History Podcasts

1795- Jay's Treaty - History

1795- Jay's Treaty - History

The "Jay Treaty" was ratified by Congress in 1797. John Jay negotiated this treaty with Great Britain. Under Jay's Treaty, the British agreed to leave areas in the Northwest Territory which they had been required to return earlier, under the Treaty of Paris. This treaty did not, however, oblige the British to observe American neutral rights. Despite the fact that Jay's Treaty was very unpopular, it was ratified by the Senate: 20-10. For the next fifteen years, the United States benefited from the treaty greatly.


With a war raging between France and England, the United States found itself constantly affected by the actions of one side or the other. The British attempt to blockade France and its colonies proved particularly onerous to the United States, resulting often in the seizure of American vessels. In early 1794, British actions had almost led to an American declaration of war against the British. Instead, it was decided to send John Jay as a special envoy to negotiate an agreement with the British over the disputed issues. Jay negotiated with the British for over four months, generally with British Foreign Secretary Grenville.

Jay was able to achieve many of the goals of his negotiations, although not all of them. One of the areas in which he failed to achieve much success was convincing Britain to alter its policies regarding neutral shipping. He could not get the British to stop defining food as contraband, although they did agree to pay for any food seized. Jay was not able to get the British to agree to pay any compensation for the carrying off of slaves during the Revolutionary War, but he had not made a great effort on that front.

He did achieve an agreement from the British to withdraw from the post in the Northwest Territory that they had held after the Revolutionary War. In addition, joint commissions were established to settle boundary disputes, as well as decide on compensation for American goods illegally seized by British ships. Finally, the agreement called for freedom of commerce between the United and Great Britain, and allowed some trade with the British West Indies. Only smaller American ships were allowed to trade, however. In addition, there was a ban on the re-export of certain goods from the United States.

As word of the agreement began reaching the US, opponents of any agreement with Great Britain began attacking the treaty as a sell-out. The full text of the agreement did not reach Washington until March 7, 1795. Washington decided to keep the text a secret until he presented it to the Senate in June. He presented it on June 8th. From June 8th to the 26th, the Senate, which was comprised of 20 Federalists and 10 Republicans, debated the treaty. They immediately struck down the clause limiting trade with the British West Indies. However, after intense debate and strong opposition from the Republicans, the treaty was approved 20 to 10.
Washington hesitated in signing the amended treaty, both from practical and constitutional concerns. Could he sign a treaty that had been amended by the Senate? What legal effect did that have? In the meantime, the Republicans were holding demonstrations against the treaty throughout the country. When Washington heard that the French Minister was involved with Secretary of State in opposing the treaty, he immediately signed the document.

Washington's signing of the treaty calmed some of the passions that the treaty had wrought. Nevertheless, opposition continued. In the next Congress; the House of Representatives, dominated by the Republicans, demanded that the President provide them with a full accounting of Jay's mission and negotiations. Washington refused, claiming that the nature of foreign negotiations demanded a certain level of secrecy. In addition, Washington asserted that a treaty signed by the President after the ratification of the Senate was the law of the land, and that the House had no right to review or oppose it. A growing support for the treaty in the land as prosperity was increasing combined with the continued popularity of Washington to force the Republicans to abandon their opposition.



1795- Jay's Treaty - History

Jay's Treaty
Digital History ID 195

Author: James Monroe
Date:1795

Washington acted decisively to end the crisis with Britain. He sent a 3000-troop army under Anthony Wayne (1745-1796) to the Ohio country. Wayne's army overwhelmed 1000 Native Americans at the Battle of Fallen Timbers in northwestern Ohio, after destroying every Indian village on their way to the battle. Under the Treaty of Greenville (1795), Native Americans ceded much of the present-day state of Ohio in return for cash and a promise of fair treatment in land dealings.

Washington then sent Chief Justice John Jay (1745-1829) to London to seek a negotiated settlement with the British. Armed with knowledge of Wayne's victory at Fallen Timbers, Jay persuaded Britain to evacuate its forts on American soil. He also got the British negotiators to agree to cease harassing American shipping (provided the ships did not carry contraband to Britain's enemies). In addition, Britain agreed to pay damages for ships it had seized and to permit the United States to trade with western Indians and carry on restricted trade with the West Indies.

Jay failed, however, to win concessions on other American grievances. The treaty said nothing about the British incitement of Native Americans, British searches for deserters on Americans ships, or compensation for slaves carried off by the British during the Revolution.

Debate over Jay's Treaty marked the full emergence of the nation's first party system. Jeffersonian Republicans denounced the treaty as craven submission to British imperial power and a sop to wealthy commercial, shipping and trading interests. Southerners were particularly vocal in their disapproval because the treaty not only ignored compensation for slaves but required them to repay prerevolutionary debts owed to British merchants while northern shippers collected damages for ships and cargoes that Britain had seized. In Boston, graffiti appeared on a wall: "Damn John Jay! Damn everyone who won't damn John Jay!! Damn everyone that won't put lights in his windows and sit up all night damning John Jay. "

In this letter, James Monroe, who was then serving as American Minister to France, observes that Jay's Treaty had produced deep consternation within the French government.

English papers were received here containing such accounts of your adjustment with the British administration as excited much uneasiness in the councils of this [the French] government. At that moment however I was favored with your [letter] of the 25 of Nov[ember] intimating that the contents of the treaty could not be made known until it was ratified, that I might say it contained nothing derogatory to our existing treaties with other powers. I proceeded therefore to make the best use in my power of the information already given. I find you consider yourself at liberty to communicate to me the contents of the treaty, and as it is of great importance to our efforts here. I. resume my original plan of sending a person to you. for that purpose. [I]n case I should be favored with the communication promised in cypher, it would be impossible for me to comprehend it. It is necessary however to observe that as nothing will satisfy this government but a copy of the instrument itself, and which as our ally it thinks itself entitled to, so it will be useless for me to make to it any new communication but short of that.


International Issues Driving Jay’s Treaty

After the American Revolutionary War ended, tensions between the United States and Great Britain remained understandably high. Specifically, three main issues remained unresolved even after the 1783 Treaty of Paris had ended military hostilities:

  • Goods exported from America were still being blocked by Britain’s wartime trade restrictions and tariffs. At the same time, British imports were flooding American markets, leaving the U.S. facing a significant trade deficit.
  • British troops were still occupying several forts on U.S.-claimed territory from the Great Lakes region to modern-day Ohio, which they had agreed to vacate in the Treaty of Paris. The British occupation of the forts left American frontier settlers living in those territories open to recurrent attacks by Indian tribes.
  • Britain continued to seize American ships carrying military supplies and force or “impress” the American sailors into the service of the British Royal Navy to fight against France.

When France went to war with Great Britain in 1793, the long period of global peace that had helped the newly-independent United States flourish in both trade and revenue ended. America’s intent to remain neutral in the European war was tested when between 1793 and 1801, the British Royal Navy, without warning, captured nearly 250 American merchant ships carrying goods from French colonies in the West Indies.

The combination of these and other lingering issues and animosities brought the U.S. and Britain back to the brink of war in the late 1700s.


Treaty terms [ edit | edit source ]

Both sides achieved many objectives. Several issues were sent to arbitration, which (after years of discussion) were resolved amicably mostly in favor of the U.S. Britain paid $11,650,000 for damages to American shipping and received £600,000 for unpaid pre-1775 debts. While international arbitration was not entirely unknown, the Jay Treaty gave it a strong impetus and is generally taken as the start of modern International arbitration. ⎝]

The British agreed to vacate its forts in United States territory—six in the Great Lakes region and two at the north end of Lake Champlain—by June 1796 which was done. They were:

Name Present day location
Fort au Fer Lake Champlain – Champlain, New York
Fort Dutchman's Point Lake Champlain – North Hero, Vermont
Fort Lernoult (including Fort Detroit) Detroit River – Detroit, Michigan
Fort Mackinac Straits of Mackinac – Mackinac Island, Michigan
Fort Miami Maumee River – Maumee, Ohio
Fort Niagara Niagara River – Youngstown, New York
Fort Ontario Lake Ontario – Oswego, New York
Fort Oswegatchie Saint Lawrence River – Ogdensburg, New York

The treaty was "surprisingly generous" in allowing Americans to trade with Great Britain on a most-favored-nation basis. ⎞] In return, the United States gave most favored nation trading status to Britain, and acquiesced in British anti-French maritime policies. American merchants obtained limited rights to trade in the British West Indies. ⎟] Two joint boundary commissions were set up to establish the boundary line in the Northeast (it agreed on one) and in the Northwest (this commission never met and the boundary was settled after the War of 1812). ⎠]

Jay, a strong opponent of slavery, dropped the issue of compensation for slaves, which angered Southern slaveholders and was used as a target for attacks by Jeffersonians. ⎡] Jay was unsuccessful in negotiating an end to the impressment of American sailors into the Royal Navy, which later became a key issue leading to the War of 1812.

American Indian rights [ edit | edit source ]

Article III states, "It is agreed, that it shall at all times be free to His Majesty's subjects, and to the citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said boundary line, freely to pass and repass, by land or inland navigation into the respective territories and countries of the two parties on the continent of America, (the country within the limits of the Hudson's Bay Company only excepted). and freely carry on trade and commerce with each other." Article III of the Jay Treaty declared the right of Indians, American citizens, and Canadian subjects to trade and travel between the United States and Canada, which was then a territory of Great Britain. ⎢] Over the years since, the United States has codified this obligation in the provisions of Section 289 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 and as amended in 1965. As a result of the Jay Treaty, "Native Indians born in Canada are therefore entitled to enter the United States for the purpose of employment, study, retirement, investing, and/or immigration". ⎣] Article III of the Jay Treaty is the basis of most Indian claims. ⎤]


Key Facts & Information

ISSUES PRIOR TO JAY’S TREATY

  • When the Treaty of Paris was signed on September 3, 1783, it ended the American Revolutionary War.
  • The treaty set boundaries between the British Empire in North America and the United States, and it also included stipulations regarding fishing rights, restoration of property, and the restoration of prisoners of war.
  • These terms were very generous for the U.S.
  • The key points of the Treaty of Paris included:
    • Britain would acknowledge the U.S. as a free, sovereign nation
    • Britain would surrender previously owned land in the U.S.
    • The guarantee of fishing rights and rightful restitution
    • The recognition of debts to be paid on both sides
    • The release of British and American prisoners of war and territories captured by either side
    • Access by both parties to the Mississippi River
    • A ratification of the treaty six months from its signing

    TERMS OF JAY’S TREATY

    • Jay’s Treaty satisfied both the United States and Great Britain by achieving many objectives.
    • It was named after John Jay, the Chief Justice of the United States and the signatory to the document.
    • The treaty stipulated that Britain would leave all of its posts by June 1, 1796, and that merchants from both countries would have free access to lands on either side of the border, including indigenous groups.
    • It also guaranteed that the Mississippi River would be open to both countries.
    • The treaty also made sure that a commission to settle debts on both
      sides would be established.
    • Americans could trade with Great Britain on the basis that they were each others “favored nation”.
    • The treaty irritated the Americans in two ways. First, Southern slaveholders in the United States weren’t granted compensation for the slaves they lost when they were taken to the West Indies with their masters between 1781 and 1783. Second, the impressment of American sailors into the Royal Navy didn’t end (this would later become an issue during the War of 1812).
    • Article III of the treaty stipulates that indigenous people would be free to pass and repass between the borders to work, study, retire, or simply live, as long as they could prove that they had at least 50% blood quantum (that their ancestry was 50% Indian).

