in which the most serene Grand Duke of Tuscany has made like conventions with other powers.

ARTICLE XX. Our laws do not assume cognizance of acts done neither within their jurisdiction, nor by their citizens. Therefore, a subject of Tuscany, committing hostilities on us at sea, under the flag of another power, would not be liable to their sentence. But a stipulation by his sovereign, that he should be liable, would give that authority. It would be necessary, however, to say in what predicament he should stand liable. That of a pirate seems most analogous to his proceedings. We propose, therefore, to retain that word, in order to adapt the article to our laws, while those proposed on the other part may be also retained, to adapt it to the laws of Tuscany, and that the article shall stand thus:

ARTICLE XX. No citizen or subject of either of the contracting parties, shall take from any power with which the other may be at war, any commission or letter of marque for arming any vessel to act as a privateer against the other, on pain of being punished as a pirate or otherwise severely according to the rigor of the laws.

We agree that the fourth section of the twenty-first article shall stand as proposed, thus :

ARTICLE XXI. 4thly. The vessels of war, public and private, of the two parties, shall be reciprocally admitted with their prizes into the respective ports of each; and shall be freely at the disposal of the captors, according to the laws, usages and regulations of the State to which the captor belongs.

ARTICLE XXIV. The twenty-fourth article proposed, that officers breaking their parole, and privates escaping from their cantonment, should lose so much of the beneVOL. II.-41

fit of the article, as provides for their enlargement on parole or in cantonment. It is proposed on the other part, that they shall lose the benefit of this article; that is to say, the whole benefit of it. But it would seem to be a rigor, neither laudable nor useful, to deprive them of their wholesome and plentiful ration, and all other benefits of this article, for a breach of the limits of their confinement. We would therefore repeat our wish, that they should thereupon be subject only to close confinement, as originally proposed, and of course that this article should remain in its first form.

We agree that the twenty-fifth article shall be as proposed, thus:

ARTICLE XXV. The two contracting powers grant to each other the liberty of having, each in the ports of the other, Consuls, Vice-Consuls, Agents and Commissaries of their own appointment, observing the usual forms of notification and admission, and on the same footing as is or shall be allowed to any other of the most favored European nations.

We agree also, that the first part of the twenty-sixth article shall stand thus:

ARTICLE XXVI. If either party shall hereafter grant to any other European nation, &c.

The articles on which no observations have been made, that is to say, the 1st, 7th, 11th, 12th, 15th, 22nd, 23rd and 27th, to remain in the form originally proposed.

FROM MONSIEUR FAVI TO THE COMMISSIONERS.

Translation.

Paris, June 11, 1785.

Gentlemen,

I have received the letter which you did me the honor to write the 8th of this month, enclosing observations upon the alterations made by the Court of Tuscany, upon some articles of the treaty which you had proposed. I forwarded them without delay. I will have the honor to inform you in due season of the reply, which I shall receive, and which I presume will be for the conclusion of this convention, and which cannot fail to be useful to both countries. I am, &c.

FAVI.

Chargé d'Affaires of Tuscany.

SEVENTH REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS TO CONGRESS, ADDRESSED TO JOHN JAY, SECRETARY FOR FOREIGN

AFFAIRS.

Sir,

Passy, June 18, 1785.

In our last to you, of May 11th, we had the honor of enclosing, among other papers, a letter from Baron Thulemeier, drawing to a close our negotiation with the Court of Berlin. We have now that of forwarding our answer, marked No. 1.

No. 2, a, contains our observations of the counter-draft from the Court of Tuscany. No. 2, b, the letter enclosing them, and No. 2, c, Mr. Favi's answer acknowledging their receipt.

Mr. Adams' appointment to the Court of London, rendering it more convenient, more speedy, and probably more effectual, that that negotiation should be conducted on the spot, we wrote to the Duke of Dorset a letter of which No. 3 is a copy, in answer to one received from and transmitted to you in April. Since Mr. Adams' departure, we have been favored by him with information. which he received from you, that a Mr. Lamb had been charged with letters and instructions for us on the subject of the treaties with the State of Barbary. He sent us, at the same time the copy of a resolution of Congress on that subject; as yet we have heard nothing more of Mr. Lamb, but hope his arrival hourly, that we may take decisive measures for establishing an amity with those powers.

Mr. John Bapt. Pecquet, of Lisbon, who was the subject of an instruction to us of May 11, 1784, is now in Paris, and has applied for such acknowledgments for his services as may be thought proper. He seemed to desire most some appointment at Lisbon, either for himself or his son. We informed him none such were in our gift, and that all we could do in that line, would be to mention him to Congress, as worthy of their recollection, if they should make any appointment there analagous to his talents. We have written to Mr. Adams, proposing to give Mr. Pecquet, in addition to ten guineas which he has received for present supply, one hundred and fifty guineas, or perhaps four thousand livres, as a compensation for his expenses and good dispositions. His expenses on our prisoners had been about fifty moidores.

Our first letter to Congress was of the 11th November, and was sent by a Colonel Lemaire. Having lately re

ceived proofs that he omitted to deliver private letters with which he was charged, though he saw in New York the persons to whom they were addressed, we begin to fear he was capable of omitting to deliver also that to the President of Congress. We are equally uncertain whether our subsequent letters may have got to hand. To relieve our anxieties on this subject, we will pray you to be so good as to inform us which of them may have been received. Their dates have been November 11, 1784, December 15, 1784, and February, 1785, addressed to the President of Congress, and March 18, April 13, and May 11, addressed to yourself.

With the highest esteem, we have the honor to be, &c, B. FRANKLIN,

THOS. JEFFERSON.

FROM BARON DE THULEMEIER TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.

Sir,

Translation.

The Hague, July 19, 1785.

The King has entirely approved the projected treaty of commerce and friendship with the United States of America, which has been the result of our common labors, and as it is found in the last letter you have honored me with, bearing date of May 26th, of the present year. His Majesty consents, besides, that agreeably to your proposition, and that of your colleagues, the duration of the said treaty be fixed at ten years, and it is according to my instructions, that in the twenty-seventh article the term mentioned has been inserted. He orders