y Wm. PINKNEY, Esq. Jonathan Russell, Esq., Chargé d'Affaires of the United States at Paris, to Mr. Smith. PARIS, December 11, 1810. SIR: On the evening of the 9th instant. I learned that the Essex frigate had arrived at L'Orient on the 4th, and had been put under quarPARIS, December 4, 1810. antine for five days for the want of a bill of health, SIR: This serves merely to cover a copy of my during which time the messenger is not allowed letter to Mr. Pinkney of the 1st of this month; to come on shore. At the same time that I resince that time nothing has come to my knowl-ceived this intelligence, I was also informed that edge to affect the statement which it contains. It is my duty, however, to say that I have not learned the occurrence of any case to which the Berlin and Milan decrees could be applied. I have the honor to be, &e. JON. RUSSELL. Hon. R. SMITH, Secretary of State. brig New Orleans Packet was seized at Bordeaux, under the Berlin and Milan decrees, by the director of the customs at that place. The simultaneous occurrence of these two events formed, in my opinion, a crisis which required a prompt decision of this Government. Under this impression, I immediately addressed to the Duke of Cadore the note of which the enclosed is a copy, and in which I thought it politic to remonstrate with firmness against the proceedings of the direction of the customs at Bordeaux, and to leave the GovPARIS, December 1, 1810. ernment here at liberty to disavow them. This SIR: As nothing has transpired here of suf- disavowal, however, I am persuaded, depends enficient importance to be communicated by a spe-tirely on the nature of the despatches brought by cial messenger, and as no safe private conveyance the Essex. I feel, therefore, the most lively anhas hitherto presented itself, I have delayed, till xiety to receive them. In the mean time, I give now, to acknowledge the receipt of your letters this letter a chance of reaching you by a vessel under date of the 7th and 28th of October. about leaving Bordeaux for New York. [Referred to in Mr. Russell's letter of Dec. 4, 1810.] Mr. Russell to Mr. Pinkney. No event within my knowledge has occurred, either before or since the 1st of November, to vary the construction given by us to the very positive and precise assurances of the Duke of Cadore on the 5th August, relative to the revocation of the Berlin and Milan decrees. That these decrees have not been executed for an entire month on any vessel arriving during that time in any of the ports of France, may, when connected with the terms in which their revocation was announced, fortify the presumption that they have Since my last, the Hanseatic towns have been annexed to this Empire. I have informed Mr. Pinkney of the arrival of the Essex, and suggested to him the possibility that the proclamation of the President had come out by her, in order that he might, if he thought proper, make a final attempt to obtain a repeal of the Orders in Council while it was yet in the power of the British Ministry to do it with a good grace. I have the honor to be, &c. JONA. RUSSELL. Relations with France. [Referred to in Mr. Russell's despatch of December on the part of the United States, there has been 11, 1810.] Mr. Russell to the Duke of Cadore. PARIS, December 10, 1810. SIR: I have this moment learned that the American brig, the New Orleans Packet, lately arrived at Bordeaux, has, with her cargo, the bona fide property of citizens of the United States, and laden at the port of New York, been seized by the director of the customs under the Berlin and Milan decrees. I have also been informed that this director of the customs, not satisfied with this hardy violation of the solemn assurances given by your Excellency to General Armstrong on the 5th of August last, and confirmed by your letter to him of the 7th of September, that these decrees were revoked, and would cease to operate from the 1st of November, has, without regard to the plighted faith of his Government, announced his intention of selling the provisions which constitute a part of the cargo, under the pretext that they are perishable. The clear and unequivocal manner in which the revocation of the Berlin and Milan decrees was announced by your Excellency, forbids me for a moment to sup; pose that the violent proceedings of this man will be sanctioned by His Majesty the Emperor and King, or that the least delay will be allowed in placing the property thus arrested at the free disposition of the rightful owner, whose confidence alone in the good faith with which it becomes nations to perform their engagements has brought him to the place where he is so inhospitably treated. none. No official information of the letter of your Excellency of the 5th of August left France for the United States, owing to circumstances strong to control, until the 29th of September; which it was not in the power of General Armand to this moment I have not learned that such official information has been there received. I might, indeed, have learned it, and been able now to have communicated to your Excellency the measures on which the President has decided in consequence of it, had not the frigate, the Essex, despatched by him, been put under quarantine, of health, and the messenger thereby detained on her arrival at L'Orient, for the want of a bill since the 4th of this month. I will not undertake tesy, to be exacted of a frigate of a friendly Power to decide whether a bill of health ought, in courknown to have been lately afflicted with any macoming in the winter season from a place not lignant disease; but surely the delay which this exaction occasions cannot be imputed to a want of due diligence on the part of the American Government. thoroughly convinced that the application of the It is from this view of the subject that I am Berlin or Milan decree, by the director of the will not be approved by His Majesty, but that customs at Bordeaux, to the New Orleans Packet, prompt and efficient measures will be taken to correct a procedure which, if persisted in, might produce a state of things which it is the obvious interest of both nations to avoid. I pray your Excellency to be assured of my most distinguished consideration. JON. RUSSELL. To the DUKE OF CADORE. [Referred to in Mr. Russell's letter of Dec. 11, 1810.] Christopher Meyer to Mr. Smith, Secretary of State. UNITED STATES' CONSULATE, I am persuaded that your Excellency will not, on this occasion, attempt to remind me of the conditions on which the revocation of those decrees was predicated. These conditions were in the alternative, and the performance of either is sufficient to render absolute and perpetual that revocation. It is of no importance that the British Orders in Council have not been withdrawn, if the United States, in due time, perform the Bordeaux, Dec. 6, 1810. condition which depends alone on them; and SIR: I have the honor to enclose a copy of Mr. what is this condition? Why, to execute an act Cathalan's letter to me, received this morning. of Congress against the English, which, to be concerning the recapture of the schooner Grace thus executed, requires the previous revocation Anne Greene, of New York, Daniel Greene, masof these very decrees. The letter of your Excel-ter, who brought her into the port of Marseilles, lency, of the 5th of August, appears to have been having two British officers and seven sailors on written with a full knowledge of this requisition board, and they only being six men and two of the law, and manifestly with the intention to boys. comply with it, in order that it might be compe- The brig New Orleans Packet, of New York tent for the President of the United States to ex-with a cargo of provisions and three hundred bags ercise the contingent power which had been given of cocoa on board, bound to the Mediterranean, to him. for a market, went to Gibraltar, and, after lying there some time, came to this port where she has been sequestered. It will not be pretended that the decrees have, in fact, been revoked, but that the delay of the United States in performing the condition presented to them authorizes their revival. The case of the New Orleans Packet is the first which has occurred since the 1st of November, to which the Berlin or Milan decrees could be applied; and if they be applied to this case, it will be difficult for France to show one solitary instance of their having been practically revoked; as to delay The schooner Friendship, of and from Balti- CHRISTOPHER MEYER. |