It was also wise to impart some benefits to nations that had formed commercial treaties with the United States, and thereby to impress on those powers which had hitherto neglected to form such treaties, the idea that some advantages were to be gained by a reciprocity of friendship.
That France had claims on the gratitude of the American people which ought not to be overlooked, was an additional argument in favour of the principle for which they contended.
The discrimination was opposed by Mr.Benson, Mr.Lawrence, Mr.
Wadsworth, and Mr.Sherman.
They did not admit that the public sentiment had been unequivocally expressed; nor did they admit that such benefits had flowed from commercial treaties as to justify a sacrifice of interest to obtain them.

There was a commercial treaty with France; but neither that treaty, nor the favours shown to that nation, had produced any correspondent advantages.

The license to sell ships could not be of this description, since it was well known that the merchants of the United States did not own vessels enough for the transportation of the produce of the country, and only two, as was believed, had been sold since the license had been granted.

The trade with Great Britain, viewed in all its parts, was upon a footing as beneficial to the United States as that with France.
That the latter power had claims upon the gratitude of America was admitted, but that these claims would justify premiums for the encouragement of French commerce and navigation, to be drawn from the pockets of the American people, was not conceded.

The state of the revenue, it was said, would not admit of these experiments.
The observation founded on the extensiveness of the trade between the United States and Great Britain was answered by saying, that this was not a subject proper for legislative interposition.