[undecipherable] Friday. [June] 93. [1013 XXXIV– 48 797–7[undecipherable]] Mr Genet the french minister this [undecipherable] [undecipherable] the [interpreter?], and after [undecipherable] [some] [undecipherable] [uninterrupted?] conversation he observed that he [had?] just received some agreeable news from Guadaloupe and Martinico — that Admiral [Gardiner?] had made his appearance off Martinico on the [cancellation?] of [the?] [undecipherable] [the?] [undecipherable] had nothing [effect?] — that [a?] good disposition [existed?] to make the best defense — and that [they] [stood?] in— need of the means — that they [wanted?] and [muskets?] cannon and [ammunition?] — [These?] of the all [?] [undecipherable] [that?] [undecipherable] one of the [similar?] [things?] the [amount?] [possibly?] be [calculated?] — the debt due France [from?] [undecipherable] [undecipherable] this [country?] and therefore [has?] [not?] put the commerce with [Netherlands?] upon the [same?] [footing?] [as?] — Helas [as?] France [owed?] That [the?] [undecipherable] any [opportunity?] — we should [afford?] in the [present?] situation [was?] [the] [right?] [offered?] to ourselves. That the U's would not [had?] [been?] — [prejudiced?] that France [had?] the right — to demand the guarantee of [their?] — [Islands?] but that the [means?] of [their?] [defense?] 3 [was?] only asked for the [subject?] [in any?] and [ammunition?] [so?] that [it?] might be — [provided?] as [secretly?] as [possible?] To this [replied?] that [upon?] — our [affairs?] was [very?] [depressed?], [informed?] [to?] that the President had decided — [some?] [thing?] about and for whatever — [many?] could [be?] devoted for [its?] [aid?] [in order to?] [help?] their [friends?] when was — by no means improbable — That if the [case?] was otherwise — it would be doubted whether they [were?] [there?] [established?] [that?] [upon?] an act of the Legislature [to?] [authorize?] the [rescission?] of [many?] [to?] [authorize?] [the?] [terms?] [of?] [determine?] That [replied?] [the?] [reasons?] [he/the?] [cannot?] [decide?] — [that?] [I?] [know?] of that the measure — would be considered contrary [to?] [what?] — [in?] the [form?] of [them?] [between?], as the — [tranquility?] could scarcely be kept [in?] — [secret?]. In [answer?] to these reasons — he [said?] that [by?] any defense [of?] [money?], the [granting?] of a [general?] [transportation?] — of [muskets?] would not [much?] increase the — [defeat?] [x] and that we [made?] [might?] [misjudge?] [make?] [arrangements?] not [waiving?] — [from?] [them?] [money?] for [quantities?] — [required?]. That if the President [had?] not — the [required?] authority to [prevent?] the — [articles?] it must be [inferred?] as — [a?] good reason for the [refusal?]. — [But?] as to the [bullets?], he [had?] — his [cogito?] that Mr Hammond was — [viewing?] [since?] Roy in this country, and that — they [had?] not [any?] right to [take?] any [opportunity?] — at [the?] themselves, as the [British?] [government?] [itself?] — [have?] the last year [passed?] [arms?] — so [prominent?] of those [informs?] — that — if there was any [objection?] to [the?] [public?] — this matter might be [conducted?] secretly — [undecipherable] to some individual — as he — [undecipherable] [undecipherable] — 7 [June?] 1793 — [undecipherable] [undecipherable] [first?] conversation with 7 June 1793 2 [XXXIV–48] he added that he understood me [had?] — [undecipherable] avons a [fine?] — He added that our [reputation?] would [have?] [been?] much affected by [the?] [British?] — and violently [impelled?], and that — he did not see that we [had?] any — [cause?] to fear our own shadow, he — that he [past?] [should?] [spend?] [a?] [performance?] — of the [fears?] of England [before?] France — [help?] [subjection?] that our Ships would — be [well?] hounded at sea by [the?] — English and [violated?] by [other?] — [manner?]. These things were [aforesaid?] — by him, and the demand urged with — [considerable?] [undecipherable] — [I?] [actually?] told him, that — 6 from his manner [of?] [no?] [nothing?] the — [request?] [would?] [about?] [been?] to [be?] his — [desire?] that [I?] [should?] mention the — [matter?] with the President of the [U.S?] He [told?] [him?] that [was?] his [object?] — thought that the [color?] of [a?] [formula?] [no?] — [nature?] [he?] was [best?] [refused?] [lamentable?] — the [business?] [especially?] that no — [unnecessary?] [thing?] might we [recommend?] in — [cases?] of [a?] [personal?] [request?], and [for?] — the matter [could?] be [convenient?] of — [ordered?] [then?] [at?] [an?] official note — [ordered?] [—] [Bielang?] [Speak?] also — might be [reserved?] [I?] [promised?] to [state?] the [no?] [occasion?] to — the President and would endeavor — know the result tomorrow — [ft] 7 Saturday 8 June Read to the President of the U.S. the before recited conversation in the [presence?] of [the?] [Secretary?] of [the?] [Hearing?]. The President [undecipherable] approved the reasons [which/what?] had been given to Mr [Gene?] — for not complying [with?] [his?] [request?] — particularly the [1^st?] and 3[d?] [that?] [as?] [the?] with his request. [and?] [at?] the [same?] [he?] directed me — to confide the — [matter?] [undecipherable] Secretary of State [through?] — this was — done, as [I?] the [particulars?] [from?] [found?] the — [result?] was [inadmissible?] for the reason — given — That [he?] thought it was — [—] the [3d?] reason [to?] Mr — [Gene?], and to [suppress?] it [collectively?] — [with?] the [1^st?].