Page:Cambridge Modern History Volume 7.djvu/350

 318 Proclamation of neutrality. [1793 Congress, in the name of the States, pledged itself to defend for ever the French possessions in America. France had made good her promise and fought in behalf of America till liberty, sovereignty, and independence were obtained. Might she not now call on the States to make good their promise and defend her West Indian possessions? And, if so, would the United States accede, and once more take up arms against Great Britain? The answer of every sympathiser with France was, Yes! France, they said, is our old friend: England is our old enemy. We are bound to France by gratitude, by a treaty of alliance, by the sympathy which one republic cannot but feel for a sister republic struggling for life. No tie, no treaty of any sort, binds us to Great Britain. To this it was replied that the French alliance was defensive, not offensive; that it was contracted with the King, not with the government which had cut off his head ; and that to go to war while Spain was in full possession of the Mississippi, with the Indians on the war-path, and British garrisons in the forts along the Canadian frontier, would be the height of folly. On hearing that war between England and France had begun, Washington, who had just entered on his second term of office, hastened to Philadelphia, and summoned his Secretaries for advice. Is it wise, he asked them, to assemble Congress ? Shall neutrality be declared ? Are the treaties made with France when under a King still in force now that she is ruled by a revolutionary government ? Does the treaty of alliance apply to an offensive as well as to a defensive war ? Is France engaged in an offensive war ? Shall the plenipotentiary of the French Republic be received ? It was the opinion of the Cabinet that Congress need not be called together ; that, although the country was under no treaty obligations to show Great Britain any consideration, it was politic to remain neutral ; that, as France had declared war against England, she was engaged in offensive war, and could claim no aid under the treaty ; and that it would be well to receive the French minister. Thus advised, Washington issued a declaration of neutrality on April 22, 1793. Had he proclaimed a monarchy he could not have been more savagely reviled. He was accused of base ingratitude to France ; he was a tool of Great Britain ; his anti-republican tendency was now quite plain, for he had placed on the same footing a republic that the States were bound to aid, and a monarchy that held their forts, insulted their flag, and would not so much as make a treaty of commerce with them. To proclaim neutrality was easy. To enforce it was hard, and was made harder by the conduct of Great Britain. France, having declared war, opened her ports in the West Indies to neutral trade. This trade Great Britain declared illegal, as giving to neutrals in time of war a trade they did not enjoy in time of peace, which was contrary to the rule of 1756. In March, 1793, she made a treaty with Prussia by