The enquirer — Richmond, Va., 1810-03-13 00:00:00, page 4

FOR THE EMQUIRER.
IMPORTANT DECISION • •
jlcforc //j<v Chancellor for the Richmond
' "iA District.
Sp&ix^.-Vscajiion, 1809.
FicoUon C'Hetk va. Fancock et al.
UPON A B1T4, FOR AN INJUNCTION.
The bill in this case was ottered during the last
•pring vacation fur an injunction It was stated
in the bill, that the plaint ills on the 25th Decem
ber, 1803, leased of David Ross and James Cur
rie. a tract of land in the county of Henrico,
•ailed the Deep Run Coal Pita, for seven years ;
that Ross was two thirds owner of the land and
Currie one third ; that the rent was payable on
the first d»v of January in each year; that Ross’s
proportion whs g 666 66 ; that in April 1806,
the plaintiffs not being indebted to Ross one skil
ling, he proposed to them, that they should ac
cept his drafts, commonly called accommodation
drafts, which he should cither discount at bank or
with private individuals, It that he would always
take them up when they fell due, which they did
for his accommodation, until they determined to
renew no longer; that inconsequence of this
determination, they had t»* take up at bank two
drafts, one dated the 15th June, 1807, for S 830,
*t six months ; the other dated the 10th Dec.
1807, for £ 1200, at ninety days ; and both ac
knowledged by him to be accommodation drafts,
accepted and paid by them; and in which they
had no interest. That on the 1st Jan 1808, he I
was oiupoieu 10 inetn in me sum ot lyj si ;
and on tiie 1st Jan. 1809, after giving him credit
for his part of the rent and coal yard in Chester
field, the balance against him in their favor, was
S 1080 28, besides interest. That the defendants
some time in the year 1808, bought of the said
Ross Ids interest in the said coal lands ; and in
January last caused distress to be made in their
names, on the plaintiffs’ property, for the rent due
in the name of the said Koss for the preceding
year ; and they were compelled to execute a te
nlevy bond with security for the same, payable
in three months : that this distress was made at
a time, when they believe the said Huncork knew
that the said Koss was indebted to them in a
greater sum than the rent. That probably the
said Hancock supposed himself entitled to the
rent, because the said Nicolson one day in a jo
cose way, said to him, “ he hoped he would be
indulgent as to the rent.” That tiie defendants
stand on no better ground than Koss, to whom
the plaintiff s would not be compelled to pay the
rent ot 1808, under the circumstances aforesaid ;
»t.d therefore they prayed for an injunction and
for general relief.
My the Chancellor .
Tliis is understood to be an applica
tion f»r an injunction upon the ground, that no
rent was due at the time of the distress ,- if tins
■was the^aef, it was a ptoner case for relief at
law ; but the plaintiffs, instead of availing them
selves of relief there, have come here for it, after
Availing themselves of the delay of the. law by
giving a replevin bond ; but this court cannot in
terpose under such circumstances ; and let it be
recollected, that where a party has relief at law,
lie must avail himself of it, by making a proper
defence, if lie does not, he closes the door of e
quity against himself, unless be can shew, from
Aom^ peculiar circumstances, which must be true,
and not within his control, that he couvd not avail
tiiinselt at law ; for otherwise every case may be
liable to be brought into this covert.
VI otion denied -• and
Afterwards in the June term renewed, upon a
•supplemental bill stating, that the plaintiffs were
governed in their conduct by the advice of their
counsel, and of which he gave a certificate, “ that
A court of chancery would afford relief notwith
standing the replevy bond.”
