By this decree, every. American vessel and cargo, even those which had been delivered up to the owners by compromise with the captors, was seized and sold. The law of March 1st, 1809, commonly called the non-intercourse law, was the pretext for this measure, which was intended as an act of reprisal. It requires no reasoning to show the injustice of this pretension. Our law regulated the trade of the United States with other powers, particularly with France and Great Britain, and was such a law as every nation has a right to adopt. It was duly promulgated, and reasonable notice of it given to other powers. It was also impartial as related to the belligerents. The condemnation of such vessels of France or England as came into the ports of the United States in breach of this law, was strictly proper, and could afford no cause of complaint to either power. The seizure of so vast a property as was laid hold of under that pretext, by the French government, places the transaction in a very fair light. If an indemnity had been sought for on imputed injury, the measure of the injury should have been ascertained, and the indemnity proportioned to it. But in this case no injury had been sustained on principle. A trifling loss only had been incurred, and for that loss all the American property which could be found was seized, involving in indiscriminate ruin innocent merchants who had entered the ports of France in the fair course of trade. It is proper that you should make it distinctly known to the French government, that the claim to a just reparation for these spoliations cannot be relinquished, and that a delay in making it will produce very high dissatisfaction with the government and people of these states.

It has been intimated that the French government would be willing to make this reparation, provided the United States would make one in return for the vessels and property condemned under, and in breach of our non-intercourse law. Although the proposition was objectionable, in many views, yet this government consented to it, to save so great a mass of the property of our citizens. An instruction for this purpose was given to your predecessor, which you are authorized to carry into effect.

The influence of France has been exerted to the injury of the United States, in all the countries to which her power has extended. In Spain, Holland, and Naples, it has been most sensibly felt. In each of these countries the vessels and cargoes of American merchants were seized and confiscated, under various decrees, founded in different pretexts, none of which had even the semblance of right to support them. As the United States never injured France, that plea must fail; and that they had injured either of those powers was never pretended. You will be furnished with the documents which relate to these aggressions, and you will claim of the French government an indemnity for them.

The United States have also just cause of complaint against France, for many injuries that were committed by persons acting

under her authority. Of these the most distinguished, and least justifiable, are the examples which occurred, of burning the vessels of our citizens at sea. Their atrocity forbids the imputation of them to the government. To it however the United States must look for reparation, which you will accordingly claim.

It is possible that in this enumeration I may have omitted many injuries of which no account has yet been transmitted to this department. You will have it in your power to acquire a more comprehensive knowledge of them at Paris, which, it is expected you will do, and full confidence is reposed in your exertions to obtain of the French government the just measure of redress.

France, it is presumed, has changed her policy towards the United States. The revocation of her decrees is an indication of that change, and some recent acts, more favourable to the commercial intercourse with her ports, the evidence of which will be found ina copy of a letter from her minister here of -, strengthens the presumption. But much is yet to be done by her, to satisfy the just claims of this country. To revoke blockades of boundless extent in the present state of her marine, was making no sacrifice. She must indemnify us for past injuries, and open her ports to our commerce on a fair and a liberal scale. If she wishes to profit of neutral commerce, she must become the advocate of neutral rights as well by her practice as her theory. The United States, standing on their own ground, will be able to support those rights with effect: and they will certainly fail in nothing which they owe to their character or interest.

The papers relative to the Impeteux, the Revanche de Cerf and the French privateer seized at New-Orleans, will be delivered to you. They will, it is presumed, enable you to satisfy the French government of the strict propriety of the conduct of the United States, in all those occurrences.

The frigate which takes you to France, will proceed to Holland to execute an order from the secretary of the treasury relative to the interest due on the public debt. She will return to France to take Mr. Russel to England, and after landing him, sail back immediately to the United States. The interval afforded by a visit to Holland, will be sufficient to enable you to communicate fully and freely with the French government on all the topics, to which it will be your duty to invite its attention, under your instructions. A short detention, however, would not be objected to, if you deemed it important to the interest of the United States. I have the honor, &c.

(Signed)

JAS. MONROE.

SIR,

Mr. Monroe to Mr. Barlow.

Department of State, November 21, 1811.

I have the honor to transmit to you a copy of the President's message to congress at the commencement of the session, and of the documents which accompanied it.

In this very interesting communication you will find that the president has done justice to both the belligerents. He has spoken of each as it deserves. To France he has given the credit due for the revocation of her decrees, while he has bestowed on those injuries which remained unredressed their merited censure. Of England he has spoken in terms of censure only, because she had in no respect changed her unfriendly policy. Thus the whole subject of our foreign relations is presented fully and fairly before the legislature and the public, and, I am happy to add, that so far as an opinion can now be formed of the impression made, the public sentiment is in strict harmony with that expressed by the executive. Few, if any, seem to be willing to relinquish the ground which has been taken by the non-importation act; and most seem to be resolved, if Great Britain does not revoke her orders in council, to adopt more decisive measures towards her.

If the United States experience any embarrassment in the course which they are pursuing in support of their rights, or fail, in the ultimate success, it will be owing to the conduct of the French government. It cannot be doubted, if France remains true to her engagements by a faithful observance of the revocation of her decrees, and acquits herself on the various other points on which you are instructed to the just claims of this country, that Great Britain will be compelled to follow her example; in which event the war will immediately assume a new character, such as has been the professed wish of both belligerents, mitigating its calamities to both of them, as well as diffusing the happiest effect on neutral states.

