Part 66

A long and protracted discussion has already taken place between the two Governments in relation to the claim of France under the eighth article of the Louisiana convention, the result of which has been a thorough conviction on the part of the American Government that the claim has no foundation in the treaty whatever. The reasons for this conviction have been so fully set forth in the discussion that it was not anticipated a further examination of it would be thought desirable. As a subject of discussion, however, the American Government is willing to resume it whenever it may suit the views of France to present further considerations relating to it; but while convinced that the claim is entirely without foundation, they can not place it on a footing of concurrent negotiation with claims of their citizens, the justice of which is so unequivocal that they have not even been made the subject of denial.

From the attention which His Excellency the Viscount de Chateaubriand has intimated his willingness to give to the consideration of these claims the President indulges the hope that they will be taken into view upon their own merits, and in that hope the representative of the United States at Paris will at an early day be instructed to present them again to the undivided and unconditional sense of the justice of France.

I pray you, sir, to accept the renewed assurance of my distinguished consideration.

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.

I took an early occasion after the receipt of your dispatch No. 1, of the 10th August, to communicate the subjects of it in a conversation I had with Viscount de Chateaubriand. His observations in relation to that of the claims, as connected with the pretensions of France under the Louisiana treaty, were of a very general nature and amounted to little more than a repetition of his readiness to enter upon the consideration of whatever subjects of discussion might exist between the two countries and the expression of his satisfaction at the prospect of being soon relieved from the labor which the affairs of Spain had thrown upon him, and having thus more time to devote to those of the United States and others not of the same pressing nature. He avoided any intimation of a disposition to take up the claims by themselves, and it can hardly be expected that the French Government will at this time relax from the ground they have so lately taken upon that point. I informed him that I should communicate in writing an answer to the overture made by Count de Menou at Washington for uniting in a new negotiation this subject with that of the Louisiana treaty, in substance the same as that gentleman had already received there, and should again press upon the French Government the consideration of the claims by themselves; to which he replied that any communication I might make would be received and treated with all the attention to which it was entitled on his part.

Mr. Sheldon to the Viscount de Chateaubriand.

PARIS, October 11, 1823.

SIR: Mr. Gallatin, during his residence as minister of the United States in France, had upon various occasions called the attention of His Majesty's Government to the claims of our citizens for the reparation of wrongs sustained by them from the unjust seizure, detention, and confiscation of their property by officers and agents acting under authority of the Government of France. During the past year His Majesty's ministers had consented to enter upon the consideration of these claims, but they proposed to couple with it another subject having no connection with those claims, either in its nature, its origin, or the principles on which it depended--a question of the disputed construction of one of the articles of the treaty of cession of Louisiana, by virtue of which France claimed certain commercial privileges in the ports of that Province. Mr. Gallatin had not received from his Government any authority to connect these two dissimilar subjects in the same negotiation, or, indeed, to treat upon the latter, which had already been very amply discussed at Washington between the Secretary of State of the United States and His Majesty's minister at that place, without producing any result except a conviction on the part of the Government of the United States that the privileges for French vessels, as claimed by the minister of France, never could have been, and were not in fact, conceded by the treaty in question. A stop was then put to the negotiations already commenced in relation to the claims, and with which had been united, on the proposition of the French Government, and as being naturally connected with it, the consideration of certain claims of French citizens on the Government of the United States.

The chargé d'affaires of France at Washington has lately, on behalf of his Government, expressed to that of the United States a wish that this double negotiation might be resumed and that a definitive arrangement might be made as well in relation to the disputed article of the Louisiana treaty as of the subject of the claims upon the one side and upon the other. The Government of the United States has nothing more at heart than to remove by friendly arrangements every subject of difference which may exist between the two countries, and to examine with the greatest impartiality and good faith as well the nature and extent of the stipulations into which they have entered as the appeals to their justice made by individuals claiming reparation for wrongs supposed to have been sustained at their hands.

But these two subjects are essentially dissimilar; there are no points of connection between them; the principles upon which they depend are totally different; they have no bearing upon each other; and the justice which is due to individuals ought not to be delayed or made dependent upon the right or the wrong interpretation by one or the other party of a treaty having for its object the regulation of entirely distinct and different interests.

The reclamations of American citizens upon the Government of France are for mere justice--for the reparation of unquestionable wrongs, indemnity or restitution of property taken from them or destroyed forcibly and without right. They are of ancient date, and justice has been long and anxiously waited for. They have been often represented to the Government of France, and their validity is not disputed. Similar reclamations without greater merit or stronger titles to admission presented by citizens of other nations have been favorably received, examined, and liquidated, and it seems to have been hitherto reserved to those of the United States alone to meet with impediments at every juncture and to seek in vain the moment in which the Government of France could consent to enter upon their consideration. Although the question arising under the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty has already been fully examined, the Government of the United States is ready, if it is desired by France, and if it is thought that any new light can be thrown upon it, to discuss the subject further whenever it shall be presented anew by France to their consideration. But they are convinced that by blending it with the claims not only will no progress be made toward its solution, but that these last, standing upon their own unquestionable character, ought not to be trammeled with a subject to which they are wholly foreign.

