e on the construction given by her to the eighth article
of the Louisiana cession treaty. The difference in the nature and
character of the two interests is such that they can not with propriety
be blended together. The claims are of reparation to individuals for
their property taken from them by manifest and undisputed wrong. The
question upon the Louisiana treaty is a question of _right_ upon the
meaning of a contract. It has been fully, deliberately, and thoroughly
investigated, and the Government of the United States is under the
entire and solemn conviction that the pretension of France is utterly
unfounded. We are, nevertheless, willing to resume the discussion if
desired by France; but to refuse justice to individuals unless the
United States will accede to the construction of an article in a treaty
contrary to what they believe to be its real meaning would be not only
incompatible with the principles of equity, but submitting to a species
of compulsion derogatory to the honor of the nation.

[Extract of a letter (No. 2) from James Brown, envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary of the United States, dated April 28, 1824.]

I have in a letter to M. de Chateaubriand, copy of which I have now the
honor to send, made an effort to separate the claims of our citizens
from the Louisiana question.

_Mr. Brown to M. de Chateaubriand_.

PARIS, _April 28, 1824_.

His Excellency VISCOUNT DE CHATEAUBRIAND,

_Minister of Foreign Affairs, etc_.

SIR: In the conference with which your excellency honored me a few
days ago I mentioned a subject deeply interesting to many citizens
of the United States, on which I have been instructed to address your
excellency, and to which I earnestly wish to call your immediate
attention.

It is well known to your excellency that my predecessor, Mr. Gallatin,
during several years made repeated and urgent applications to His
Majesty's Government for the adjustment of claims to a very large
amount, affecting the interests of American citizens and originating in
gross violations of the law of nations and of the rights of the United
States, and that he never could obtain from France either a settlement
of those claims or even an examination and discussion of their validity.
To numerous letters addressed by him to His Majesty's ministers on that
subject either no answers were given or answers which had for their only
object to postpone the investigation of the subject. Whilst