I have examined the case of Captain Thomas, with all the dispositions possible, to interpose for him.  But on mature reflection, I find it is one of those cases wherein my solicitation would be ill received.  The government of France, to secure to its subjects the carrying trade between her colonies and the mother country, have made a law, forbidding any foreign vessels to undertake to carry between them.  Notwithstanding this, an American vessel has undertaken, and has brought a cargo.  For me to ask that this vessel shall be received, would be to ask a repeal of the law, because there is no more reason for receiving her, than there will be for receiving the second, third, &c, which shall act against the same law, nor for receiving an American vessel, more than the vessels of other nations.  Captain Thomas has probably engaged in this business, not knowing the law; but ignorance of the law is no excuse, in any country.  If it were, the laws would lose their effect, because it can be always pretended.  Were I to make this application to the Comptroller General, he might possibly ask me, whether, in a like case, of a French vessel in America acting through ignorance, against law, we would suspend the law as to her?  I should be obliged honestly to answer, that with us there is no power which can suspend the law for a moment; and Captain Thomas knows that this answer would be the truth.  The Senegal company seems to be as much engaged in it as he is.  I should suppose his most probable means of extrication, would be with their assistance, and availing himself of their privileges, and the apparent authority he has received from the officers of government there.  I am sorry his case is such a one, as I cannot present to the minister.  A jealousy of our taking away their carrying trade, is the principal reason which obstructs our admission into their West India islands.  It would not be right for me to strengthen that jealousy.

I have the honor to be, with much esteem, Sir, your most obedient, humble servant,

Th:  Jefferson.

LETTER CXX.—­TO JOHN JAY, December 31, 1787

TO JOHN JAY.

Paris, December 31, 1787.

Sir,

Since the receipt of the letter of Monsieur de Calonne, of October the 22nd, 1786, I have several times had the honor of mentioning to you, that I was endeavoring to get the substance of that letter reduced into an Arret, which, instead of being revocable by a single letter of a Comptroller General, would require an Arret to repeal or alter it, and of course must be discussed in full Council, and so give time to prevent it.  This has been pressed as much as it could be with prudence.  One cause of delay has been the frequent changes of the Comptroller General; as we had always our whole work to begin again, with every new one.  Monsieur Lambert’s continuance in office for some months has enabled us, at length,