prizes brought into its ports by vessels under this predicament. In the present case the facts are, that the schooner Industry, according to the deposition of Benjamin Baker, of Baltimore, (at whose wharf and shipyard she lay during her additional equipment,) had no more than four or six cannon mounted when she was brought to his wharf; that when she left it she had four 6-pounders, eight 4-pounders, and two howitzers completely mounted; and that from Mr. Kelty's report it appears that he himself was convinced that she had added to the number of her guns, and had made alterations of a warlike nature, but as he could not learn whence these additional cannon had been procured, he did not deem himself justified in refusing his assent to the authenticity of the documents produced by the captain of the vessel, or in detaining her any longer. The privateer Industry was therefore allowed to depart from Baltimore under an augmentation of force more than double to that of her original appearance in that port, and to which augmentation I have reason to believe her subsequent capture of the ship Roehampton is in a great measure, if not entirely, to be imputed.

I have, &c.,
(Signed)

GEO. HAMMOND.

No. 51.

Mr. G. Hammond to Mr. Jefferson.

PHILADELPHIA, December 23, 1793.

SIR: In consequence of our conversation of this morning, I have made the necessary inquiries relative to the sloop Hope, of Antigua, Captain W. John Richardson, and I learn that that vessel was captured on her passage from St. Bartholomew's to Norfolk, near the Capes of Virginia, on the 10th day of August last, by the privateer Le Citoyen Genêt; was sent into this port, where she arrived on the 14th of the same month; and, on the 20th of August, was restored to her master, in consequence of the orders of this Government.

[267] As this vessel appears to be strictly within the description of those whose losses by waste, spoliation, or detention are to be ascertained in the mode prescribed by your letter to me of the 5th of September, I flatter myself, sir, that you will be pleased to give the proper directions for the purpose, with as little delay as may be convenient, since it is probable that the navigation of the Delaware may shortly be closed, and the detention of this vessel, which has so long subsisted, be protracted by this circumstance to a still more distant period.

I have, &c.,
(Signed)

GEO. HAMMOND.

No. 52.

Mr. Jefferson to Mr. G. Hammond.

PHILADELPHIA, December, 26 1793.

SIR: Your letter of the 23d instant, desiring an ascertainment in the mode pointed out in my letter of September 5, of the losses occasioned

by waste, spoliation, and detention of the sloop Hope, taken on the 10th of August by Le Citoyen Genêt, brought into this port the 14th, and restored on the 20th, in consequence of the orders of this Government, has been laid before the President.

I observed to you, in the letter of September 5, that we were bound by treaties with three of the belligerent powers, to protect their vessels on our coasts and waters by all means in our power; that if these means were sincerely used in any case, and should fail in their effect, we should not be bound to make compensation to those nations. Though these means be effectual and restitution of the vessel be made, yet if any unnecessary delay or other default in using them should have been the cause of a considerable degree of waste or spoliation, we should probably think we ought to make it good; but whether the claim be for compensation of a vessel not restored, or for spoliation before her restitution, it must be founded on some default in the Government.

Though we have no treaty with Great Britain, we are, in fact, in the course of extending the same treatment to her as to nations with which we are in treaty; and we extend the effects of our stipulations beyond our coasts and waters, as to vessels taken and brought into our ports by those which have been illicitly armed in them. But still the foundation of claim from her, as from them, must be some palpable default on the part of our Government. Now, none such is alleged in the case of the sloop Hope. She appears to have been delivered within six days after her arrival in port, a shorter time than we can possibly count upon in general. Perhaps, too, the term may have been still shorter between notice to the proper officer and restitution; for the time of notice is not mentioned. This, then, not being a case where compensation seems justly demandable from us, the President thinks it unnecessary to give any order for ascertaining the degree of injury sustained.

I have stated to the President the desire you expressed to me in conversation, that the orders proposed to be given for ascertaining damages in the special cases described in my letter of September 5 should be rendered general, so that a valuation might be obtained by the officers of the customs, whenever applied to by a consul, without the delay of sending for the orders of the Executive in every special case. The President is desirous not only that justice shall be done, but that it shall be done in all cases without delay. He, therefore, will have such general orders given to the collector of the customs in every State. But you must be pleased to understand, that the valuation in such case is to be a mere provisory measure, not producing any presumption whatever that the case is one of those whereon compensation is due, but that the question whether it is due or not shall remain as free and uninfluenced as if the valuation had never been made.

