The Life of George Washington, Vol. 5 | Page 7

the intelligence of his transactions in
South Carolina. This information did not diminish the extravagant
transports of joy with which he was welcomed by the great body of the
inhabitants. Means had been taken to render his entry pompous and
triumphal; and the opposition papers exultingly stated that he was met
at Gray's ferry by "crowds who flocked from every avenue of the city,

to meet the republican ambassador of an allied nation."
The day succeeding his arrival, he received addresses of congratulation
from particular societies, and from the citizens of Philadelphia, who
waited on him in a body, in which they expressed their fervent
gratitude for the "zealous and disinterested aids," which the French
people had furnished to America, unbounded exultation at the success
with which their arms had been crowned, and a positive conviction that
the safety of the United States depended on the establishment of the
republic. The answers to these addresses were well calculated to
preserve the idea of a complete fraternity between the two nations; and
that their interests were identified.
The day after being thus accredited by the citizens of Philadelphia, he
was presented to the President, by whom he was received with
frankness, and with expressions of a sincere and cordial regard for his
nation. In the conversation which took place on this occasion, Mr.
Genet gave the most explicit assurances that, in consequence of the
distance of the United States from the theatre of action, and of other
circumstances, France did not wish to engage them in the war, but
would willingly leave them to pursue their happiness and prosperity in
peace. The more ready faith was given to these declarations, because it
was believed that France might derive advantages from the neutrality of
America, which would be a full equivalent for any services which she
could render as a belligerent.
Before the ambassador of the republic had reached the seat of
government, a long catalogue of complaints, partly founded on his
proceedings in Charleston, had been made by the British minister to the
American executive.
This catalogue was composed of the assumptions of sovereignty
already mentioned;--assumptions calculated to render America an
instrument of hostility to be wielded by France against those powers
with which she might be at war.
[Sidenote: Illegal proceedings of the French cruisers.]

These were still further aggravated by the commission of actual
hostilities within the territories of the United States. The ship Grange, a
British vessel which had been cleared out from Philadelphia, was
captured by the French frigate L'Ambuscade within the capes of the
Delaware, while on her way to the ocean.
The prizes thus unwarrantly made, being brought within the power of
the American government, Mr. Hammond, among other things,
demanded a restitution of them.
On many of the points suggested by the conduct of Mr. Genet, and by
the memorials of the British minister, it would seem impossible that
any difference of opinion could exist among intelligent men, not under
the dominion of a blind infatuation. Accordingly it was agreed in the
cabinet, without a dissenting voice, that the jurisdiction of every
independent nation, within the limits of its own territory, being of a
nature to exclude the exercise of any authority therein by a foreign
power, the proceedings complained of, not being warranted by any
treaty, were usurpations of national sovereignty, and violations of
neutral rights, a repetition of which it was the duty of the government
to prevent.
It was also agreed that the efficacy of the laws should be tried against
those citizens of the United States who had joined in perpetrating the
offence.
[Sidenote: Opinions of the Cabinet in relation thereto.]
The question of restitution, except as to the Grange, was more dubious.
The secretary of state and the attorney general contended that, if the
commissions granted by Mr. Genet were invalid, the captures were
totally void, and the courts would adjudge the property to remain in the
former owners. In this point of view, therefore, there being a regular
remedy at law, it would be irregular for the government to interpose.
If, on the contrary, the commissions were good, then, the captures
having been made on the high seas, under a valid commission from a
power at war with Great Britain, the original right of the British owner

was, by the laws of war, transferred to the captor.
The legal right being in the captor, it could only be taken from him by
an act of force, that is to say, of reprisal for the offence committed
against the United States in the port of Charleston. Reprisal is a very
serious thing, ought always to be preceded by a demand and refusal of
satisfaction, is generally considered as an act of war, and never yet
failed to produce it in the case