STATE PAPERS. 
tween her and the United States ; 
if by a perfidious condescension it per- 
mitted the English to violate a 
right which it ought, for its own 
honour and interest, to defend ; if, 
under the cloak of neutrality, it 
presented to England a pontard to 
cut the throat of its faithful ally; 
if, in fine, partaking iz the tyran- 
nical and. homocidal rage of Great 
Britain, it concurred to plunge the 
people of France inte the horrors of 
famine!” For the sake of pre- 
serving harmony, silence was pre- 
ferred to a comment upon these ine 
sinuations. 
You are also pleased to refer to 
your letters of March and April 
lust, relative to impresses of Ame- 
rican seamen by British ships, and 
complain that the government of 
the United States had not made 
known te you the steps they had 
taken to obtain satisfa@ion. ‘This, 
Sir, was a matter which concerned 
enly that government. As an in. 
dependent nation, we are not bound 
to render an account to any ojher 
of the measures we deemed proper 
for the proteétion of our own citi- 
zens ; so long as there was not the 
slightest ground to suspect that the’ 
government ever acquiesced in any 
aggression. 
But permit me to recur to the 
subjeét of the decree of the execu- 
tive directory. 
As before observed, we are offi- 
cially informed that the British go- 
vernment have issued’ no new or- 
ders for capturing the vessels of 
the United States. We are also 
officially infermed, that on the ap- 
pearance of the notification of that 
deeree, the minister of the Unite 
Seates at Paris applied for informa- 
tion; £“ Whether orders were issued 
for the. seizure of neutral vessels, 
3 : 
[309 
and was informed, that no such 
order was issued, and further, that 
no such order would be issued, 
ia case the British did not seize 
our vessels.” This communica- 
tion from the minister of the 
United States, at Paris, to their 
minister at London, was dated the 
28th of August; but the decree 
of the directory bears date the 
14th Messidor, answering to the 
zd of July. ‘These circumstances, 
together with some observations 
in your note, leave the American 
government in a, state of uncer. 
tainty of the real intentions of 
the government in France. Allow 
me then to ask, whether, in the 
actual state of things, our com- 
merce is considered as liable to suf. 
fer any new restrictions on the part 
of the French republic? Whether 
the restraints now exercised by the 
British government are considered 
as of a nature to justify a denial 
of those rights which are pledged 
to us by our treaty with your 
nation? Whether orders have 
been a@ually given to the ships 
ef war of the French republic to 
capture the vessels of the United 
States? And what, if they exist, 
are the precise terms of those orders? 
‘Lhe questions, Sir, you will see, 
age highly interesting to the United 
States. It is with extreme concern 
that the government finds itself re- 
duced to the necessity of asking an 
explanation of this nature; and if 
it shall be informed that a new line 
of conduct is to be adopted towards 
this country, on the ground of the 
decree referred to, its surprize will 
equal its regret, that principles 
should now be questioned, which, 
aftér repeated discussions, both 
here and in France, have been de- 
monstrated to’ be founded, as we 
X 3 conceive, 