I have, &c.,
(Signed)

TH. JEFFERSON.

No. 53.

Mr. G. Hammond to Mr. Jefferson.

PHILADELPHIA, December 29, 1793.

SIR: I have had the honor of receiving your letter of the 26th current, communicating to me the President's refusal to give any order for ascertaining the degree of injury sustained by the sloop Hope, of Antigua, in consequence of capture by the privateer Le Citoyen Genêt.

H. Ex. 324- -36

Having never entertained a doubt that this particular vessel, from the circumstances under which she was taken, would have been included in the number of those entitled to compensation for damages resulting from waste, spoliation, or detention, the present determination of the President has naturally excited in me considerable concern.

My confidence on this subject was founded on the following reasons: I have always imagined that the resolution of the Federal Government to restore vessels captured by the privateers fitted out in the United States, (or in some instances,) to grant compensation for them, was dictated, not more by a sense of the necessity of avenging the insult offered to its sovereignty, and of represing such practices in its citizens, than by the desire of affording retribution to the individuals who might suffer injury from the unauthorized depredations of American citizens, and from means of annoyance originally created in, and issuing from, American ports. Considering the latter part of this position to be as

just as the former, I also concluded that, as this Government [268] preferred the prohibition of *future asylum, and the restitution

of, or compensation for, any prizes they might make to the suppression of these privateers, while, on their first return to its ports, they were in its power, it intended likewise to comprehend in the restitution of, or compensation for, the vessel, an indemnification for other damages arising from the capture, I deemed myself further justified in forming this conclusion by the single passage upon this point in your letter of the 5th of September, wherein you specified the mode to be pursued for ascertaining the amount of "losses by detention, waste, or spoliation sustained by vessels taken between the dates of June 5 and August 7." Though you advert to vessels in this predicament only, yet as you assign no reason for this distinction, I did not infer from your silence as to all future cases that no compensation would be granted for waste or spoliation suffered by any vessels that might be taken after that date, and restored to their owners. Had you stated at that time, (the 5th of September,) as you have asserted in your letter of the 26th of December, that no retribution would be allowed for waste or spoliation, except it should be proved that they resulted from any unnecessary delay or other default on the part of the Government in restoring the vessel, and upon no other ground whatsoever, I should certainly not have applied to you for redress in the present instance; but, however I might have lamented the decision, should have waited until I could have received instructions from my court upon the subject.

To the principle now established in your letter of the 26th current, the case of the sloop Hope is certainly not applicable, for I most readily admit that no unnecessary delay in effecting her restitution occurred on the part of the Government. At the same time, you will permit me, sir, to observe, that waste and spoliation of every material of a vessel (the hull indeed alone excepted) can be committed to as great an extent in the space of a few hours as of any longer period. And that the sloop Hope actually suffered very considerable waste and spoliation previ ously to her restitution, will be fully evinced by the authentic documents which I have the honor of inclosing.

It is not my intention to urge further this particular case for the present; but whatever may be the ultimate decision upon it, I cannot but indulge the hope that, in all future cases of a similar nature, this Government may be induced to adopt the more comprehensive principle I had attributed to it, viz: to grant a compensation for all damages from waste, spoliation, or detention that may occur to prizes made by the proscribed privateers. The danger to be apprehended from these

last-mentioned vessels still continues to exist to a very alarming degree, since notwithstanding the repeated assurances I have received from the Federal Government of its determination to exclude those privateers from any future asylum in its ports, and the sincerity of its desire to enforce this determination, I have reason to infer that, in other quarters, means have been successfully devised, either to elude its vigilance, or to render nugatory its injunctions. This inference arises from the information I have received-that the privateer Le Citoyen Genêt, fitted out at Charleston, was on the 21st of August permitted to return to the port of Philadelphia for the second time, to remain there some days, and then to proceed to sea for the purpose of committing new depredations, which, as it appears from the public prints, she is now prosecuting in the adjacent seas; that Le Petit Democrat and La Carmagnole, both fitted out in the Delaware, were permitted to enter the port of New York, and to continue therein unmolested during a great part of the months of August, September, and October last; that the latter vessel is still in that port, and that the former, having sailed from thence in company with the French fleet under the command of Admiral Sercey, and having separated from it at sea, proceeded first to Boston, and. afterward returned for the second time to New York, wherein she at present remains.

