OUR NAVAL WAR WITH

FRANCE

CHAPTER I

EARLY MISUNDERSTANDINGS

THE British colonies of North America having declared their independence and being involved in an unequal struggle with the mother-country, the newborn nation appealed to France for aid at an early period of the contest. The American envoys, Benjamin Franklin, Silas Deane, and Arthur Lee, were happily able to engage the attention of Louis XVI and his ministers. They, however, cautiously held aloof at first, naturally unwilling to support a rebellion while success appeared almost hopeless; but the defeat and capture of Burgoyne's army in 1777 turned the scale in the wavering French councils, and it was decided to espouse the American cause. Accordingly, on the 6th of February, 1778, two treaties between the United States and France were signed at Versailles, a treaty of amity and commerce and one of alliance.

In their desperate strait the Americans gladly assumed obligations, imposed by these treaties, which in after years proved embarrassing. With

out the French alliance and the liberal loans of the king the fortunate outcome of the war must surely have been impossible; and gratitude to France was a universal sentiment in America. Some of the provisions of a consular convention, concluded between the two nations in 1788, also caused complications a few years later.

In his annual address to Congress, December 8, 1790, President Washington called attention to the disturbed situation of Europe and the necessity for circumspection on the part of the United States. Shortly after this, France complained of certain duties imposed by the United States, and this caused discussion as to the interpretation of the treaty of commerce of 1778;2 but no serious trouble arose between the two countries until after the breaking out of the general European war brought on by the French Revolution.

A strict fulfillment of our treaty obligations would have drawn the United States into this war as an ally of France. The question as to whether the treaties had been terminated by the revolution and change of government in France was discussed in Washington's cabinet, and it was agreed that they had not been. According to the eleventh article of the treaty of alliance the United States guaranteed "to His Most Christian Majesty the present possessions of the Crown of France in America, as

1 State Papers, vol. i, p. 18. See Appendix I for authorities. 2 Ibid. vol. x, pp. 68–77.

well as those which it may acquire by the future treaty of peace." This referred especially to the French West Indies, and to have complied with the treaty would have involved the United States in the defense of these islands against the attacks of England. In view of the exhausted condition of the country at the time, slowly recovering from the strain of the War for Independence and loaded with debt, to have embarked in another great war would have been suicidal. As a matter of self-preservation it was necessary to maintain strict neutrality. In February, 1793, soon after the execution of Louis XVI, the war in Europe became general, involving besides France the maritime nations of Great Britain, Spain, and Holland.

In order to get the opinions of his cabinet on the situation, the President submitted to the members certain questions, and obtained their unanimous approval of two important measures: that neutrality should be proclaimed, and that the Republic of France should be recognized and a French minister received. April 22, 1793, Washington issued his proclamation, in which it is declared that the United States will "pursue a conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerent powers," that American citizens engaging in contraband trade will not be protected by the government against punishment or forfeiture, and that the United States will prosecute all persons who violate the law of nations. It was agreed that the word "neutrality"

1

should be omitted from the text of the proclamation. Public sentiment in America at this time was strongly in favor of France, and the proclamation was unpopular, although it was approved by both the Senate and House of Representatives at the next session of Congress."

Shortly before this, on April 8, there had arrived at Charleston, South Carolina, the newly appointed French minister to the United States, Citizen Genet. In a letter written after his arrival, to the French minister of foreign affairs, Genet attributes to contrary winds his landing at this point instead of proceeding directly to Philadelphia, the seat of government. Yet the frigate Embuscade in which he came he sent north at once, and she soon arrived at Philadelphia, while he himself made the journey by land, after a halt of two weeks or more in Charleston. During his stay in the south Genet entered upon a course of conduct certain to embarrass the United States, and from this time forth his behavior indicates a misapprehension of the rights and powers of the American executive under the Constitution, as well as of the duties and limitations of his own office. He had brought with him two hundred and fifty blank commissions, and four of these he now issued to privateers, which were rapidly fitted out and

1 St. Pap. vol. i, p. 44; Washington, vol. xii, pp. 279–282; Jefferson, vol. i, pp. 226, 227, vol. vi, pp. 315, 346.

2 St. Pap. vol. ii, p. 127.

8 American Historical Association, 1903, vol. ii, pp. 211-213; for Genet's instructions from his government, see p. 201.

manned, partly by Frenchmen and partly by Americans.1 They were sent to sea and soon began to return with English prizes, some of them captured within the territorial waters of the United States. The British minister complained of these proceedings, and one of the prizes, taken in Delaware Bay by the Embuscade, was afterwards surrendered by Genet. 2

In a letter to Jefferson, the Secretary of State, dated May 27, after his arrival in Philadelphia, Genet vigorously defended his conduct against the complaints of the British minister. In his reply of June 5, in speaking of the arming of privateers in American ports and the enlisting of American citizens for the French service, Jefferson expressed the opinion of the President "that the arming and equipping vessels in the ports of the United States, to cruise against nations with whom they are at peace, was incompatible with the territorial sovereignty of the United States; .. that it is the right of every nation to prohibit acts of sovereignty from being exercised by any other within its limits, and the duty of a neutral nation to prohibit such as would injure one of the warring powers; that the granting military commissions, within the United States, by any other authority than their own, is an infringement on their sovereignty, and particularly so when granted to

1 Amer. Hist. Assoc. 1903, vol. ii, pp. 253, 848.

2 Ibid. pp. 196-198; St. Pap. vol. i, pp. 69-76, 114–122, 145, 195; Claims, p. 379.