History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 2 (of 4)Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
History
History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 2 (of 4)
Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
Commerce -- History; Shipping -- History; Steam navigation -- History
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_;[242]
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
vessels having French property on board were warranted by the law of
nations_; that the operation of this law was contemplated by France
and the United States when they formed their treaty of commerce, and
that their special stipulation on this point was meant as an exception
to an universal rule.[243] The Americans, moreover, saw the advantage
of preserving amicable commercial relations with Great Britain, and
this “_perfidious condescension_,” as the French stigmatised it, “to
the tyrannical and homicidal rage of the English government concurred
to plunge the people of France into the horrors of famine.”[244] This
violent correspondence thus threatened to embroil France and the
United States, and in about three weeks afterwards (15th of November,
1796) M. Adet, the French Minister at Philadelphia, gave notice that
his diplomatic functions were suspended, and, at the same time, the
Directory of France refused to receive Mr. Pinckney, the accredited
ambassador from the United States.
It was at this period, while French armies, under the generals of the
Republic, were pursuing their victorious career by land, that England,
on her natural element, the sea, sought to secure a compensating
balance by the monopoly of the carrying trade of the world. Desperate
measures were considered necessary to counteract the sweeping conquests
of the French and to save herself from what then appeared to be
impending annihilation. In 1794 and 1795 the conquest of Belgium and
Holland had been achieved by the arms of France; and in the following
year Napoleon began his victorious campaign in Italy, his first battle
having been gained at Montenotte on the 11th of April, 1796.[245]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account