Message of the President on French affairs. of his court, on the acts of Congress of the 20th of July, 1789 and 1790, imposing an extra tonnage on foreign vessels, not excepting those of that country; together with the report of the Secretary of State thereon: and I recommend the same to your consideration, that I may be enabled to give to it such answer as may best comport with the justice and the interest of the United States. GEO. WASHINGTON. The papers referred to in the above message were read as follows: DOCUMENTS. The Secretary of State having received from the Chargé des Affaires of France, a note on the tonnage payable by French vessels in the ports of the United States, has had the same under his consideration, and thereupon makes the following report to the President of the United States. wit: "Dans l'exemption ci-dessus est nommément compris, &c." "in the above exemption is particularly comprised the imposition of 100 sols per ton established in France on foreign vessels." Here, then, is at once an express declaration, that the exemption from the duty of 100 sols is comprised in the third and fourth articles; that is to say, it was one of the exemptions enjoyed by the most fovored nations, and, as such, extended to us by those articles. If the exemption spoken of in this first member of the fifth article was comprised in the third and fourth articles, as is expressly declared, then the reservation by France out of that exemption (which makes the second member of the same article,) was also comprised, that is to say, if the whole was comprised, the part was comprised. And if this reservation of France in the second member was comprised in the third and fourth articles, then the counter reservation by the United States (which constitutes the third and last member of the same article) was also comprised; because, it is but a corresponding portion of a similar whole, on our part, which had been comprised by the same terms with theirs. In short, the whole article relates to a particular duty of 100 sols, laid by some antecedent law of France on the vessels of foreign nations, relinquished as to the most favored, and consequently to us. It is not a new and additional stipulation, then, but a declared application of the stipulations comprised in the preceding articles to a particular case, by way of greater caution. The Chargé des Affaires of France, by a note of the 13th of December, represents, by order of his court, that they consider so much of the acts of Congress of July 20, 1789 and 1790, as imposes an extraordinary tonnage on foreign vessels, without excepting those of France, to be in contravention of the fifth article of the treaty of amity and commerce between the two nations; that this would have authorized, on their part, a proportional modification in the favors granted to the American navigation; but that his sovereign had thought it more conformable to his principles of friendship and attachment to the United States, to The doctrine laid down generally in the order him to make representations thereon, and third and fourth articles, and exemplified speto ask in favor of French vessels a modifica-cially in the fifth, amounts to this: "The vestion of the acts which impose an extraordinary tonnage on foreign vessels. The Secretary of State, in giving in this paper to the President of the United States, thinks it his duty to accompany it with the following observations: sels of the most favored nations coming from foreign ports are exempted from the duty of 100 sols; therefore, you are exempted from it by the third and fourth articles. The vessels of the most favored nations coming coastwise pay that duty; therefore, you are to pay it by The third and fourth articles of the treaty of the third and fourth articles. We shall not amity and commerce between France and the think it unfriendly in you to lay a like duty on United States, subject the vessels of each na-coasters, because it will be no more than we tion to pay, in the ports of the other, only such duties as are paid by the most favored nation; and give them, reciprocally, all the privileges and exemptions in navigation and commerce, which are given by either to the most favored nations. Had the contracting parties stopped here, they would have been free to raise or lower their tonnage, as they should find it expedient, only taking care to keep the other on the footing of the most favored nation. The question then is, whether the fifth article cited in the note is any thing more than an application of the principle comprised in the third and fourth to a particular object, or whether it is an additional stipulation of something not so comprised? I. That it is merely an application of a principle comprised in the preceding articles, is declared by the express words of the article, to have done ourselves. You are free also to lay that or any other duty on vessels coming from foreign ports, provided they apply to all other nations, even the most favored. We are free to do the same, under the same restriction. Our exempting you from a duty which the most favored nations do not pay, does not exempt you from one which they do pay." In this view it is evident that the fifth article neither enlarges nor abridges the stipulations of the third and fourth. The effect of the treaty would have been precisely the same had it been omitted altogether; consequently, it may be truly said, that the reservation by the United States in this article is completely useless. And it may be added, with equal truth, that the equivalent reservation by France is completely useless, as well as her previous abandonment of the same duty; and, in short, Message of the President on French affairs. the whole article. Each party then remains free to raise or lower its tonnage, provided the change operates on all nations, even the most favored. Without undertaking to affirm, we may obviously conjecture that this article