The part which France ought to act is a plain one. It is dictated, in every circumstance, by the clearest principles of justice and soundest maxims of policy. The President has presented to view, in the message to congress, the prominent features of this plan by stating equally our rights and injuries. It will scarcely be necessary for me to go into any of the details, which are already so well known to you. I will briefly advert to them.

It is not sufficient in the final decision of a cause brought before a French tribunal, that it should appear that the French decrees are repealed. An active prohibitory policy should be adopted to prevent seizures on the principles of those decrees. All that is expected is that France will act in conformity to her own principles. If that is done, neutral nations would then have an important object before them, and one belligerent at least prove that it contended for principle rather than for power; that it sought the aid of neu VOL. IV. APP. † B

tral nations in support of that principle, and did not make it a pretext to enlist them on its side, to demolish its enemies. The abuses that are practised by French privateers in the Baltic, the Channel, the Mediterranean, and wherever else they cruise, have, of late more especially, reached an enormous height. In the Baltic they have been more odious from the circumstance that it was expected that they had been completely suppressed there. Till of late these abuses were imputed to the privateers of Denmark, which induced the President to send a special mission to the Danish government, which it was understood, was producing the desired effect. But it is now represented that the same evil is produced by a collusion between the privateers of Denmark and those of France. Hence it assumes a worse character; to seizures equally unlawful, is added, by carrying the causes to Paris, still more oppressive delays.

If the French government is not willing to adopt the general rule alluded to, in favor of American commerce, it is presumed that it will not hesitate to define explicitly the causes of seizure, and to give such precise orders to its cruizers, respecting them, with an assurance of certain punishments to those who violate them, as will prevent all abuse in future. Whatever orders are given, it would be satisfactory to this government to be made acquainted with them. The President wishes to know with great accuracy, the principles by which the French government intends to to be governed, in regard to neutral commerce. A frank explanation on this subject will be regarded as a proof of the friendly policy which France is disposed to pursue towards the United States. What advantage does France derive from these abuses? Vessels trading from the United States can never afford cause of suspicion on any principle, nor ought they to be subject to seizure. Can the few French privateers, which occasionally appear at sea, make any general impression on the commerce of Great Britain? They seldom touch a British vessel. Legitimate and honorable warfare is not their object. The unarmed vessels of the United States are their only prey. The opportunities of fair prize are few, even should France maintain the British principle. Can these few prizes compensate her for the violation of her own principles, and for the effect which it ought, and cannot fail to produce here?

Indemnity must be made for spoliations on American property under other decrees. On this subject it is unnecessary to add any thing to your present instructions. They are detailed and explicit.

The trade by licenses must be abrogated. I cannot too strongly express the surprise of the President, after the repeated remonstrances of this government, and more especially after the letter of the duke of Cadore to Mr. Russell of the last, informing him that that system would fall with the Berlin and Milan decrees, that it should still be adhered to. The exequaters of the consuls who have granted such licenses would long since have been revoked, if orders to them to discontinue the practice had not daily been expected, or in case they were not received, the

more effectual interposition of congress to suppress it. It will certianly be prohibited by law, under severe penalties, in compliance with the recommendation of the President, if your despatches by the Constitution do not prove that your demand on this subject has been duly attended to.

It is expected also that the commerce between the United States and France and her allies will be placed on the basis of a fair reciprocity. If the oppressive restrictions which still fetter and harass our commerce there are not removed, it cannot be doubted that congress will, as soon as it appears that a suitable change may not be expected, impose similar restraints on the commerce of France. Should such a state of things arise between the two countries, you will readily perceive the obvious tendency, or rather certain effect on the relations which now subsist between them.

This is a short sketch of the policy which it is expected France will observe in regard to neutral commerce, and the other just claims of the United States. A compliance with it will impose on her no onerous conditions, no concessions in favour of the United States. She will perform no act which she is not bound to perform, by a strict regard to justice. She will abstain from none, the abstinence from which is not dictated by the principles which she asserts, and professes to support. What is also of great importance, the course pointed out cannot fail to prove in all its consequences, of the highest advantage to her.

Among the measures necessary to support the altitude taken by this government it is more than probable that a law will pass authorizing all merchant vessels to arm in their own defence. If England alone, by maintaining her orders in council, violates our neutral rights, with her only can any collision take effect. But in authorizing merchant vessels to arm, the object will be to enable them to support their rights against all who attempt to violate them. This consideration ought to afford a strong additional motive to France to inhibit her privateers from interfering with American vessels. The United States will maintain their neutral rights equally against all nations who violate them.

You will find among the documents which accompanied the President's message, a correspondence between Mr. Foster and me, by which the difference relative to the attack on the Chesapeak is terminated. It was thought advisable not to decline the advance of the British government on this point, although none was made on any other; and as the terms offered were such as had been in substance approved before, to accept them. The adjustment, however, of this difference, does not authorize the expectation of a favorable result from the British government on any other point.

This government will pursue the same policy towards Great Britain, in regard to other injuries, as if this had not been accommodated.

You will also find among the printed documents a correspondence with Mr. Foster, respecting the Floridas. To his remon