Still further, to give the devil his due (the French), it should be observed that it has been said without contradiction, and the people made to believe, that their refusal to receive our Envoys was contrary to the law of nations, and a sufficient cause of war: whereas every one who ever read a book on the law of nations knows, that it is an unquestionable right in every power, to refuse to receive any minister who is personally disagreeable. Martens, the latest and a very respected writer, has laid it down so clearly and shortly in his ’Summary of the Law of Nations,’ B. 7. ch. 2. sect. 9. that I will transcribe the passage verbatim. ’Section 9. Of choice in the person of the minister. The choice of the person to be sent as minister depends of right on the sovereign who sends him, leaving the right, however, of him to whom he is sent, of refusing to acknowledge any one, to whom he has a personal dislike, or who is inadmissible by the laws and usages of the country.’ And he adds notes proving by instances, &c. This is the whole section.
Notwithstanding all these appearances of peace from France, we are, besides our existing army of five thousand men, and additional army of nine thousand (now officered and levying), passing a bill for an eventual army of thirty regiments (thirty thousand) and for rigimenting, brigading, officering, and exercising at the public expense our volunteer army, the amount of which we know not. I enclose you a copy of the bill, which has been twice read and committed in Senate. To meet this expense, and that of the six seventy-fours and six eighteens, part of the proposed fleet, we have opened a loan of five millions at eight per cent., and authorize another of two millions: and, at the same time, every man voting for these measures acknowledges there is no probability of an invasion by France. While speaking of the restoration of our vessel, I omitted to add, that it is said that our government contemplate restoring the Frenchmen taken originally in the same vessel, and kept at Lancaster as prisoners. This has furnished the idea of calling her a cartel vessel, and pretending that she came as such for an exchange of prisoners, which is false. She was delivered free and without condition, but it does not suit to let any new evidence appear of the desire of conciliation in France.