| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875
Journals of the Continental Congress --TUESDAY, AUGUST 29, 1786.
Congress assembled. Present as before.
August 29, 1786.
Congress resumed the consideration of the report of the committee of the whole, when a motion was made by the delegates of Virginia, That the further consideration of the report be postponed in order to take up the following:
"The United States in Congress assembled having, upon the report of a committee to whom was referred the commission of Don Diego de Gardoqui, on the 20 July, 1785, Resolved, That the henble John Jay, secretary to the United States of America for the department of foreign affairs, be and hereby is invested with full power, in behalf of the U.S. of America, to treat, adjust, conclude and sign with Don Diego de Gardoqui, Encargado
Page 575 | Page image
de negocios of his Catholic Majesty, whatever articles, compacts and conventions may be necessary for establishing and fixing the boundaries between the territories of the said United States and those of his Catholic Majesty, and for promoting the general harmony and mutual interest of the two Nations. That the Secretary of the U.S. of America for the department of foreign Affairs be and he is hereby instructed, previous to his making propositions to Don Diego de Gardoqui, or agreeing with him on any article, compact or convention, to communicate to Congress the propositions to be made, or received relative to such Article, compact or convention."
And afterwards on the 25 of August following, upon the report of a committee on a letter of the Secretary for foreign Affairs, complaining of the restrictions imposed on him in the said instructions, Resolved, That the last paragraph in the instructions to the Secretary to the U. S. for the department of foreign Affairs, passed the 20 of July, 1785, for entering into a treaty, compact or convention with the Encargado de Negocios of his C. M., in the words following: "That the Secretary of the U.S. of America for the department of foreign Affairs be and hereby is instructed, previous to his making propositions to Don Diego de Gardoqui, or agreeing with him on any Article, compact or convention, to communicate to Congress the propositions to be made or received relative to such article, compact or convention," be repealed, and that the following be substituted in its place: "That the Secretary to the U. S. for the department of foreign Affairs be and he is hereby instructed, in his plan of a treaty with the Encargado de Negocios of his C. M., particularly to stipulate the right of the U.S. to their territorial bounds,
Page 576 | Page image
and the free navigation of the Mississippi, from the source to the Ocean, as established in their treaties with G. B.; and that he neither conclude nor sign any treaty, compact or convention with the said Encargado de Negocios, until he hath previously communicated it to Congress and received their approbation."
And the said Secretary having, on the 29 of May, 1786, addressed a letter to the president of Congress on the subject of the said negotiations to the following effect:
Office for Foreign Affairs,
May 29, 1786.
Sir: In my negotiations &c. (here insert whole letter),1
[Note 1: 1 See post, May 31, 1786.]
And upon being afterwards called before Congress to explain, &c. proceeded, in a written statement of August 13th, for the reasons therein contained, to advise, that the U.S. enter into a treaty with Spain upon the following principles: 1. That all commercial regulations affecting each other shall be founded in perfect reciprocity. Spanish Merchants shall enjoy all the commercial privileges of native merchants in the United States, and the American Merchants shall enjoy all the commercial privileges of native Merchants in the kingdom of Spain, and in the countries and other islands belonging and adjacent thereto. The same privileges shall extend to their respective vessels and merchandise consisting of the manufactures and productions of their respective countries. 2. Each party may establish consuls in the countries of the other, excepting such provinces in Spain into which none have heretofore been admitted, viz. Bilboa and Guipusca, with such powers and privileges as shall be ascertained by a particular convention. 3. That the bona fide manufactures and productions of
Page 577 | Page image
the U.S., tobacco only excepted, which shall continue under its present regulations, may be imported in American or Spanish vessels into any parts of his Majesty's European dominions and islands aforesaid, in like manner as if they were the productions of Spain; and on the other hand that the bona fide manufactures and productions of his Majesty's dominions may be imported into the U.S. in Spanish or American vessels, in like manner as if they were the manufactures and productions of the said States; and further, that all such duties and imposts as may mutually be thought necessary to lay on them, by either party, shall be ascertained and regulated on principles of exact reciprocity, by a tariff to be formed by a convention for that purpose, to be negotiated and made within one year after the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty; and in the mean time that no other duties or imposts shall be exacted from each others merchants and ships, than such as may be payable by natives in like cases. 4. That inasmuch as the U.S., from not having mines of gold and silver, may often want supplies of specie for a circulating medium, his C. M, as a proof of his good will, agrees to order the masts and timber which may from time to time be wanted for his royal navy, to be purchased and paid for in specie in the U.S.; provided the said masts and timber shall be of equal quality, and when brought to Spain shall not cost more than the like may there be had from other countries. 5. It is agreed that the articles commonly inserted in other treaties of commerce for mutual and reciprocal convenience shall be inserted in this; and that this treaty, and every article of stipulation therein, shall continue in full force foryears, to be computed from the day of the date thereof. In consideration
Page 578 | Page image
for which we are to forbear the navigation of the Mississippi for years.
