trade it was necessary to monopolize, found themselves at variance on every point with the systems of the European governments. In their earliest instructions, Congress recommended the adoption of a very liberal scheme of commerce, a system now gradually introducing itself through the world, but at the time exceedingly disrelished and condemned by most of the writers on commerce, particularly Lord Sheffield, in a pamphlet, that attracted great notice. And, undoubtedly, without the alarm caused in the governments of Europe by the French revolution, that led them to consider every reform an innovation, we should already have had a much greater freedom of commercial, and, perhaps, also political institutions in the old world. The commercial regulations of these instructions of Congress of '84 differ little from the doctrines of the armed neutrality, a short time before that period in high repute, but then falling into decay.*

*The first administration under the constitution was disposed to maintain the same system. We shall quote a remarkable passage from a report of the Secretary of State for the year '92. "Instead of embarrassing commerce under piles of regulating laws, duties, and prohibitions, could it be relieved from all its shackles, in all parts of the world, could every country be employed in producing that which nature has best fitted it to produce, and each be free to exchange with others mutual surpluses for mutual wants, the greatest mass possible would then be produced of those things which contribute to human life and human happiness; the numbers of mankind would be increased, and their condition bettered. Would even a single nation begin with the United States this system of free commerce, it would be advisable to begin it with that nation; since it is one by one only, that it can be extended to all. Where the circumstances of either party render it expedient to levy a revenue, by way of impost on commerce, its freedom might be modified in that particular, by mutual and equivalent measures, preserving it entire in all others. Some nations, not yet ripe for free commerce in all its extent, might still be willing to mollify its restrictions and regulations for us, in proportion to the advantages which an intercourse with us might offer. Particularly, they may concur with us in reciprocating the duties to be levied on each side, or in compensating any excess of duty by equivalent advan

Great anxiety naturally existed in America on the subject of commercial intercourse. The commissioners, that made the treaty of '83, were empowered, as has already been said, to conclude a commercial convention. They did not succeed in that object; for Great Britain manifested uncommon reluctance to take any other step in her diplomatic relations with America, than to acknowledge the independence of the country. In the meanwhile, the nation rushed into a most ruinous commerce with England, that in a short time added infinitely to the alarming evils the war and the weakness of the confederacy were daily causing. The very earliest measures were adopted, however, by the government to obtain a formal protection for the trade of the country. On the 1st of May '83, ten days only after the ratification of peace, Congress ordered a second commission to be prepared for Messrs. Adams, Franklin, and Jay, or either of them, to enter into a treaty of commerce with Great Britain. But this commission appears to have accomplished nothing.

The commission of '83 not having succeeded in concluding a commercial convention, John Adams of Massachusetts was chosen in February '85 minister plenipotentiary to the court of St. James; the first envoy sent to Great Britain by the United States; he was well received by the king and ministry.*

tages of another nature. Our commerce is certainly of a character to entitle it to favour in most countries. The commodities we offer are either necessaries of life, or materials for manufacture, or convenient subjects of revenue; and we take in exchange, either manufactures, when they have received the last finish of art and industry, or mere luxuries. Such customers, too, whose demands, increasing with their wealth and population, must very shortly give full employment to the whole industry of any nation whatever, in any line of supply they may get into the habit of calling for from it."

* We believe the following account may be relied on as an authentic version of the remarks of the king on the occasion of the interview of the American minister:

"Mr.

But the English government does not appear to have paid much attention to America the first five or six years after the peace. They were occupied, entirely, with domestic affairs; -in renewing their ancient alliances with Holland, Prussia, and other governments of the continent, disturbed by the revolution war-in concluding a commercial convention with France-in regulating the trade of Quebec and Ireland—and, besides the customary topics of India and the catholics, two unexpected and very laborious subjects, the establishment of a regency, and the impeachment of Warren Hastings, engrossed a great deal of time and deliberation. England, taking advantage of the general calm, to repair, as rapidly as she could, the disasters of the war, (not, to be sure, preparatory to the tremendous contest, in which she was about to be involved, far more terrible, and in the end fortunate for her, than the one from which she had just emerged,) saw America struggling, and at one time nearly overpowered, with her own

