Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Story
February 24, 1851
Portage Sentinel
Ravenna, Portage County, Ohio
What is this article about?
Article critiques a $5M Senate bill for French spoliations on U.S. commerce (1793-1800), arguing claims are speculative and unjust, urging Congress to pay repudiated Revolutionary debts first rather than these unfounded demands.
Clipping
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
$5,000,000 out of the Treasury!!
We have read the speech of Mr. Hunter of Virginia on the subject of French Spoliations, and we are satisfied that those claims against the government are not just. They were purchased of the original claimants for a mere song—bought and held for speculation with the full knowledge of the weakness of the pretensions upon which they were founded. Still as there is so large an interest involved, we have no doubt that Congress in its usual liberal—or lavish spirit—will generously vote a few millions out of the Treasury, rather than trouble themselves with any thorough investigation. This matter of economy is something altogether too small to engage any very serious attention. It is decidedly the easiest way for members to vote for everything asked for. In that way they avoid importunities, and gain an excellent reputation with the whole race of sharpers and claimants—if not something more substantial.
The Washington correspondent of the Baltimore Sun has some very appropriate remarks respecting the bill lately passed by the Senate to pay $5,000,000 for what are called French Spoliations on American Commerce. He says:
"Some one, of course in derision, calls this a Revolutionary debt. It was a capital hint to Congress that they had better be just before they are generous. I shall have some hopes now that Congress will begin to pay the Revolutionary debts, which were so deliberately and disgracefully repudiated. Not only the Revolutionary debt, but a thousand other engagements of the United States are entitled to preference, as to the period legislation, over the claimants for spoliations committed by France, and to resent which, this country went to war with France in 1798-9 after abrogating all the treaties of alliance and amity with France.
The spoliations were committed in 1793 and 1800. So far from being a remnant of the Revolutionary debt at all. This government never assumed to pay it. The Convention of 1800 did not provide for its payment. Not a man in the United States were bound by those treaties. Therefore the renunciation of the pretensions of France, on their account, was simply gratuitous. It was no consideration with this government for the renunciation of the claims of our citizens."
—Toledo Republican.
We have read the speech of Mr. Hunter of Virginia on the subject of French Spoliations, and we are satisfied that those claims against the government are not just. They were purchased of the original claimants for a mere song—bought and held for speculation with the full knowledge of the weakness of the pretensions upon which they were founded. Still as there is so large an interest involved, we have no doubt that Congress in its usual liberal—or lavish spirit—will generously vote a few millions out of the Treasury, rather than trouble themselves with any thorough investigation. This matter of economy is something altogether too small to engage any very serious attention. It is decidedly the easiest way for members to vote for everything asked for. In that way they avoid importunities, and gain an excellent reputation with the whole race of sharpers and claimants—if not something more substantial.
The Washington correspondent of the Baltimore Sun has some very appropriate remarks respecting the bill lately passed by the Senate to pay $5,000,000 for what are called French Spoliations on American Commerce. He says:
"Some one, of course in derision, calls this a Revolutionary debt. It was a capital hint to Congress that they had better be just before they are generous. I shall have some hopes now that Congress will begin to pay the Revolutionary debts, which were so deliberately and disgracefully repudiated. Not only the Revolutionary debt, but a thousand other engagements of the United States are entitled to preference, as to the period legislation, over the claimants for spoliations committed by France, and to resent which, this country went to war with France in 1798-9 after abrogating all the treaties of alliance and amity with France.
The spoliations were committed in 1793 and 1800. So far from being a remnant of the Revolutionary debt at all. This government never assumed to pay it. The Convention of 1800 did not provide for its payment. Not a man in the United States were bound by those treaties. Therefore the renunciation of the pretensions of France, on their account, was simply gratuitous. It was no consideration with this government for the renunciation of the claims of our citizens."
—Toledo Republican.
What sub-type of article is it?
Historical Event
Deception Fraud
What themes does it cover?
Deception
Justice
What keywords are associated?
French Spoliations
Congress Bill
Revolutionary Debt
Speculative Claims
Government Payment
What entities or persons were involved?
Mr. Hunter Of Virginia
Where did it happen?
Washington
Story Details
Key Persons
Mr. Hunter Of Virginia
Location
Washington
Event Date
1793 1800
Story Details
Criticism of a Senate bill to pay $5,000,000 for French spoliations claims, viewed as speculative purchases with weak foundations; calls for prioritizing genuine Revolutionary debts over these unjust claims, noting no government assumption of liability in 1800 Convention.