1The Secretary having thus, agreeably to his statement aforesaid, conducted the negotiation committed to his care with the Encargado of Spain to a point, it becomes the duty of the United States to examine well the measures they now take, that they may be calculated to secure the friendship of the catholic King, and preserve at the same time the honour and the interests of the confederacy. These must be either in conformity with the opinions of the Secretary, or, from a conviction of their impropriety, by adopting some other plan, which shall appear preferable to it; it will therefore be well, in the first instance, to examine the plan itself.
[Note 1: 1 At this point Roger Alden takes up the entry.]
The Secretary hath united the project of a commercial treaty with Spain, with the interfering claims of the two powers respecting the boundaries and the Mississippi, and proposes, that to obtain what he calls liberal terms in commerce, we should by compact forbear the use of the navigation of the Mississippi for the period of the treaty; that the claims of the parties respecting the boundaries remain as they are, to be the subject of future discussion and compromise. The project is a plain and simple one. It proposes to give the merchants, the vessels, and the productions and manufactures of each country in the ports of each other, viz. those of Spain in the ports of the United States, and those of the United States in the ports of Spain and the Canaries, the same privileges as if they were those of the Country itself. It behooves us, therefore, in the first instance to inquire, what alteration this will make in those instances from the condition on which we now stand. Secondly, whether this alteration, if there should be any, will be beneficial to the United States.
Page 579 | Page image
Page 580 | Page image
our productions, will be received into the ports of Spain and the Canaries, upon different terms from those on which they are now received? If this is not the case, let the contrary be shewn.
But how will the Secretary's project affect us? The merchants of Spain shall have in our ports the rights of the native merchants of America. When we consider that our commerce is subjected, in every article, to the most severe restrictions, in almost every foreign port; that under the necessary encouragement given by France and Britain to their own fisheries, that Article is excluded from their ports; that the Mediterranean sea is shut against us; and that it is the interest of those powers, as it would after this treaty be that of Spain also, it should be so always; that the West India Islands are also occluded almost altogether; that the wheat and rice trade is from these causes greatly injured; that the Tobacco is a monopoly in the hands of the farmers General in France; in Spain a contraband. Thus banished from the European countries and their dependencies, one would suppose it the duty of every wise American Statesman to secure our rights and interests at home; to give in our own ports to our own citizens exclusive privileges: but of this advantage the project would deprive them.
Spain shall be admitted into the carriage of our productions, &c. upon the same footing that we are into that of hers. If the materials of both parties were such as to employ the same number of vessels in the carriage, such a compact would, on the part of these States, in their circumstances, be unwise. But when we consider how few ships will be employed in the carriage of the productions, &c. of Spain, how unimportant they are in point of bulk and proportion to that
Page 581 | Page image
of the productions of these States, the disadvantage of the stipulation must obviously occur. How contrary would such a stipulation be to the policy of Great Britain. To the policy of her navigation act, an act founded on very different principles from those the project proposed and which gives to her own subjects, in their intercourse with all other nations, high privileges and immunities they do not enjoy. To the wisdom of this act and her other regulations in commerce, it is owing, that she hath attained to such a height of power and grandeur on the Seas, as to be at the same time the terror and the admiration of the world; that her subjects have obtained such commercial wealth and astonishing resources, as to be able to support her in the most splendid enterprises, and the longest and most difficult wars that her councils could devise, or the change of fortune expose her to. Yet of the right of adopting and pursuing such a system of policy, or in any degree discriminating in favour of our own carriage, would the project deprive us.
