The enquirer — Richmond, Va., 1810-02-27 00:00:00, page 3

even doubts on he subject? Astotbe^ffi.
•rial reports of this officer, the last annual
report of the Secretary oT the Treasury is
"nc ol the clearest, ablest and iv >st explicit
state papers that graces the annals ol the
country. The circumstance of adtjiciency
of the revenue is easily accounted lor with.,
out attaching any blame to him, when it is
considered that for one half the year the
embargo cut off our revenue. The gentle
man who moved the resolutions must him
self be convinced of the impropriety of in
stitutiugan enquiry on a ground in which no
one can confide. Whilst there is an enlight
ened committee of Ways and Means in this
House to superintend the operations of the
Treasury Department, there can be no pro
bability of any misconduct in that depart
ment escaping inquiry. Whilst I believe
that the Secretary of the Treasury would
be uninjured by any enquiry, I cannot, with
out reason, consent to institute an enquiry.
If the House investigate such charges, they
may sit the whole year and do nothing else;
for not a day passes but some newspaper
brings a new slander on the officers of go
vermnent.
iWr. JJunvcu Withdrew his motion to
prstpon*' the question.
Mr. 71.'tor asked what these resolutions
were—and, according to the scope of opera
tion which they were to take, what did they
involve ? The high attribute, the vindictive
prerogative ,of the House, of impeaching
public officers. Should a subject ot that
magnitude be tiifltd with f Should they
for newspaper scraps mcke use of it ? There
is, said Mr. T. a principle which, it appears
to me, ought in this case to govern everv
gentleman on this floor, viz: that such an
enquiry ought not to be sanctioned, unless
there be an impression, that that enquiry
ought tobemadc for the purpose of punish
ing the officer in question. I confess, when
the motion first was made, the high opinion i
I entertain of the individual inv-lved in it,
my impress'!»n of his being immaculate would !
have induced me to vote for it, for a reason
different trom its object, but that it was a
course which I never would adopt, but at
the request of the . party concerned._
I at first was inclined to vote for it, be
cause I knew it would eventuate in clear
ing the character denounced | in the paper,
from all improper imputations. That is
not the purpose of such restitutions. It is to
probe guilt, and bring it to punishment. Wc
are not here, by legislative acts, to plaistcr
up characters. It is not our business, unless
the officer himself, feeling the denunciati
ons marie to rest so heavily on him, that
he could not perforin tile duties of his of-'
fice with advantage to his country, should 1
apply to the House for an investigation. 1
will not exercise this attribute to clear the
character of any man, unless he himself
requires it. The mover of the resolution
tcils you, that according to his impressions,
the, charge is a calumny, and that he be
lieves an investigation will eventuate in the
acquittal of the character denounced. Even
a justice of the peace, in such a case as
this, would say, he could not proceed to ex
amine a person charged with a crime, when
no evidence whatever appeared against him.
There is r.ot before the Mouse a tittle of tes
timony. Shall this House, then, cheapen
tiie high attribute of bringing to condign
punishment the officers of the natisn * The
i louse cannot proceed a step in this case.
Tno gentleman who does not believe in the
guilt of the Secretary of the Treasury, can,
in my opinion, with any propriety vote for
the resolution on the tabic.
Mr. cunrli• said, he was of opinion, that
tiie House ought to act at once on the reso
lution. He wished, sincerely, that the mat
ter was so situated, that the House could
with propriety go into an investigation of the
public character of that officer. I think
(said Mr. S.) that I may sav, that there is
not a man in the U. States that knows him
better in his public, or in liis private capacity
than myself. If the most distant suspicion
rested on my mind of any foundation for the
charges, I would instantly move an impeach
ment, and proceed regularly with the mat
ter. This enquiry is proposed on such a
ground ns never legislative body acted on be
fore, an anonymous publication. If the
House institutes an enquiry on such ground,
it puts itself in the power of every calumni
ator who can wield a pen. Is this the first
i '.stance in which the highest characters in
the government have been assailed ? How
many calumnies were daily heaped on the
late President of the United States ! Is it
^ 1 • >c known to the House that at this very
«‘“y*s said in the public papers, that the
President has in his possession a treaty with
I ranee which lie dare not shew ? Why
then should thisetdumny be selected for ex
amination * It it was possble to bring to pu
nishment the vile author of it, I would a
gree to it; as it is a serious and flagrant li
bel ; but that is nut of our power. The
grand objection to this course, however, is
that I ran see no end of it. If there be a
gentleman in the House who thinks it pos. 1
j-iblc that the Secretary of the Treasury ran '
be guilty, he will vote for the resolution._
Oi the other hand a decided negative w;li
check the calumny at once.
J.l.V yt/.iitnn d he < mild rot permit the
question in he taken without expressing his opu.
