consequence of orders given upon this subject, and cannot but be regarded as a direct and unprovoked attack of their flag, as well as of their independence and sovereignty. That as to what Lord Stormont advances in saying, that in virtue of the treaty of 1674, all merchant vessels loaded with suspected merchandises ought to be visited, to the end to excuse by this assertion the conduct of Mr Fielding, it is but a vain allegation, contradicted by the very words of the said treaty, in which, in truth, there is no mention made of suspected merchandises, but only in the third article of commodities of contraband, which are particularly enumerated. That the convoy, by its nature, rendering useless all visits, the fifth and sixth articles of the said treaty of 1674, relative to rencounters at sea, explain themselves upon the following case. We there find literally, 'That when any private vessel, subject to one of the contracting powers, shall meet in open sea a vessel of war, or other vessel provided with a commission from the other power, and that the said vessel shall not be under convoy, she shall not be held only barely to the exhibition of her sea letters to justify the property of her cargo, and this in consequence of the 8th article of said treaty, except, nevertheless, when a merchant vessel shall be destined for an enemy's port, she shall be obliged also to show her passport, containing the list of effects which shall be on board, and to show that she is not loaded with any of the articles prohibited by the 3d article of the said treaty.'