Jackson's message caused great excitement and irritation in France, where the moderate tone of previous messages had been quite misunderstood. A bill making the appropriation was promptly rejected by the Chambre, and the French minister was shortly recalled. April 25, 1835, the appropriation was voted on condition that satisfactory explanation be offered of the expressions concerning France in the message. Livingston remained long enough to write an able note to the Duc de Broglie, defending Jackson, and then withdrew.1 Jackson met the affront of France with characteristic vigor. "The honor of my country," he wrote in his annual message of December 7, "shall never be stained by an apology from me for the statement of truth and the performance of duty; nor can I give any explanation of my official acts except such as is due to integrity and justice and consistent with the principles on which our institutions have been framed." A special message of January 15, 1836, again recommended reprisals, and urged the increase of the navy and the completion of the coast defences.

Jackson had not failed, however, to leave a loophole through which France might escape. Any "intention to menace or insult the Government of France" was declared "unfounded," and the curious doctrine asserted that the discussions between the president and Congress were matters of domestic importance only, and that they became of public international character only when they "terminate in acts." "The principle which calls in question the President for the language of his message would equally justify a foreign power in demanding explanation of the language used in the report of a committee or by a member in debate." If Jackson could urge such claptrap, France could afford to accept it. January 27, 1836, Great Britain offered to mediate. The offer was accepted, and on February 25 the British minister had the satisfaction of informing the secretary of state that the "frank and honorable manner" in which Jackson had expressed himself had removed the "difficulties" which had interfered with the execution of the treaty of 1831.2 On May 10, Jackson was able to apprise Congress that four instalments of the indemnity had been paid.

In the session of 1834-1835 claims to the amount of five million dollars, arising from alleged depredations of France on American commerce prior to 1800, were presented to Congress. The basis of the claim to indemnity was the exclusion from the provisions of the treaty of 1800, between the United States and France, of claims on account of captures or condemnations, and the surrender of these claims

by the United States in return for benefits received from France under the treaty. In other words, the United States, "having appropriated to itself a benefit resulting from the losses of its citizens, should make compensation to the sufferers." 1 The case for the claimants was ably argued by Webster, and vigorously opposed by Tyler, Benton, Wright, and others. A bill for the relief of the claimants passed the Senate January 28, 1835, but was not acted on by the House. The "French spoliation claims," as they were called, were brought before Congress from time to time until 1885, when provision for their examination by the court of claims was finally made.2

Claims against other European countries, similar in origin and character to those against France, were also prosecuted, and in some cases settled, during Jackson's administrations. Diplomatic relations with Portugal, which had been suspended after the seizure of the throne by Don Miguel, in June, 1828, were resumed in the summer of 1829. Depredations on American commerce by Portuguese armed vessels continued, and diplomatic intercourse was again broken off, to be renewed in 1835. A treaty for the arbitration of claims growing out of the destruction of the American privateer brig General Armstrong by British vessels in the harbor

Treaties and Conventions (ed. of 1889), 335-338, and J. C. B. Davis, note at 1309; Webster, Works (ed. of 1851), IV., 152-178. U. S. Statutes at Large, XXIII., 283.

of Fayal, in September, 1814, was not concluded until 1851, and the decision was against the United States. A convention with Denmark for the payment of claims to the amount of six hundred and fifty thousand dollars was concluded in 1830. A convention with the Two Sicilies, in 1832, provided for the payment of claims for depredations on American commerce by Murat in 1809-1812. The claims against Spain were settled in 1834.1

Commercial relations were further improved by the negotiation of a number of commercial treaties -with Austria-Hungary in 1829, with the Ottoman Porte in 1830, with Mexico in 1831, with Chili and Russia in 1832, with Siam and Muscat in 1833, and with Morocco, Venezuela, and the Peru-Bolivian Confederation in 1836. Commercial treaties with Prussia and Brazil, concluded in 1828, were ratified in March, 1829. In May, 1829, discriminating tonnage duties on Austrian vessels were suspended under reciprocity arrangements. Similar suspension was proclaimed regarding the Grand Duchy of Oldenburg in September, 1830, the Grand Duchy of Mecklenberg-Schwerin in 1835, and Tuscany in 1836. Spain in 1832 made the tonnage duties on American vessels the same as those imposed on the vessels of Spain. Tonnage dues on American vessels were abolished by an act of May 31, 1830.2

1

The northeast boundary controversy continued to be a subject for diplomatic consideration under Jackson, without, however, arriving at any settlement. In 1827 a convention between Great Britain and the United States provided for the submission of the dispute to arbitration. The king of the Netherlands was chosen as arbitrator, but his decision, made in 1831, was rejected by the United States and not insisted on by Great Britain. No further progress in the matter was made during Jackson's administrations, although frequent reference was made to the subject in the annual messages. The boundary was finally settled in 1842.2 The northwest boundary dispute, which was also pending, rested under an agreement, first made in 1818, and renewed in 1827, for joint occupation of the territory in controversy, subject to a termination of the agreement on twelve months' notice by either party.

The movement for the annexation of Texas, though originating before Jackson became president, was materially advanced during his administrations. The treaty of 1819 with Spain, under which the United States acquired the Floridas, had fixed the boundary between the two countries, west of the Mississippi, in the Sabine River, from its mouth to the parallel 32° north latitude.4 In 1821 certain of