J)y the Chancellor
Tiie rule as laid down in this case, i
when this motion was first made, has been recon
sidered apd approved ; and now let me again
test this application, by that rule, namely, “ that
^untess the plaintifs can shew from some peculiar
circumstances which must be true, and not within
their control that they could not be relieved at law,
they shall not be allowed to come into this court ;
for otherwise, every cate may be liable to be brought
in as for example—suppose one who never had
the small pox was sued at law in one of the com
mon lawcourt3of this place, and on his way hi
ther to make his defence, lie should hear tnat
that complaint was in town ; and from a fear of
taking it he should return, and a judgment was
to go against him, this court should, undor such
circumstances, upon the usual proof, grant an
Injunction ; hut if upon the coming in of the an
swer, the f-tets were denied and not proved, the
injunction should bo dissolved; and so in a case
v/here an injunction should be obtained, and up
on filing the answer, it should appear, that the
circumstances under which it was obtained, might
have been controlled, it should likewise be dis
solved, and the party left to the c<* isequences of
the law ; because, in either case, his application
■was rnuJe with unclean hands, against one of the
jdainest principles of the court, numely, that
relief shall never he afforded but to those who
come without blame in themselves ; but where
the circumstances under w hich relief could not
be obtained at law, are true, and could not be con
trolled, there relief in equity should be afforded ;
but in this case, though the circumsimces staled
in the supplemental bill be true, it was within
the control of the plaintiffs, for they might have
had better advice from their counsel, if In* had
given himself the trouble to emmine the subject
ujiuii pi uicjpic , mr i noui ii to i>e a very clear
case, that the errors of n competent tribunal m
)*iw, which can or might have been corrected
there, a fiords no ground for relief in equity ;
but they must be corrected hy a superior court in
the mode pointed out by law. I Call 540, Tend
-<t. Dish ; 2 I-fen h Mun. 139, Turpin rs Tho
mas, are authorities completely up fa this point ;
much lesf ther, can the.errors of counsel furnish
ground for relief in equity ; for surely fJic party
who takes advice must abide the consequences of
it. This may be thought a strict rule, but it is a
just one, and it will be found in practice, as bene
ficial as economical, since it will make parties
attend in 'he first instance, to their rights at law,
where the witnesses generally must be in person,
and can be setn at the same time that they arc
cross-examined and heard, which is one of the
best means by which tlie truth can be attained ;
but in this court the mode of proof is different ;
the testimony is upon paper ; a mode much more
liable to abuse than t.'.e former, and therefore it
fchauld not be resorted to hut where relief cannot
be obtained by means of tlie law : by a strict ad
herence to this course, the ancient trial by jury,
which i* preferable to ail others, will be preserv
ed ; and the saving to suitors on account of costs,
will be immense ; for it it a tael, that I Iihvc dis
solved at least one hundred injunctions wnfcli
had beon granted by my predecessor, without
having been asked, in a single instance, (as well
as I recollectj up >n what ground : and it is e
qually true, that not withstanding the strictness
•which I have observed, in granting injunctions
that not one in ten stands the test upon » motion
to dissolve : for tliace reasons I must adhere to
th« most rigid rule* of the courty and with me
there remain* not a doubt but that tlie whole
country will find their interests sopporied by it.
Pul Upon the rot. its, the plaintiffs should not
be relieved; and. why l because the equity now
tu t Up, existed before tiycy gave their boo l l\,r
the rent, payable to the defendants in three
month* ; the plaintiff then, end not the defend
ants, Hancock anil G that, should be tut ned over
to lloss, as they rosy have discharged him, rely
in,'upon‘b« p’nifrt tfi, in consequence of tlieir
conduct, \rjirst askir g indulgence, and then giv
ing t!.eu‘ bond lor tb_ nr:t.
(<’o n.>t mean l^, >y m y thing to r.fTett »Le ge
nre, i rule, that »n atstg.itr e-nn»t hr. in a beiwr
Ailuffirua than '.be atitgnsr, as to lie sliigor’s tqm-1
tv ; unless by the act of the obligor li'r.nself, as j
the case of Hoomes, ex’or of Elliot vs. Smock, 1
Wash 389, and so in the case before me, Koss
could not place the defendants, Hancock and Gil
liat in a better situation than he himself occupi
ed, but the plaintiffs might, and so they did by
giving thvir bond to those defendants ; to illus
trate this by example, let it be stated, that A
transfers his claim on B to C, and upon applica
tion B executes his bond to C, who thereupon
discharges A, and afterwards C obtains a judg
ment against B upon this bond, who applies for
relief to a court of chancers upon some ground of
latent tq lity between him and A—B should cer
lainly be turned over to A and not allowed relief
against C. This is a like case with the one before
the court.
Ulotion again denied.
Mr. Hay then said, that he had been employed
in this case, and should have been glad to have
made some remarks before the court had decid
ed, if he nad been apprised of the court’s inten
tion.
The Chancellor said he might be heard on the
first motion day j and the counsel who made the
motion said, he would, with the leave of the
court, avail himself of the indulgence granted to
Mr Hay to put into the Chancellor's hands some
notes, which the court said he might do.
Mr. Hay was fully heard, and the other counsel
filed his notes—curia advisure Mult.
February Term, 1810.
