{"character_count": 3468, "word_count": 602, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9649999737739563], "ccnet_perplexity": [1438.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
mits that the French minister in 1881, per- suaded Mr. RIvEs, to abandon the claim for interest and for credits, and that 5 rnil- lions was offered, but refused. The basis was the vessels destroyed ;--amounting to 3l ships and 3l cargoes. Then there were 40 ships and 336 cargoes eonfscated under the decrees of Berlin and Milan,--28 ships and 35 cargoes seized under the decree of Ranboullet, and brought to Bayonne. Tho Duke of Broglie farther admits that if the principle adopted previous to the revolution of July had been carried cut, the American claims would have amounted to forty mil- lions. If France had been treated, says the Duke. m the ports of Louisiana as the most favored nation, in conformity 10 the sth article of the treaty of cession, she would not have had to pay the sum of 40o,- GOO francs, which the Americans have ex- acted of her, over and above the terms of that treaty. The exportations to America from France, form about quarter part of the French commerce. It is pretended that the Americans will see. without dis pleasure, the rejection of the treaty, be- cause 1t will remain a tranquil spectator of the result. This is not so.

 M. Bignon, among others remarks in answer to M. Broglie, said, if the Gov ernment of the United States should deter mine upon rigorous measures, France would have power of making reprisals.- He did not deny the principle of just in- demnity.

 Nj. Berryer asked why in the treaty of 1900 no claims were presented by the Americans, for the depredations previously committed under the directory. A motive of Napoleon in making the generous ces- sion et Louisiana, was to aggrand:ze the United States against England. The Duke of Richelieu's promises to the U. States Tn 1874, were mere diplomatic words with out any pledge. The diminution of imposts ] by the treaty of 1881, IS no compensation for the losses sustained by the neglect on the part Of the Americans to fulfil the trea- ty ot lS03. The commission formed by the minister himself in 1881, only placed the American claims at l2 millions. The 20 millions proposed IS too large sum to pay for new tariff, which some may think necessary. Nor are we to purchase in France by paying silver 10 the Americans.

 M. George La Fayette stated that he was in the minority of the commission, and that Tn hls opinion much more was due the U. States than the majority acknowledged. Sitting of .April lst. M. de Lamartne, though in favor of the project, admitted the skilful and learned ex- li pose oi the question made by M. Bignon.

 The speech of M. de Lamartine IS full of eloqnenee and feeling on the general sub- ject of national faith and honor, and of chi- yalroos, generous sentiments towards the United States, but deyeiopes no other fact than that the American people should be 10th to make war upon an ancient ally that entertains such liberal opionions toward, and strong affection for us.

 M. Duchatel, admitted that France took fifty millions or more of American cotfons iu 1s33-being half of the amount of French products received by America therefore France would be the greatest suf- ferer by a rupture. America opens for French commerce the most brilliant pros- poets in the future.

 M. salverte, contended that the rejection of the treaty would lead to negotiations better founded in right and justice.

 M. Jay supported the project.

 The first section being put, it was re- ljected by vote of i76 to f66.

 szzz4xzznaaaax=z......-ac4sz.u