has been inserted on the part of the United States from an overcaution to guard, nommément, by name, against a particular aggrievance, which they thought they could never be too well secured against; and that has happened which generally happens, doubts have been produced by the too great number of words used to prevent doubt. tinuing the old. If we ought to refund the port duties received from their vessels since the date of the act of Congress, they should refund the port duties they have received from our vessels since the date of the treaty, for nothing short of this is the reciprocity of the treaty. If this contruction be adopted, then each party has for ever renounced the right of laying any duties on the vessels of the other coming from any foreign port, or more than 100 sols on those coming coastwise. Could this relinquishment be confined to the two contracting parties alone, the United States would be the gainers; for it is well known that a much greater number of American than of French vessels are employed in the commerce between the two countries; but the exemption once conceded by the one nation to the other, becomes immediately the property of all others who are on the footing of the most favored nations. It is true that those others would be obliged to yield the same compensation, that is to say, to receive our vessels duty free. Whether we should gain or lose in the exchange of the measures with them, is not easy enough to say. II. The court of France, however, understands this article as intended to introduce something to which the preceding articles had not reached; and not merely as an application of them to a particular case. Their opinion seems to be founded on the general rule in the contruction of instruments, to leave no words merely useless, for which any rational meaning can be found. They say that the reservation by the United States, of a right to lay a duty equivalent to that of the 100 sols reserved by France, would have been completely useless, if they were left free by the preceding articles to lay a Another consequence of this construction will tonnage to any extent whatever; consequently, be, that the vessels of the most favored nations, that the reservation of a part proves a relin-paying no duties, will be on a better footing quishment of the residue. If some meaning, and such a one is to be given to the last member of the article, some meaning, and a similar one, must be given to the corresponding member. If the reservation by the United States of a right to lay an equivalent duty, implies a relinquishment of their right to lay any other, the reservation by France, of a right to continue the specified duty to which it is an equivalent, must imply a relinquishment of the right on her part to lay or continue any other. Equivalent reservations by both must imply equivalent restrictions on both. The exact reciprocity stipulated in the preceding articles, and which pervades every part of the treaty, ensures a counter right to each party for every right ceded to the other. than those of natives which pay a moderate duty; consequently either the duty on these also must be given up, or they will be supplanted by foreign vessels in our own ports. The resource, then, of duty on vessels, for the purposes either of revenue or regulation, will be for ever lost to both. It is hardly conceivable that either party looking forward to all these consequences, would see their interest in them. III. But if France persists in claiming this exemption, what is to be done? The claim, indeed, is couched in mild and friendly terms; but the idea leaks out that a refusal would authorize them to modify proportionally the favor granted by the same article to our navigation. Perhaps they may do what we should feel much more severely; they may turn their eyes to the favors granted us by their arrêts of December 29, 1787, and December 7, 1788, which hang on their will alone, unconnected with the trea ty. Those arrêts, among other advantages, admit our whale oils to the exclusion of that of all other foreigners. And this monopoly procures a vent for seven-twelfths of the produce of that fishery, which experience has taught us could find no other market. Near two-thirds of the produce of our cod fisheries, too, have lately found a free vent in the colonies of Let it be further considered, that the duty called tonnage in the United States is in lieu of the duties for anchorage, for the support of buoys, beacons, and lighthouses, to guide the mariner into harbor and along the coast, which are provided and supported at the expense of the United States; and for fees to measurers, weighers, gaugers, &c., who are paid by the United States, for which articles, among many others, (light-house money excepted,) duties are paid by us in the ports of France under their specific names. That Government has hitherto thought these duties consistent with the treaty; and consequently the same duties, under a general, instead of specific names, with * By an official paper from the bureau of the balus, must be equally consistent with it. It is ance of commerce of France, we find that of the not the name, but the thing which is essential. ships which entered the ports of France from the If we have renounced the right to lay any port United States in the year 1789, only thirteen, amountduties, they must be understood to have equal-ing to 2,105 tons, were French; and 163, making ly renounced that of either laying new, or con- 24,173 tons, were Americans. Message of the President on French affairs. France. This, indeed, has been an irregularity growing out of the anarchy reigning in those colonies. Yet the demands of the colonists, even of the Government party among them, (if an auxiliary disposition can be excited by some marks of friendship and distinction on our part,) may perhaps produce a constitutional concession to them to procure their provisions at the cheapest