the closing years of the last century. They have
become quite familiar to those having Congressional experience, as they
have been pressed for recognition and payment, with occasional intervals
of repose, for nearly one hundred years.

These claims are based upon the allegations that France, being at war
with England, seized and condemned many American vessels and cargoes in
violation of the rules of international law and treaty provisions and
contrary to the duty she owed to our country as a neutral power and to
our citizens; that by reason of these acts claims arose in favor of such
of our citizens as were demnified against the French nation, which
claims our Government attempted to enforce, and that in concluding a
treaty with France in the year 1800 these claims were abandoned or
relinquished in consideration of the relinquishment of certain claims
which France charged against us.

Upon these statements it is insisted by those interested that we as a
nation having reaped a benefit in our escape from these French demands
against us through the abandonment of the claims of our citizens against
France, the Government became equitably bound as between itself and its
citizens to pay the claims thus relinquished.

I do not understand it to be asserted that there exists any legal
liability against the Government on account of its relation to these
claims. At the term of the Supreme Court just finished the Chief
Justice, in an opinion concerning them and the action of Congress in
appropriating for their payment, said:

We think that payments thus prescribed to be made were purposely
brought within the category of payments by way of gratuity--payments
of grace and not of right.

From the time the plan was conceived to charge the Government with
the payment of these claims they have abided in the atmosphere of
controversy. Every proposition presented in their support has been
stoutly disputed and every inference suggested in their favor has
been promptly challenged.

Thus, inasmuch as it must, I think, be conceded that if a state of war
existed between our country and France at the time these depredations
were committed our Government was not justified in claiming indemnity
for our citizens, it is asserted that we were at the time actually
engaged in war with the French nation. This position seems to be
sustained by an opinion of the Attorney-General of the United States
written in 1798 and by a number of decis