    ISSUES WITH THE TREATY

    • One of the harshest critics of the treaty was Thomas Jefferson, who argued that the treaty only took into account the views of the Federalists in the United States and not of the opposing party – the Jeffersonians – who were more supportive of France in the European wars.
    • Jeffersonians viewed the treaty as a threat to U.S. Republican values and denounced those who supported the treaty as “monarchists” who had betrayed American values.
    • These disagreements further divided the country’s two major political factions.

    HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF THE TREATY

    • Historians have noted that the treaty was harsh against John Jay, as he neglected important issues and settled for more non-important issues.
    • They also argue that, while he did not assert neutral rights, he did manage to include the prevention of war with Great Britain.
    • Some historians argue that the war with Great Britain wasn’t necessarily avoided, but rather it was put off until the United States was stronger and more capable of handling it.
    • Other historians view the treaty as the first positive step in the right direction following years of trials and tribulations following the American War of Independence. They argue that this treaty was the first to establish a special relationship between the two countries and that it calmed any remaining tension.
    • Some modern examinations of the treaty suggest that it served American interests well, while others think it served the British more favorably, as it bet on England rather than France as being the dominant power in Europe.

    Jay’s Treaty Worksheets

    This is a fantastic bundle which includes everything you need to know about the Jay’s Treaty across 20 in-depth pages. These are ready-to-use Jay’s Treaty worksheets that are perfect for teaching students about the Jay’s Treaty, signed in 1795 by the United States and Great Britain, which resolved issues that remained from the Treaty of Paris, which was signed in 1783. It facilitated peaceful trading between the two countries and averted potential future wars.

    Complete List Of Included Worksheets

    • Jay’s Treaty Facts
    • The First Party System
    • Contemporary Issues with Jay’s Treaty
    • Ceremonial Poster
    • A Closer Look at John Jay
    • Jay’s Treaty Crossword
    • Peaceful Trade Picture Cards
    • Special Relationships
    • John Jay Photo Puzzle
    • Opinion Piece
    • Jay’s Treaty Wordsearch

    Link/cite this page

    If you reference any of the content on this page on your own website, please use the code below to cite this page as the original source.

    Use With Any Curriculum

    These worksheets have been specifically designed for use with any international curriculum. You can use these worksheets as-is, or edit them using Google Slides to make them more specific to your own student ability levels and curriculum standards.


    1795- Jay's Treaty - History

    The Jay Treaty. Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, signed at London November 19, 1794, with additional article Original in English. Submitted to the Senate June 8, Resolution of advice and consent, on condition, June 24, 1795. Ratified by the United States August 14, 1795. Ratified by Great Britain October 28, 1795. Ratifications exchanged at London October 28, 1795. Proclaimed February 29, 1796.

    Treaty of Amity Commerce and Navigation, between His Britannick Majesty and The United States of America, by Their President, with the advice and consent of Their Senate.

    His Britannick Majesty and the United States of America, being desirous by a Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation to terminate their Differences in such a manner, as without reference to the Merits of Their respective Complaints and Pretensions, may be the best calculated to produce mutual satisfaction and good understanding: And also to regulate the Commerce and Navigation between Their respective Countries, Territories and People, in such a manner as to render the same reciprocally beneficial and satisfactory They have respectively named their Plenipotentiaries, and given them Full powers to treat of, and conclude, the said Treaty, that is to say His Brittanick Majesty has named for His Plenipotentiary, The Right Honourable William Wyndham Baron Grenville of Wotton, One of His Majesty's Privy Council, and His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and The President of the said United States, by and with the advice and Consent of the Senate thereof, hath appointed for Their Plenipotentiary The Honourable John Jay, Chief Justice of the said United States and Their Envoy Extraordinary to His Majesty, who have agreed on, and concluded the following Articles

    There shall be a firm inviolable and universal Peace, and a true and sincere Friendship between His Britannick Majesty, His Heirs and Successors, and the United States of America and between their respective Countries, Territories, Cities, Towns and People of every Degree, without Exception of Persons or Places.

    His Majesty will withdraw all His Troops and Garrisons from all Posts and Places within the Boundary Lines assigned by the Treaty of Peace to the United States. This Evacuation shall take place on or before the first Day of June One thousand seven hundred and ninety six, and all the proper Measures shall in the interval be taken by concert between the Government of the United States, and His Majesty's Governor General in America, for settling the previous arrangements which may be necessary respecting the delivery of the said Posts: The United States in the mean Time at Their discretion extending their settlements to any part within the said boundary line, except within the precincts or Jurisdiction of any of the said Posts. All Settlers and Traders, within the Precincts or Jurisdiction of the said Posts, shall continue to enjoy, unmolested, all their property of every kind, and shall be protected therein. They shall be at full liberty to remain there, or to remove with all or any part of their Effects and it shall also be free to them to sell their Lands, Houses, or Effects, or to retain the property thereof, at their discretion such of them as shall continue to reside within the said Boundary Lines shall not be compelled to become Citizens of the United States, or to take any Oath of allegiance to the Government thereof, but they shall be at full liberty so to do, if they think proper, and they shall make and declare their Election within one year after the Evacuation aforesaid. And all persons who shall continue there after the expiration of the said year, without having declared their intention of remaining Subjects of His Britannick Majesty, shall be considered as having elected to become Citizens of the United States.

    It is agreed that it shall at all Times be free to His Majesty's Subjects, and to the Citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said Boundary Line freely to pass and repass by Land, or Inland Navigation, into the respective Territories and Countries of the Two Parties on the Continent of America (the Country within the Limits of the Hudson's Bay Company only excepted) and to navigate all the Lakes, Rivers, and waters thereof, and freely to carry on trade and commerce with each other. But it is understood, that this Article does not extend to the admission of Vessels of the United States into the Sea Ports, Harbours, Bays, or Creeks of His Majesty's said Territories nor into such parts of the Rivers in His Majesty's said Territories as are between the mouth thereof, and the highest Port of Entry from the Sea, except in small vessels trading bona fide between Montreal and Quebec, under such regulations as shall be established to prevent the possibility of any Frauds in this respect. Nor to the admission of British vessels from the Sea into the Rivers of the United States, beyond the highest Ports of Entry for Foreign Vessels from the Sea. The River Mississippi, shall however, according to the Treaty of Peace be entirely open to both Parties And it is further agreed, That all the ports and places on its Eastern side, to whichsoever of the parties belonging, may freely be resorted to, and used by both parties, in as ample a manner as any of the Atlantic Ports or Places of the United States, or any of the Ports or Places of His Majesty in Great Britain.

    All Goods and Merchandize whose Importation into His Majesty's said Territories in America, shall not be entirely prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of Commerce, be carried into the same in the manner aforesaid, by the Citizens of the United States, and such Goods and Merchandize shall be subject to no higher or other Duties than would be payable by His Majesty's Subjects on the Importation of the same from Europe into the said Territories. And in like manner, all Goods and Merchandize whose Importation into the United States shall not be wholly prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of Commerce, be carried into the same, in the manner aforesaid, by His Majesty's Subjects, and such Goods and Merchandize shall be subject to no higher or other Duties than would be payable by the Citizens of the United States on the Importation of the same in American Vessels into the Atlantic Ports of the said States. And all Goods not prohibited to be exported from the said Territories respectively, may in like manner be carried out of the same by the Two Parties respectively, paying Duty as aforesaid

    No Duty of Entry shall ever be levied by either Party on Peltries brought by Land, or Inland Navigation into the said Territories respectively, nor shall the Indians passing or repassing with their own proper Goods and Effects of whatever nature, pay for the same any Impost or Duty whatever. But Goods in Bales, or other large Packages unusual among Indians shall not be considered as Goods belonging bona fide to Indians. No higher or other Tolls or Rates of Ferriage than what are, or shall be payable by Natives, shall be demanded on either side And no Duties shall be payable on any Goods which shall merely be carried over any of the Portages, or carrying Places on either side, for the purpose of being immediately reimbarked, and carried to some other Place or Places. But as by this Stipulation it is only meant to secure to each Party a free passage across the Portages on both sides, it is agreed, that this Exemption from Duty shall extend only to such Goods as are carried in the usual and direct Road across the Portage, and are not attempted to be in any manner sold or exchanged during their passage across the same, and proper Regulations may be established to prevent the possibility of any Frauds in this respect.

    As this Article is intended to render in a great Degree the local advantages of each Party common to both, and thereby to promote a disposition favourable to Friendship and good neighbourhood, It is agreed, that the respective Governments will mutually promote this amicable Intercourse, by causing speedy and impartial Justice to be done, and necessary protection to be extended, to all who may be concerned therein.

    Whereas it is uncertain whether the River Mississippi extends so far to the Northward as to be intersected by a Line to be drawn due West from the Lake of the woods in the manner mentioned in the Treaty of Peace between His Majesty and the United States, it is agreed, that measures shall be taken in Concert between His Majesty's Government in America, and the Government of the United States, for making a joint Survey of the said River, from one Degree of Latitude below the falls of St Anthony to the principal Source or Sources of the said River, and also of the parts adjacent thereto, And that if on the result of such Survey it should appear that the said River would not be intersected by such a Line as is above mentioned The two Parties will thereupon proceed by amicable negotiation to regulate the Boundary Line in that quarter as well as all other Points to be adjusted between the said Parties, according to Justice and mutual Convenience, and in Conformity, to the Intent of the said Treaty.

    Whereas doubts have arisen what River was truly intended under the name of the River st Croix mentioned in the said Treaty of Peace and forming a part of the boundary therein described, that question shall be referred to the final Decision of Commissioners to be appointed in the following Manner-Viz-

    One Commissioner shall be named by His Majesty, and one by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and Consent of the Senate thereof, and the said two Commissioners shall agree on the choice of a third, or, if they cannot so agree, They shall each propose one Person, and of the two names so proposed one shall be drawn by Lot, in the presence of the two original Commissioners. And the three Commissioners so appointed shall be Sworn impartially to examine and decide the said question according to such Evidence as shall respectively be laid before Them on the part of the British Government and of the United States. The said Commissioners shall meet at Halifax and shall have power to adjourn to such other place or places as they shall think fit. They shall have power to appoint a Secretary, and to employ such Surveyors or other Persons as they shall judge necessary. The said Commissioners shall by a Declaration under their Hands and Seals, decide what River is the River St Croix intended by the Treaty.

