has been construed so rigorously to the letter, as to consider us as Aubaines in the colonies of France. Our intercourse with those colonies is so great, that frequent and important losses will accrue to individuals, if this construction be continued. The death of the master or supercargo of a vessel, rendered a more common event by the unhealthiness of the climate, throws all the property which was either his, or under his care, into contest. I presume that the enlightened Assembly now, engaged in reforming the remains of feudal abuse among them, will not leave so inhospitable an one as the Droit d’Aubaine existing in France, or any of its dominions. If this may be hoped, it will be better that you should not trouble the minister with any application for its abolition in the colonies as to us. This would be erecting into a special favor to us, the extinction of a general abuse, which will, I presume, extinguish of itself. Only be so good as to see, that in abolishing this odious law in France, its abolition in the colonies also be not omitted by mere oversight; but if, contrary to expectations, this fragment of barbarism be suffered to remain, then it will become necessary that you bring forward the enclosed case, and press a liberal and just exposition of our treaty, so as to relieve our citizens from this species of risk and ruin hereafter. Supposing the matter to rest on the eleventh article only, it is inconceivable, that he, who with respect to his personal goods is as a native citizen in the mother country, should be deemed a foreigner in its colonies. Accordingly, you will perceive by the opinions of Doctor Franklin and Doctor Lee, two of our ministers who negotiated and signed the treaty, that they considered that rights stipulated for us in France, were meant to exist in all the dominions of France.
Considering this question under the second article of the treaty also, we are exempted from the Droit d’Aubaine in all the dominions of France: for by that article, no particular favor is to be granted to any other nation which shall not immediately become common to the other party. Now, by the forty-fourth article of the treaty between France and England, which was subsequent to ours, it is stipulated, ‘que dans tout ce qui concerne—les successions des biens mobiliers—les sujets des deux hautes parties contractantes auront dans les Etais respectifs les memes privilèges, libertés et droits, que la nation la plus favorisée.’ This gave to the English the general abolition of the Droit d’Aubaine, enjoyed by the Hollanders under the first article of their treaty with France of July the 23rd, 1773, which is in these words. ‘Les sujets des E. G. des P. U. des Pays-Bas ne seront point assujettis au Droit d’Aubaine dans les Etats de S. M. T. C. This favor, then, being granted to the English subsequent to our treaty, we become entitled to it of course by the article in question. I have it not in my power at this moment to turn to the treaty between France and Russia, which was also posterior to ours. If by that, the Russians are exempted from the Droit d’Aubaine, ‘dans les Etats de S. M. T. C. it is a ground the more for our claiming the exemption. To these, you will be pleased to add such other considerations of reason, friendship, hospitality, and reciprocity, as will readily occur to yourself.
About two or three weeks ago, a Mr. Campbell called on me, and introduced himself by observing that his situation was an awkward one, that he had come from Denmark with an assurance of being employed here in a public character, that he was actually in service, though unannounced. He repeated conversations which had passed between Count Bernstorff and him, and asked me when a minister would be appointed to that court, or a character sent to negotiate a treaty of commerce: he had not the scrip of a pen to authenticate himself, however informally. I told him our government had not yet had time to settle a plan of foreign arrangments; that with respect to Denmark particularly, I might safely express to him those sentiments of friendship which our government entertained for that country, and assurances that the King’s subjects would always meet with favor and protection here; and in general, I said to him those things which, being true, might be said to any body. You can perhaps learn something of him from the Baron de Blome. If he be an unauthorized man, it would be well it should be known here, as the respect which our citizens might entertain, and the credit they might give to any person supposed to be honored by the King’s appointment, might lead them into embarrassment.
You know the situation of the new loan of three millions of florins going on at Amsterdam. About one half of this is destined for an immediate payment to France; but advantage may be gained by judiciously timing the payment. The French colonies will doubtless claim, in their new constitution, a right to receive the necessaries of life from whomever will deliver them cheapest; to wit, grain, flour, live stock, salted fish, and other salted provisions. It would be well that you should confer with their deputies, guardedly, and urge them to this demand, if they need urging. The justice of the National Assembly will probably dispose them to grant it, and the clamors of the Bordeaux merchants may be silenced by the clamors and arms of the colonies. It may cooperate with the influence of the colonies, if favorable dispositions towards us can be excited in the moment of discussing this point. It will therefore be left to you to say, when the payment shall be made, in confidence that you will so time it as to forward this great object: and when you make this payment, you may increase its effect, by adding assurances to the minister, that measures have been taken which will enable us to pay up, within a very short time, all arrears of principal and interest now due; and further, that Congress has fully authorized our government to go on and pay even the balance not yet due, which we mean to do, if that money can be borrowed on reasonable terms; and that favorable arrangements of commerce between us and their colonies, might dispose us to effect that payment with less regard to terms. You will, of course, find excuses for not paying the money which is ready and put under your orders, till you see that the moment has arrived when the emotions it may excite, may give a desisive cast to the demands of the colonies.
The newspapers, as usual, will accompany the present.
I have the honor to be, with great esteem and attachment, Dear Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,
Th: Jefferson.
LETTER XLIII.—TO M. LA FOREST, August 30, 1790
TO M. LA FOREST, Consul of France,
New York, August 30, 1790.
Sir,
I asked the favor of the Secretary of the Treasury to consider the fourth article of the consular convention, and to let me know whether he should conclude that Consuls not exercising commerce, were exempt from paying duties on things imported for their own use. I furnished him no explanation whatever, of what had passed on the subject at the time of forming the convention, because I thought it should be decided on the words of the convention, as they are offered to all the world, and that it would only be where these are equivocal, that explanations might be adduced from other circumstances. He considered the naked words of the article, and delivered to me as his opinion, that, according to these, the first paragraph, ‘The Consuls and Vice-Consuls, &c. as the natives are,’ subjected all their property, in whatever form and under whatever circumstances it existed, to the same duties and taxes to which the property of other individuals is liable, and exempts them only from taxes on their persons, as poll-taxes, head-rates for the poor, for town-charges, &c.; and that the second paragraph, ‘Those of the said Consuls, he or other merchants,’ subjected such of them as exercised commerce, even to the same personal taxes as other merchants are: that the second paragraph is an abridgment of the first, not an enlargement of it; and that the exemption of those, not merchants, which seemed implied in the words of the second paragraph, could not be admitted against the contrary meaning, directly and unequivocally expressed in the first.
Such, Sir, was his opinion, and it is exactly conformable to what the negotiators had in view in forming this article. I have turned to the papers which passed on that occasion, and I find that the first paragraph was proposed in the first project given in by myself, by which the distinction between taxes on their property and taxes on their persons, is clearly enounced, and was agreed to: but as our merchants exercising commerce in France, would have enjoyed a much greater benefit from the personal exemption, than those of France do here, M. de Reyneval, in his first counter-project, inserted the second paragraph, to which I agreed. So that the object was, in the first paragraph,