Spain shall have a right to bring her manufactures, &c. here, and take off our own, (Tobacco excepted) in the same manner as they were her own. It is difficult to understand the nature of this engagement. If by this it is meant that productions, &c. of the one shall of right be admitted into the ports of the other, independent of the will of the other, after this treaty for that term, the duties remaining as they are, (Tobacco only excepted) its operation is very extensive and important. The States The parties have in that instance given up the right of prohibition or restriction on Imports or exports, which do not apply at the time to similar articles of their own. The case is perhaps without a precedent, and one would suppose it never could have one, unless
Page 582 | Page image
the family compact between the different branches of the house of Bourbon may be considered as such, which was even between those nations found inconvenient; and afterwards by the treaty of Paris, in 1763, annulled. Independent Nations have always heretofore retained to themselves the right of regulating their own interior police, which they could not do if thus connected, and made dependent on that of others, and by that means of securing to themselves a reciprocity in their intercourse with other nations. Many are the purposes to which the exercise of this power in different countries is made subservient, depending in each on a variety of circumstances; the nature of the Government, the manners of the people, state of population, resources, and the purposes to which it might incline to turn them, with others, that upon examination might occur. But here they might be defeated. If, for instance, the object was to promote virtue and frugality, by prohibiting the importation of foreign luxuries; if to encourage Manufactures and to countenance the mechanical Arts at home, by prohibiting imports from other countries, the right by this treaty would be abrogated. In short, the police of these States would be so interwoven with that of Spain, and the management of her own System made so dependent on her will, that we should not be able to act on it afterwards. Such a stipulation would also be contrary to the federal compact; for by it each State retains the right of prohibiting the importation or exportation of any species of goods or commodities whatever. If such then is its purport, it is in direct violation of the compact itself, and of course void. If it is our intention to merit and preserve the confidence of our constituents, we should hold this compact sacred: and if to support any Character among the Nations of the Earth, we
Page 583 | Page image
should enter into no engagements we cannot fulfil. It is sufficiently low already; we need not debase it further. If, on the other hand, they retain the right of prohibiting, or of encouraging imports and exports, by imposing what duties they may from time to time think proper, under this restriction only, that their Subjects and Citizens respectively shall pay in the ports of each other the duties of Natives only, the effect will be very confined and unimportant. It is still within the power of each Nation to suspend all commercial intercourse with the other; for by prohibiting the importation of the Manufactures and productions of the other, by its own Subjects or Citizens, the prohibition is extended to those of the other, and the commerce at an end; each party still retains the right of contracting with others, and without restraint. For instance, Spain might covenant with France to admit her flour or fish into her ports, paying the duty of five per cent. ad valorem; and afterwards impose twenty per cent. on similar Articles from these States. If the same duty on our commodities was imposed equally on her own and our citizens, there would be no violation of the treaty; and thus, while she preserved her faith with us, she would give a monopoly in these Articles to France. So that in either view, this stipulation, which the Secretary holds to be so liberal and advantageous, will not bear a close examination. It presents at first view, in appearance, plausible colours, but when investigated, will be found to be either mischievous, or at best of no advantage to these United States.
[Our treaties with France, the United Netherlands, Sweden, Russia, &c. stipulate to each, "the right of the most favoured Nations." These Nations, therefore, coming into the terms of Spain, will be entitled to these
Page 584 | Page image
benefits; and that they will, cannot be questioned; for in so doing, they give up little or nothing. The evils of this project will therefore be almost universal, and of course without remedy. They will also of right require a consideration for so doing, equivalent to the value of the occlusion of the Mississippi. In addition to which the Article of Tobacco will by compact be excluded from all their ports, as well as from those of Spain.]
