.

I have the honor to be, with sentiments of perfect esteem and respect,
Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,

Th: Jefferson.

LETTER CLIII.--TO MR. HAMMOND, June 5, 1793

TO MR. HAMMOND.

Philadelphia, June 5, 1793.

Sir,

In the letter which I had the honor of writing you on the 15th of
May, in answer to your several memorials of the 8th of that month, I
mentioned that the President reserved for further consideration, a part
of the one which related to the equipment of two privateers in the port
of Charleston. The part alluded to was that wherein you express your
confidence that the executive government of the United States would
pursue measures for repressing such practices in future, and for
restoring to their rightful owners any captures, which such privateers
might bring into the ports of the United States.

The President, after a full investigation of this subject and the most
mature consideration, has charged me to communicate to you, that the
first part of this application is found to be just, and that effectual
measures are taken for preventing repetitions of the act therein
complained of; but that the latter part, desiring restitution of the
prizes, is understood to be inconsistent with the rules which govern
such cases, and would, therefore, be unjustifiable towards the other
party.

The principal agents in this transaction were French citizens. Being
within the United States at the moment a war broke out between their
own and another country, they determine to go into its defence;
they purchase, arm, and equip a vessel with their own money, man it
themselves, receive a regular commission from their nation, depart
out of the United States, and then commence hostilities by capturing a
vessel, If, under these circumstances, the commission of the captors was
valid, the property, according to the laws of war, was by the capture
transferred to them, and it would be an aggression on their nation, for
the United States to rescue it from them, whether on the high seas or
on coming into their ports. If the commission was not valid, and,
consequently, the property not transferred by the laws of war to the
captors, then the case would have been cognizable in our courts of
admiralty, and the owners might have gone thither for redress. So
that, on neither supposition, would the executive be justifiable in
interposing.

With respect to the United States, the transaction can be in nowise