mation from running the course which has hitherto marked the deftiny of nations. But if I may even flatter my felf that they may be productive of fome partial benefit, fome occafional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party fpirit, to warn against the mifchiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impoftures of pretended pafull triotifm; this hope will be recompenfe for the folicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated. How far, in the difcharge of my official duties, I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct muft witness to you and to the world. To myfelf the affurance of my own confcience is, that I have at least believed my felf to be guided by them. In relation to the ftill fubfifting war in Europe, my proclamation of the 22d of April, 1793, is the index to my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your reprefentatives in both houfes of Congrefs, the fpirit of that meafure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it. After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well fatisfied that our country, under all the circumftances of the cafe, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and in tereft to take a neutral pofition. Having taken it, I determined, as far as fhould depend upon me, to maintain it with moderation, perfeverance and firmness. The confiderations which refpe&t the right to hold this conduct, it is not neceffary on this occafion to detail. I will only obferve, that, The duty of holding a neutral The inducements of intereft for obferving that conduct will beft be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me a predominant motive has been to endeavour to gain time to our country to fettle and mature its yet recent inftitutions, and to progrefs, without interruption, to that degree of ftrength and confiftency which is neceffary to give it, humanly fpeaking, the command of its own fortunes. Though, in reviewing the incidents of my adminiftration, I am unconfcious of intentional error, I an nevertheless too fenfible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently befeech the almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I fhall alfo carry with me the hope that my country will never ceafe to view them with indulgence; and that, after fortyfive years of my life dedicated to its fervice with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be configned to oblivion, as myfelf muft foon be to the manfions of rest. Relying on its kindnefs in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is fo natural to a man who views in it it the native foil of himfelf and his progenitors for feveral generations, I anticipate with pleafing expectation that retreat, in which I promife myfelf to realize, without alloy, the fweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow 'citizens, the benign influence of good laws, under a free government, the ever favourite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I truit, of our mutual cares, labours, and dangers. G. WASHINGTON. United States, Sept. 17, 1796. Note prefented to the American Secretary of State, by Citizen Adet, Minifter Plenipotentiary from the French Republic, Oct. 17, 1796. The underfigned minifter plenipotentiary of the French republic, in conformity to the orders of his government, has the honour of tranfmitting to the fecretary of ftate of the United States, a refolution taken by the executive of the French republic on the 11th Mellidor, 4th year, relative to the conduct which the hips of war of the republic are to hold toward neutral veffels. "The flag of the republic will treat the flag of neutrals in the fame manner as they fhall fuffer it to be treated by the English." The fentiments which the Ainerican government have manifested to the underfigned minifter plenipotentiary, do not permit him to doubt, that they will fee, in its true light, this meafure as far as it may concern the United States, and that they will alfo feel that it is dictated by imperious circumftances, and approved by juftice. Great Britain, during the war fhe has carried on against the republic, has not ceafed ufing every means in her power to add to that fcourge fcourges ftill more terrible. She has ufed the well-known liberality of the French nation to the detriment of that nation. Knowing how faithful France has always been in the obfervance of her treaties; knowing that it was a principle of the republic to refpect the flags of all nations, the British government, from the beginning of the war, has caufed neutral veffels, and in particular American veffels, to be detained, taken them into its ports, and dragged from them Frenchmen and French property. France, bound by a treaty with the United States, could find only a real difadvantage in the article of that treaty which caufed to be refpected as American property English property found on board American veffels. They had a right, under this confideration, to expect that America would take fteps in favour of her violated neutrality. One of the predeceffors of the underfigned, in July 1793, applied on this fubject to the government of the United States; but he was not fuccefsful. Nevertheless the national convention, who, by their decree of the 9th of May, 1793, had ordered the feizure of enemy's property on board neutral veffels, declaring, at the fame time, that the measure fhould ceafe when the English fhould refpect neutral flags, had excepted, on the 23d of the fame month, the Americans from the operation of this general order. But the convention was obliged foon to repeal the law which contained this exception fo favourable to Americans; the manner in which the English conducted themselves, the manifeft intention they had to ftop the exportation of provifions from America to France, rendered it unavoidable. The national convention by this had had restored the equilibrium of neutrality which England had deftroyed; had difcharged their duty in a manner justified by a thousand past examples, as well as by the neceflity of the then exifting moment. They might, therefore, to recall the orders they had given to feize the enemy's property on board American veffels, have waited till the British government had first definitively revoked the fame order, a fufpenfion only of which was produced by the embargo laid by Congrefs the 26th of March, 1794. But as foon as they were informed that, under orders of the government of the United States, Mr. Jay was directed to remonftrate against the vexatious meafures of the English, they gave orders, by the law of the 13th Nivofe, 3d year, to the fhips of war of the republic to refpect American veffels; and the committee of public fafety, in their explanato. y refolve of the 14th of the fame month, haftened to fanction the fame principles. The national convention and the committee of public fafety had every reafon to believe that this open and liberal conduct would determine the United States to ufe every effort to put a ftop to the vexations impofed upon their commerce, to the injury of the French republic; they were