HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
ble. This was Mr. Monroe, who 
was received with great respeét and 
cordiality. But when this gentle- 
man was recalled, and Mr. Pinkney 
appointed his successor, which was 
in November, 1796, the directory 
refused to admit him in that capa- 
city, and suspended, at the same 
time, their own ambassador in Ame- 
rica, Mr. Adet, who was ordered 
to lay before that government the 
complaints of the tepublic against 
its proceedings, and the determina- 
tion to issue orders to the French 
ships of war to aét towards the 
trading vessels of neutral states in 
the same manner that those states 
permitted themselves to be treated 
by the British navy. 
- In support of this determination, 
the directory alleged the seizure of 
French property, by the English, on 
board of American vessels, in the 
very ports of the United States, and 
through the connivance of their go- 
vernment. Such had been the re- 
gard paid to America, by the con- 
vention, at the commencement of 
this war, that while it declared law- 
ful prize all English property found 
in neutral vessels, the shipping of 
the United States ‘was excepted 
from this declaration. But the con- 
duét of the English, in seizing the 
American ships Jaden with provi- 
sions on French account, had com- 
pelled the convention, through mere 
necessity, to rescind this aét of in- 
dulgence, and to use the right of ree 
taliation, by seizing English property 
in American vessels. 
It was farther stated,by Mr. Adet, 
that American sailors were pressed 
into the service of the English, with- 
out reclamations being made, or 
even marks of disapprobation being 
manifested on the part of the Ame- 
rican government. These and other 
[173 
aéts of partiality, amply justified the 
measures taken by the direétory. 
When the United States thought 
proper to enforce the respeét due to 
their flag by the English, the French 
would also treat it with the same 
degree of respect. 
- These remonstrances of the French 
resident were answered by stating 
to him, that, according to the terms 
of the treaty of 1778, neutral pro- 
perty had been declared secure in 
American vessels: but that no such 
stipulations were contained in the 
present treaty between England and 
America. But the propriety of this 
answer was pronounced inadmissible 
by the French. It was absurd, they 
said, that any state should assent to 
the continuance of a treaty, when 
they found it was to be converted 
into an instrument of the deepest 
injury to their interests. For the 
Americans to insist on the validity 
of such a treaty was an insult to 
the understanding of the French, to 
which it could not be expeéted they 
were either so unwise, or so pusil- 
lanimous, to submit ; nor could the 
Americans reconcile to any princie 
ple of justice, or of honour, the 
breach of that article in the treaty 
with France, by which they had 
bound themselves to guarantee the 
French colonies, in the West Indies, 
against the attempts of the English. 
The reciprocal jealousies excited 
by these various transaétions were 
greatly heightened by the motives 
which were understood in France 
to have influenced the recall of Mr. 
Monroe from his embassy, and the 
nomination of Mr. Pinkney in his 
stead. These were the reputed 
partiality of the one to the French, 
and the contrary disposition of the 
other. When the former took leave 
of the direétory, they did not omit 
, this 