Spain is, of all countries, the one from whose commercial restrictions we have the least to fear; and of course the one with whom there is the least necessity for our binding ourselves under any engagements to. Her exports are but few, and her commerce with all Nations against her. Considering it as below their station and appropriate only to the subordinate ranks of men, her Councils composed of nobles the proudest and vainest in Europe, are Britain are always labouring to turn this circumstances to their advantage against each other. Britain hath often wounded her pride by stating her to be under the influence of French Councils and Spain has occasionally given herself airs to show she was not as her late attempt to treat with Britain upon the subject of trade which was as weak as it was unsuccessful. Encumbered with her immense and opulent colonies, the great exertion of the Spanish Monarchy is to keep them together. The price of an Alliance with Britain, is exclusive advantages in trade. This separates her from France; and in the superiority of her fleets puts her commerce and her Colonies together into the Arms of Britain. Spain will therefore maintain her connexions with France, from whose superiority by Sea she hath less to fear, and cultivate the friendship of the United States. A connexion with Britain turns the
Page 585 | Page image
scale against the other powers in favour of Britain, and makes her a british colony. A connexion with France and the allies of France preserves things as they now stand: we may therefore safely conclude, that as the friendship of the United States must form an essential part of her system, that if she fads in the present object, which from the disposition of the United States (made known to her by the Secretary himself at the Court of Spain, in the midst of the war, and while surrounded with difficulties) she must calculate on, she will either come forward and grant fully the terms we require, or at least still seek an accommodation by the most friendly and conciliating attention to our interests. By procrastination she will still court our commerce, and continue to exert her influence with the regency of Algiers, &c. for the relief of our prisoners, and with other powers in our favour by bargain. Unless these advantages become a part of the treaty, we lose them.
[As to the surrender or forbearance of the use of the navigation of the Mississippi for the term proposed, for the consideration proposed, (the right of the United States to dismember the government being out of the question) it is inadmissible for the reasons above stated; but it is also inadmissible upon the principle of the right, and independent of the right, upon the highest principles of national expedience, which apply even if the commercial project were an advantageous one. In the present state of the powers of Congress, it should be the policy of every wise Statesman to pursue such a System of conduct as shall be best calculated to gain the confidence of the several States in the federal councils, and thereby an extension of their powers; but this measure we apprehend would tend to defeat that object. The States who have ceded it, and the
Page 586 | Page image
confederacy at large, look up to the western lands as a substantial fund for the discharge of the publick debt. The value of these lands will depend in a great measure on the navigation of the Mississippi. By suspending this right we depreciate this fund, unnecessarily burden the confederacy with an additional weight, and proportionally injure the publick creditors. By the compact with Virginia it is stipulated, that the western country shall be divided into States, and admitted with the rights of the original States into the confederacy. The spirit of this compact is, that the territory should retain all its rights, and have them promoted under the patronage of Congress. This Act would therefore be a direct violation of it, and have a tendency to fix the weight of population on one side of the Continent only. But the dismemberment of the Government, which this unquestionably is, without the consent of the State interested, one would suppose would prevent even the consideration of the subject by Congress. That the United States have a right to the free navigation of the Mississippi, and the boundaries as established in the treaty with Great Britain, is a truth too well established in the Journals of Congress, and too fully supported by their Acts on the subject, to require any thing to be said at this day in its favour. To proceed on a contrary principle would manifest such a contradiction to their former Acts, and be such a subversion of the rights of nature and the States, as to lessen them throughout the world. It would also be such a sacrifice for particular purposes, as would be obvious to even the most undiscerning. The right, therefore, cannot now be called in question; nor can it be a principle on which we are to act. "Can the United States then dismember the government by a treaty of commerce?"