By the Chancellor :
Mr. Hay, in taking a general view or
this case, said, “ that it was not universally true,
that where relief could be had at law, it should
not be had inequity ; u-s for example, in waste,
in dower, and in the case of a nuisance, relief
may !>e had in Chancery, though it may also he
had at law ; that a matter of discount was not a
matter of original jurisdiction at law ; and that
it never had been lecided that one, who had a
discount, should not have it in equity, unless lie
had failed at law ; hut he admitted, that if the
rent had been actually paid to Koss, the plaintiffs
might have been relieved at law, in a writ of re
plcvin, but that they could not in the Vrcscnt case,
as the payment was on account of other matters,
for the statute concerning discounts did not em
brace the case of a tenant or plaintiff in replevin,
and that a court of equity should not be so strict
in confining >, party to relief at law, in a writ of
replevin, as in other actions, because, if he should
be cast, he would have to pay double the amount
>>t the rent in arrear and according to the
fashion at the times, Mr. Hay referred the court
to sewral English authorities, St to a few home de
cisions. But as his whole argument went to prove
that the plaintiffs could not have been relieved by
a writ of replevin, as evidence of the discount,
in that kind of action, would.havc been improper,
1 shall confine myself to the examinatien of this
point principally.
i ne wriole cate then, is reduced to this ques
tion ; could the plaintiffs, in a writ of replevin,
have given evidence of the advancement of mo
ney to Ross, while they were his tenants, which
overpaid the rent, that was due to him, before he
sold the lease hold premises to the defendants ?
If the plaintiffs could have given such evidence,
at law, they cannot, upon Mr. Hay’s own princi
ples, be admitted now to come into equity, unless
they bring themselves within the rule as laid
down. To illustrate this point by example : 1
will suppose, that the defendants Hancock and
Gilhat had, instead of the distress which they
made for tlie rent, brought an action of debt, as
the assignees of Ross, might the plaintiffk not in
this action have proved their discounts against
him, before notice of the assignment, and must
they not have been allowed agreeably to the sta
tute in the edition of the laws by PI. as. and Pace
p. 36. sect. 4. ? tlie answer, I apprehend, is too
clear in the affirmative, to be questioned. I ask
then if their rights can be changed, because of a
different form ol action ? and tlie answer is, to
iny mind, equally clear, that they cannot: for I
take the la w to be, that the plaintiff in replevin,
and the defendant in all olhcr.actions, may plead
is many several matters, whether of law or fact,
as he shall think necessary for his defence : ib. p.
60. sect. 40. I have referred to this statute to
prove, that the pluuiiifl in teplsvin, may do, what
a defendant in all othfr actions may: in other
words ; that their rights are the same, without
regard to tilcjorm ol the action : and by another
statute, in what is called the old body of laws,
P-249. and in tne 2-vol. by Pleas. 119. sect. 1. the
Jejendant, upon tlie trial of any suit, shall be at
liberty to make ull the discounts, he can, and up
on proof thereof, the same shall be allowed in
couit : but it was said, that this statute, dul not
embrace tlie case of a tenant or plai ntff in reple
vin i but surely die equity of the statute does :
but it it does not, may tlie defendant^, Hancock
.tad Gilhat, not be considered as the grantors of
the rent, that was due to Ross, by the planititls,
at the time of the purchase of the defendants,
Hancock and Giiiut, from Ross of the leas'.e hold
premises ? and jl so, by another statute, Plea, t nd
Pace s edition p. 159. soct. 17. no tenant wlio be
lore notice of the grunt, shall have paid the rent
to tlie grantor, shall suffer any damage thereby :
d tins statute be applicable to the present case,
as 1 apprehend it is.it would seem to be very clear,
that il the phiintifls had made advancements to
Ross, before he sold the lease hold premises, and
granted the rents thereof to the defendants,
Hancock and Giliiav, that the plaintiffs should
not sufler any damage thereby, whether those
advancements were made on account of the rent,
or any other account ; as Ross could not place
: faiicock and Gillut in a better situation than lit
ilime"1 * stood : for 1 hold it to be very clear, that
i" a writ of replevin between Ross and the plain
,u**» evidence might have been given oftlpj dis
oui.ts ; and of course, that they, might have been
proved in a writ of replevin, between tlie plain
ii‘s i*nd Ilunccck and Giliiat as Ross’s grantors
or asa;guees.
IMS IS a short view of the case before me, as
presented under our own statutes, and 1 think,
mat they very clearly warrant the construction
winch I have given to them : but it wes said, In
Mr.Hay in his argument, that as in England, it
had Oecn held, that the statutes of set-oil did not
extend to a replevin, the same rule should obtain
here : but, I think otherwise ; bee a is e, I dis
approve r.f the reason given for it there—namely,
that a replevin is not an action, but a remedy
without suit, and like an action for a tort. iial.
n. p 181 and Montg. on set-off 18. And Mr.