    The said Declaration shall contain a description of the said River, and shall particularize the Latitude and Longitude of its mouth and of its Source. Duplicates of this Declaration ant of the State meets of their Accounts, and of the Journal of their proceedings, shall be delivered by them to the Agent of His Majesty, and to the Agent of the United States, who may be respectively appointed and authorized to manage the business on behalf of the respective Governments. And both parties agree to consider such decision as final and conclusive, so as that the same shall never thereafter be called into question, or made the subject of dispute or difference between them.

    Whereas it is alledged by divers British Merchants and others His Majesty's Subjects, that Debts to a considerable amount which were bona fide contracted before the Peace, still remain owing to them by Citizens or Inhabitants of the United States, and that by the operation of various lawful Impediments since the Peace, not only the full recovery of the said Debts has been delayed, but also the Value and Security thereof, have been in several instances impaired and lessened, so that by the ordinary course of Judicial proceedings the British Creditors, cannot now obtain and actually have and receive full and adequate Compensation for the losses and damages which they have thereby sustained: It is agreed that in all such Cases where full Compensation for such losses and damages cannot, for whatever reason, be actually obtained had and received by the said Creditors in the ordinary course of Justice, The United States will make full and complete Compensation for the same to the said Creditors But it is distinctly understood, that this provision is to extend to such losses only, as have been occasioned by the lawful impediments aforesaid, and is not to extend to losses occasioned by such Insolvency of the Debtors or other Causes as would equally have operated to produce such loss, if the said impediments had not existed, nor to such losses or damages as have been occasioned by the manifest delay or negligence, or wilful omission of the Claimant.

    For the purpose of ascertaining the amount of any such losses and damages, Five Commissioners shall be appointed and authorized to meet and act in manner following-viz- Two of them shall be appointed by His Majesty, Two of them by the President of the United States by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and the fifth, by the unanimous voice of the other Four and if they should not agree in such Choice, then the Commissioners named by the two parties shall respectively propose one person, and of the two names so proposed, one shall be drawn by Lot in the presence of the Four Original Commissioners. When the Five Commissioners thus appointed shall first meet, they shall before they proceed to act respectively, take the following Oath or Affirmation in the presence of each other, which Oath or Affirmation, being so taken, and duly attested, shall be entered on the Record of their Proceedings, -viz.- I. A: B: One of the Commissioners appointed in pursuance of the 6th Article of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between His Britannick Majesty and The United States of America, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will honestly, diligently, impartially, and carefully examine, and to the best of my Judgement, according to Justice and Equity decide all such Complaints, as under the said Article shall be preferred to the said Commissioners: and that I will forbear to act as a Commissioner in any Case in which I may be personally interested.

    Three of the said Commissioners shall constitute a Board, and shall have power to do any act appertaining to the said Commission, provided that one of the Commissioners named on each side, and the Fifth Commissioner shall be present, and all decisions shall be made by the Majority of the Voices of the Commissioners then present. Eighteen Months from the Day on which the said Commissioners shall form a Board, and be ready to proceed to Business are assigned for receiving Complaints and applications, but they are nevertheless authorized in any particular Cases in which it shall appear to them to be reasonable and just to extend the said Term of Eighteen Months, for any term not exceeding Six Months after the expiration thereof. The said Commissioners shall first meet at Philadelphia, but they shall have power to adjourn from Place to Place as they shall see Cause.

    The said Commissioners in examining the Complaints and applications so preferred to them, are impowered and required in pursuance of the true intent and meaning of this article to take into their Consideration all claims whether of principal or interest, or balances of principal and interest, and to determine the same respectively according to the merits of the several Cases, due regard being had to all the Circumstances thereof, and as Equity and Justice shall appear to them to require. And the said Commissioners shall have power to examine all such Persons as shall come before them on Oath or Affirmation touching the premises and also to receive in Evidence according as they may think most consistent with Equity and Justice all written positions, or Books or Papers, or Copies or Extracts thereof. Every such Deposition, Book or Paper or Copy or Extract being duly authenticated either according to the legal Forms now respectively existing in the two Countries, or in such other manner as the said Commissioners shall see cause to require or allow.

    The award of the said Commissioners or of any three of them as aforesaid shall in all Cases be final and conclusive both as to the Justice of the Claim, and to the amount of the Sum to be paid to the Creditor or Claimant. And the United States undertake to cause the Sum so awarded to be paid in Specie to such Creditor or Claimant without deduction and at such Time or Times, and at such Place or Places, as shall be awarded by the said Commissioners, and on Condition of such Releases or assignments to be given by the Creditor or Claimant as by the said Commissioners may be directed Provided always that no such payment shall be fixed by the said Commissioners to take place sooner then twelve months from the Day of the Exchange of the Ratifications of this Treaty.

    Whereas Complaints have been made by divers Merchants and others, Citizens of the United States, that during the course of the War in which His Majesty is now engaged they have sustained considerable losses and damage by reason of irregular or illegal Captures or Condemnations of their vessels and other property under Colour of authority or Commissions from His Majesty, and that from various Circumstances belonging to the said Cases adequate Compensation for the losses and damages so sustained cannot now be actually obtained, had and received by the ordinary Course of Judicial proceedings It is agreed that in all such Cases where adequate Compensation cannot for whatever reason be now actually obtained, had and received by the said Merchants and others in the ordinary course of Justice, full and Complete Compensation for the same will be made by the British Government to the said Complainants. But it is distinctly understood, that this provision is not to extend to such losses or damages as have been occasioned by the manifest delay or negligence, or wilful omission of the Claimant. That for the purpose of ascertaining the amount of any such losses and damages Five Commissioners shall be appointed and authorized to act in London exactly in the manner directed with respect to those mentioned in the preceding Article, and after having taken the same Oath or Affirmation (mutatis mutandis). The same term of Eighteen Months is also assigned for the reception of Claims, and they are in like manner authorised to extend the same in particular Cases. They shall receive Testimony, Books, Papers and Evidence in the same latitude, and exercise the like discretion, and powers respecting that subject, and shall decide the Claims in question, according to the merits of the several Cases, and to Justice Equity and the Laws of Nations. The award of the said Commissioners or any such three of them as aforesaid, shall in all Cases be final and conclusive both as to the Justice of the Claim and the amount of the Sum to be paid to the Claimant and His Britannick Majesty undertakes to cause the same to be paid to such Claimant in Specie, without any Deduction, at such place or places, and at such Time or Times as shall be awarded by the said Commissioners and on Condition of such releases or assignments to be given by the Claimant, as by the said Commissioners may be directed. And whereas certain merchants and others, His Majesty's Subjects, complain that in the course of the war they have sustained Loss and Damage by reason of the Capture of their Vessels and Merchandize taken within the Limits and Jurisdiction of the States, and brought into the Ports of the same, or taken by Vessels originally armed in Ports of the said States:

    It is agreed that in all such cases where Restitution shall not have been made agreeably to the tenor of the letter from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Hammond dated at Philadelphia September 5th 1793. A Copy of which is annexed to this Treaty, the Complaints of the parties shall be, and hereby are referred to the Commissioners to be appointed by virtue of this article, who are hereby authorized and required to proceed in the like manner relative to these as to the other Cases committed to them, and the United States undertake to pay to the Complainants or Claimants in specie without deduction the amount of such Sums as shall be awarded to them respectively by the said Commissioners and at the times and places which in such awards shall be specified, and on Condition of such Releases or assignments to be given by the Claimants as in the said awards may be directed: And it is further agreed that not only to be now existing Cases of both descriptions, but also all such as shall exist at the Time, of exchanging the Ratifications of this Treaty shall be considered as being within the provisions intent and meaning of this article.

    It is further agreed that the Commissioners mentioned in this and in the two preceding articles shall be respectively paid in such manner, as shall be agreed between the two parties, such agreement being to be settled at the Time of the exchange of the Ratifications of this Treaty. And all other Expences attending the said Commissions shall be defrayed jointly by the Two Parties, the same being previously ascertained and allowed by the Majority of the Commissioners. And in the case of Death, Sickness or necessary absence, the place of every such Commissioner respectively, shall be supplied in the same manner as such Commissioner was first appointed, and the new Commissioners shall take the same Oath, or Affirmation, and do the same Duties.

    It is agreed, that British Subjects who now hold Lands in the Territories of the United States, and American Citizens who now hold Lands in the Dominions of His Majesty, shall continue to hold them according to the nature and Tenure of their respective Estates and Titles therein, and may grant Sell or Devise the same to whom they please, in like manner as if they were Natives and that neither they nor their Heirs or assigns shall, so far as may respect the said Lands, be and the legal remedies incident thereto, be regarded as Aliens.

    Neither the Debts due from Individuals of the one Nation, to Individuals of the other, nor shares nor monies, which they may have in the public Funds, or in the public or private Banks shall ever, in any Event of war, or national differences, be sequestered, or confiscated, it being unjust and impolitick that Debts and Engagements contracted and made by Individuals having confidence in each other, and in their respective Governments, should ever be destroyed or impaired by national authority, on account of national Differences and Discontents.

    It is agreed between His Majesty and the United States of America, that there shall be a reciprocal and entirely perfect Liberty of Navigation and Commerce, between their respective People, in the manner, under the Limitations, and on the Conditions specified in the following Articles.

    His Majesty Consents that it shall and may be lawful, during the time hereinafter Limited, for the Citizens of the United States, to carry to any of His Majesty's Islands and Ports in the West Indies from the United States in their own Vessels, not being above the burthen of Seventy Tons, any Goods or Merchandizes, being of the Growth, Manufacture, or Produce of the said States, which it is, or may be lawful to carry to the said Islands or Ports from the said States in British Vessels, and that the said American Vessels shall be subject there to no other or higher Tonnage Duties or Charges, than shall be payable by British Vessels, in the Ports of the United States and that the Cargoes of the said American Vessels, shall be subject there to no other or higher Duties or Charges, than shall be payable on the like Articles, if imported there from the said States in British vessels. And His Majesty also consents that it shall be lawful for the said American Citizens to purchase, load and carry away, in their said vessels to the United States from the said Islands and Ports, all such articles being of the Growth, Manufacture or Produce of the said Islands, as may now by Law be carried from thence to the said States in British Vessels, and subject only to the same Duties and Charges on Exportation to which British Vessels and their Cargoes are or shall be subject in similar circumstances.