Page 587 | Page image
To evince the contrary let us recur to the writers on the laws of Nations on the subject.] (Vattel, vol. i. p. 105. book 1. chap. 21. sec. 260. "The Prince or Superiour of the Society, whatever he is, being naturally no more than the Administrator, and not the proprietor of the State, his Authority, as Sovereign or Head of the Nation, does not of itself give him a right to alienate or dispose of the publick property. The general rule then is, that the Superior cannot dispose of the publick property, as to its substance. If the Superior make use of this property, the alienation he makes of it will be invalid, and may at any time be revoked by his Successor, or by the Nation. This is the Law commonly received by France; and it was upon this principle that the Duke of Sully advised Henry 4th. to resume the possession of all the domains of the Crown alienated by his predecessors.
"The Nation having the free disposal of all the property belonging to it, it may convey this right to the Sovereign, and consequently confer upon him that of alienating and mortgaging the public property. But this right not necessarily belonging to the Conductor of the State to enable him to render the people happy by his Government, it is not to be presumed that the Nation has given it him; and if it has not made an express law for that purpose, it ought to be maintained that the Prince is not invested with it." § 265. "The Prince, the Superior of whatever kind, has he the power to dismember the State? Let us answer as we have done above with respect to the domain. If the fundamental Laws forbid the dismembering, he cannot do it without the concurrence of the Nation, or its representatives. But if the laws are silent, and if the Prince has received a full and absolute authority, he is then the depositary
Page 588 | Page image
of the rights of the Nation, and the organ by which it declares its will. The Nation ought never to abandon its Members, but in a case of necessity, or with a view to the public safety, and to preserve itself from total ruin; and the Prince ought only to cede them for the same reasons; but since he has received an absolute Authority, he is to judge of the necessity of the case, and what the safety of the State requires."
"On occasion of the treaty of Madrid, the principal persons in France assembled at Cognac after the King's return, unanimously concluded that his authority did not extend so far as to dismember the Crown, and the treaty was declared void, as contrary to the fundamental law of the Kingdom; indeed it was done without sufficient power, the Law in express terms refusing the King the right of dismembering the Kingdom: the concurrence of the Nation was necessary for this purpose, and it might give its consent by the medium of the States-General. Charles 5th. ought not to have released his prisoner before those very States had approved the treaty, or rather, making a more generous use of his victory, he should have imposed less rigorous conditions, such as it was in the power of Francis to grant, and with which he could not have refused to comply without shame. But at present, when the States-General do not assemble in France, the King remains the sole organ of the State with respect to other powers: they have a right to take his will for that of all France; and the Cessions the King might make them, would remain valid, in virtue of the tacit consent by which the Nation has submitted all power into the hands of the King with respect to treaties. Were it otherwise, no certain treaty could be1 entered into with the crown of France. However, by way of precaution,
[Note 1: 1 Thomson here resumes the entry.]
Page 589 | Page image
precaution, other powers have often demanded that their treaties should be registered in the parliament of Paris; but at present this formality seems to be laid aside."
Vol. ii. b. 116. p. 4. ch. 2. sect. 10. "When a limited power is authorized to make peace, as he cannot of himself grant every condition, in order to treat on sure grounds with him, it must be required that the treaty of peace be approved by the Nation or the power which can make good the conditions. If for instance, in treating of a peace with Sweden, a defensive alliance and a guaranty be required for the condition, this stipulation will be of no effect, unless approved and accepted by the diet, which alone has the power of imparting validity to it. The kings of England conclude treaties of peace and alliance; but by these treaties, they cannot alienate any of the possessions of the crown without the consent of Parliament."
By the second Article of the Confederation of these United States, each State retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction and right which is not therein expressly delegated to the U. S. in Congress assembled. This is a fundamental law of the Nation, and the powers granted in the 9th. Article to make treaties must be construed in subordination to it. No treaty even of peace entered into by the U.S. in Congress assembled, extending to a cession or suspension of the rights of any of the states without their consent, can therefore be valid; much less can such a treaty of commerce, which in point of political necessity can never be so pressing.)