Kenyon, the c ue! justice said, that it wu, much
to he l.uiieiiled, ttiui it had been so decided ; hut
that sue 11 was the law . and in this, weie I a
judge in this country, 1 might concur with him ;
out as 1 am not, 1 shut) lay down a different rule
here; and again, our statutes of set off ate not
like those in England : for there the statutes of
sct-oll sjieak of mutual debts, which was the
common law principles but here, a deftidantin
any suit is jIIo wed to make all lie discounts lie
c-.i, and ujHin proof ^hereof shall be allowed
them in court, by which, most clearly, the lev
.sLlure meant to extend the common law rule
and 1 have oelore said. Uiat a plaintiff in reple
v.n ban thosame rights, as a dc/enffam in all o
t er actions has : and in support of which, I
must beg leave ly draw to my aid, tlie ease of
I url.ei'v.lle vs. Sell. 2. Wash. 71.where the court !
f *PF,C®14 rnust have given tlie same construction
to our statutes, nr in tl,at case the court could
the judgment ol the district
court of W cstpioreland, which had allowed Self
the plaintiff in replevin, to give in evidence nna
wai Jot the arbitrators made after the distress,
, 1 resf>eHmg account, which subsisted be
tween the narties before, toabewthat ho did not
owe any part of t|,c rent to TurberviJle: upoif the
whole, I have no doubt, but that under our sta
*:•*••• , counJ*,n reP‘**i”, may be proved in or
i.er to shew, that tlie avowant distrained for two
mucii rent , and therefore it devolves uj>on the
plaintiffs to bring themselves within the rule n
laid down, or Vo stand bound by their own act :
ler certainly thcr^ is no principle better settled
than this, that diacounta shall not Ire firat act up in t
equity without some sufficient mason.
A s to rcliefin equity, in uditq in doxaer, and
in the esse of a nuiaimce, though it may, also be
had at law : this is true as a general prof osi
tior.; but it is not true, even in those cases,
where there is no impediment at lsw ; for
wherever that is the ca<c, this court should not
interfere. As to the severity of the law, 1 have
nothing to say except, that 1 cannot lend my aid,
to assist a party, to avoid the consequences of a
statute : unless he brings himself within the
rule as before laid down ; if the statute is kard\
and unjuat, the legislature should change it; but
this court should not.
The notes of the other counsel arc next in or
der : and so far as he has taken a different view
of the subject, from Mr. Hay, they will be staled
and considered.
lie said, that if A wa« gue«l on a bond, anil
negligently suffered a judgment to go against
him by default, when he might have defended
himself, and proved payment of the debt ; yet
that this court would relieve him : that his cli
ents were blameless, and that if he was in an er
ror, lie v. as partly brought into it l>y the court of
appeals, in the cast; of NVIple, Whittle, and (Jo.
vs. Banister's oxer’s. 1 Wash. 1G6- w! re it ne
ver was doubted, but that a court of equity
would give relief, notwithstanding the party com
plaining, might have resorted to a writ of reple
vin .- that lie had practised law for i‘3 years
and upwards, and in all that time he had never
known but one writ of replevin prosecuted ; and
that at least twenty cases, hkc the presold, h.‘d
been entertained in the courts of equity : that
t he writ of replevin was nearly as obsolete, as the
audita querela : that as courts of law would al
low of suits for ir-mey paid bv mistake, a court
ofeqiuy, if one had gi.cn his b> p-J for money,
under like circumstances, would relieve against
a judgement thereupon" : and he closed his re
marks by complaining of the animadversions of
the court upon the conduct of his clients.
As to A’s case, 1 repeat again, that this court
could not relieve in such a case, without violnl
ing every legitimate principle of the couit, un
less the application was made within the rulg as
laid down.
The misapprehension as to the case of While,
Whittle and Co. vs Banister's exor’s. proves
how dangerous it would be to the common law
jurisdiction of this country, to open the door of
this court to protect our citizens against the
mistake* of counsel, and more especially, when
we consider what number of inexperienced
j young gentlemen are daily turning out in the
profession of the law. I have very attentively
examined this case, for the principle said to have
been decided in it, anil I cannot find even the
word replevin in any part of it, which shews,
that the question as to jurisdiction was not made ;
and certainly there is no principle belter known
than this, that u question not made, in the deci
sion of a case, is never considered si settled by
it. But the case itself is totally unlike the pre
sent : for the appellees in that case, were execu
tors, and had distrained for rent upon a lease
made by themselves upon the authority of their
testator's will, and the discount offered was a
debt due y their testator, and if it had been al
lowed, it might have subjected them to a devas
tavit ; and therefore, upon every principle the
appellants could not he relieved, but in a court
ol equity, as their relief depended upon the a
mount of the assets, an amount of which was di
I recteil, although the injunction was dissolved.