    Provided always that the said American vessels do carry and land their Cargoes in the United States only, it being expressly agreed and declared that during the Continuance of this article, the United States will prohibit and restrain the carrying any Melasses, Sugar, Coffee, Cocoa or Cotton in American vessels, either from His Majesty's Islands or from the United States, to any part of the World, except the United States, reasonable Sea Stores excepted. Provided also, that it shall and may be lawful during the same period for British vessels to import from the said Islands into the United States, and to export from the United States to the said Islands, all Articles whatever being of the Growth, Produce or Manufacture of the said Islands, or of the United States respectively, which now may, by the Laws of the said States, be so imported and exported. And that the Cargoes of the said British vessels, shall be subject to no other or higher Duties or Charges, than shall be payable on the same articles if so imported or exported in American Vessels.

    It is agreed that this Article, and every Matter and Thing therein contained, shall continue to be in Force, during the Continuance of the war in which His Majesty is now engaged and also for Two years from and after the Day of the signature of the Preliminary or other Articles of Peace by which the same may be terminated

    And it is further agreed that at the expiration of the said Term, the Two Contracting Parties will endeavour further to regulate their Commerce in this respect, according to the situation in which His Majesty may then find Himself with respect to the West Indies, and with a view to such Arrangements, as may best conduce to the mutual advantage and extension of Commerce. And the said Parties will then also renew their discussions, and endeavour to agree, whether in any and what cases Neutral Vessels shall protect Enemy's property and in what cases provisions and other articles not generally Contraband may become such. But in the mean time their Conduct towards each other in these respects, shall be regulated by the articles hereinafter inserted on those subjects.

    His Majesty consents that the Vessels belonging to the Citizens of the United States of America, shall be admitted and Hospitably received in all the Sea Ports and Harbours of the British Territories in the East Indies: and that the Citizens of the said United States, may freely carry on a Trade between the said Territories and the said United States, in all articles of which the Importation or Exportation respectively to or from the said Territories, shall not be entirely prohibited Provided only, that it shall not be lawful for them in any time of War between the British Government, and any other Power or State whatever, to export from the said Territories without the special Permission of the British Government there, any Military Stores, or Naval Stores, or Rice. The Citizens of the United States shall pay for their Vessels when admitted into the said Ports, no other or higher Tonnage Duty than shall be payable on British Vessels when admitted into the Ports of the United States. And they shall pay no other or higher Duties or Charges on the importation or exportation of the Cargoes of the said Vessels, than shall be payable on the same articles when imported or exported in British Vessels. But it is expressly agreed, that the Vessels of the United States shall not carry any of the articles exported by them from the said British Territories to any Port or Place, except to some Port or Place in America, where the same shall be unladen, and such Regulations shall be adopted by both Parties, as shall from time to time be found necessary to enforce the due and faithful! observance of this Stipulation: It is also understood that the permission granted by this article is not to extend to allow the Vessels of the United States to carry on any part of the Coasting Trade of the said British Territories, but Vessels going with their original Cargoes, or part thereof, from one port of discharge to another, are not to be considered as carrying on the Coasting Trade. Neither is this Article to be construed to allow the Citizens of the said States to settle or reside within the said Territories, or to go into the interior parts thereof, without the permission of the British Government established there and if any transgression should be attempted against the Regulations of the British Government in this respect, the observance of the same shall and may be enforced against the Citizens of America in the same manner as against British Subjects, or others transgressing the same rule. And the Citizens of the United States, whenever they arrive in any Port or Harbour in the said Territories, or if they should be permitted in manner aforesaid, to go to any other place therein, shall always be subject to the Laws, Government and Jurisdiction, of what nature, established in such Harbour, Port or Place according as the same may be: The Citizens of the United States, may also touch for refreshment, at the Island of st Helena, but subject in all respects to such regulations, as the British Government may from time to time establish there.

    There shall be between all the Dominions of His Majesty in Europe, and the Territories of the United States, a reciprocal and perfect liberty of Commerce and Navigation. The people and Inhabitants of the Two Countries respectively, shall have liberty, freely and securely, and without hindrance and molestation, to come with their Ships and Cargoes to the Lands, Countries, Cities, Ports Places and Rivers within the Dominions and Territories aforesaid, to enter into the same, to resort there, and to remain and reside there, without any limitation of Time: also to hire and possess, Houses and ware houses for the purposes of their Commerce and generally the Merchants and Traders on each side, shall enjoy the most complete protection and Security for their Commerce but subject always, as to what respects this article, to the Laws and Statutes of the Two Countries respectively.

    It is agreed, that no other or higher Duties shall be paid by the Ships or Merchandize of the one Party in the Ports of the other, than such as are paid by the like vessels or Merchandize of all other Nations. Nor shall any other or higher Duty be imposed in one Country on the importation of any articles, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the other, than are or shall be payable on the importation of the like articles being of the growth, produce or manufacture of any other Foreign Country. Nor shall any prohibition be imposed, on the exportation or importation of any articles to or from the Territories of the Two Parties respectively which shall not equally extend to all other Nations.

    But the British Government reserves to itself the right of imposing on American Vessels entering into the British Ports in Europe a Tonnage Duty, equal to that which shall be payable by British Vessels in the Ports of America: And also such Duty as may be adequate to countervail the difference of Duty now payable on the importation of European and Asiatic Goods when imported into the United States in British or in American Vessels.

    The Two Parties agree to treat for the more exact equalization of the Duties on the respective Navigation of their Subjects and People in such manner as may be most beneficial to the two Countries. The arrangements for this purpose shall be made at the same time with those mentioned at the Conclusion of the 12th Article of this Treaty, and are to be considered as a part thereof. In the interval it is agreed, that the United States will not impose any new or additional Tonnage Duties on British Vessels, nor increase the now subsisting difference between the Duties payable on the importation of any articles in British or in American Vessels.

    It shall be free for the Two Contracting Parties respectively, to appoint Consuls for the protection of Trade, to reside in the Dominions and Territories aforesaid and the said Consuls shall enjoy those Liberties and Rights which belong to them by reason of their Function. But before any Consul shall act as such, he shall be in the usual forms approved and admitted by the party to whom he is sent, and it is hereby declared to be lawful and proper, that in case of illegal or improper Conduct towards the Laws or Government, a Consul may either be punished according to Law, if the Laws will reach the Case, or be dismissed or even sent back, the offended Government assigning to the other, Their reasons for the same.

    Either of the Parties may except from the residence of Consuls such particular Places, as such party shall judge proper to be so excepted.

    It is agreed that, in all Cases where Vessels shall be captured or detained on just suspicion of having on board Enemy's property or of carrying to the Enemy, any of the articles which are Contraband of war The said Vessel shall be brought to the nearest or most convenient Port, and if any property of an Enemy, should be found on board such Vessel, that part only which belongs to the Enemy shall be made prize, and the Vessel shall be at liberty to proceed with the remainder without any Impediment. And it is agreed that all proper measures shall be taken to prevent delay, in deciding the Cases of Ships or Cargoes so brought in for adjudication, and in the payment or recovery of any Indemnification adjudged or agreed to be paid to the masters or owners of such Ships.

    In order to regulate what is in future to be esteemed Contraband of war, it is agreed that under the said Denomination shall be comprized all Arms and Implements serving for the purposes of war by Land or Sea such as Cannon, Muskets, Mortars, Petards, Bombs, Grenades Carcasses, Saucisses, Carriages for Cannon, Musket rests, Bandoliers, Gunpowder, Match, Saltpetre, Ball, Pikes, Swords, Headpieces Cuirasses Halberts Lances Javelins, Horsefurniture, Holsters, Belts and, generally all other Implements of war, as also Timber for Ship building, Tar or Rosin, Copper in Sheets, Sails, Hemp, and Cordage, and generally whatever may serve directly to the equipment of Vessels, unwrought Iron and Fir planks only excepted, and all the above articles are hereby declared to be just objects of Confiscation, whenever they are attempted to be carried to an Enemy.

    And Whereas the difficulty of agreeing on the precise Cases in which alone Provisions and other articles not generally contraband may be regarded as such, renders it expedient to provide against the inconveniences and misunderstandings which might thence arise: It is further agreed that whenever any such articles so becoming Contraband according to the existing Laws of Nations, shall for that reason be seized, the same shall not be confiscated, but the owners thereof shall be speedily and completely indemnified and the Captors, or in their default the Government under whose authority they act, shall pay to the Masters or Owners of such Vessels the full value of all such Articles, with a reasonable mercantile Profit thereon, together with the Freight, and also the Demurrage incident to such Detension.

    And Whereas it frequently happens that vessels sail for a Port or Place belonging to an Enemy, without knowing that the same is either besieged, blockaded or invested It is agreed, that every Vessel so circumstanced may be turned away from such Port or Place, but she shall not be detained, nor her Cargo, if not Contraband, be confiscated unless after notice she shall again attempt to enter but She shall be permitted to go to any other Port or Place She may think proper: Nor shall any vessel or Goods of either party, that may have entered into such Port or Place before the same was besieged, block aced or invested by the other, and be found therein after the reduction or surrender of such place, be liable to confiscation, but shall be restored to the Owners or proprietors thereof.

    And that more abundant Care may be taken for the security of the respective Subjects and Citizens of the Contracting Parties, and to prevent their suffering Injuries by the Men of war, or Privateers of either Party, all Commanders of Ships of war and Privateers and all others the said Subjects and Citizens shall forbear doing any Damage to those of the other party, or committing any Outrage against them, and if they act to the contrary, they shall be punished, and shall also be bound in their Persons and Estates to make satisfaction and reparation for all Damages, and the interest thereof, of whatever nature the said Damages may be.

    For this cause all Commanders of Privateers before they receive their Commissions shall hereafter be obliged to give before a Competent Judge, sufficient security by at least Two responsible Sureties, who have no interest in the said Privateer, each of whom, together with the said Commander, shall be jointly and severally bound in the Sum of Fifteen hundred pounds Sterling, or if such Ships be provided with above One hundred and fifty Seamen or Soldiers, in the Sum of Three thousand pounds sterling, to satisfy all Damages and Injuries, which the said Privateer or her Officers or Men, or any of them may do or commit during their Cruize contrary to the tenor of this Treaty, or to the Laws and Instructions for regulating their Conduct and further that in all Cases of Aggressions the said Commissions shall be revoked and annulled.

    It is also agreed that whenever a Judge of a Court of Admiralty of either of the Parties, shall pronounce sentence against any Vessel or Goods or Property belonging to the Subjects or Citizens of the other Party a formal and duly authenticated Copy of all the proceedings in the Cause, and of the said Sentence, shall if required be delivered to the Commander of the said Vessel, without the smallest delay, he paying all legal Fees and Demands for the same.