I have thought it my duty to relate these last-mentioned particulars. in the manner in which they have been communicated to me; but if my information has been erroneous, it will afford me the sincerest satisfac-tion to have my error corrected.

I have, &c.,
(Signed)

GEO. HAMMOND.

No. 54.

Extract from the speech of President Washington to both Houses of Congress, December 3, 1793.-(Sent by Mr. G. Hammond to Lord Grenville, 22d February, 1794.)

[Extract.]

Fellow-citizens of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:

Since the commencement of the term for which I have been again called into office, no fit occasion has arisen for expressing to my fellowcitizens at large the deep and respectful sense which I feel of the renewed testimony of public approbation. While, on the one hand, it awakened my gratitude for all those instances of affectionate partiality with which I have been honored by my country, on the other it could not prevent an earnest wish for that retirement from which no private consideration should ever have torn me. But influenced by the belief that my conduct would be estimated according to its real motives, and that the people, and the authorities derived from them, would support exertions having nothing personal for their object, I have obeyed the suffrage which commanded me to resume the executive power, and I humbly implore that Being, on whose will the fate of nations depends,. to crown with success our mutual endeavors for the general happiness. As soon as the war in Europe had embraced those powers with whom the United States have the most extensive relations, there was reason to apprehend that our intercourse with them might be interrupted, and our disposition for peace drawn into question by the suspicions too often.

entertained by belligerent nations. It seemed, therefore, to be my duty to admonish our citizens of the consequences of a contraband trade and of hostile acts to any of the parties, and to obtain, by a declaration of the existing legal state of things, an easier admission of our right to the immunities belonging to our situation. Under these impressions, the proclamation which will be laid before you was issued. [269] *In this posture of affairs, both new and delicate, I resolved to adopt general rules which should conform to the treaties and assert the privileges of the United States. These were reduced into a system, which will be communicated to you. Although I have not thought myself at liberty to forbid the sale of the prizes permitted by our treaty of commerce with France to be brought into our ports, I have not refused to cause them to be restored when they were taken within the protection of our territory, or by vessels commissioned or equipped in a warlike form within the limits of the United States.

It rests with the wisdom of Congress to correct, improve, or enforce this plan of procedure, and it will probably be found expedient to extend the legal code and the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States to many cases which, though dependent on principles already recognized, demand some further provisions.

When individuals shall, within the United States, array themselves in hostility against any of the powers at war, or enter upon military expeditions or enterprises within the jurisdiction of the United States, or usurp and exercise judicial authority within the United States, or where the penalties or violations of the law of nations may have been indistinctly marked, or are inadequate, these offenses cannot receive too early and close an attention, and require prompt and decisive remedies. Whatsoever those remedies may be, they will be well administered by the judiciary, who possess a long-established course of investigation, effectual process, and officers in the habit of executing it.

In like manner, as several of the courts have doubted, under particular circumstances, their power to liberate the vessels of a nation at peace, and even of a citizen of the United States, although seized under a false color of being hostile property, and have denied their power to liberate certain captures within the protection of our territory, it would seem proper to regulate their jurisdiction in these points. But if the Executive is to be the resort in either of the two last-mentioned cases, it is hoped that he will be authorized by law to have facts ascertained by the courts when, for his own information, he shall request it.

PHILADELPHIA, December 3, 1793.

No. 55.

Instructions to the collectors of the customs.-(Communicated to Congress December, 1793, and sent by Mr. G. Hammond to Lord Grenville, 22d February, 1794.)

[Circular.]

PHILADELPHIA, August 4, 1793.

SIR: It appearing that repeated contraventions of our neutrality have 'taken place in the ports of the United States without having been discovered in time for prevention or remedy, I have it in command from the President to address to the collectors of the respective districts a particular instruction on the subject.

It is expected that the officers of the customs in each district will, in