in France, and the establishment of the constitution of the United States, were nearly cotemporary events. Till about the year 1793, perfect harmony subsisted between the two countries; but from the commencement of the war between France and England the greatest address was requisite to prevent the United States from being involved in hostilities, with one or the other, and sometimes with both. Goodwill to France and hatred to Britain, which had prevailed more or less from the peace of 1783, revived with great force on the breaking out of war between the two countries. These dispositions were greatly increased by the arrival of M. Genet the first minister plenipotentiary from the republic of France to the United States. He landed April 8th 1793, at Charleston South Carolina, the contiguity of which to the ocean, fitted it to be a convenient resort for privateers. By the governor of the state, William Moultrie, and the citizens, he was received with ardour approaching to enthusiasm. During his stay, which was for several days, he received very unequivocal proofs of the warmest attachment to his person, his country, and its cause. Encouraged by these evidences of the good wishes of the people for the success of the French revolution, he undertook to autho

rize the fitting and arming of vessels in that port, enlisting men, and giving commissions to vessels to cruise and commit hostilities on nations with whom the United States were at peace. The captures made by these citizens were to be tried, condemned, and sold under the authority of Genet, who had not yet been recognised as a public minister by the government. Similar marks of enthusiastic attachment were lavished on Genet, as he passed through the country between Charleston and Philadelphia. At Gray's ferry over the Schuylkill, he was met by crowds, who flocked to meet the first ambassador of a republican allied nation. On the day after his arrival in Philadelphia, he received addresses from societies, and the inhabitants, who expressed their gratitude for the aids furnished by the French nation to the United States in their late struggles for liberty and independence, and unbounded exultation at the success of the French arms. Genet's answers to these addresses were well calculated to preserve the idea of a complete fraternity between the two nations, and that their interests were the

same.

After Genet had been thus accredited by the citizens of Philadelphia, he was presented to the president, and received with expressions

of

of a sincere and cordial regard for his nation. In the conversations which took place on the occasion, he gave the most explicit assurances that France did not wish to engage the United States in the war between his country and Great Britain.

While M. Genet was receiving these flattering marks of attention from the people, the British minister preferred a long catalogue of complaints against his proceedings at Charleston. This was founded on the acts already mentioned, which were calculated to make the United States instruments of hostility in the hands of the French, against those with whom she was at war. These were farther aggravated by actual hostilities within the territories of the United States. The ship Grange, a British vessel, was captured by the French frigate l'Ambuscade within the capes of the Delaware, while on her way from Philadelphia to the ocean. Of this ship and of other illegal prizes which were within the power of the American government, restitution was demanded.

The cabinet council of Washington was 'unanimous, that every independent nation was exclusively sovereign in its own territories, and that the proceedings complained of were unwarranted usurpations of sovereignty,

and

and violations of neutrality, and therefore must in future be prevented. It was farther resolved, that the efficacy of the laws should be tried against those citizens of the United States who had joined in the offences complained of. The restitution of the Grange was also agreed to. But on the propriety of enforcing the restitution of prizes made on the high seas, there was a diversity of sentiment; the secretaries of the treasury and of war being for it, and the secretary of state and the attorney general against it. The principles on which a concurrence of sentiment had taken place, being considered as settled, the secretary of state was desired to communicate them to the ministers of France and of Britain; and circular letters were written to the several state governors, requiring their co-operating, with force if necessary, to execute the rules which had been so agreed upon. /

M. Genet was highly dissatisfied with these determinations, and considered them as subversive of the treaty between the United States and France. His representations induced a reconsideration of the subject; but on the most dispassionate review of it in all its bearings, no reason appeared for altering any part of the system. The minister of France was further informed, that in the opi

nion of the president, the vessels which had been illegally equipped, should depart from the ports of the United States.

M. Genet, adhering to his own construction of the treaty between France and the United States, would not acquiesce in these decisions of the government. Intoxicated with the flattering attentions he had received, and ignorant of the firmness of the executive, he seems to have expected that the popularity of his nation and its cause, would enable him to undermine the executive, or render it subservient to his views.

About this time two citizens of the United States, who had been engaged in Charleston by M. Genet to cruise in the service of France, were arrested by the civil authority, in pursuance of the determination formed by government to prosecute persons who had offended against the laws. M. Genet demanded their release, as French citizens, in the most extraordinary terms. This was refused; but on trial, they were acquitted by the verdict of a jury.

The minister of the French republic was encouraged to this line of opposition by a belief that the sentiments of the people were in direct opposition to the measures adopted by the executive. So extravagant was their enthusiastic