nder authority of the Government of France. During the past
year His Majesty's ministers had consented to enter upon the
consideration of these claims, but they proposed to couple with it
another subject having no connection with those claims, either in its
nature, its origin, or the principles on which it depended--a question
of the disputed construction of one of the articles of the treaty of
cession of Louisiana, by virtue of which France claimed certain
commercial privileges in the ports of that Province. Mr. Gallatin had
not received from his Government any authority to connect these two
dissimilar subjects in the same negotiation, or, indeed, to treat upon
the latter, which had already been very amply discussed at Washington
between the Secretary of State of the United States and His Majesty's
minister at that place, without producing any result except a conviction
on the part of the Government of the United States that the privileges
for French vessels, as claimed by the minister of France, never could
have been, and were not in fact, conceded by the treaty in question.
A stop was then put to the negotiations already commenced in relation
to the claims, and with which had been united, on the proposition of
the French Government, and as being naturally connected with it, the
consideration of certain claims of French citizens on the Government
of the United States.

The charge d'affaires of France at Washington has lately, on behalf
of his Government, expressed to that of the United States a wish that
this double negotiation might be resumed and that a definitive
arrangement might be made as well in relation to the disputed article of
the Louisiana treaty as of the subject of the claims upon the one side
and upon the other. The Government of the United States has nothing
more at heart than to remove by friendly arrangements every subject of
difference which may exist between the two countries, and to examine
with the greatest impartiality and good faith as well the nature and
extent of the stipulations into which they have entered as the appeals
to their justice made by individuals claiming reparation for wrongs
supposed to have been sustained at their hands.

But these two subjects are essentially dissimilar; there are no points
of connection between them; the principles upon which they depend are
totally different; they have no bearing upon each other; and the justice
which is due to individuals ought not to be