Alexandria Gazette & Daily Advertiser

From the Washington City Gazette.

NEGOTIATIONS WITH FRANCE IN 1803.

A view of the negotiation between the United States and France, which resulted in the treaty of cession of 1803, from a MS. work, entitled "Sketches of a Diplomatic History."

(Concluded.)

Statement on the part of the United States.

"The third provision has an object equally distinct and is more important, because by giving it its intended effect, the construction given to the others is fully confirmed, such as it should be after the treaties subsequently entered into between Spain and other states. By the treaty between the United States and Great Britain in 1783, and the free navigation of the Mississippi, are confirmed with the right of deposit at New-Orleans. This provision applies to this treaty, and likewise to the treaty of 1783 between Great Britain and Spain, by which West Florida was ceded to the latter, whereby she was enabled to restore it in the extent contended for, to France. In regard to its operation on the treaty of 1795, between the United States and Spain it was a provision which the United States had a right to expect from the good faith of Spain."

"This view of the subject, which was in substance, taken by the ministers of the United States in 1805 in a negotiation at Aranjuez appears to be conclusive."

With regard to the western boundary of Louisiana the government of the United States never doubted since the "treaty of 1733 that it extended to the Rio Bravo.

The discovery of the Mississippi as low down as the Arkansas in 1673, to its mouth in 1680, and the establishment of settlers on that river and on the Bay of St. Bernard, on the western side of the Colorado in 1685 under the authority of France when the nearest settlement of Spain was in the Province of Panuco, are facts which place the claim of the U. States on ground not to be shaken, it is known that nothing occurred afterwards on the part of France to weaken this claim. The difference which afterwards took place between France and Spain respecting the Spanish encroachments there, and the war which ensued, to which they contributed, tend to confirm it." (36)

Statement on the part of Spain.

"The third clause, like the second, qualifies the first. According to this, Louisiana must be, as to extent, not merely "what it was in the hands of Spain," or "when France possessed it; but such as it ought to be under the treaties subsequently made by Spain with other powers." What are the treaties here alluded to? Those of 1673, of 1783 and of 1795. By the first, Spain became a party to the dismemberment of Louisiana and to the cession of the eastern section thereof to Great Britain.-- by the second, she received this eastern section under the name of West Florida, to Great Britain with the limits it had as a British Province and of course with the Mississippi and Iberville rivers as its western boundary ; which, in effect, was declaring anew, that these rivers form the eastern boundary of Louisiana : By the third, was vested in the United States a right of deposit in her principal port of New-Orleans and to keep good her faith on this head, this provision became necessary.

On the subject of western boundary, we but remark that the pretended rights of France to the Bay of St. Bernard, did not survive the treaty of 1719. between France and Spain ;-that from that period to 1762 (more than forty years) (37] while Louisiana remained in the hands of the former, the authority of the latter was constantly and openly exercised, without question or controversy, from the Mermentas to the Bravo; that this long and quiet possession, undisturbed by France and acquiesced in by all the world, was, as it ought to be, a sure title to her, and not to be shaken by obsolete pretensions-founded on mistake and obtrusion, and long since abandoned by the power which made them. (38)

Our confidence in this reasoning is increased by the consideration, that this construction of the third article of the treaty of St. Ildefonso, is not ours alone, but that also of the power to which Spain had made the cession ; that this power when standing in the place now occupied by the United States (with all the interest they at present have in the question, and with means infinitely varied and powerful to enforce their pretensions neither demanded nor received from Spain any territory westward of the Sabine, nor eastward of the Mississippi and Iberville rivers."

While this verbal controversy was going on, the temporary extinction of the old dynasty of Spain and the embarrassments of
the new, could not escape the notice of an administration, equally vigilant and intelligent, and sufficiently indicated the moment, when to a war of words, they might safely superadd a little physical force. The page of revolutionary Europe was also open before them, and abundantly showed the facility and convenience of finding, or of making a state of things, within the colony or dependence of a neighboring & exhausted power, which should give to an act of the most direct hostility, the air only of cautionary or defensive policy. Two men of the name of Kemper, were the first to raise the standard of revolt among the Spanish colonists; outrages were multiplied : insurrections existed; conventions held : a constitution of government, independent of Spain agreed upon and declared, and a Presidential protege elected Governor; but here the pantomime ended, the new Republic vanished like a dream, and the U. States were found in quiet possession of the greater and better part of West Florida!

Of the errors of great men, it has been said, that they are twice mischievous ;- first by their necessary and direct operation, and again by the herd of imitating fools whom they produce. In the hands of a Jefferson, this miserable policy would but form an isolated case, and be restricted to its least possible sphere of mischief; but under successors of less capacity who might even mistake it for a stroke of great political genius-its injuries would be incalculable; and History seizes the occasion to admonish rulers, that perfidy is not policy that justice and wisdom are sufficient for their own legitimate purposes and that the magistrate or nation that creeps and crawls to an object by false pretences and vile instruments, is both wicked and contemptible."(39)

36 See M. Talleyrand's letter to gen Armstrong of the 13th July, 1807 "For more than eighty years no controversy had existed between France and Spain, with regard to the limits of Louisiana.

37 See Mr. Monroe's letter of June 16. 1818, to Mr. Onis.

38 See Mr. Champagny's letter on the western limit of Louisiana written to general Armstrong, on the 3d Sept 1807.

39) This infallible nostrum for territorial enlargement was again employed, in 1812. under Governor Matthews, of Virginia. in an attempt on East Florida, but without success. We have since seen M'Gregor's capture of Amelia Island. his retreat from it and its subsequent occupation by the arms of the United States. Were not Matthews and M'Gregor the Kempfers of a later period? And would it be either extravagant or uncharitable to suppose that the French establishment at the mouth of the Trinity, has an impulse and objects not dissimilar from those we have mentioned.

While the ink is actually flowing from our pen we find it announced, in a southern paper, that "General Ripley was in march to dispossess the French pirate, and seize on the whole province of Texas." We do not ask, under whose authority Lallemand went to the Trinity? because we know, that when a commission was demanded it was refused : but may we not ask, at whose solicitation he made this establishment? and whether, in making it, the support and protection of the U. States were not pledged?

If he has acted without the privity and connivance of government, why has he been so long tolerated ? Why was not commodore Patterson's proposition (to break up the establishment immediately) accepted ? To have willed its suppression then, was alone necessary to have effected it. The answer is obvious; it was imprudent to unmask this new battery on Spain until we were assured that the plunder of that unfortunate nation no longer excited either sympathy or support.