hope, therefore, for the pleasure of personal conferences with your Excellency, on the subject of this letter, and others interesting to our country; of getting my own ideas set to rights by a communication of yours, and of taking again the tone of sentiment of my own country, which we lose in some degree, after a certain absence.  You know, doubtless, of the death of the Marquis de Chastellux.  The Marquis de la Fayette is out of favor with the court, but high in favor with the nation.  I once feared for his personal liberty, but I hope he is on safe ground at present.

On the subject of the whale-fishery, I enclose you some observations I drew up for the ministry here, in order to obtain a correction of their Arret of September last, whereby they had involved our oils with the English, in a general exclusion from their ports.  They will accordingly correct this, so that our oils will participate with theirs, in the monopoly of their markets.  There are several things incidentally introduced, which do not seem pertinent to the general question:  they were rendered necessary by particular circumstances, the explanation of which would add to a letter already too long.  I will trespass no further, than to assure you of the sentiments of sincere attachment and respect, with which I have the honor to be your Excellency’s most obedient, humble servant,

Th:  Jefferson.

P. S. The observations enclosed, though printed, have been put into confidential hands only.  T. J.

LETTER CLXXIII.—­TO JOHN ADAMS, December 5, 1788

TO JOHN ADAMS.

Paris, December 5, 1788.

Dear Sir,

I had the pleasure of writing to you on the 2nd of August, and of adding a Postscript of August the 6th.

You recollect well the Arret of December the 29th, 1787, in favor of our commerce, and which, among other things, gave free admission to our whale-oil, under a duty of about two louis a ton.  In consequence of the English treaty, their oils flowed in, and over-stocked the market.  The light duty they were liable to under the treaty, still lessened by false estimates and aided by the high premiums of the British government, enabled them to undersell the French and American oils.  This produced an outcry of the Dunkirk fishery.  It was proposed to exclude all European oils, which would not infringe the British treaty.  I could not but encourage this idea, because it would give to the French and American fisheries a monopoly of the French market.  The Arret was so drawn up; but, in the very moment of passing it, they struck out the word European, so that our oils became involved.  This, I believe, was the effect of a single person in the ministry.  As soon as it was known to me, I wrote to Monsieur de Montmorin, and had conferences with him and the other ministers.  I found it necessary to give them information on the subject