I am instructed to bring them anew before your excellency, and to express the hope of the President that His Majesty's Government will not continue to insist upon connecting together two subjects of so different a nature, but that the claims may be taken up on their own merits and receive the consideration which they deserve, unencumbered with other discussions.

I request your excellency to accept the assurance, etc,

D. SHELDON.

You will immediately after your reception earnestly call the attention of the French Government to the claims of our citizens for indemnity.

You will at the same time explicitly make known that this Government can not consent to connect this discussion with that of the pretension raised by France on the construction given by her to the eighth article of the Louisiana cession treaty. The difference in the nature and character of the two interests is such that they can not with propriety be blended together. The claims are of reparation to individuals for their property taken from them by manifest and undisputed wrong. The question upon the Louisiana treaty is a question of right upon the meaning of a contract. It has been fully, deliberately, and thoroughly investigated, and the Government of the United States is under the entire and solemn conviction that the pretension of France is utterly unfounded. We are, nevertheless, willing to resume the discussion if desired by France; but to refuse justice to individuals unless the United States will accede to the construction of an article in a treaty contrary to what they believe to be its real meaning would be not only incompatible with the principles of equity, but submitting to a species of compulsion derogatory to the honor of the nation.

I have in a letter to M. de Chateaubriand, copy of which I have now the honor to send, made an effort to separate the claims of our citizens from the Louisiana question.

Mr. Brown to M. de Chateaubriand.

PARIS, April 28, 1824.

His Excellency VISCOUNT DE CHATEAUBRIAND,

Minister of Foreign Affairs, etc.

SIR: In the conference with which your excellency honored me a few days ago I mentioned a subject deeply interesting to many citizens of the United States, on which I have been instructed to address your excellency, and to which I earnestly wish to call your immediate attention.

It is well known to your excellency that my predecessor, Mr. Gallatin, during several years made repeated and urgent applications to His Majesty's Government for the adjustment of claims to a very large amount, affecting the interests of American citizens and originating in gross violations of the law of nations and of the rights of the United States, and that he never could obtain from France either a settlement of those claims or even an examination and discussion of their validity. To numerous letters addressed by him to His Majesty's ministers on that subject either no answers were given or answers which had for their only object to postpone the investigation of the subject. Whilst, however, he indulged the hope that these delays would be abandoned, and that the rights of our citizens, which had been urged for so many years, would at length be taken up for examination, he learned with surprise and regret that His Majesty's Government had determined to insist that they should be discussed in connection with the question of the construction of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty of cession. Against this determination he strongly but ineffectually remonstrated in a letter to Mr. De Villele, dated the 12th November, 1822.

It is notorious that the Government of the United States, whenever requested by that of His Majesty, have uniformly agreed to discuss any subject presented for their consideration, whether the object has been to obtain the redress of public or private injuries. Acting upon this principle, the question of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty was, upon the suggestion of the minister of France, made the subject of a voluminous correspondence, in the course of which all the arguments of the parties respectively were fully made known to each other and examined. The result of this discussion has been a thorough conviction on the part of the Government of the United States that the construction of that article of the treaty contended for by France is destitute of any solid foundation and wholly inadmissible. After a discussion so full as to exhaust every argument on that question, the attempt to renew it in connection with the question of the claims of our citizens appeared to the Government of the United States to be a measure so contrary to the fair and regular course of examining controverted points between nations that they instructed Mr, Sheldon, their chargé d'affaires, to prepare and present a note explaining their views of the proceeding, which he delivered on the 11th of October, 1823. To this note no answer has ever been received.

I have the express instructions of the Government again to call the attention of that of His Majesty to this subject, and to insist that the claims of our citizens may continue to be discussed as a distinct question, without connecting it in any way with the construction of the Louisiana treaty. The two subjects are in every respect dissimilar. The difference in the nature and character of the two interests is such as to prevent them from being blended in the same discussion. The claims against France are of reparation to individuals for their property taken from them by undisputed wrong and injustice; the claim of France under the treaty is that of a right founded on a contract. In the examination of these questions the one can impart no light to the other; they are wholly unconnected, and ought on every principle to undergo a distinct and separate examination. To involve in the same investigation the indisputable rights of American citizens to indemnity for losses and the doubtful construction of a treaty can have no other effect than to occasion an indefinite postponement of the reparation due to individuals or a sacrifice on the part of the Government of the United States of a treaty stipulation in order to obtain that reparation. The United States would hope that such an alternative will not be pressed upon them by the Government of His Majesty.

Whilst I indulge a hope that the course to which I have objected will no longer be insisted on by His Majesty's ministers, permit me to renew to your excellency the sincere assurance that the United States earnestly desire that every subject of difference between the two countries should be amicably adjusted and all their relations placed upon the most friendly footing. Although they believe that any further discussion of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty would be wholly unprofitable, they will be at all times ready to renew the discussion of that article or to examine any question which may remain to be adjusted between them and France.

I request your excellency to accept, etc.

JAMES BROWN.