deceived in this hope; and though the treaty of friendship, navigation, and commerce, between Great Britain and the United States had been figned fix weeks before France adopted the measure I have juft fpoken of, the English did not abandon the plan they had formed, but continued to ftop and carry into their ports all American veffels bound to French ports, or return ing from them. This conduct was the fubject of a note which the undersigned addreffed on the 7th Vendemiaire, 4th year (29th September 1795, O. S.) to the fecretary of fate. The remonftrances which it contained were founded on the duties of neutrality, upon the principles which Mr. Jefferson had laid down in his letter to M. Pinckney, dated the 13th September, 1794. Yet this note has remained without an answer, though recalled to the remembrance of the fecitary of ftate by a dispatch of the 9th Germinal, 4th year (29th March, 1796, O. S.); and American veffels bound to French ports, or returning from them, have ftill been feized by the English. Indeed more; they have added a new yexation to thofe they had already impofed upon Americans; they have impreffed feamen from on board American veffeis, and have thus found the means of ftrengthening their crews at the expence of the Americans, without the government of the United States having made known to the undersigned the fteps they had taken to obtain fatisfaction for this violation of neutrality, fo hurtful to the interefts of France, as the underfigned hath fet forth in his difpatches to the fecretary of state of the 9th Germinal, 4th year (29th March, 1796, O. S.), 19th Germinal (9th April, 1796), and 1ft Floreal (20th April, 1796), which have remained without an answer. The French government then finds itfelf, with refpect to America. at the prefent time, in circumftances fimilar to thofe of the year 1795; and if it fees itfelf obliged to abandon, with refpect to them, and neutral powers in general, the favourable line of conduct it purfued, and to adopt different meafures, the blame fhould fall upon upon the British government: it is their conduct which the French government has been obliged to follow. The undersigned minister plenipotentiary conceives it his duty to remark to the fecretary of ftate, that the neutral governments, or the allies of the republic, have nothing to fear as to the treatment of their flag by the French, fince if, keeping within the bounds of their neutrality, they caufe the rights of that neutrality to be refpected by the English, the republic will refpect them. But if, through weaknefs, partiality, or other motives, they thould fuffer the English to fport with that neutrality, and turn it to their advantage, could they then complain, when France, to reftore the balance of neutrality to its equilibrium, fhall act in the fame manner as the English? No, certainly; for the neutrality of a nation confifts in granting to belligerent powers the fame advantages; and that neutrality no longer exifts, when, in the course of the war, that neutral nation grants to one of the belligerent powers advantages not ftipulated by treaties anterior to the war, or suffers that power to feize upon them. The neutral government cannot then complain if the other belligerest power will enjoy advantages which its enemy enjoys, or if it fizes upon them; otherwife that neutral government would deviate, with respect to it, from the line of neutrality, and would become its Extract from the Regifter of Refolu tions of the Executive Directory of the 14th Mefidor, 4th Year of the French Republic, one and indivifible. The executive directory, confidering that, if it becomes the faith of the French nation to refpect treaties or conventions which fecure to the flags of fome neutral or friendly powers commercial advantages, if they fhould turn to the benefit of our enemies, either through the weakness of our allies or of neutrals, or through fear, through interested views, or through whatever motives, it would, ipf fallo, warrant the inexecution of the articles in which they were stipulated, decrees as follows: "All neutral or allied powers fhall, without delay, be notified, that the flag of the French republic will treat neutral veffels, either as to confifcation, as to fearches, or or capture, in the fame manner as they fhall fuffer the English to treat them." The minister of foreign relations is charged with the execution of the prefent refolution, which fhall not be printed. whom the United States fhould be A true copy. Anfwer of the Executive Government of America to Citizen Adet's Note, inclofing the Decree of the Directory respecting Neutral Vessels. SIR, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your note, of the 27th ult. covering a decree of the executive directory of the French republic, concerning the commerce of neutral nations. This decree makes no diftinction between neutral powers who can claim only the rights fecured to them by the law of nations, and others between whom and the French republic treaties have impofed fpecial obligations. Where no treaties exift, the republic, by feizing and confifcating the property of their enemies found on board neutral veffels, would only exercise an acknowledged right under the law of nations. If, towards fuch neutral nations, the French republic has forborne to execute this right, the forbearance has been perfectly gratuitous. The United States, by virtue of their treaty of commerce with France, ftand on different ground. In the year 1778, France voluntarily entered into a commercial treaty with us, on principles of perfect reciprocity, and exprefsly ftipulating that free ships should make free goods. That is, if France fhould be at war with any nation with nation, while France remained at peace, then the goods (except contraband) and the perfons of our enemies (foldiers in actual service excepted), found on board French veffels, were also to be free from capture. This is plainly exprefled in the 23d article of that treaty, and demonftrates that the reciprocity thereby ftipulated was to operate at different periods; that is, at one time in favour of one of the contracting parties, and of the other at another time. At the prefent time, the United States being at peace, they poffefs by the treaty the right of carrying the goods of the enemies of France, without fubjecting them to capture. But what do the fpirit of the decree of the executive directory and the current of your obfervations require? That the United States fhould now gratuitoufly renounce this right. And what reafon is affigned for denying to us the enjoyment of this right? Your own words furnifh the anfwer: "France, bound by treaty to the United States, could find only a real difadvantage in the articles of that treaty, which caused to be respected, as American property, English property found on board American veffels." This requifition, and the reafon affigned to fupport it, alike excite furprize. The American government, fir, confcious of the purity of its intentions, of its impartial obfervance of the laws of nentrality, and of its inviolable regard |