market; that is to say, at ours. Considering the value of the interests we have at stake, and considering the smallness of difference between foreign and native tonnage on French vessels alone, it might, perhaps, be thought advisable to inake the sacrifice asked; and especially if it can be so done as to give no title to other the most favored nations to claim it. If the act should put French vessels on the footing of those of natives, and declare it to be in consideration of the favors granted us by the arrêts of December 29, 1787, and December 7, 1788, (and perhaps this would satisfy them,) no nation could then demand the same favor with out offering an equivalent compensation. It might strengthen, too, the tenure by which those arrêts are held, which must be precarious so long as they are gratuitous. It is desirable, in many instances, to exchange mutual advantages by legislative acts rather than by treaty; because the former, though understood to be in consideration of each other, and therefore greatly respected, yet when they become too inconvenient, can be dropped at the will of either party: whereas, stipulations by treaty are forever irrevocable but by joint consent, let a change of circumstances render them ever so burdensome. On the whole, if it be the opinion that the first construction is to be insisted on as ours, in opposition to the second, urged by the court of France, and that no relaxation is to be admitted, an answer shall be given to that court, defending that construction, and explaining, in as friendly terms as possible, the difficulties opposed to the exemption they claim. 2. If it be the opinion that it is advantageous for us to close with France in her interpretation of a reciprocal and perpetual exemption from tonnage, a repeal of so much of the tonnage law will be the answer. 3. If it be thought better to waive rigorous and nice discussions of right, and to make the modification an act of friendship and of compensation for favors received, the passage of such a bill will then be the answer. JANUARY 18, 1791. TH. JEFFERSON. [TRANSLATION.] L. G. Otto to the Secretary of State. SIR: During the long stay you made in France, you had opportunities of being satisfied of the favorable dispositions of His Majesty to render permanent the ties that united the two nations, and to give stability to the treaties of alliance and of commerce which form the basis of this Union. These treaties were so well maintained by the Congress formed under the ancient confederation, that they thought it their duty to interpose their authority whenever any laws made by individual States appeared to infringe their stipulations, and particularly in 1785, when the States of New Hampshire and of Massachusetts had imposed an extraordinary tonnage on foreign vessels, without exempting those of the French nation. The reflections that I have the honor to address to you in the subjoined note, being founded on the same principles, I flatter myself that they will merit, on the part of the Government of the United States the most serious attention. I am, with respect, &c. L. G. OTTO. [TRANSLATION.] L. G. Ollo to the Secretary of State. NOTE. The underwritten Chargé des Affaires of France has received the express order of his court to represent to the United States that the act passed by Congress the 20th July, 1789, and renewed the 20th July of the present year, which imposes an extraordinary tonnage on foreign vessels, without excepting the French vessels, is directly contrary to the spirit and to the object of the treaty of commerce which unites the two nations, and of which His Majesty has not only scrupulously observed the tenor, but of which he has extended the advantages by many regulations very favorable to the commerce and navigation of the United States. By the 5th article of this treaty, the citizens of these States are declared exempt from the tonnage duty imposed in France on foreign vessels, and they are not subject to that duty but in the coasting business. Congress has re served the privilege of establishing a duty equivalent to this last, a stipulation founded on the state in which matters were in America at the time of the signature of the treaty. There did not exist, at that epoch, any duty on tonnage in the United States. • Abstract of the produce of the fisheries exported from the United States from August 20, 1789, to August 14, 1790, in which is omitted one quarter's exportations from Boston, Plymouth, Dighton, Penobscot, Frenchman's Bay, Machias, and New York, of which the returns are not received. France and the French West Indies, The rest of the world, Whole produce, $586,167 $131,906 $718,073 408,403 Message of the President on French affairs. It is evident that it was the non-existence of which M. de Montmorin has written to yourthis duty, and the motive of a perfect recipro- self. You will find therein the sincere senticity stipulated in the preamble of the treaty, ments with which you have inspired our Govthat had determined the King to grant the ex-ernment, and the regret of the minister in not emption contained in the article fifth; and a having a more near relation of correspondence proof that Congress had no intention to contra- with you. In these, every person who has had vene this reciprocity is, that it only reserves a the advantage of knowing you in France parprivilege of establishing on the coasting busi- ticipates. ness a duty equivalent to that which is levied in France. This reservation would have been completely useless, if, by the words of the treaty, Congress thought themselves at liberty to lay any tonnage they should think proper on French vessels. At the same time, it gives me pain, sir, to be obliged to announce to you that the complaints of our merchants on the subject of the tonnage duty increase, and that they have excited not only the attention of the King, but that of several departments of the kingdom. I have reThe