CHAPTER XIV.

Hostility of America towards Great Britain-Deserters protected-- Loss of a lieutenant and twelve midshipmen of the Assistance-Farther causes of disgust and alienation-Stopping ships, and impressment of American seamen-Boston and Ambuscade-Death of Captain Courteney-Causes of disagreement between France and AmericaCommercial treaty between England and America-Insolence of the Directory and their agents-Spirited conduct of the American government-Right of search and detention acknowledged by America-Correspondence between M. Adet and Mr. Pickering-Articles of the treaty-Angry feelings of the French and Americans towards each other-Effects-Decree of France to put to death all English seamen found in neutral vessels-Not executed-Directory wish to borrow money of America-Sensation felt at the proposal — America armsEmbarrassment of France-Affair of Cochrane and Beresford with five French ships-Conduct of Richery at Newfoundland-He threatens St. John's-Retreats-Destroys settlement at Bay of Bulls-Loss of the Tribune at Halifax-Reflections.

THE Conduct of the United States of North America, after the acknowledgment of their independence, had manifested irritation and unfriendliness towards Great Britain. While the French met with the most cordial reception in their ports, we were scarcely admitted to the common rights of hospitality. In the whole of our intercourse with them, from the year 1783 to 1812, insult and injury constantly attended the arrival of every British ship in what were called "the waters of the United States." If a boat landed, the seamen were enticed to desert, and often openly paraded the streets in defiance of their officers; the magistrates of the republic refused to interfere, and exulted in the mortification of their hated and unwelcome visitors.

About the year 1787 a boat was run away with by some of the crew of the Assistance, of 50 guns, then bearing the flag of Sir Charles Douglas, and lying at Sandy Hook; the first lieutenant and 12 midshipmen pursued them in the barge, and the whole of these gallant and promising young officers were found dead the next morning: the boat had grounded in the

mud, in which they were all frozen as they attempted to reach firm ground, nor did we ever hear of the seamen being restored to their ship.

The war of the French revolution increased this hostile feeling. The trade of America, no doubt, suffered much interruption from French as well as British cruisers. The condenmation of her ships in the ports of France was in violation of every principle of justice. While in England they had at least a fair and impartial trial, yet France, with her arbitrary exercise of power, was the favourite, and found numerous advocates in America, where the legal acts of Britain met with unmerited censure. England, it must be acknowledged, committed an act for which France had no temptation-she detained her merchantmen, and took from them all British subjects, in doing which, it frequently happened that an American seaman was taken among the number. The seamen of both countries, speaking the same language, and being governed by the same manners and customs, no mark remained by which to distinguish the natives of the one from those of the other country. Desertion from the British navy had become a most alarming evil, and while England was contending for existence. against the united powers of Europe, America was known to encourage her seamen in this disgraceful practice. It was, therefore, a duty incumbent on England to maintain her rights over her seamen, though in a manner the least incompatible with those of America. That American seamen were occasionally impressed I have admitted; I also know, that when claimed, and proved to be such, they were invariably released ; and from my own experience I can assert, that when the impolicy of the American government in 1812 had induced it to declare war against us, all American seamen serving in our ships were gratuitously sent to their own country.

When, in the year 1794, the French West India trade put into the Chesapeake for convoy and fictitious papers, Great Britain was justly incensed. The transhipment of French cargoes into American bottoms, and the use of simulated papers to cover the property of our enemies, excited suspicions which increased the breach between the two nations. Had the great convoy, which it was the object of Lord Howe and Admiral Montagu to intercept and of Villaret to save, been captured, the open hostility of America might probably have followed the event. By the return of the British admirals into port, after the battle of the 1st of June, the Americans escaped the intended blow, and preserved a sort of armed neutrality for a few years longer, always exhibiting a partiality in favour of France. The Ambuscade, a French frigate of the large class,

or what was called an 18-pound ship, with 300 men, was lying at New York, and Captain George William Augustus Courteney, of the Boston, of 32 guns and 220 men, appeared off that port in hopes of meeting and trying the fortune of war. The Boston stood in under French colours; the Ambuscade, supposing her to be a consort, sent an officer, whom Courteney detained, and kept or sank the boat. This brought out the French frigate, and on board of her came, we believe, 100 American volunteers, armed with rifles, committing by this act a flagrant violation of the law of nations. The Boston was a ship of 700 tons, of a class which I have already described as defective, and consequently very unequal to the enterprise which her gallant commander had undertaken. The action soon began, and continued with great bravery on both sides, until the iron hammock-rail of the quarter-deck being struck by a shot, a part of it took Captain Courteney on the back of the neck, and he fell, but no blood followed. The first licutenant caused the body to be immediately thrown overboard, lest, as he said, it should" dishearten the people;" and, after this prudent precaution, hauled away from the enemy, who had no inclination to follow him. The Boston, having 11 men killed and 37 wounded, returned to Newfoundland, where Captain James Nichol Morris, of the Pluto sloop of war, was appointed to command her. This statement has been confirmed by the late Captain Robert Kerr, who was second lieutenant of the Boston in the action.