How then shah we proceed in the present critical circumstances with Spain? An honorable arrangement with the court of Spain upon these points, and an advantageous treaty of commerce, though indeed whilst our
Page 590 | Page image
trade is so restrained by the piratical powers, it will be of less consequence [than it otherwise would be,] are certainly desirable objects. A continuance of the negociation in the hands of the secretary alone, as his sentiments are now known [in Congress, and differ so widely from the opinions of several States in this Confederacy,] especially on the points relative to the Mississippi and the boundaries, would be improper. It would give the opposite party a manifest advantage and in short counteract on our part the objects of the negotiation itself. It would also be dissatisfactory to the States in the confederacy, especially those interested in it. [not be advisable.] Upon the first point, therefore, it will be proper to instruct our charge d'affaires at the court of Spain to agree with that court on the principles; the treaty ultimately to be concluded here; that it be negotiated under the mediation of France. Upon the second it will be proper, agreeably to the arrangement at Annapolis, that two other commissioners be appointed with Mr. Jay, the consent of the majority of whom shall be necessary to conclude the treaty.
It is to be observed, that the Secretary hath no power to treat on the subject of commerce, being confined solely to the interfering claims of the two parties as above. The power to form such a treaty with Spain having been committed to Messrs. Adams, Franklin and Jefferson, at Annapolis, on 7th May, 1784, under a commission which had then near one year to run, with all the other powers of Europe, upon principles then agreed on as applying to all. This must be the more obvious from the care the U.S. have always taken to establish the principles in Congress upon which their treaties should be formed, and making their ministers the instruments only of their will, especially at Annapolis, in 1784,
Page 591 | Page image
when their system of commercial policy to be established in treaties was, after mature consideration, agreed to, and men appointed from different quarters of the union, as being necessary to concentre a representation of the different interests. Can it be supposed then, that the commission of these gentlemen with respect to Spain, without even mentioning it, or agreeing on the principles in the instructions to the Secretary, or even mentioning the subject of trade in said instructions, were repealed, and he thus loosely authorized to form a treaty of commerce? [his conduct therefore upon this subject not being warranted by his instructions is conceived to be unjustifiable and dangerous]That their interfering claims, however, may be amicably settled, and that the two nations may enjoy reciprocal advantages in trade, it is hereby
Resolved, [That the charge des affaires of the U. S. at the court of Spain be instructed to assure his Catholic Majesty of the high regard the U.S. entertain for his friendship, and of their earnest desire to cultivate and preserve always the best understanding between his Majesty and the said States. That as an evidence of this disposition they are willing to settle their interfering claims respecting the Mississippi, and the boundaries, upon the following principles, 1. That New Orleans be made an Entrepot for the reception of the bona fide produce of the U. S. brought down the river Mississippi by the Citizens of the said States: such produce to be landed at said port for exportation. That the said citizens be at liberty to return with their boats empty, or with passengers only, up the Mississippi to the places from whence they came. 2. That such produce aforesaid shall pay there, or the merchants exporting it give bond for the payment within six months from
Page 592 | Page image
the date, of a duty not exceeding per cent. ad valorem at the time of exportation, to the crown of Spain. That such produce aforesaid shall be exported thence in Spanish, American or French vessels, those in the bottoms of Spain under the regulations of Spain, and those in the bottoms of America and France under the regulations of the two countries, by treaty or otherwise. That imports of every kind and country to the said port and up the said river, in American and french bottoms, be prohibited; and that all vessels engaged in transportation of said exports shall come to such port in ballast only. That the U. S. be authorised to appoint a consul to reside at New Orleans, who shall be responsible for any violation of these stipulations by the citizens of the U.S. That American factors be permitted to reside at said port for the management of the business of exportation only. That as to the boundaries, they must insist on those established in their treaty with G. Britain. And further to assure his Cath: Majesty, that so soon as instructions shall be given to his minister in these states to this effect, the U. S. will authorise their Minister to conclude a treaty in conformity herewith. But that they cannot enter into any treaty or compact whatsoever with his Cath: Majesty on the said subjects upon any other terms or conditions whatsoever.