undersigned has the honor to observe, ceived new orders to request of the United that this contravention of the fifth article of States a decision on this matter, and to solicit, the treaty of commerce might have authorized in favor of the aggrieved merchants, the restiHis Majesty to modify proportionably the favors tution of the duties which have already been granted by the same article to the American paid. I earnestly beg of you, sir, not to lose navigation; but the King, always faithful to the sight of an object, which, as I have already had principles of friendship and attachment to the the honor to tell you verbally, is of the greatUnited States, and desirous of strengthening est importance for cementing the future commore and more the ties which subsist so happi-mercial connexions between the two nations. ly between the French nation and these States, In more particularly examining this question, thinks it more conformable to these views to you will perhaps find that motives of conorder the undersigned to make representations on this subject, and to ask in favor of French vessels a modification of the act which imposes an extraordinary tonnage on foreign vessels. His Majesty does not doubt but that the United States will acknowledge the justice of this claim, and will be disposed to restore things to the footing on which they were at the signature of the treaty of the 6th February, 1778. L. G. OTTO. PHILADELPHIA, December 13, 1790. [TRANSLATION.] L. G. Otto to the Secretary of State. SIR: I have the honor herewith to send you a a letter from the King to Congress, and one venience are as powerful as those of justice, to I have the honor to be, &c. ACTS OF CONGRESS; PASSED AT THE FIRST SESSION OF THE FIRST CONGRESS BEGUN AT NEW YORK, ON THE FOURTH OF MARCH, 1789. An Act to regulate the time and manner of administering certain oaths. spectively, and all executive and judicial officers of the several States, who have been hereBe it enacted by the Senate and House of tofore chosen or appointed, or who shall be Representatives of the United States of Ameri- chosen or appointed before the first day of ca in Congress assembled, That the oath or af- August next, and who shall then be in office, firmation required by the sixth article of the shall, within one month thereafter, take the constitution of the United States, shall be ad- same oath or affirmation, except where they ministered in the form following, to wit: "I, shall have taken it before; which may be adA. B. do solemnly swear or affirm (as the case ministered by any person authorized by the law may be) that I will support the Constitution of of the State in which such office shall be holden, the United States." The said oath or affirma- to administer oaths. And the members of the tion shall be administered within three days several State Legislatures, and all executive after the passing of this act, by any one member and judicial officers of the several States, who of the Senate to the President of the Senate, shall be chosen or appointed after the said first and by him to all the members, and to the Sec- day of August, shall, before they proceed to retary; and by the Speaker of the House of execute the duties of their respective offices, Representatives to all the members who have take the foregoing oath or affirmation, which not taken a similar oath, by virtue of a particu- shall be administered by the person or persons lar resolution of the said House, and to the who, by the law of the State, shall be authorizclerk. And in case of the absence of any mem-ed to administer the oath of office; and the ber from the service of either House, at the time prescribed for taking the said oath or affirmation, the same shall be administered to such member when he shall appear to take his seat. person or persons so administering the oath hereby required to be taken, shall cause a record or certificates thereof to be made, in the same manner, as by the law of the State, he or they shall be directed to record or certify the oath of office. Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That all officers appointed, or hereafter to be appointed under the authority of the United States, shall, before they act in their respective offices, take the same oath or affirmation which shall be administered by the person or persons who shall be authorized by law to administer to such officers their respective oaths of office; and such officers shall incur the same penalties in case of failure, as shall be imposed by law in case of failure in taking their respective oaths of office. Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That at the first session of Congress after every general election of Representatives, the oath or affirmation aforesaid shall be administered by any one member of the House of Representatives to the Speaker, and by him to all the members present, and to the clerk, previous to entering on any other business, and to the members who shall afterwards appear, previous to taking their seats. The President of the Senate, for the time being, shall also administer the said oath or affirmation to each Senator who shall hereafter be elected, previous to his taking his seat. Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That the And in any future case of a President of the Senate, who shall not have taken the said oath Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the or affirmation, the same shall be administer-House of Representatives for the time being, ed to him by any one of the members of the Senate. Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the members of the several State Legislatures, at the next sessions of the said Legislatures re shall, at the time of taking the oath or affirmation aforesaid, each take an oath or affirmation in the words following, to wit: "I, A. B. Secretary of the Senate, or Clerk of the House of Representatives (as the case may be) of the |