    It is further agreed that both the said Contracting Parties, shall not only refuse to receive any Pirates into any of their Ports, Havens, or Towns, or permit any of their Inhabitants to receive, protect, harbour conceal or assist them in any manner, but will bring to condign punishment all such Inhabitants as shall be guilty of such Acts or offences.

    And all their Ships with the Goods or Merchandizes taken by them and brought into the port of either of the said Parties, shall be seized, as far as they can be discovered and shall be restored to the owners or their Factors or Agents duly deputed and authorized in writing by them (proper Evidence being first given in the Court of Admiralty for proving the property,) even in case such effects should have passed into other hands by Sale, if it be proved that the Buyers knew or had good reason to believe, or suspect that they had been piratically taken.

    It is likewise agreed that the Subjects and Citizens of the Two Nations, shall not do any acts of Hostility or Violence against each other, nor accept Commissions or Instructions so to act from any Foreign Prince or State, Enemies to the other party, nor shall the Enemies of one of the parties be permitted to invite or endeavour to enlist in their military service any of the Subjects or Citizens of the other party and the Laws against all such Offences and Aggressions shall be punctually executed. And if any Subject or Citizen of the said Parties respectively shall accept any Foreign Commission or Letters of Marque for Arming any Vessel to act as a Privateer against the other party, and be taken by the other party, it is hereby declared to be lawful for the said party to treat and punish the said Subject or Citizen, having such Commission or Letters of Marque as a Pirate.

    It is expressly stipulated that neither of the said Contracting Parties will order or Authorize any Acts of Reprisal against the other on Complaints of Injuries or Damages until the said party shall first have presented to the other a Statement thereof, verified by competent proof and Evidence, and demanded Justice and Satisfaction, and the same shall either have been refused or unreasonably delayed.

    The Ships of war of each of the Contracting Parties, shall at all times be hospitably received in the Ports of the other, their Officers and Crews paying due respect to the Laws and Government of the Country. The officers shall be treated with that respect, which is due to the Commissions which they bear. And if any Insult should be offered to them by any of the Inhabitants, all offenders in this respect shall be punished as Disturbers of the Peace and Amity between the Two Countries.

    And His Majesty consents, that in case an American Vessel should by stress of weather, Danger from Enemies, or other misfortune be reduced to the necessity of seeking Shelter in any of His Majesty's Ports, into which such Vessel could not in ordinary cases claim to be admitted She shall on manifesting that necessity to the satisfaction of the Government of the place, be hospitably received, and be permitted to refit, and to purchase at the market price, such necessaries as she may stand in need of, conformably to such Orders and regulations as the Government of the place, having respect to the circumstances of each case shall prescribe. She shall not be allowed to break bulk or unload her Cargo, unless the same shall be bona fide necessary to her being refitted. Nor shall be permitted to sell any part of her Cargo, unless so much only as may be necessary to defray her expences, and then not without the express permission of the Government of the place. Nor shall she be obliged to pay any Duties whatever, except only on such Articles, as she may be permitted to sell for the purpose aforesaid.

    It shall not be lawful for any Foreign Privateers (not being Subjects or Citizens of either of the said Parties) who have Commissions from any other Prince or State in Enmity with either Nation, to arm their Ships in the Ports of either of the said Parties, nor to sell what they have taken, nor in any other manner to exchange the same, nor shall they be allowed to purchase more provisions than shall be necessary for their going to the nearest Port of that Prince or State from whom they obtained their Commissions.

    It shall be lawful for the Ships of war and Privateers belonging to the said Parties respectively to carry whithersoever they please the Ships and Goods taken from their Enemies without being obliged to pay any Fee to the Officers of the Admiralty, or to any Judges what ever nor shall the said Prizes when they arrive at, and enter the Ports of the said Parties be detained or seized, neither shall the Searchers or other Officers of those Places visit such Prizes (except for the purpose of preventing the Carrying of any part of the Cargo thereof on Shore in any manner contrary to the established Laws of Revenue, Navigation or Commerce) nor shall such Officers take Cognizance of the Validity of such Prizes but they shall be at liberty to hoist Sail, and depart as speedily as may be, and carry their said Prizes to the place mentioned in their Commissions or Patents, which the Commanders of the said Ships of war or Privateers shall be obliged to shew. No Shelter or Refuge shall be given in their Ports to such as have made a Prize upon the Subjects or Citizens of either of the said Parties but if forced by stress of weather or the Dangers of the Sea, to enter therein, particular care shall be taken to hasten their departure, and to cause them to retire as soon as possible. Nothing in this Treaty contained shall however be construed or operate contrary to former and existing Public Treaties with other Sovereigns or States. But the Two parties agree, that while they continue in amity neither of them will in future make any Treaty that shall be inconsistent with this or the preceding article.

    Neither of the said parties shall permit the Ships or Goods belonging to the Subjects or Citizens of the other to be taken within Cannon Shot of the Coast, nor in any of the Bays, Ports or Rivers of their Territories by Ships of war, or others having Commission from any Prince, Republic or State whatever. But in case it should so happen, the party whose Territorial Rights shall thus have been violated, shall use his utmost endeavours to obtain from the offending Party, full and ample satisfaction for the Vessel or Vessels so taken, whether the same be Vessels of war or Merchant Vessels.

    If at any Time a Rupture should take place (which God forbid) between His Majesty and the United States, the Merchants and others of each of the Two Nations, residing in the Dominions of the other, shall have the privilege of remaining and continuing their Trade so long as they behave peaceably and commit no offence against the Laws, and in case their Conduct should render them suspected, and the respective Governments should think proper to order them to remove, the term of Twelve Months from the publication of the order shall be allowed them for that purpose to remove with their Families, Effects and Property, but this Favor shall not be extended to those who shall act contrary to the established Laws, and for greater certainty it is declared that such Rupture shall not be deemed to exist while negotiations for accommodating Differences shall be depending nor until the respective Ambassadors or Ministers, if such there shall be, shall be recalled, or sent home on account of such differences, and not on account of personal misconduct according to the nature and degrees of which both parties retain their Rights, either to request the recall or immediately to send home the Ambassador or Minister of the other and that without prejudice to their mutual Friendship and good understanding.

    It is further agreed that His Majesty and the United States on mutual Requisitions by them respectively or by their respective Ministers or Officers authorized to make the same will deliver up to Justice, all Persons who being charged with Murder or Forgery committed within the Jurisdiction of either, shall seek an Asylum within any of the Countries of the other, Provided that this shall only be done on such Evidence of Criminality as according to the Laws of the Place, where the Fugitive or Person so charged shall be found, would justify his apprehension and commitment for Tryal, if the offence had there been committed. The Expence of such apprehension and Delivery shall be borne and defrayed by those who make the Requisition and receive the Fugitive.

    It is agreed that the first Ten Articles of this Treaty shall be permanent and that the subsequent Articles except the Twelfth shall be limited in their duration to Twelve years to be computed from the Day on which the Ratifications of this Treaty shall be exchanged, but subject to this Condition that whereas the said Twelfth Article will expire by the Limitation therein contained at the End of two years from the signing of the Preliminary or other Articles of Peace, which shall terminate the present War, in which His Majesty is engaged It is agreed that proper Measures shall by Concert be taken for bringing the subject of that article into amicable Treaty and Discussion so early before the Expiration of the said Term, as that new Arrangements on that head may by that Time be perfected and ready to take place. But if it should unfortunately happen that His Majesty and the United States should not be able to agree on such new Arrangements, in that case, all the Articles of this Treaty except the first Ten shall then cease and expire together.

    Lastly. This Treaty when the same shall have been ratified by His Majesty, and by The President of the United States, by and with the advice and Consent of Their Senate, and the respective Ratifications mutually exchanged, shall be binding and obligatory on His Majesty and on the said States, and shall be by Them respectively executed and observed with punctuality, and the most sincere regard to good Faith. And Whereas it will be expedient in order the better to facilitate Intercourse and obviate Difficulties that other Articles be proposed and added to this Treaty, which Articles from want of time and other circumstances cannot now be perfected It is agreed that the said Parties will from Time to Time readily treat of and concerning such Articles, and will sincerely endeavour so to form them, as that they may conduce to mutual convenience, and tend to promote mutual Satisfaction and Friendship and that the said Articles after having been duly ratified, shall be added to, and make a part of this Treaty.

    In Faith whereof We the Undersigned, Ministers Plenipotentiary of His Majesty The King of Great Britain and the United States of America, have signed this present Treaty, and have caused to be affixed thereto, the Seal of Our Arms.

    Done at London, this Nineteenth Day of November, One thousand seven hundred and ninety Four.


    1795- Jay's Treaty - History

    There is no signed original of the Jay Treaty in the Department of State file.

    That John Jay sent two originals of this treaty to the United States is clear from his despatches. That only two originals were transmitted seems equally certain. If a third original had been transmitted, the records of the time would mention it but they do not.

    The first of the two originals which Jay did send went from Falmouth by the packet Tankerville , which had been detained a week or more for the purpose of taking the treaty. Jay wrote on November 19, 1794, the date of signature:

    And on November 21 he wrote:

    The example sent by the packet was lost it is reported to have been "cast into the sea to escape French hands" (Conway, Omitted Chapters of History Disclosed in the Life and Papers of Edmund Randolph, 233-34,293). Grenville wrote of the unfortunate "loss" of the packet, misspelled Tankerville (Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 1794-1826, IV, 174). The press of the period recounts that the Tankerville , on account of bad weather, did not sail from Falmouth until December 14, and that she was taken by a French brig near the West Indies and burned (the Evening Mail, London, December 3--5 and 15-17, 1794, and April 20-22, 1795).

    As to the second original, Jay wrote in his despatch of November 21:

    That only two originals were sent by Jay appears from his letter of December 10, 1794 (D. S., 1 Despatches, Great Britain, No. 26, duplicate), from which the following is extracted:

    It appears that Captain Blaney left London on December 17, sailing by the Thomas (Captain Vickery), and reached Norfolk on February 27, going to Philadelphia by way of Baltimore (Boston Gazette, March 23, 1795).

    Blaney's arrival was reported in the letter of Edmund Randolph (Secretary of State) to Jay of March 8, 1795 (D. S., 2 Instructions, U. S. Ministers, 327-28), as follows:

    It was this original, delivered by Blaney, which was sent to the Senate on June 8 for the message of Washington says that it had been received by the Secretary of State on March 7 (Executive Journal, I, 178).

