Brooks: Diplomwcyi asd the Borderloums


million dollars. He wished to have the United States assume re-
sponsibility for all types of claims in order to relieve Spain of the
litigation. Furthermore, he argued that the ignorant grandees of
the Spanish court might think it was a purchase and consider the
price too small, as the Floridas were worth far more than that sum.
Onis feared, as Adams explained it, that, "if the limitation of five
millions should be in the treaty, it might give them a handle to say
that the interest and honor of Spain were both sacrificed by the
bargain.'" Adams remained firm, however, and five millions was
the amount stated to which the United States would reimburse its
own citizens for the several kinds of claims against Spain which
were enumerated (Arts. 9 and 11).
 Onis called on Adams on the eighteenth, and the drafts of the
 agreement were studied. A Cabinet meeting was held on the fol-
 lowing day, but no important revisions resulted. In the final settle-
 ment, January 24, 1818, was set as the date up to which Spanish
 land grants in the ceded territories should be validated (Art. 8).
 Onis had suggested to Irujo that any Florida grants which might
 be ruled out by this provision could be replaced by lands in Texas,
 "which remain assured to the Crown, and which are of infinitely
 better quality, and in a better climate.'" Such substitution, how-
 ever, was never made.
 The right of Spain to call qn France for payment for spoliations
 by the French cruisers was allowed, and the declaration was made
 that the United States had received no recompense on that account
 and that it renounced any claim thereto (Arts. 9 and 14). Other
 renunciations of the United States included damages incurred in
 the suspension of the right of deposit at New Orleans in 1802, and
 all maritime claims on Spain. This country was released, on the
 other hand, from Spanish claims for damages resulting from the
 Pike and Miranda expeditions, and from unlawful seizures at sea
 (Art. 9). The Convention of 1802 was annulled and all claims in-
 cluded in it were renounced (Art. 10).
 A nice distinction was made in the wording of the section of the
 treaty which pertained to the cession of the Floridas, with the re-
 sult that the previous claims of the two governments were not
 defined, and the notorious West Florida controversy remained
 forever unsettled.
 The King was to cede "all the territories which belong to him,