Although the counsel has practised law for
twenty-three years and upwards, and has not in
all that lime known baton* writ of replevin to he
prosecuted ; yet this only proves, that from his
great attention to his profession, in other res
pects, he has not takun time to read with attenti
on the reports of our own courts : and therefore,
1 will, with his permission refer him to another
case in 2. Wash. 71 : and two others in 1. Call
117 and 405-which have come to the court of
appeals: and how many others, that have not
been brought up to that court, 1 cannot say. It
is true, that such au action is not very common ;
but Ibis is no objeclionto the legality of it : for
it is expressly authorised by the legislature, and
forms a part of one of our most prominent sta
tutes, in die edition of the laws by Plea, and
lh: :e p. 153. *nd should be resorted to upon all
proper occasions : first, because it U the law:
and secondly, because the trial must be by a jury.
As to the number of cases like the present,
which may have been entertained in equity, it
may be well accounted for by all those who will
give themselves the trouble to t'.amine the
course of our judicial proceedings from the time
of the decision of the case of Barret vs. Floyd in
the year 1790, until the decision of the case of
Terrel vs. Dish in 1799: but this case, and ano
ther which followed of Turpin vs. Thomas in
1808, most clearly overruled the case of Barret
vs. Floyd, as well as all those determined, in the
mean time, upon like principles ; and again set
tied the line of demarcation between the courts
of law and equity upon very correct principles:
and I pledge myself to be among the last to refuse
my aid to support it.
Surely the counsel was not serious, when he
remarked, that th.* writ of replevin, was as near
ly obtolrtg, a3 the audita quirela : for the tornrier
is not only prescribed as a Irgal remedy, by a
very recent act of the Isgitlature, and it, frequent
ly put in practice ; but the latter, even in Eng
land, has long since given way to a summary
mode of relief upon motion, and there, as judge
Hlackvtqne says, is quite driven out of practice :
and 1 think I may venture to say, that it never
was introduced into this country.
It is certainly true that a court of law will en
tertain a suit for money paid by mistake; and
that a court of equity will relieve against judg:
tnent obtained upon a bond, given for money,
under like circumstances ; and for this plain rea
son : that at law you cannot go into the conside
ration of the bond, and therefore it is a good
ground for relief in equity ; but this is not’ the
plaintiff's case r for they knew wlut they were
about.
Upon this view of the subject, these general
rules present themselves as proper for the gov
ernment of a court of equity.
1 That in all cases where a remedy may he hail
at law, reliej shall not he had in equity unless
there he some impediment at law : ami,
2. That in all cases where relief can he had at
la*, it shall not be had in entity, unless the case
falls within the rule as before laid down ; and
which his been tin standing course of the court
ever since I have had the honor of a seal on the
bench.
And I entreat the gendemen oftho bar, to take
not ice, that these general rules, as now again r«
peated, cannot he departed from, but must be
steadily regarded by the court.
I shall take my leave of this case, without ta
king any farther notice of the remark made by
Miv- Hay, which I afterwards noticed in the re
vision ot my notes, in the case of Alderson ve.
Iiiggars et al. and which I have omitted now j
because Mr. Hay lias explained to my satisfac
tion, that the remark was nut intended tob* made
in the sense 1 understood it, and with which I
am now perfectly satisfied.
Mr. Hay will not suppose, that the court lias
been inattentive to his aiidioritics, when be is in.
formed, that only one or two of the cases refer
red to by him could be found, and which taken
alone, he would not probably have rel.ed upon.
This, I presume, was owin'- to our books being
of different editions ; and 1 beg the other conn
sel to have the goodness to lirlievc, that the
court did not censure the conduct of bis clients,
wl* must ioo.» to Koss, arjl not to the other de
fendants.
Metis,t finally denied.
[BY AUTHORITY]
LAW OF THE UNITED STATES.
AN ACT
To prefer the the tncde in which application s’, all
be Tnude for the purchase of land at the sew
rat land ojf.ee* : and for the tclhfofjo at Unt -1
ret.
1) E it enaetrif by the Senate anti House of Pc'
present at ives of the United States of Ame
rica, in Congress assembled, That from ami af
ter tlie first day of June next, every person m tk
•'iff application at any of the land ofliees of the U.