    There can be no doubt that that same original was used, after its return from the Senate, to form part of the original United States instrument of ratification, which was transmitted to London and was there exchanged for the British instrument of ratification on October 28, 1795 accordingly the Department of State archives do not, and seemingly since 1795 have not, contained a signed original of the Jay Treaty. There is, however, now in the file a facsimile of the United States instrument of ratification which is in the British archives as that instrument includes as a part thereof the original signed treaty, the facsimile is in part a facsimile of that original and the text here printed is taken therefrom. It differs from the text heretofore usually printed only in matters of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphing. In the signed treaty, as here, the copy of Jefferson's letter of September 5, 1793, follows the signatures the additional article was, as hereafter noted, the result of the later action of the Senate.

    The procedure adopted in 1795 regarding the ratification of the Jay Treaty by the United States was a most unusual one. While two originals of the treaty had been sent to the United States by Jay, it was known that one of them had been lost. One had arrived and that original was a document of the highest importance, belonging to the United States. Every consideration required that it be retained in the archives of the Government. To return it to London as a part of the United States instrument of ratification was not only unnecessary, but a gravely imprudent step it was unnecessary, for international procedure requires merely the copying of the text of a treaty into an instrument of ratification which is to be delivered to the other party it was imprudent, as it deprived this Government of possession of the best evidence of the text of one of its most essential treaties, a treaty which was constantly a matter of diplomatic discussion up to the war of 1812, which was of practical and historical importance for generations thereafter, and which, indeed, was before the Supreme Court of The United States for consideration as late as 1929.

    Of course the text of the treaty has always been available here, it is written in full in D. S., 2 Despatches, Great Britain, at pages 131-68 it was printed at the time-"a printed and authentic copy of the treaty and of the advice of the Senate " was among the papers transmitted to John Quincy Adams on August 25, 1795 (D. S., 3 Instructions, U. S. Ministers, 27) and the treaty was duly proclaimed but the primary document was sent to London.

    It seems that it was expected at the Department of State that the British instrument of ratification would itself include an original signed treaty expressions in various letters to Deas in 1796 (D. S., 3 Instructions, U. S. Ministers, 95, 99-100, 104) indicate this fact: "the treaty itself, with the ratification, has not yet arrived" (January 15) "nothing but the Treaty itself with the ratification signed by the King's own hand, and further authenticated by annexing thereto the Great Seal of the Kingdom, would be proper for such a purpose" (January 25) "the treaty itself with the King's ratification" (February 27). But even if that expectation had been a reasonable one, as it was not it was foolhardy to trust to the then risk of transportation overseas a single instrument of ratification including the only original of the treaty which the Government of the United States possessed and that transportation risk was a serious one, as the loss of the Tankerville had just shown. If the United States ratification had not safely reached London, as it did, in October, 1795, the Jay Treaty could hardly have gone into force until the following spring at the earliest.

    Furthermore, while it might properly have been thought that the British instrument of ratification, although not including a signed original of the treaty, would be a perfect evidence of the exact text, still that expectation would not, in this particular case, have been justified by the fact for, as is noted hereafter, the British ratification is a quite imperfect paper.

    The Department of State file of the Jay Treaty also contains the British instrument of ratification of October 28, 1795, and the original proclamation of the treaty, dated February 29, 1796. It does not include any protocol or other original record of the exchange of ratifications but with the facsimile of the United States instrument of ratification is a facsimile of a certificate of the exchange of ratifications on October 28, 1795. It is signed by William Allen Deas, Charge d'Affaires of the United States, and is dated November 5, 1795. An initialed copy in the handwriting of Deas is in D. S., 3 Despatches, Great Britain, November 5, 1795.

    Some historians have thought that the Jay Treaty was for some four months withheld from the Senate. Such was not the case. It was widely reported and well known in the United States in the first days of February, 1795, that a treaty with Great Britain had been signed at London on the previous November 19 but its terms were not disclosed, and the treaty was not received at the Department of State until the evening of March 7, 1795, three and one-half months after its signature. The Senate was not then in session a call for an extra session had previously (onMarch 3) been issued the date set by that call was June 8, 1795 and on that day the treaty was sent to the Senate by President Washington. No earlier date of submission was possible unless another and earlier extra session of the Senate had been called for the purpose.

    In this letter of Secretary of State Jefferson to George Hammond, Minister of Great Britain to the United States, reference Is made to two earlier letters, one written by Jefferson to Hammond on August 7, 1793, the text of which (from D. S., 5 Domestic Letters, 218) follows:

    The other was the letter of Hammond to Jefferson of August 30, 1793 (original in D. S., 1 Notes from the British Legation), which reads thus:

    L'Anti-George* Savannah
    Le Citoyen Genet Charleston
    Le Sans culotte Charleston
    Le Vainqueur de la Bastille Charleston
    La Caramagnde River Delawar
    Le petit Democrat Philadelphia
    Le Republicain t Boston
    Le Roland Boston.
    * lost ------------------ t taken

    The additional article was added pursuant to the Senate resolution of advice and consent of June 24, 1795. No attested copy of that resolution is in the Department of State file as printed in the Executive Journal, I, 186, it reads:

    The form of the Senate resolution, being then without precedent, caused doubt as to the procedure necessary for ratification on the part of the United States. On July 21, 1795, Randolph wrote as follows:

    The additional article was recited textually in each instrument of ratification, but was not otherwise drawn up or signed in 8 Statutes at Large, 130, the date thereof is given erroneously as May 4, 1796 reference thereto in the British instrument of ratification is in the following language:

    In the United States instrument of ratification the language following the text of the letter of Jefferson is this:

    Aside from minor matters of punctuation, etc., the language of the treaty provisions in the British instrument of ratification varies in thirty or more instances from that of the signed treaty moreover, the former does not contain the treaty heading, and it inserts a heading to the letter of Jefferson to Hammond of September 5, 1793. Most of the variances between the two documents are not very material, but at least one is. The treaty text in the British ratification was obviously very carelessly copied, notably in the first paragraph of Article 18. There could have been no scrupulous comparison of the documents upon the exchange of ratifications, as is customary.

    Elaborate instructions were drawn up at Philadelphia regarding the exchange of ratifications. It was intended that these should be carried out by John Quincy Adams, then at The Hague but Deas, the Charge at London, was instructed to proceed if Adams did not arrive by October 20 (see D. S., 3 Instructions, U. S. Ministers, 24-32, letters to Adams of August 14 and 25, and letters to Deas of August 15 and 25 the letters of August 14 and 15 are signed by Randolph, the others by Pickering). The language of the letter of August 25 to Deas correctly describes the United States instrument of ratification as including the original treaty:

    The various letters were not received in London until October 3 and 8 (D. S., 3 Despatches, Great Britain, letter from Deas of October 13, 1795). As Adams had not arrived in London, Deas sent (Irenville a copy of the ratification on October 23 (ibid., letter from Deas of that date). There appears to have been no discussion between Grenville and Deas regarding the additional article. As to this, Adams, who reached London on November 11, wrote:

    The despatch of Deas of October 28, 1795 (D. S., 3 Despatches, Great Britain), reported the exchange of ratifications on that day and enclosed a copy of the British ratification. That despatch is endorsed as received on December 28,1795.

    The original British instrument of ratification did not arrive, however, until April 22, 1796, when it was received from Thomas Pinckney it is endorsed as received on that date (see D. S., 3 Instructions, U. S. Ministers, 123, letter to Pinckney of April 23, 1796). Various letters to Deas complained of the delay as preventing proclamation and communication to Congress ( ibid ., 95, 99-100,104-7, January 15 and 25, February 27, and March 9, 1796). The letter of February 27 says that a copy of the treaty, "with the ratifications of the King of Great Britain and of the President," had arrived a month earlier at Charleston and had all been printed in the newspapers the letter of March 9 states that "the President at length directed the treaty with Great Britain to be promulgated, on the evidence of its ratification by his Britannic Majesty contained in your letter of October 28th."

    No "such agreement" as that "to be settled" pursuant to Article 8 of the treaty was entered into upon the exchange of ratifications as therein Drovided (D. S., 3 Despatches, Great Britain, letter of Deas of October 28, 1795). Subsequently an informal understanding regarding the payment of the Commissioners was reached by the two Governments (see D. S., 1 Despatches, Netherlands, 260-78,283-89, letters of John Quincy Adams of November 27 and December 5 and 19,1795 D. S., 3 Instructions, U. S. Ministers, 131-34, Pickering to Pinckney, May 23, 1796 also act of May 6, 1796, (1 Statutes at Large, 459).

    As has been stated above, the original proclamation, dated February 29, 1796, signed by Washington, attested by Timothy Pickering as Secretary of State, and with the Great Seal, is in the treaty file. Its treaty text is an accurate copy of the language of the original treaty which is embodied in the United States instrument of ratification, although it differs from that text in matters of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphing. Following the signatures to the treaty is copied the letter of Jefferson to Hammond of September 5, 1793, and then the additional article.

    It appears that the proclamation is the source of the text printed in 8 Statutes at Large and other treaty collections.


    The Defence No. I25

    IT was to have been foreseen, that the treaty which Mr. Jay was charged to negociate with Great Britain, whenever it should appear, would have to contend with many perverse dispositions and some honest prejudices. That there was no measure in which the government could engage so little likely to be viewed according to its intrinsic merits—so very likely to encountre misconception, jealousy, and unreasonable dislike. For this many reasons may be assigned.

    It is only to know the vanity and vindictiveness of human nature, to be convinced, that while this generation lasts, there will always exist among us, men irreconciliable to our present national constitution—embittered in their animosity, in proportion to the success of its operation, and the disappointment of their inauspicious predictions. It is a material inference from this, that such men will watch with Lynx’s eyes for opportunities of discrediting the proceedings of the government, and will display a hostile and malignant zeal upon every occasion, where they think there are any prepossessions of the community to favor their enterprizes. A treaty with Great Britain was too fruitful an occasion not to call forth all their activity.

    It is only to consult the history of nations to perceive, that every country, at all times, is cursed by the existence of men, who, actuated by an irregular ambition, scruple nothing which they imagine will contribute to their own advancement and importance. In monarchies, supple courtiers in republics, fawning or turbulent demagogues, worshipping still the idol power wherever placed, whether in the hands of a prince, or of the people, and trafficking in the weaknessess, vices, frailties, or prejudices of the one or the other. It was to have been expected, that such men, counting more on the passions than on the reason of their fellow citizens, and anticipating that the treaty would have to struggle with prejudices, would be disposed to make an alliance with popular discontent, to nourish it, and to press it into the service of their particular views.

    It was not to have been doubted, that there would be one or more foreign powers, indisposed to a measure which accommodated our differences with Great Britain, and laid the foundation of future good understanding, merely because it had that effect.

