It is very painful for me to write to you in the language of complaint, but I feel myself hurt, and it is proper that I should tell you of it. It does not appear to me to be possible, that any inconvenience could have arisen, if you had mentioned to me the proposition of an exemption of all duties on our exports, as a compensation for the exemption of the duty on molasses alone. When I had the pleasure of seeing you last at my house, I spoke to you in general about the treaty, and particularly about the article of molasses, and expressed my fears, that the French Ministry would not consent to have such a restraint put upon their power, as was contained in the article of the original treaty. I asked you whether you were under any injunctions of secrecy, which prevented you from satisfying me. You replied, that certainly secrecy was necessary to be observed, but that as I was myself a Commissioner, you thought that you might without any impropriety talk with me on the subject, and informed me that the objection, which I apprehended, had been made, and that the article was to be given up. Not a word was mentioned about an equivalent. As you thought at that time, that my being a Commissioner entitled you to speak to me on the subject, I cannot conceive what impropriety there could possibly have been in your doing it, when so material an alteration was under consideration. The instructions sent to me by Congress came through your hands, and it will be hardly necessary to remind you, that though the conclusion of the treaty with this Court is intrusted to you, and the other gentlemen joined with you in the Commission, I am directed by the same authority under which you act to apply to you for a copy, not only of the original treaty, but likewise of “every subsequent alteration, that has been _proposed_ on either side.” It appears therefore to me, that as soon as the alteration was _proposed_ it ought to have been communicated to me. Had you made such communication, I should have thought it my duty to have called your attention to the principles of the treaty, and should have requested you to consider whether you were not going to act in direct violation of them. My reason for thinking so is, that I am instructed to “propose to the Court of Tuscany a treaty on the same commercial principles as are the basis of the treaty, which you are directed to propose to the Court of France.” What this basis, and these principles are, is clearly explained to me in the following instructions. “It must never be forgotten in these commercial treaties, that reciprocal and equal advantages to the people of both countries be firmly and plainly secured.” This matter gives me a great deal of uneasiness, and I am extremely anxious to know, if there be yet a possibility of stopping the execution of the article. You will therefore excuse my requesting, that you will favor me with an answer to this letter as soon as possible.[63]