HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



[53 



state, the French government never 

 failed, either by a declaration in the 

 name of the king, or simply by a 

 ministerial letter, to prescribe the 

 decision that was to be given, or 

 even, in certain cases, to modify 

 the decisions already made. 



The French government was in- 

 duced to observe more than usual 

 management and respect, in their 

 treatment of neutral vessels, by their 

 new connection of friends and allies, 

 with the revolted British colonies in 

 America, in 1778: because every 

 thing that should be done in favour 

 of neutral ships, and of the free and 

 unmolested navigation of the seas, 

 would be, in fact, a blow struck 

 against England. No sooner was 

 thefamous treaty for an armed neu- 

 trality ratified by the northern pow- 

 ers, than the French government, 

 in order to give an emphatic proof 

 of its regard to neutral vessels, and 

 the freedom of navigation, acceded 

 to the principle and spirit of that 

 theory, and invited the Spaniards 

 to do the same. All French pri- 

 vateers were ordered to pay respect 

 to neutral flags; and the councils 

 for maritime affairs, or, as an Eng- 

 lishman would say, the courts of 

 admiralty, received orders to act in 

 conformity with this new ordi- 

 nance. 



The national convention, inl 793, 

 finding itself in the full possession of 

 all political powers, granted letters 

 of marque, with orders that the 

 laws concerning prizes should re- 

 main on the old footing: on which, 

 as already observed, the executive 

 government took upon itself to in- 

 terpret or modify the maritime law, 

 according to circumstances. But, 

 as any arbitrary interpretati(m or 

 modification of laws is utterly in- 



compatible with a free government, 

 it appeared indispensably necessary 

 to the national assembly, after the 

 executive committee and the com- 

 mittee of public safety, which had 

 for some time taken the manage- 

 ment of the prize business, was (on 

 account of their tyranny ) suppressed, 

 to refer this business, by a decree of 

 November, 1796"? to the ordinary 

 tribunals; and now it was that the 

 French privateers fell with little 

 ceremony or distinction on neutral 

 vessels, as well as on those of ene- 

 mies. To former regulations new 

 laws were added, of a nature to con- 

 firm an opinion, already very preva- 

 lent, that privateering could not be 

 too much extended or encouraged. 



The French directory, in 1799^ 

 considered this piratical system, 

 both as it related to the internal 

 prosperity of the kingdom, and as it 

 might affect its credlt,respectability, 

 and general interests in its various 

 connections with other nations. 



In the most flourishing period of 

 the French marine, the number of 

 seamen, as appeared by the public en- 

 rolment of their names, amounted 

 to eighty thousand. They were now 

 reduced tohalf that number. It was 

 the common fate of privateers to fall, 

 sooner or later, into the hands of 

 the English. But, even when suc- 

 cessful, they were obliged to put 

 their best hands into the prizes 

 which they took ; and, when these 

 prizes were retaken, as often hap- 

 pened, both men and ships were 

 lost to the republic. The business 

 of privateering appeared to have 

 absorbed the whole naval energy of 

 the state. The arsenals and dock- 

 yards were deserted. Ships of war 

 could not be manned, for want of 

 seamen. In proportion as priva- 