That the honble. Mr. Jefferson be furnished with a copy of these instructions, and directed to make known to his M. Cn. Majesty the sincere regard they have for his person and family, the gratitude they bear for his former good offices, and the earnest desire they have of his friendly Mediation with the Catholic King, that by his interposition the interfering claims of the two Nations may be amicably settled.
Page 593 | Page image
That the resolutions of the 20 July, 1785, and the 25th of August following, authorising the Secretary of foreign Affairs to treat with Don Diego de Gardoqui respecting the boundaries and the Mississippi, in the words above recited, be and they are hereby repealed.
That two commissioners be appointed and associated with the Secretary of foreign Affairs, with powers to enter into a treaty with Don Diego de Gardoqui, or such other person as his C. M. shall appoint, upon the following principles. Upon the Mississippi and the boundaries as above; but that they receive no proposition on the said points until he shall be authorized by his said Majesty to accede to the said terms.1
[Note 1: 1 On folio 304, No. 81, II, Papers of the Continental Congress, is the following resolve in Charles Pinckney's handwriting: "Resolved that; two Commissioners be appointed by Congress in addition to the honorable John Jay for the purpose of negotiating with Don Diego de Gardoqui, Encargado de Negotios of his catholic majesty upon such principles as will in their opinion conduce to the interests of the U.S. and the harmony of the two powers provided no compact or treaty shall be signed until the same has been first laid before Congress and received their approbation."]
That they be authorised to enter into a commercial treaty with Spain upon the following principles]: 1st, That each party shall have a right to carry their own produce, Manufactures and Merchandise, in their own bottoms, to the ports of the other, paying in both cases such duties only as are paid by the most favored nations, freely where it is freely granted to such Nation, or paying the compensation where such nation does the same; and so on as in the 3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th resolutions of the 7 of May, 1784.]2
[Note 2: 2 This motion, in the handwriting of clerks except the portions in brackets [ ] which are in that of James Monroe and the portion in parenthesis ( ) which is in that of Edward Carrington, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 81, II, folio 263. According to indorsement it was offered August 29 and the yeas and nays demanded by Mr. Monroe. The words lined out so appear in the original motion and not in the Journal.]
Page 594 | Page image
On the question to postpone for the purpose abovementioned, the yeas and nays being required by the delegates of Virginia--
{table}
So it passed in the negative.
Page 595 | Page image
On the question to agree to the first resolution reported by the committee of the whole, the yeas and nays being required by the delegates of Virginia--
{table}
So it was
Resolved, That so much of the resolution of Congress of the 25 day of August, 1785, being an instruction to the Secretary of the United States for the department of foreign Affairs, as is contained in the following words, namely, "And that the following be substituted in its place; that the Secretary of the United States for the department of foreign Affairs be and hereby is instructed, in his plan of a treaty with the Encargado de Negocios of his Catholic Majesty, particularly to stipulate the right of the United States to their territorial boundaries,
Page 596 | Page image
and the free navigation of the Mississippi, from the source to the Ocean, established in their treaties with Great Britain; and that he neither conclude or sign any treaty, compact or convention, until he hath previously communicated it to Congress, and received their approbation," be and the same is hereby repealed and made void.1
[Note 1: 1 These proceedings are entered only in Secret Journal, Foreign, No. 5.
August 29: The following committee was appointed: Mr. [Nathaniel] Ramsay, Mr. [Charles] Pinckney and Mr. [Arthur] Lee, on the memorial of Captain John O'Donnel for sea-letters for the ship Chesapeake, for the India trade. A copy of the memorial, by Roger Alden, is in No. 41, VII, folio 326. Iris dated August 25 and, according to indorsement, was read August 29. The committee reported and the report was acted on August 30.
Committee Book No. 190.
Also, according to indorsement, was read the letter of Governor George Clinton, dated August 26, replying to the resolutions of Congress of August 23 urging the calling of the New York Legislature in session to grant Congress the system of impost as recommended April 18, 1783. Clinton declined to convene the Legislature and gave his reasons therefor. His letter is in No. 67, II, folio 545--547.]
PREVIOUS SECTION .. NEXT SECTION .. NAVIGATOR
| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |