old
and unauthorized assertions. I shall note the most material of them in
the order of the paper.

1. It is grossly false that our ministers, as is said in a note,
had proposed to surrender our claims to compensation for Spanish
spoliations, or even for French. Their instructions were to make no
treaty in which Spanish spoliations were not provided for; and although
they were permitted to be silent as to French spoliations carried into
Spanish ports, they were not expressly to abandon even them. 2. It is
not true that our ministers, in agreeing to establish the Colorado as
our western boundary, had been obliged to exceed the authority of their
instructions. Although we considered our title good as far as the
Rio Bravo, yet in proportion to what they could obtain east of the
Mississippi, they were to relinquish to the westward, and successive
sacrifices were marked out, of which even the Colorado was not the last.
3. It is not true that the Louisiana treaty was antedated, lest Great
Britain should consider our supplying her enemies with money as a breach
of neutrality. After the very words of the treaty were finally agreed
to, it took some time, perhaps some days, to make out all the copies in
the very splendid manner of Bonaparte's treaties. Whether the 30th of
April, 1803, the date expressed, was the day of the actual compact, or
that on which it was signed, our memories do not enable us to say. If
the former, then it is strictly conformable to the day of the compact;
if the latter, then it was postdated, instead of being antedated. The
motive assigned, too, is as incorrect as the fact. It was so far from
being thought, by any party, a breach of neutrality, that the British
minister congratulated Mr. King on the acquisition, and declared that
the King had learned it with great pleasure: and when Baring, the
British banker, asked leave of the minister to purchase the debt and
furnish the money to France, the minister declared to him, that so far
from throwing obstacles in the way, if there were any difficulty in the
payment of the money, it was the interest of Great Britain to aid it.
4. He speaks of a double set of opinions and principles; the one
ostensible, to go on the journals and before the public, the other
efficient, and the real motives to action. But where are these double
opinions and principles? The executive informed the legislature of the
wrongs of Spain, and that preparation should be made to repel them,