the subject of the fisheries, was rendered of no effect on account of the refusal of the colony of Newfoundland to give its assent, but the action of that colony will not, on the present occasion, affect the rest of the treaty. The articles as to the fisheries, moreover, are not to go into effect till the necessary laws shall be passed by the Imperial Parliament, the Parliament of Canada, and the Legislature of Prince Edward Island on the one hand, and by the Congress of the United States on the other. These articles are to remain in force for ten years, and further, until the expiration of two years after either party has given notice to terminate the same.

The northwestern boundary (as well as the northeastern, which was, in conformity to a convention then made, referred to the King of the Netherlands) and the navigation of the St. Lawrence are old acquaintances, having been included in the negotiations of 1827-8, originally confided to Mr. Rufus King and Mr. Gallatin, but which, owing to the illness of Mr. King, devolved exclusively on the latter. The rights of the United States in all these cases were made the subjects of elaborate memoirs, with the preparation of which, as the secretary of the mission, I became familiar, while many matters connected with these discussions were confided to me on the departure of Mr. Gallatin. The convention of 1846 as to the northwestern boundary, has only left to be determined a question which it created as to the channel intended to be indicated, separating Vancouver's Island from the continent. At the time of the negotiations to which I have referred, the British plenipotentiaries would entertain no proposition founded on the right of the United States to navigate the River St. Lawrence to the sea. Nor was it till the treaty of 1854, that any conventional arrangement was made on that subject. By that convention, the citizens and inhabitants of the United States were to have the right to navigate the River St. Lawrence and the canals in Canada used for communicating between the great lakes and the Atlantic Ocean as freely as the subjects of her Britannic Majesty, subject only to the same rates, and British subjects were to have the right of

navigating freely Lake Michigan so long as the privilege of navigating the River St. Lawrence should continue. The British Government had reserved the right of suspending the privilege on their part on giving due notice to the United States, in which case, the latter might suspend, as affected Canada, the free trade reciprocity article. By the present treaty, the navigation of the River St. Lawrence, ascending and descending, from the 45th parallel of north latitude, where it ceases to be a boundary between the two countries, from, to, and into the sea, shall remain forever free and open for commerce to the citizens of the United States, subject to any laws and regulations of Great Britain or Canada not inconsistent with the privilege of free navigation. The like privilege is accorded to the subjects of Great Britain for the navigation of the rivers Yukon, Porcupine and Stikine; but the navigation of Lake Michigan, subject in like manner to the laws and regulations of the United States, is only conceded to the subjects of Great Britain for the same period as is provided for the fishery articles. There is a provision also as to the use of the canals. The British government agree to urge on the government of Canada to secure to the United States the use of certain canals on an equality with the inhabitants of the Dominion, and the United States agree that British subjects shall have the like use of the St. Clair Flats Canal, and the President is to urge on the State governments to secure to them the State canals connected with the navigation of the lakes or rivers traversed by or contiguous to the boundary between the possessions of the two powers. W. B. LAWRENCE.

To the Editor of the Providence Journal:

THE kind notice which you took of my letter to the World on the recent treaty with England, in your paper of Monday, induces me to suppose that the enclosed memorandum may not be without interest to your readers. It establishes from the notes of Mr. Jefferson to the English and. French ministers, the accordance, before any neutrality act was passed by Congress, of the principles of international law, as maintained in General Washington's administration, with the rules laid down in the late treaty for the adjudication of the Alabarna claims. W. B. LAWRENCE.

OCHRE POINT, Newport, June 1, 1871.

Mr. Jefferson, Secretary of State, writing to Mr. Hammond, British Minister, under date of May 15, 1793, after stating that an alleged condemnation of a British prize by the French Consul at Charleston was a legal nullity, and can make no part in the title of a vessel, though it was an act of disrespect towards the United States, asserts that the purchase of arms and military accoutrements by an agent of the French government, in this country, with an intent to export them to France, is permitted by the law of nations. "It (the law of nations) is satisfied with the external penalty pronounced by the President's proclamation, that of confiscation of such portion of these arms as shall fall into the hands of any of the belligerents on the way to the ports of their enemies. To this penalty our citizens are warned that they will be abandoned.

"The capture of the British ship George, by the French frigate L'Embuscade, has, on inquiry, been found to have taken place within the Bay of Delaware and jurisdiction of the United States. The government is, therefore, taking measures for the liberation of the crew and restitution of the ship and cargo.

"It condemns, in the highest degree, the conduct of any of our citizens who may personally engage in committing hostilities at sea against any of the nations, parties to the present war, and will exert all the means with which the laws and Constitution have armed them to discover such as offend herein, and bring them to condign punishment.

"The practice of commissioning, equipping and manning vessels in our ports to cruise on any of the belligerent parties is equally and entirely disapproved; and the government will take effectual measures to prevent a repetition of it."

In a note from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Genet, Minister of France, dated August 7, 1793, it is said: "I have it in charge to inform you that the President considers the United States as bound, pursuant to positive assurances given in conformity to the laws of neutrality, to effectuate the restoration of or to make compensation for prizes, which shall have been made of any of the parties at war with France, subsequently to the fifth day of June last, by privateers fitted out of our ports.

"That it is consequently expected that you will cause restitution to be made of all prizes taken and brought into our ports subsequent to the above mentioned day, by such privateers, in defect of which, the President considers it as incumbent upon the United States to indemnify the owners of those prizes, the indemnification to be reimbursed by the French nation."

In a note to Mr. Hammond, dated September 5, 1793, and which was subsequently annexed to the treaty of 1794, Mr. Jefferson says: "Having for particular reasons foreborne to use all the measures in our power for the restitution of the three vessels mentioned in my letter of August 7, the President thought it incumbent on the United States to make compensation for them; and though nothing was said in that letter of other vessels taken under like circumstances, and brought in after the date of that letter, the President determined that all the means in our power should be used for

their restitution.

If these fail us, as we should not be bound by our treaties to make compensation to the other powers, in the analogous case, he did not mean to give an opinion that it ought to be done to Great Britain. But still, if any cases shall arise subsequent to that date, the circumstances of which shall place them on similar grounds with those before it, the President would think compensation equally incumbent on the United States." [Jefferson's Works, vol. III., pp. 229, 265, 285.]

By Art. VII., treaty of 19th November, 1794, (Jay's treaty): "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 5, 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 like manner relative to these as to the other cases committed to them." [United States Statutes at Large, Vol. VIII., p. 121.