",n •" rcMinn to it. As to the individual unpli
e md m this motion,(slid Mr. J.) I am atudi.
ml to hiin (ram a consideration ot Ills merit and of
tli(- services dune to his count >v, sod for no oilier
reasons, having but littb- personal Acquaintance
w.th him. This is nut the firs* rharg. which had
l>a. o made ngamst this great and good man, and
' ' fT-cer. 1 linve heretofore smiled with
contempt upon these publications engeiidered by
ff malice, and have f. It pity for their misguided ui.
t' ors. ^ c people of this nation know tlie man.
1 oe P?r*eciit,on o( good men, as of Aristides
*,M' •‘'"crate*, one of whom was banished and
t le other put to death, tor their virtues, gives
ooca« on to those who know them to erect inonu
Mems to their glory. This will he the ellrctof
t c peis»cution ot this tt.no, whose reputation is
or.tarnished—even the gentleman who moved tt.e ’
resolution does not flunk bis character impeach.
« >ie. As to clearing his fame, Mr. J.sat 1 it was
n.,» neresssryto institute j,n enquiry t.» clear his
bime ♦ <»m imputations tvhirh must he ns impo
t. nl against lum as the waters of the orean n
P'.nst the rock of Gibraltar The mnnnniHf a-»<‘ I
pr naps ms r onip.-rta to the set vu >■ «.f id.
lubbe rumor en bus pom: any more than in the
i.i :ge against toe Secretary ot the Tre. surv.
-tr. Nudity wms tor au immediate decision on
* >c leaohu.vjits. H wouid not eulogise the Se
si^t. iy oi the ! rcamq, hut lie gave no credit tp
) Air. Hrjuutiil said there was no testimony he
i lore the house to induce them to raise a commit
tee on this subject. If any member would pro
! ducc any, or state that he had grounds to believe
| he could, in support of the charges, .then and
lht.ii only Humid a committee be appointed.
Air. £hi:ncj' said that mere rumor or newspa
per paragraphs he did not deem a lit ground for
enquiry by the. house, unless they came in such
a shape as to r;.ise reasonable ground of suspicion.
F..r this reason be was unv. Oiing.to pass the reso
lution. At the same time he suggested that
whatever was done, it should not be done under
the influence of instant passion ; and thought, if
the Secretary himself were oil the floor, be
| WO! dd wish a decision delayed.
Mr. Stanford declared that be should vote for
i the motion on the general principle of making an
i enquiry whertver wished for by a member. He
j quoted the journals to shew instances of cases
| which he deemed similar, lie thought a post
ponement cl the decision on the motion would
giveturther time for reflection, and therefore
111. .M ,1 a postponement of it t dl to morrow.
i !.*■ motion for postponement was negatived by
t i large majority.
Air. Dana said that ifl he question had been
I put lor dm rejection of the motion, be should cer
| taudy have\oted against it ; but the question of
! adoption was essentially dilWrt. lie did not
r' rt*vc an annonymous publication in a news
• paper sufficient ground lor an enquiry by the
House; and, that being all the ground assigned
j lor the resolution, he would vote against it.
.•!/•. Hot.. £* Mr. Southard also spoke against
the motion.
Air Gardcti'cr again spoke in support of the re
solutions He could not say that he believed the
charges, hut he could r.ot conceive that oliar >-es
| so specifically stated, and by so able a writer,
were the result of profligacy an.I wholly without
lonr.i it ion. An.nqoii) could do no harm; and
the < barges might be well founded. Who would
have suspected the great Bacon, or who J.ord
.VUIvine, before their peculation was proved >
11 the House did not now investigate it, he tho’t
they vwilil |H/ soon called upon to do it. The
smoke would not appear in so many different pla
ces together, miles, there was sonic where a l«
lent com.mstion The volcano never emitted
smoke* but when fire raged within. T here must
he some foundation for these rumors.
T he question on the passage of the resolutions
was dcci<fc d as follows «
YEAS—Messrs. Cobb,Ely, Gardenier, Gray.
Macon, Stuntord, Whitman—7.
NAYS—Messrs. I. J. Alston, W Alston. An
derson, Ha on,Hard,Bassett,Bibb.Bhisd; ll.U.iyd
d. ekeuridge, J Brown, It. Brown,Biirwcll, But- i
ler,Calhoun, Campbell, W Clnml.ei lin, Clismpi
on, Chittenden, Clay, Cochran, iwford, Crist,
Cutts, Dans, Desha, Einott, Findley, 1-isk, !
Franklin, Gannct, Gardner, Ghohlsoo, G- udwyn!!
