United States, of this decree, as follows: "It was intended to be little short of a declaration of war." "The government here was determined to fleece Barlow's letter. you to a sufficient degree, to bring you to your feeling in the only nerve in which your sensibility lay, which was your pecuniary interest." But what was probably merely a matter of opinion with Barlow, became a certainty when the consul-general of the United States complained of the condemnation of two American vessels on the ground that they had no roles d equipage. To this complaint, Merlin, the French minister of justice, who was also a speculator in privateers, replied: "Let your government return to a sense of what is due to itself and its true friends, become just and grateful, and let it break the incomprehensible treaty which it has concluded with our most implacable enemies, and then the French republic will cease to take advantage of this treaty, which favors England at its expense, and no appeals will then, I can assure you, be made to any tribunal against injustice."

Merlin's statement.

But the most outrageous attack made by the French government upon American commerce was not mentioned Decree of 1798. by the envoys in their letter to Talleyrand, since it was not passed until after the letter was written. In utter disregard, not only of the treaties between the United States and France, but the principles of international law, this decree (Jan. 18, 1798) forbade any vessel,

which at any part of her voyage, had touched at an English port, or of any of her colonies, to enter a French port, and declared that any vessel which had on board merchandise which was the produce of England or her colonies, no matter who was the owner of it, was liable to confiscation.

From the point of view of an American of the present day, who looks upon his country

Talleyrand's

United States.

as the most powerful in the world, the opinion of the interpretation here given of the conduct of France may seem difficult to believe. But in considering the matter two things must be constantly borne in mind. The first is that the United States had but just entered the great family of nations and were by no means regarded as a first-class power. Talleyrand, who was a refugee in America in the period of the Terror in France, told the Directory on his return, so Pinckney was informed, that the United States were of no more consequence than Genoa, and needed to be treated with no greater ceremony.

The second point was clearly stated by Hamilton. There are," he said "currents in human affairs, when events, at other times little less than miraculous, are to be considered as natural and simple." That France, from 1793 to 1800, should think of reducing the United States to a position of helpless dependence upon her was the most natural thing in the world. A country which in 1793 was at war with all Europe, and which by 1795 had

compelled all of her enemies except Austria and England to make peace with her, would find it hard to believe that the "enemies of liberty, fraternity and equality” in the United States would be able to oppose her will.

QUESTIONS.

1. What was the nature of the question at issue between the United States and France from 1793 to 1800?

2. Compare the word "State" as used in this chapter with the same word in a quotation made from Burgess on page 50, and state its meaning?

3. Give the names of the men who were ministers from France to the United States from 1793 to 1800, and give an account of their conduct.

4. Contrast the letter written by Lord Sackville-West in 1888 with the letters published by Adet in the Aurora in 1796, and the conduct of the government with reference to the former with its conduct with reference to the latter.

5. How do you explain the difference?

6. Give the substance of the various decrees issued by France relating to the United States from 1793 to 1798, and explain their object.

7. Compare the decree of January, 1798, with the famous Berlin decree afterwards issued by Napoleon in 1806.

1798?

8. What was Talleyrand's opinion of the United States in

10. A member of the French council of five hundred in 1797 made a speech in which he said: "It is not Pinckney whom they (the government) repulse. It is the government of which he is the minister and the organ. And what have we been doing? Our agents at St. Domingo announce to the minister of marine, that having no other financial resources, and knowing the unfriendly dispositions of the Americans, they had, to avoid perishing, armed privateers; that already eighty-seven corsairs were at sea; and that for three months the administration had subsisted, and individuals had been enriched by the product of their prizes.

That the revolting conduct of the Americans and the indirect evidence of the intentions of the government, made it their duty to order reprisals. Corsairs against a friendly nation! Reprisals! When we are the assailants! Reprisals towards a nation which has not taken one of our vessels! Wealth acquired by the confiscation of the vessels of a people with whom treaties unite us; from whom no declaration of war separates us. What is the pretext? The treaty with Great Britain! Are we then the sovereigns of the world? Are our allies only our subjects, who cannot form treaties at their will?" Explain and comment upon the italicized passages.

A

President's message to Congress.

CHAPTER XIX.

THE ALIEN AND SEDITION LAWS.

BOUT the middle of March (March 19), the President sent to Congress a message informing them of the conclusion he had reached from a careful consideration of the contents of the dispatches from our envoys in France, which had been received about two weeks before. He told Congress that although nothing had been left undone which honorably could have been done, he saw no reason to expect that the envoys could accomplish the objects of their mission on terms compatible with the honor and essential interests of the United States; and that nothing further could be attempted without abandoning the prin ciples for which the country had uniformly contended, and which lay at the basis of its national sovereignty. He therefore urged them to adopt measures for the protection of our commerce and citizens; "for the defense of any exposed portions of our territory; for replenishing our arsenals, establishing foundries and military manufactories, and to provide such efficient revenue as will be necessary to defray extraordinary expenses, and supply the deficiencies which may be occasioned by depredations on our commerce." He also informed them that he had cancelled the instructions to collectors not to permit private armed vessels to sail.