The Ambuscade returned to New York, with what loss I never heard. Here she was received by the Americans with every demonstration of joy, for what they were pleased to call a victory, but which was in fact only a drawn battle between two ships unequally matched.

The fate of Captain Courteney was deeply lamented, and the king, as a mark of his royal approbation, was pleased to settle a pension of £200 a-year on his widow, and £50 a-year on each of his two daughters.*

The good understanding between France and America appears to have continued till the end of 1795; when we find that the colours of the French republic were presented to the President of the United States.

General Washington, who at that time filled the important situation, was as remarkable for the liberality of his sentiments

I have the honour of being personally acquainted with these amiable ladies; the subject of the above action has been frequently discussed between us. Mrs. Courteney (now Mrs. Brune Prideaux) admits that she always had the same impression of the fate of her husband as stated by me.

in peace, as for his wisdom and valour in war. Having nobly fought for his country in the field, he devoted the remainder of his life to her service in the cabinet, without partaking of those national prejudices common to the unenlightened in every country. The independence of America secured, he saw no advantage to the Union by cherishing animosity between the parent state and its offspring, and resolved to do all in his power in order to render the industry and productions of each country mutually serviceable to both. For this benevolent and wise purpose he despatched Mr. Jay to London, who, after much discussion, concluded a commercial treaty with the court of St. James's. The democratic sentiment which prevailed in America rendered the people extremely jealous of the prerogative which the constitution had given to the President of concluding treaties with foreign powers, although by the advice and with the consent of the senate. At this treaty the enemies of Great Britain in France and America expressed much dissatisfaction, and their partisans in the House of Representatives demanded the official correspondence which led to its conclusion. This Washington refused, giving the clearest and most unanswerable reasons for his decision. The Directory of France, considering itself the head of all republics, and particularly of that of America, was deeply offended that that government should presume without their consent to make a treaty with a monarchy, and that monarchy, of all others, the most inimical to France. A very strong and insolent note was addressed to Mr. Pickering by the citizen Adet on the subject of the treaty. "He has the honour," he says, 66 of transmitting to the Secretary of State of the United States of America, a resolution taken by the executive government of the French republic in July 1796, relative to the conduct which the ships of war of the republic of France are to hold towards neutral vessels. The flag of the republic will treat the flag of neutrals in the same manner as they shall suffer it to be treated by the English." This dictatorial tone assumed by the French government was not likely to conciliate the favour of a nation jealous of its liberty, and proud of its newly-won independence. Accordingly, the American government highly resented this language, and prepared to resist all encroachments on their rights. The great cause of complaint against America was, that she had permitted her vessels, laden with provisions and bound to France, to be detained by British cruisers, and condemned in British ports without a declaration of war. The minister of the French republic, not content with censuring the American government and councils for permitting these "infractions of the rights of nations," called upon the President

of the United States to resent the conduct of Great Britain for impressing or detaining British seamen when found on board. American ships. The note of Monsieur Adet was ably answered by Mr. Pickering, who reminded him that the treaties subsisting between France and America since 1778 were founded on mutual and reciprocal benefit, and stipulated expressly that "free bottoms made free goods," except articles contraband of war; and that consequently America, under this exception, had a perfect right to trade with any belligerent without the consent of France; but, as Mr. Pickering most keenly and justly observes, the note of M. Adet attempts to justify the conduct of France, who, no longer reaping any advantage from the treaty of 1778, was desirous of rescinding or putting her own construction upon it. The following part of the secretary's letter is perfectly conclusive as to the right assumed by Great Britain over American or neutral property during the war of the French revolution. "We are ignorant of any new restraint on our commerce; on the contrary, we possess recent official information that no new orders have been issued.

The captures made by the British, of American vessels having French property on board, are warranted by the law of nations. The force and operation of this law was contemplated by France and the United States when they formed their treaty of commerce; and their special stipulation on this point was meant as an exception to a universal rule. Neither our weakness nor our strength have any choice when the question concerns the observation of a known rule of the law of nations." This was very fair and very honourable dealing.

Of the treaty with Great Britain, which had given so much offence, the following are the principal articles:

1st, To ascertain the limits of the trade on the Mississippi, which was to be entirely free.

2dly, Mutual indemnification by each of the governments for illegal captures and detentions of merchant vessels.

3dly, Liberty of navigation and commerce between the two nations.

4thly, Importation by the citizens of the United States of America of the produce of that country into the West India islands, in vessels not exceeding 70 tons burden, with permission to export to the United States only the produce of these islands.

5thly, American vessels to be admitted into the British ports in the East Indies, but not to carry on the coasting trade of the country. 6thly, Reciprocal equalization of duties.

7thly, Vessels having enemy's property on board to be liberated after taking out such property.