Gobi, II .Ie, ll .reo, Helms, Holland, Howard,
Holly, It J-cUson, Jenkins, Johiwuii, Jones, Keiu
nedy, I.me, f.)lc, M «rion, Matthews, .M’Hrydc 1
M’Kcc, *rk.m, Miller, M.l.uir, N R. Af.^re, i
‘ij °r*' *J(,rr ,yv’ d/osclv, .VumfWd, Now
>old, Newton, Nicholson, Pearson, Pitkin, f J
!, Vnru r> Hotter, (Jhiincv, Hta (of
Jen.) Kbea (of Ten.) Richards, Roane, Root, I
Boss, Sag-, Sammons, Sawyer, Beaver, Seybrrt.
Shaw, Sfu tley, Sm- It, Srnilie, G. Smith, | ,
Smith, Southard, Btanley, Stephenson, SturgeS :
I a/.,art, T ay!.i,-, I hompson, Tracy, Turner, <
Upbam, Van Dyke, Van Horn, Van Rons elm r, j
iVeakley, Wheaton, Whitehill, Wilson, Winn,
W itherspoon—LOi.
the newspaper paragraph*, and made gome ob
servations going to shew that they were destitute
••veil of plausibility.
Mr Ho** confessed he had some douhts as to
.he course proper to be pursued. If the political
friends of the Secretaiy of the Treasury had
brought forward the motion, he should have no
Hesitation what course to pursuo 5 l it when the
political enemies of a man undertook to lie the
guardians ot his reputation, the course proper to
be pursued was rendered much m^rc doubtful.
Nothing could sooner destroy the reputation of a
man with his party than tor his enemies to be
come the guardians >1 it. He had seen in papers
professing democratic principles, puhl.cations
against this man—and would it not tie askrd by
the people, if the course proposed was pursued,
if the Secretary of the Treasury has not changed 1
his principles, whilst his political enemies are so j
careful ol his reputation—why are they not e- j
qunily careful of the reputation ot the Secretary !
of State, who Ins been equally abused by the ;
writers under the signature of Philu-Lan* or'
Mucins. Mr. It made further observations go
ingto show, that if enquiry was made :n one case,
it ought in tne oilier. He was opposed to the
passage of the resolutions.
Mr. Jlrltns moved to reject the resolution*,
but 'he motion was declared to be out of order.
Mr. Altscun said, that as to himself, he felt sa
tisfied that none of these very serious charges 1
could be supported against the Secretary of the j
I reasury. This belief was founded upon the -
opinion he entertained of the moral character of |
the man. He believed the investigation could |
only lend to raise the reput ion of that man in
the nation. Under this belief he would luve no
hesitation in voting for the enquiry, liut (said
Mr. M.) if contrary to my sincere belief, lie
should be guilty of the charges alledged against |
hi®, lei him share the fate of the guilty, l’ was
not in the House when the resolution was mov
ed, and do not therefore know the ground of the
motion, but it is sufficient lor me that the gentle
man who made the motion thinks himself 'autho
ri ed to do it. No matter on what inlor.nation he |
deemed it his duty to make the motion, 1 for one !
am willing he should be grati.'ied. Honesty and I
pi Jn deal ng have nothing to fear. An honest
man may be calumniated, but time will put down
the calumny, li was impossible that some of the
charges could have foundation in fact ; but he
was willing to enquire into them. It the St ore,
tary ol the t reasury was his own brother, if he
were bis father, anti an enquiry was askctl into!
his conduct, he would grant it. When the se
cond Secretary of the 't reasury went out of of
fice, he asked an enquiry into his conduct, which
was granted. Passing these resolutions would
only be doing the same in relation to the present
Secretary of the Treasury as was done in relation
t<i ttie former. Couhl any tiling be a greater tri
umph to a man placed in the situation of the Se-1
ere'ary of the Treasury than for those opnosed
to him to declare him innocent ? He hoped the
motion would be agreed to ; and had no doubt
such would be the result of the enquiry.
Mr. Bibb regretted exceedingly the determi
nation o» the gentleman from North Carolina had
expressed to vote in favor of tlie resolutions, and
he was oonlident the gentleman would not have
come to the s .roe determination if he had heard
the remarks which preceded and followed the
motion. It was not a charge made by’ a member
"f the House ; on the contrary the member ma
king the motion declared his disbelief of the
charge. What said Mr B wotdd be the conse
quence, in relation to the public mind, of pursu
ing the enquiry under these circumstances ? l)o
we not every d*v see the basest calumnies in the
public prints not only against the heads of depart
ments but against this house ? Has not the Le
gislature of a slate ( Mnstachutctt*J declared
•hat the measures of a majority of this House
are adopted in subservience to 'Napoleon ? Is it
not as important that the Representatives cf the
people should stand fair before this house ? Do
we not every day see charges mail.; in the public
prints against individuals in the government
! without instituting enquiries into them ? Now
I ask, if we institute an enquiry in this case and
not in others, w hether we shall not he giving at
least presumptive evidence against the Secretary
; of the Ti eastiry ? It appears to me that the licst
way to vindicate the character of this officer
from the aspersions levelled at it, is to give as
strong a vote as we can against the motion.
