If some meaning, and such a one, is to be given to the last member of the article, some meaning, and a similar one, must be given to the corresponding member.  If the reservation by the United States of a right to lay an equivalent duty, implies a relinquishment of their right to lay any other, the reservation by France of a right to continue the specified duty, to which it is an equivalent, must imply a relinquishment of the right on her part, to lay or continue any other.  Equivalent reservations by both, must imply equivalent restrictions on both.  The exact reciprocity stipulated in the preceding articles, and which pervades every part of the treaty, ensures a counter right to each party for every right ceded to the other.

Let it be further considered, that the duty called tonnage, in the United States, is in lieu of the duties for anchorage, for the support of buoys, beacons, and light-houses, to guide the mariner into harbor and along the coast, which are provided and supported at the expense of the United States, and for fees to measurers, weighers, guagers, &c, who are paid by the United States; for which articles, among many others (light excepted), duties are paid by us in the ports of France, under their specific names.  That government has hitherto thought these duties consistent with the treaty; and consequently, the same duties under a general instead of specific names, with us, must be equally consistent with it:  it is not the name, but the thing, which is essential.  If we have renounced the right to lay any port duties, they must be understood to have equally renounced that of either laying new or continuing the old.  If we ought to refund the port duties received from their vessels since the date of the act of Congress, they should refund the port duties they have received from our vessels since the date of the treaty, for nothing short of this is the reciprocity of the treaty.

If this construction be adopted, then each party has for ever renounced the right of laying any duties on the vessels of the other coming from any foreign port, or more than one hundred sols on those coming coastwise.  Could this relinquishment be confined to the two contracting parties alone, its effect would be calculable.  But the exemption once conceded by the one nation to the other, becomes immediately the property of all others who are on the footing of the most favored nations.  It is true, that those others would be obliged to yield the same compensation, that is to say, to receive our vessels duty free.  Whether France and the United States would gain or lose in the exchange of the measure with them, is not easy to say.

Another consequence of this construction will be, that the vessels of the most favored nations, paying no duties, will be on a better footing than those of natives, which pay a moderate duty:  consequently, either the duty on these also must be given up, or they will be supplanted by foreign vessels in our own ports.