Page:History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce (Volume 2).djvu/283

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
  • sure against the Americans, whom they accused of

base ingratitude; although it was evident to the whole world that the assistance France had previously rendered to the revolted colonists was simply prompted by a desire to check the power of England, and not from any real sympathy with the American cause.

Do "free ships make free goods?" In this instance the enforcement of the paper treaties pre-existing between France and America threatened a rupture between the two countries. The French ambassador to the United States presented a remonstrance in September 1795 wherein he insisted upon the mutual duties of neutrality. Not having received any answer, he made further applications in the ensuing year, which were equally disregarded. In his last note (27th of October, 1796) he observed, "that neutrality no longer exists when, in the course of war, the neutral nation grants to one of the belligerent powers advantages not stipulated by treaties anterior to the war, or suffers that power to seize upon them." Mr. Pickering, the United States Secretary of State, replied (3rd of November, 1796), that by the treaty of 1778 with France it was expressly stipulated that free ships should make free goods;[1] that the Americans, being now at peace, have the right of carrying the property of the enemies of France; and that the French could not expect them to renounce that privilege because it happened to operate to the disadvantage of one of the parties engaged in the war. He maintained that the captures made by the British of American

  1. See further details on this subject, and on the duties of neutrals, together with an examination of the Orders of Council, infra ch. viii.