"Mr. Adams, according to etiquette, was introduced to the king's closet, where ('as is usual for foreign ministers') he made a speech to his majesty; in performing which, he was somewhat affected, and when he had finished, the king said :—

"SIR,-The whole of this business is so extraordinary, that the feelings you discover on the occasion appear to me to be just and proper. I wish, sir, to be clearly understood, before I reply to the obliging sentiments, you have expressed in behalf of the United States. I am, you may well suppose, the last person in England, that consented to the dismemberment of the empire, by the independence of the new states, and, while the war was continued, I thought it due to my subjects to prosecute that war to the utmost. But, sir, I have consented to the independence, and it is ratified by treaty, and I now receive you as their minister plenipotentiary; and every attention, respect, and protection, granted to other plenipotentiaries, you shall receive at this court. And, sir, as I was the last person that consented to the independence of the United States, so I shall be the last person to disturb, or in any way infringe upon, their sovereign independent rights; and I hope and trust, that from blood, religion, manners, habits of intercourse, and almost every other consideration, the two nations will continue for ages in friendship and confidence with each other.'”

domestic difficulties. At this period, it could not be said the American revolution was consummated. Europe, probably, supposed this country was destined to go through the agony of a civil war, a condition of society, heretofore a necessary consequence of any great change in the form of government. But this evil America escaped, either because the country was exhausted, or from the character of the people, long accustomed to self-government, and not bewildered by independence. The interval, from the peace to the establishment of the present federal constitution in '89, is properly the second period in the history of the revolution, during which all the elements of a civil war were consumed in the inefficient but harmless conflicts of the confederation with the states.

The treaty of '83, much as it effected, still left many causes of great uneasiness particularly harassing to the American government and people, and to that portion of the subjects of the mother country, who had entered into her armies, or abandoned the colonies and their cause. The British government took their part, though at first without the appearance of much zeal or irritation. It sent no minister to America during the time of the confederation; refused to agree to any commercial arrangement whatever; and contented itself with the barren but provoking satisfaction of holding, contrary to the treaty, the north and western ports. To make all the objects of Mr. Adams' mission intelligible, it will here be necessary to give a brief account of the difficulties in fulfilling the terms of the treaty, that arose between the United States and Great Britain, and which were only finally removed by the treaty, that makes the subject of this chapter.

The ninth article of the act of confederation and perpetual union conferred upon the United States, in Congress assembled, the sole right and power of making treaties. This power, though limited and specific, is full and perfect in its kind. In making treaties, the states did not possess a concurrent jurisdiction, though a treaty properly made, like any other act the Congress were authorized to perform, was a part of the law of

the land. It was a contract with another power competent to make such contract. The same body, to whom the confederation confided the power of making treaties, necessarily possessed the right of explaining, interpreting and enforcing them. The states could not make treaties; they could not judge of them. A treaty, when duly ratified, being part of the law, all doubts that arose respecting it between individuals became simple judicial questions. There was then in the country no court erected by the confederation. The duty, therefore, of interpreting and enforcing the provisions of a treaty, under the general restriction, just mentioned, fell to the state courts. This was the situation and condition of the government; this the extent and nature of its authority in regard to foreign relations, conferred upon it by the celebrated articles of confederation and perpetual union. Congress very faithfully and punctually exercised, in regard to the British treaty, all the authority with which it was legitimately invested. On two occasions, the first in '83, and again in '87, it unanimously recommended to the states, and it could do no more, (the British commissioner was aware of this fact when the treaty was made,) to comply speedily and exactly with that portion of the instrument that concerned creditors and royalists; though the article was no part of the law of the land, for it contained only a recommendation. But the states did not yield an immediate attention even to the recommendation; and, in vindication of themselves, they said that grievous infractions of the treaty were committed by the other party,-that the garrisons were not withdrawn with convenient speed, the English still holding the posts of Michilimachinac on lake Michigan, Detroit, Fort Erie, Oswego and Niagara, Oswegatchie on the St. Lawrence, Point au fer and Dutchman's Point on Lake Champlain, -that British officers exercised jurisdiction over the country in the vicinity of those posts-and that a large body of negroes, the property of American citizens, had been embarked at New-York against the special remonstrance of the American commissioners. Indeed, Lord Carmarthen in a letter, dated