It was not possible to come to an agreement on all points. The American envoys wished first to settle claims for injuries inflicted upon commerce before the abrogation of the old treaties by Congress ; but the French contended that there had been no abrogation, as this would have required the consent of both parties to these compacts. They would not even admit that the treaties would have lost their force in case of war, and they denied that the present hostilities constituted war in the full sense.1 However, admitting the war and the annulment of the treaties by it, the claims likewise had been liquidated by war and no indemnity could be expected. They were willing to accept this view of the case, and on August 11, after prolonged discussion, the French commissioners insisted on the alternative: "Either the ancient treaties, with the privileges resulting from priority [as regards Jay's treaty], and a stipulation of reciprocal indemnities; or a new treaty assuring equality without indemnity." At last the American ministers were forced to abandon their instructions and admit the validity of the old treaties, or at least recognize the embarrassing provisions of those treaties as live issues. Agreement was still impossible, and after several more weeks of discussion the temporary expedient was adopted of leaving open for future negotiation the

1 Doc. 102, p. 616. On the question of the abrogation of treaties by war, see Wharton, vol. ii, p. 43.

2 Doc. 102, p. 618.

questions as to indemnity and as to the old treaties.1

This arrangement formed the substance of the second article of the new treaty. The third and fourth articles required the mutual restoration of national vessels captured during the hostilities and of all captured property not already condemned. The fifth provided for the settlement of debts due from France to American citizens, chiefly for supplies and provisions furnished the French government. No loans were provided for and no guarantee of French possessions, nor were any obligations incurred inconsistent with other treaties. Although the envoys found it impracticable fully to carry out their instructions, they were able to abolish some of the abuses practiced by the French, such as the demand for a rôle d'équipage, and to maintain the doctrine of "free ships, free goods."

The treaty, called a Convention of Peace, Commerce, and Navigation, is very long, consisting of twenty-seven articles; it was concluded September 30, 1800. When it was laid before the Senate, that body advised its ratification provided the second article, relating to indemnities and the old treaties, were stricken out and the duration of the treaty limited to eight years. The Senate took this method of precluding any attempt to revive the

1 For. Rel. vol. ii, pp. 307-344; Doc. 102, pp. 577-644; Wharton, vol. ii, pp. 128-142.

2 For these articles see Appendix II.

treaties with their embarrassing provisions, at the same time hoping to revive the claims at some favorable opportunity in the future. Upon the exchange of ratifications at Paris, July 31, 1801, Bonaparte, on behalf of the French government, agreed to these amendments on condition "that by this retrenchment the two States renounce the respective pretensions which were the object of said article." The Senate agreed to this, being willing, for the sake of getting rid of the treaties, to sacrifice prospective indemnities for the depredations committed upon American commerce. The convention was proclaimed December 21, 1801.1 "So died the treaties of 1778, with all the obligations which they imposed, and with them passed from the field of international contention the claims of American citizens for French spoliation." This refers only to claims for depredations committed at sea.

The third article of the treaty called for no sacrifice on the part of France, but compelled the United States to surrender the Berceau and the schooner Vengeance. The Insurgente, which must also have been given up under this stipulation, had been lost at sea before the treaty was signed. The Berceau was refitted, being put in better condition than before she was captured, and then turned over to her old crew, who took her back to France. 1 Doc. 102, pp. 661-686.

2 Ct. Claims Rep. vol. xxi, p. 387.

The amount of American property described in the fourth article, in the hands of the French, was estimated at about forty ships and cargoes, while the Americans held but few French prizes not already condemned.1

The obligations incurred by France under the fourth and fifth articles were not promptly discharged, owing partly no doubt to the embarrassed condition of French finances. This state of things called forth a prolonged correspondence between the United States minister, Robert R. Livingston, and the French government, and gave rise to another class of claims, estimated at twenty million francs in amount. In a convention concluded April 30, 1803, the United States assumed these claims as part of the price paid for the territory of Louisiana, which was ceded by treaty on the same day."

The convention of 1800 did not furnish a satisfactory solution of the questions at issue between the two countries, but it put an end to hostilities which, if they had continued, would doubtless have made impossible the acquisition of Louisiana. It was therefore most fortunate for the United States to be able to reëstablish amicable relations with France at this time.

1 St. Pap. vol. iv, pp. 388-421; Nav. Chron. p. 185; Doc. 102, p. 644; Jefferson, vol. viii, p. 73.

2 Doc. 102, pp. 700–762; Treaties and Conventions, pp. 1233, 1307, 1308.

CHAPTER X

REDUCTION OF THE NAVY

WHEN it became known, late in 1800, that a treaty with France had been concluded, discussion naturally arose as to the reduction of war expenses and the placing of the navy on a peace footing. January 12, 1801, Secretary Stoddert made a report to the naval committee of the House of Representatives, in which he said that "it would be good economy to sell all the public vessels, except the following frigates: The United States, President, Constitution, Chesapeake, Philadelphia, New York, Constellation, Congress, Essex, Boston, John Adams, Adams, and General Greene. The rest were either built of materials which do not promise long duration, or are too small to form a part of the national defense. In future wars the enterprising spirit of our citizens will quickly furnish, for private emolument, nearly all the small vessels necessary to be employed; and will thus add to the national means of annoyance, without adding to the national expense. In this view, it may be sufficient for the United States to attend principally to a provision for ships of the line and frigates."1 He 1 Nav. Aff. vol. i, p. 74.