1765. CONTRABAND OF WAR, Naval Stores and.—
I have had a consultation with
Mr. Madison on the application of the British
vessel of war for stores. We are both of
opinion that if by this term he meant sea
stores only, or even munitions de bouche, or
provisions generally, there can be no objection
to their taking them, or indeed anything except
contraband of war. But what should be
deemed contraband of war in this case we are
not agreed. He thinks that as the English
deem naval stores to be contraband, and as
such take them from our vessels at sea,
we ought to retaliate their own definition on
them. I think we ought to act on the opinion
that they are not contraband; because by
treaties between all the nations (I think)
having treaties with another they are agreed
not to be contraband; even England herself,
with every nation but ours, makes them noncontraband,
and the only treaty making them
contraband (Jay's) is now expired. We
ought, then, at once to rally with all the other
nations on the ground that they are noncontraband;
and if England treats them as
contraband in our ships, instead of admitting
it by retaliation, let us contest it on its true
ground. Mr. Madison thinks France might
complain of this; but I think not, as we shall
permit both nations equally to take naval
stores; or at least such articles of them as
may be used for peaceable as well as warlike
purposes; this being the true line.—
To Albert Gallatin.
Ford ed., viii, 455.
(June. 1806)