    Nations are never content to confine their rivalships and enmities to themselves. It is their usual policy to disseminate them as widely, as they can, regardless how far it may interfere with the tranquility or happiness of the nations which they are able to influence. Whatever pretentions may be made, the world is yet remote from the spectacle of that just and generous policy, whether in the cabinets of republics or of kings, which would dispose one nation, in its intercourses with another satisfied with a due proportion of privileges and benefits to see that other pursue freely, its true interest, with regard to a third though at the expence of no engagement, nor in violation of any rule of friendly or fair procedure. It was natural that the contrary spirit should produce efforts of foreign counteraction to the treaty, and it was certain that the partizans of the counteracting power would second its efforts by all the means which they thought calculated to answer the end.

    It was known, that the resentment produced by our revolution war with Great-Britain had never been entirely extinguished, and that recent injuries had rekindled the flame with additional violence.26 It was a natural consequence of this, that many should be disinclined to any amicable arrangement with Great Britain, and that many others should be prepared to acquiesce only in a treaty which should present advantages of so striking and preponderant a kind, as it was not reasonable to expect could be obtained, unless the United States were in a condition to give the law to Great Britain, and as if obtained under the coercion of such a situation could only have been the short lived prelude of a speedy rupture to get rid of them.

    Unfortunately too the supposition of that situation has served to foster exaggerated expectations, and the absurd delusion to this moment prevails, notwithstanding the plain evidence to the contrary, which is deducible from the high and haughty ground still maintained by Great Britain, against victorious France.

    It was not to be mistaken that an enthusiasm for France and her revolution throughout all its wonderful vicissitudes has continued to possess the minds of the great body of the people of this country, and it was to be inferred, that this sentiment would predispose to a jealousy of any agreement or treaty with her most persevering competitior—a jealousy so excessive as would give the fullest hope to insidious arts to perplex and mislead the public opinion. It was well understood, that a numerous party among us, though disavowing the design, because the avowal would defeat it, have been steadily endeavouring to make the United States a party in the present European war, by advocating all those measures which would widen the breach between us and Great Britain, and by resisting all those which could tend to close it and it was morally certain, that this party would eagerly improve every circumstance which could serve to render the treaty odious, and to frustrate it, as the most effectual road to their favorite goal.

    It was also known beforehand that personal and party rivalships of the most active kind, would assail whatever treaty might be made, to disgrace, if possible, its organ.

    There are three persons prominent in the public eye, as the successor of the actual President of the United States in the event of his retreat from the station, Mr. Adams, Mr. Jay, Mr. Jefferson.

    No one has forgotten the systematic pains which have been taken to impair the well earned popularity of the first gentleman. Mr. Jay too has been repeatedly the object of attacks with the same view. His friends as well as his enemies anticipated that he could make no treaty which would not furnish weapons against him—and it were to have been ignorant of the indefatigable malice of his adversaries to have doubted that they would be seized with eagerness and wielded with dexterity.

    The peculiar circumstances which have attended the two last elections for governor of this state, have been of a nature to give the utmost keen[n]ess to party animosity.27 It was impossible that Mr. Jay should be forgiven for his double, and in the last instance triumphant success or that any promising opportunity of detaching from him the public confidence should pass unimproved.

    Trivial facts frequently throw light upon important designs. It is remarkable, that in the toasts given on the 4th of July, wherever there appears a direct or indirect censure on the treaty, it is pretty uniformly coupled with compliments to Mr. Jefferson, and to our late governor Mr. Clinton, with an evident design to place those gentlemen in contrast with Mr. Jay, and decrying him to elevate them.28 No one can be blind to the finger of party spirit, visible in these and similar transactions. It indicates to us clearly, one powerful source of opposition to the treaty.

    No man is without his personal enemies. Pre-eminence even in talents and virtue is a cause of envy and hatred of its possessor. Bad men are the natural enemies of virtuous men. Good men sometimes mistake and dislike each other.

    Upon such an occasion as the treaty, how could it happen other wise, than that personal enimity would be unusually busy, enterprising and malignant?

    From the combined operation of these different causes, it would have been a vain expectation that the treaty would be generally contemplated with candor and moderation, or that reason would regulate the first impressions concerning it. It was certain on the contrary, that however unexceptionable its true character might be, it would have to fight its way through a mass of unreasonable opposition and that time, examination and reflection would be requisite to fix the public opinion on a true basis. It was certain that it would become the instrument of a systematic effort against the national government and its administration a decided engine of party to advance its own views at the hazard of the public peace and prosperity.

    The events which have already taken place, are a full comment of these positions. If the good sense of the people does not spe[e]dily discountenance the projects which are on foot, more melancholy proofs may succeed.

    Before the treaty was known, attempts were made to prepossess the public mind against it. It was absurdly asserted, that it was not expected by the people, that Mr. Jay was to make any treaty as if he had been sent, not to accommodate differences by negociation and agreement, but to dictate to Great Britain the terms of an unconditional submission.

    Before it was published at large, a sketch, calculated to produce false impressions, was handed out to the public through a medium noted for hostility, to the administration of the government.29 Emissaries flew through the country, spreading alarm and discontent: the leaders of clubs were every where active to seize the passions of the citizens and preoccupy their judgments against the treaty.

    At Boston it was published one day, and the next a town meeting was convened to condemn it, without ever being read without any serious discussion, sentence was pronounced against it.30

    Will any man seriously believe that in so short a time, an instrument of this nature could have been tolerably understood by the greater part of those who were thus induced to a condemnation of it? Can the result be considered as any thing more than a sudden ebullition of popular passion, excited by the artifices of a party, which had adroitly seized a favourable moment to surprize the public opinion? This spirit of precipitation and the intemperance which accompanied it, prevented the body of merchants and the greatest part of the most considerate citizens from attending the meeting, and left those who met, wholly under the guidance of a set of men, who, with two or three exceptions, have been the uniform opposers of the government.

    The intelligence of this event had no sooner reached New York, than the leaders of the clubs were seen haranguing in every corner of the city to stir up our citizens into an imitation of the example of the meeting at Boston. An invitation to meet at the City Hall quickly followed, not to consider or discuss the merits of the treaty, but to unite with the meeting at Boston to address the president against its ratification.31

    This was immediately succeeded by a hand bill,32 full of invectives against the treaty as absurd as they were inflammatory, and manifestly designed to induce the citizens to surrender their reason to the empire of their passions.

    In vain did a respectable meeting of the merchants endeavour, by their advice, to moderate the violence of these views, and to promote a spirit favourable to a fair discussion of the treaty in vain did a respectable body of citizens of every discription, attend for that purpose. The leaders of the clubs resisted all discussion, and their followers, by their clamours and vociferations, rendered it impracticable, notwithstanding the wish of a manifest majority of the citizens convened upon the occasion.33

    Can we believe, that the leaders were really sincere, in the objections they made to a decision, or that the great and mixed mass of citizens then assembled had so thoroughly mastered the merits of the treaty, as that they might not have been enlightened by such a discussion.

    It cannot be doubted that the real motive to the opposition, was the fear of a discussion the desire of excluding light the adherence to a plan of surprize and deception. Nor need we desire any fuller proof of that spirit of party which has stimulated the opposition to the treaty, than is to be found in the circumstances of that opposition.

    To every man who is not an enemy to the national government, who is not a prejudiced partizan, who is capable of comprehending the argument, and passionate enough to attend to it with impartiality, I flatter myself I shall be able to demonstrate satisfactorily in the course of some succeeding papers—

    1. That the treaty adjusts in a reasonable manner the points in controversy between the United States and Great-Britain, as well those depending on the inexecution of the treaty of peace, as those growing out of the present European war.

    2. That it makes no improper concessions to Great-Britain, no sacrifices on the part of the United States.

    3. That it secures to the United States equivalents for what they grant.

    4. That it lays upon them no restrictions which are incompatible with their honour or their interest.

    5. That in the articles which respect war, it conforms to the laws of nations.

    6. That it violates no treaty with, nor duty toward any foreign power.

    7. That compared with our other commercial treaties, it is upon the whole, entitled to a preference.

    8. That it contains concessions of advantages by Great-Britain to the United States, which no other nation has obtained from the same power.

    9. That it gives to her no superiority of advantages over other nations with whom we have treaties.

    10. That interests of primary importance to our general welfare, are promoted by it.

    11. That the too probable result of a refusal to ratify is war, or what would be still worse, a disgraceful pas[s]iveness under violations of our rights, unredressed and unadjusted and consequently, that it is the true interest of the United States, that the treaty should go into effect.

    It will be understood, that I speak of the treaty as advised to be ratified by the Senate—for this is the true question before the public.

    25 . The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 22, 1795.

    27 . This is a reference to the New York gubernatorial elections in 1792 and 1795. In the first instance, the returns from three counties were disallowed because of technicalities, and George Clinton defeated Jay. See Philip Schuyler to H, May 9, 1792, note 4 H to King, June 28, 1792, note 1. The 1795 election, in which Jay defeated Robert Yates, was unusual in that Jay was nominated when he was in England, and he did not return to the United States until the conclusion of the campaign. See Edward Jones to H, March 30, 1795, note 10.

    28 . See, for example, toasts offered in New York City at the Fourth of July meetings of the Democratic, Tammany, Mechanic, and Military societies and by the companies of Light Infantry and Artillery ( The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 6, 7, 1795).

    29 . On June 29, 1795, Benjamin Franklin Bache’s [Philadelphia] Aurora. General Advertiser published an abstract of the treaty. See Wolcott to H, June 26, 1795, note 2, and Bradford to H, July 2, 1795, note 6.

    30 . The [Boston] Independent Chronicle: and the Universal Advertiser printed the first eight articles of the treaty on July 9, 1795. A group of citizens opposed to the treaty met at Faneuil Hall on July 13. As a result of that meeting the Boston selectmen sent Washington a resolution supported by twenty arguments, condemning the treaty (LS , George Washington Papers, Library of Congress). The resolution reads: “Resolved, as the sense of the Inhabitants of this Town, that the aforesaid Instrument, if ratified, will be highly injurious to the commercial Interest of the United States, derogatory to their National honor and Independence, and may be dangerous to the Peace and happiness of their Citizens” (copy, George Washington Papers, Library of Congress).

    H’s statement is not, however, altogether accurate, for a pamphlet published by Benjamin Franklin Bache was available in Boston before the July 13 meeting in Faneuil Hall. See Wolcott to H, June 26, 1795, note 2, and Bradford to H, July 2, 1795, note 6.

    31 . One version of the invitation reads: “The citizens of New-York, are earnestly requested, to assemble at the City Hall, This Day , at 12 o’clock, to deliberate upon the proper mode of communicating to the President, their disapprobation of the English treaty. The unanimous decision of the town of Boston, on this subject, not only shews the important light in which the business is viewed there but should prompt us to add our exertions to theirs, to prevent the ratification of a treaty, which has every where created the most lively sensations of regret and dissatisfaction …” ( The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 18, 1795).