S’atcs, for the purchase at private sale of a tract
»l land, shall produce to the register, a memo
randum in writing, describing the tract, which
li“ shall enter by the proper number of the sec
tions, halt sections, or quarter (as the caao may
be) and for the township uqd range, subscribing
his name thereto ; which memorandum the reg
ister shall file and preserve in his ofliee.
3ec. 3 And be it further enacted. That Joah
Ganet shall be permitted to withdraw his entry,
made on tlie second day of September, one thou
sand eight hundred and seyen, at tlie lan * ofliee
at Y inctrines, from the north west quarter sec
tion, number two, township number seven, south
run- • number seven west ; and the money paid
Li v him on the said entry shall he placet! to liis
credit, on any purchase lie shall, or may have
made of public land in the same district.
J II VAKNUM,
Speaker of the House of Pepresenta fives.
GISO : Cl ANTON,
Vice President of the United States, and
President cf the Senate
February 21th, 1310.
Arraovca,
JAMES MADISON.
I^Oil SALE, the following PROPKRl'P ir
the Town of W&yne&b»ruup,)i, viz:
The T/ vbiin occupied by William Brown—
The H<mi • contains ten moms and live fire places,
with a portico in front ; a large complete Store
llocse adjoining, a cellar under the whole, and a
log kitchen on a lot opposite, a stable GO by Si)
Teel. The builidiugs (kitchen excepted) are
frame, put up about five or six years: Also the
adjoining lot and old buildings, long occupied as
a Tavern. The garden ground is of the first
quality : Also two out lots, one of live, the other ;
two acres, together, with or without, as might
suit the purchaser. One hundred acres of well
timbered Laud, lying on botli sides the Turnpike
in Rockfish Gap, two to three miles from the a
foresaid property All the roads leading from
the west to Rockfish, unite at Wuynesborough,
and being situate in a popular neighborhood, is
believed to be one of the bent stands for public
business in the upper country. Possession nr ay
be had on the 25th- of June next—Apply to Ro
bert Porterfield, who abo oilers foe sale, the
following
MILITARY LANDS
IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY.
No. 1G4—1200 acres on the Ohio, at the mouth
of Delaware Creek.
No. 304—1333 1 3 acres on the Ohio, adjoining
the above, &c.
No. 317—1200 acres on Delaware creek, adjoin
ing James Curry* hc.
No. 319—1200 acres on said creek adjoining No.
317, &c.
No. 394—1200 acres on Hunting creek adjoining
John Baytop, he.
No. 543—1200 acres adjoining Wm. Campbell's
entry, he. near the lands reserved
for a town on the Mississippi.
These locations are specially made, copies of
which, together with copies of all the military
entries made below the Tennessee, certified by
the principal surveyor of tire military’ lands, arc
in my possession. It has been staled to me that a
great portion of the above lands are of the first
quality ; & that neck of land bounded by lire Ten
ncssee river, the Ohio, the Mississippi and the
Tennessee line, haB been generally represented
by those who have explored it, to possess superior
local advantages to any tract of equal extent in
the western country. The Indian claim to the
Lands in question is now about to be extinguish
ed, commissioners being appointed for that pur’
pose, when those lands will unquestionably be of
good value.
Also, 814 acres on the S. W. side of the
Cumberland, one to two iniics below the town ol i
Eddyville—This tract fronts on the river 488
poles, part ol the low ground, which is extensive,
is heavily timbered ; and lrom the quantity of
earth eaten by wild animals at the river bank ami
sundry places in the low ground, from my own
view and the opinion ot others, it probably con
tains as rich a body of salt, as any yet discovered
in the slate of Kentucky.
Also, 489 1 3 acres adjoining the back line of
the above. These tracts were patented in the
year 1787.
IN THE STATE OF OHIO.
1000 acres on Deer creek, about 3 miles from
its mouth and about 9 or 10 miles from the scat
ot government, includes an old Indian town, lies
600 poles on the creek, affords an excellent mill
seat and a number of never failing springs, per
haps from 5 to 6J0 acres of low ground, part of
which is heavily timbered, part prairie, a consi
derable portion of which is inclosed and under
cultivation, some timothy meadow, fruit trees
planted, and other improvements made. On the
high land are two large groves of sugar maple.
1000 acres oi' high land near Darby creek, a
bout three miles from the Sciota and perhaps 25
miles from the scat of government—This tract
lies extremely well, is covered with a heavy
grow th of oak, hickory, walnut, cherry, he.