    32 . “Last Thursday evening and Friday morning, notices appeared in all the public papers, requesting a meeting of the citizens, at 12 o’clock on Saturday, for the purpose of joining with our fellow citizens of Boston, who last Monday unanimously adopted resolutions expressive of their detestation of the treaty with Great Britain—a hand-bill was also circulated, to the same effect, conjuring them to come forward like freemen, and declare the treaty a disgraceful one, ruinous to our commerce, &c” ( The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 20, 1795). According to J. B. McMaster, who does not give a source, the handbill described the treaty in these terms: “It was non-reciprocal it gave up the right of search it called for no indemnity for the injury done by holding the posts it yielded advantages no American ought to yield but with his life it settled principles dangerous to the lives and liberties of the people” ( History of the People of the United States, from the Revolution to the Civil War [New York, 1885], II, 218–19).

    33 . In this paragraph H is referring to a meeting in New York City on Saturday, July 18, 1795, to consider the Jay Treaty. According to John Church Hamilton, when H spoke at this meeting, “He was replied to by a volley of stones, one of which struck his forehead …” ( Hamilton, History description begins John C. Hamilton, Life of Alexander Hamilton, a History of the Republic of the United States of America (Boston, 1879). description ends , VI, 225), and a Federalist who attended the meeting wrote, “Stones were thrown at Mr Hamilton one of which grazed his head” (Seth Johnson to Andrew Craigie, July 23, 1795 [ALS , American Antiquarian Society, Worcester, Massachusetts]). Others who were present, however, did not mention this incident, and the story may be apocryphal. See Mitchell, Hamilton description begins Broadus Mitchell, Alexander Hamilton (New York, 1957–1962). description ends , II, 342–43.

    A contemporary newspaper reported this meeting on July 18 and a subsequent one which took place on July 20, as follows: “On Friday evening there was a small meeting of merchants at Tontine hall, with Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Rufus King at their head, who harrangued them, Mr. James Watson in the chair a plan of opposition was there devised, and, on Saturday morning, an address appeared in the papers, and the city was filled with hand-bills of the same composition, signed by the chairman. This address condemned the mode, declared the treaty not quite so bad as was supposed, challenged discussion, and pressed a full attendance upon the principles of opposition.

    “In consequence of these various notices, a very numerous body of citizens collected at 12 o’clock on Saturday, at the Federal Hall.

    “At the moment the clock struck twelve , Mr. Hamilton , who was mounted upon a stoop in Broad-street, supported by Mr. King , Mr. [Josiah Ogden] Hoffman, Mr. [Richard] Harrison, &c. attempted to harrangue the people. He had proceeded no farther than an expression of his ignorance who called the meeting , before he was interrupted by the call, ‘Let us have a chairman’ on which Col. William S. Smith was nominated, appointed, and took his stand upon the balcony of the Federal Hall.

    “Mr. Peter R. Livingston then attempted to address the chair, but was interrupted by Mr. Hamilton on which a question of order took place, whether Mr. H. or Mr. L. should speak first this was put by the chairman, and carried, by a large majority, in favor of Mr. L. Mr. Livingston then attempted to state the business of the meeting, as expressed in the bills but the confusion was so great, that he could not be heard—and, finding that there was an intention, by the opposite party, to defeat the object of the meeting, and prevent the questions being taken on the treaty, he moved, ‘ That those who disapproved of the treaty, should go to the right, and those who approved of it, to the left ’ which motion was but partly carried into effect a large body marched up to the church, a large body still remained on the ground, and none, upon the question being reversed, moved to the left.

    “In the mean time Mr. Hamilton, probably supposing that enemies to the treaty had all moved off, re-commenced his harrangue upon the treaty, urging the necessity of a full discussion before the citizens could form their opinions very few sentences, however, could be heard, on account of hissings, coughings, and hootings, which entirely prevented his proceeding—His proposition of discussion was, however, opposed by Mr. Brockholst Livingston, who observed, as nearly as we can recollect, that as the treaty had been published for two weeks, and was in the hands of every one, he presumed the assembly had already made up their minds upon it—that the place was very improper for discussion, as the speakers could not be heard, and that it was impossible to find a building large enough to contain so great a number of people. He further said that the object of the meeting, which was to express their opinion on the treaty, might be defeated by procrastination, as the next moment accounts might arrive of its ratification. Mr. Livingston concluded by saying that although the place was highly improper for discussion, yet if any persons present had not formed their opinion on the treaty, and would retire to a church, a gentleman would appear to discuss it, article by article, in opposition to Mr. Hamilton.

    “Finding it impossible to effect a division, those who had drawn off now returned but finding a great tumult, about 500 of them drew off again, proceeded to the battery, formed a circle, and there Burnt the treaty , opposite the government house.

    “During this interval, Mr. Hamilton introduced a resolution, said to be pened by Mr. King, and transmitted it to the Chairman, who attempted to read it, and, behold, a momentary silence took place—but when the citizens found that the resolution declared it unnecessary to give an opinion on the treaty , they roared, as with one voice: we’ll hear no more of it tear it up , &c.

    “The question was then moved, and carried, for the appointment of a committee of 15, to draft Resolutions , ‘ expressive of their disapprobation of the treaty ’….

    “Mr. Hamilton, before the appointment of the Committee, finding the question on his resolutions could not obtain in the great body , put the question ( himself ) to those around him, some of whom cried aye —after which he called to the friends of order to follow him, and they moved off the ground, but the number that followed was small.

    “At half after one the meeting adjourned to this day, at 12 o’clock, To Receive The Report Of The Committee on this important subject and it is hoped that there will be a full attendance of the citizens.” ( The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 20, 1795.)

    “No official account of the important proceedings of yesterday having been communicated to us, and being anxious to disseminate the patriotic virtues of our fellow-citizens, as expeditiously as possible, we submit the following hasty sketch, subject to such corrections (if any are necessary) as want of documents might have rendered indispensable.

    “At noon yesterday, agreeably to adjournment, the citizens met at the Federal Hall, in immense numbers, to receive the Report of their Committee , when Col. W. S. Smith took his former stand, and opened the meeting. He informed the citizens, that as there had been doubts in the minds of some, whether the committee had been regularly appointed, the committee wished to know, whether they would now confirm their appointment which was unanimously agreed to. A regular vote was then taken upon each name composing the committee, and unanimously confirmed. The chairman then informed them, that their committee was ready to report upon the subject of their appointment, and put the question, whether they were now ready to receive the report this was also unanimously agreed to. Mr. Brockholst Livingston, of the committee, now stepped forward, and, after expressing his satisfaction at the perfect order and consistency of their conduct, and enlarging on the subject of certain doubts, respecting the appointment of the committee, ocasioned by the confusion of Saturday, he introduced a set of Resolutions , which proved to be fully expressive of their opinions of the treaty, by having received, paragraph by paragraph, the Unanimous Vote of the body present, which is said to have been much more numerous than that on Saturday, as, in the opinion of the chairman, and others who had a good view, it consisted of between 5 and 6000 persons others say 7000.

    “The meeting adjourned at about a quarter past one, previous to which a volunteer Resolution of thanks to the virtuous minority of the Senate of the United States was passed. A vote of thanks to the chairman unanimously obtained, as put by Mr. B. Livingston.

    “It would have given us infinite satisfaction to be able to communicate these important resolutions, which we shall not attempt to describe—but as they are, by a resolution, to be immediately ( By Express ) transmitted to the President of the United States, it is conceived there would be a degree of indecorum, and want of respect, in publishing them before the express sets off with the original copy. Not a moment’s time shall be lost when a copy can be obtained.

    “The meetings of Saturday and yesterday will not bear a contrast—on Saturday tumult lifted her bloated head, the head of A Faction but yesterday, all was harmonious , and the citizens unanimously retired by half after one. Ask , ye heroes of Saturday’s minority, how is it possible that there should be any harmony , while ‘ the friends of good order ’ were absent!!

    “It is rumored, that a number of merchants in this city intend to meet and protest against the proceedings of yesterday. An extra meeting of the chamber of commerce was called last evening.” ( The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 21, 1795.) See also “To the Citizens of New York,” July 18, 1795, which is an account of the July 18 meeting by William S. Smith (broadside, Library of Congress) The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 21, 1795.

    For the resolution adopted at the July 20 meeting, see “At an Adjourned meeting of the Citizens of New York assembled in front of the Federal Hall at 12 O’Clock on Monday the 20th day of July, 1795, Colonel William S. Smith in the Chair” (DS , George Washington Papers, Library of Congress). The resolutions are also printed in The [New York] Argus, or Greenleaf’s New Daily Advertiser , July 25, 1795


    Bibliography

    Bemis, Samuel Flagg. Jay's Treaty: A Study in Commerce and Diplomacy. 2nd ed. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1962.

    Combs, Jerald A. The Jay Treaty: Political Battleground of the Founding Fathers. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970.

    Elkins, Stanley, and Eric McKitrick. The Age of Federalism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

    Horsman, Reginald. The Diplomacy of the New Republic, 1776–1815. Arlington Heights, Ill.: Harlan Davidson, 1985.


    Evaluations

    Historian Marshall Smelser argues that the treaty effectively postponed war with Britain for ten years and more (war finally did break out in 1812). [14]

    Bradford Perkins argued in 1955 that the treaty was the first establishment of a special relationship between Britain and America, with a second installment under Lord Salisbury. In his view, the treaty worked for ten years to secure peace between Britain and America: "The decade may he characterized as the period of "The First Rapprochement." As Perkins concludes, "For about ten years there was peace on the frontier, joint recognition of the value of commercial intercourse, and even, by comparison with both preceding and succeeding epochs, a muting of strife over ship seizures and impressment. Two controversies with France. pushed the English-speaking powers even more closely together." [15] Starting at swords' point in 1794 the Jay treaty reversed the tensions, Perkins concludes: "Through a decade of world war and peace, successive governments on both sides of the Atlantic were able to bring about and preserve a cordiality which often approached genuine friendship." [16]

    Perkins gives more weight than other historians to valuable concessions regarding trade in India and the concession on the West Indies trade. In addition, reports Perkins, the Royal Navy treated American commerce with "relative leniency" during the wars, and many impressed seamen were returned to America. Furthermore, Spain, seeing an informal British-American alliance shaping up, became more favorable regarding American usage of the Mississippi River and signed Pinckney's Treaty which the Americans wanted. When Jefferson took office he gained renewal of the commercial articles that had greatly benefitted American shipping. [17]

    Joseph Ellis finds the terms of the treaty "one-sided in Britain's favor" , but asserts a consensus of historians that it was [18]


    Watch the video: Jay s Treaty 1794 (January 2022).