2000 acres on Mad l iver or its waters, entered
second rate ; a true description i s shortly expect
ed.
333 1-3 acres onIVhiteoak creek, not far from
the Ohio, entered second rate. Its true descrip
tion, together with that of two other small tracts,
is also shortly expected.
1 am desirous of soiling the above lands :;''.o
gether, or they will be sold separately for cash,
well secured bonds or other negotiable paper, or
part payment may l>e made in lands below, or in
the adjoining counties above the blue ridge. The
terms will be made known by application to
ROBERT I’OItTiiRFlELD.
Augusta County, (Va.) Feb, 6. 2av. -f
¥ AND FOR SAI.E.—Thai valuable Tract <d
X-s LANT) laying in Amherst county, common
ly known by the name of Gordon's Quarter, situ
ated near the Tobacco row mountain, containing
eleven hundred acres, is now offered for sale on
liberal terms. The quality of this land is said to
be equal to any tract in tliat county.
1 lie terms will i»e known by making applica
tion to either of the subscribers in Petersburg,
or to Mr. Samuel Irvin of I.ynchburgh, who will
shew the premises or give such description of
hem as will satisfy any person desirous of pur
chasing.
JOHN WILDER,
JOHN HELL.
Petersburg, January \. w3m
WANTED as a Te acii eh in an Aca'dehi), f
ft Gentleman possessing a classical know
ledge of the French l anguage. A native of
France would be preferred, should lie happen to
be sufficiently acquainted with the English
tongue. If, beside; his information in any other
language or in any of the arts and sciences usu
ally taught in academies, he such as would qua
lify him to give instruction, he Mali be consider
:d, on that account, as entitled to further remu
neration.
Application to be made to the Printer ; or Jet
> n puit piidaud ad Ircasjd to E—na, will be at*
tended i;>.
21. ~ jytf
IH/'vVE nppni:.- _* I ' P’-r . i IJ I;/?..,
*nv ajjent lor r.e fl .t Territory
wlio is In i»!jv aiii.Nii ivi . , civr, and jprsnt
receipts for, any im>i.:<s •.e •.•> me in that <(UUT>
ler.
TliCMAS RITCHIE,
1. ..u, oj iiic iiwjuircr.
Richmond, Virjpnia,?
Feb. 16. 1310. £ law4t
A]’\ sKl ISKMENT.— Agreeably to the last
Will ihkI T«-*tuinent ol Col. James Calla
way, derutsed, ldo e; lictiiV’d county, his Exe
cutors offer the foliowi g EANpS for sale.
Several Lots ami Hou.c:. mine town of New
London--amongst with. h is a large and commo
dious house, completely finished and new, smd
was erected ior a uvrni, than which none can
be better culcid *teu. The stand is good, the si
luati'-n ilcg&nt and commanding, with a good
garden, and large and fentile lots attached to it,
with 400 acres of good Land contiguous, which
will he either sold with or without the houses.
One thousand acres oi'Land on Sycamore creek
in the county of Pittsylvania; this land is well
calculated for raking tobacco, wheat and corn,
the common produce of the country; it has a
plantation with ah overseer’s house, tobacco
houses, &c.
Several tracts In the county of Montgomery, of
different sizes, all tine for grass and small grain,
surrounded with a range equal to any in the
state.
The Carron Iron Works in the county of Krank
l.n, consisting «>t a b u~nr.ee and Forge, with sc -
vcral thousand acres of Lr.lul. The advantages
of this establishment cun bn bi^t ill described in
an advertisement, but is sUT.ugly recommended
to such as v. isb to engage in the business. It is
indeed considered as unnecessary to say much
“bout the property now offered to the public at
tention,for however valuabto it may be, no person
will wish to purchase without first viewing md
making himself acquainted with it.
The terms of sale will be reasonable and ac
commodating, and intule known by applying to
either of the Executors, who will shew the pro
perly.
WM. CALLAWAY,
CHKISTk CLARK, |
JAMES STEPTOE, >Executor*
JOHN CALLAWAY, I
GEORGE CALLAWAYJ
Bedford County, Feb 27. wl2wfl
NOTICE—A. 11 persons having claims against
the Estate of John Holt, dec’d. late of Sur
ry county, or against the late Firm of John Holt
and Co are earnestly requested to bring them
forward properly authenticated, and they shall
be discharged, and those indebted to the estate
or to the late Firm, are solicited to come for
ward and settle, as a division of the Estate is a
boatto be made between the parties interested.
JAMES SIMPSON,
Attorney for Eltzu A■ Holt, AJm'rx. of
JOHN HOLT, deed.
Surry County, March 6. w-lwV
Battersea PAPERMiLLs.-Thosewu®
wish to encourage Lhe manufactures of their
own state are informed, tiiat they can be suppli
ed with Paper Manufactured in Petersburg, it
any quantities
PRICES AS FOLLOWS:
Fine Letter Paper Vellum, g 4 75
Do. do. Laid, 4 51) Jjs
Fools Cap No. 1. 4 3~.i "»
Ho. No 2. 3 37$ S*
Do. No. 3. 3 12$
Folio Post Vellum, 9 50 f
Do. Laid, 9 ^
Fine Printing Medium, 5 50 »
Do. 4 50 ?
Excellent Wrapping Paper, 1 12$,
•Xj“ A Lberal discount made to wholesale pur*
chasers.
Orders for any of the above qualities, address
ed to the subscribers, executed at the shortest
notice.
3AHISTER & Co.
August 4._ wtf
1xAzL.UK Nt)M.,jr. «xecuior Sic. ot Rich
ard Noel, deceased. Take notice that w®
shall upon the Gth and 12th days of A
pril next at Lloyds Tavern in the county of Es
sex, and on the ninth day of the said month at the
Bowling Green Tavern in the county of Caro
line, proceed to lake tlie Depositions of sundry
witnesses to be read in evidence in the Suit de
pending in the Superior Court of Chancery, for
the Richmond district, wherein you arep!aintifliia
and we and others are defendants.
THOMAS ST If RESULT,
AMBROSE BROWN,
JiLLli ARMSTRONG.
March 2. w4wfl
r EDWARD HALL AM. ""
AS received by the last arrivals from Eu
. rope, and for vile next door above the Eagle
Tavern—afresh and general supply of Garden
Seeds, viz.
CABBAGES.
F.ariy York,
Eu ly Sugar Loaf,
Early heart-shaped,
Drum Head,
Green and Yellow
Savoy.
PEAS.
Early Frame,
Early Hot Spur,
Canadian,
Marrowfat!,
Glory of England,
and Bine Prussian.
SNAPS.
Early six weeks,
Early China Dwarf,
Early Speckled,
Early Dim.
LETTUCE.
tmperial,
Brown Dutch,
Grand Admiral,
Mouse Ear,
and Ice.
RADISH.
S I mon Purple,
White and Black.
CUCUMBER.
Early f rame,
Long Green,'
and Prickle/.
Large .Vhite Indire.
Wove m her 24.
MANCHESTER TURNPIKE COMPANY.
Stockholdcn arc requested to meet at
1 Brooks’s Tavern /« Manchester, on the 4th
Afonday in March ensuing. Special matters of
business important to the interest of the Company ,
rrr/uiri a full meeting and the early attendance of
each member on that day.
By order of the Directors,
JAMES 11 HANDER, Clk.
nehester, / eh. 20
I?OR SALE—A two story WOOD HOUSE,
upon tt Cel! ir Story of brick, pleasantly sit
uated in a retired part oftliecity of Richmond,
on Sho> koe Hill. There arc six rooms, inch'd'
injf the Cellars, nil of which have fire places. For
terms enquire of
SAMUEL COLEMAN.
February 20. tf
NOTICE — I hf-pxrtne;shiji fat ‘Jilt: I ,maT7
b-rt Gamble, jr. will expire Oi th< Ki stof
Ap.i'. next. All those iuJc bled to t finn a .
.equ. sited to coni- forwar I and art le tno*r ac •
comits, as lor.^ej indu^cncrc«in.ol bei;.vcn.——
Tboseli*\ii1# cldfni »tfnlf.'.k Hit fit A, will ( ieus«
pie.faci>t them fo; T.uypHvit.
u..:tN OAMP.LK-,
y OAiVJbE!., ]».
Fcbt uavj 2b. epew
Solid Cellery,
Round Spinage,
Pepper Grass,
Early Spring,
aiul Winter Cress.
Double Pot Mary
gold,
Pot Marjoram,
Blood Beet,
Orange Carrot.
Spring and Winter
Turnips,
and White Mustard
Seed.
i BEANS.
Large white Kid
ney,
i Cranbfiry,
Spqckltd and
i Arbour.
' CORN.
Ear'y Frame,
Do. Canadian,
Do. Sweet,
Do. Silesia.
Little Dv.arf Clo
ver,
Large Red, do. and
Timothy Seed.
Also Fifteen Tierces
Rice,
Ten Bovcs Sperma
ceti Candles.
_____ wlf