PROPOSITIONS TO BELLIGERENTS. Lc.
The following message was received from the
President of the U. States :
7 9 the Hotter if ffefirrtenfativet of th* U. S.
1 tr-. ismit reports of the Secretaries of State
and of the Treastiry, complying with your reso
lution of the fifth iust.
JAMES MADISON.
February 17, 1810.
Department or State,
February 11, 1810.
Agreeably to a resolution of the Jlouse of Re
presentative* of the .5th instant, requesting the
President of the United Sta* es to cause to be j
laid before that House copies of the several coin- |
muuications made to the governments of France
am! Great Britain, in pursuance of hie authori
ties vested by the Congress in the F.xccutive,!
with respect to the several orders and decrees of
either violating the lawful commerce and neutral
rights of the United States, except such parts as
may, in his judgment, require secrecy ; and also
to communicate to the same House such informa
tion as he may have received touching the forge
ry of papers purporting to be those of American
vessels, the Secretary of Slate has the honor of
laying before the President the following papers,
1st Extract of a letter from Mr. Smith, Secre
tary of State, to generr.l Armstrong, Minister
Plenipotentiary of the U. Slate* at Paris, dated
March 15th, 1809.
2. A copy of a note from General Arms' rong to
Count Champagny, minister ol exterior relations
at Paris, dated 29th April, 1809.
"d. Extract of a letter from Mr. Smith to Mr.
Pinkney, Minister Plenipotentiary of the U. S.
at London, dated March 2.5th, 1809.
4th Extracts of a letter from Mr. Pinkney to
Mr. Smith, dated May l, 180l».
A. Extracts of a letter from John M. F <rhes,
consul of the United Slates at Hamburg, to Mr
Madison, Secretary ofState, dated 13th Novem
ber, 1807.
B. Extracts of a letter from Mr. Lee, com
mercial agent of the U. S. at Bordeaux, to the
same, dated Nov. 1, 1808.
C. Copy ol a letter Irom Mr. llncktev, consul
of the United States at St. Lucar, to Mr. Smith,
dated Cadiz, 23d March, 1309.
D Sundry original documents belonging to,
and concerning the ship Aurora of New York.
E. Extract of a letter to Mr. Harris, consul
of the United States at St. Petersburg, to Mr.
Smith, tinted 25th October, 1809, coveung cer
tain papers belonging to the ship called the Geor
gia, of New York.
F. Extracts of a letter from John M. Forhes,
dated November 7, 1809, to Mr. Smith, covering
the forged sea letter ol the ship Arno, of Boston)
d.iled August 21st, 1809, also a letter of the
same date, signed Stephen Higginson and com
pany, to captain William Kempion.
G. Extract of a letter from William Kirkpa
trick, consul of the United Stales at Malaga, to
Mr. Smith, dated November 25, 1809.
It may be proper moreover to slate, that vari
ous other communications have beer, received at
this department from the agents of the United
States in foreign countries, which mention, that
the practice prevails of forging American ship.'
papers and documents ; but as they do not afford
any details, they are not included in this report,
which is respectfully submitted.
P. SMITH.
Extract of a letter from the Secretary of State to
general Armstrong, Alim tier Plenipotentiary of
I the United States at Paris, dated
Department of State,
March 15, 1809.
| “ The proceedings of Congress at their late
| session, combined with tin* Executive com muni
| options, affording, as they d'», additional proofs of
i the pacific disposition of this government, and of
| its strict observance of whatever tbs laws of
neutrality require, y.vi will not fail to avail your
| self of the just arguments thence deducible in
I urging the equitable claims of the United States.
Fbe 1,2, 3, 4, 11 Mild 17lb sections of the act in
te"dieting our commercial intercourse with Great
Britain and France,will, in that view, claim your
attention, and especially the 11th section, auttio
ri/.ii;g the Executive to renew our commerce with
the nation withdrawing the operation of its ille
| gal edicts. Am’ you will he careful to let it be
, understood that the authority thus vested, will of
course, be exercised in the event slated in tue
| law .”
General Armstrong to Count Chnmpagnyi
| ^ “ I’aris, April 29, 1809.
“ The undersigned, minister plenipotentlarv
i oftlie United States, has the honor of presenting
[ to his excellency live minister of exterior relati
ons, tlie enclosed copy of a law recently passed
hy the legislature ol the Union.
“ This law, as may he seen by the several pro
visions of it, has been forced upon them by die
extraordinary circumstances of the times, and is
to be regarded as an act of precaution, taken with
the view only of protecting their own property
and rights, and of once more appealing to the:
interest and justice of those who would disturb
or destroy them.
“ Your excellency may be assured, that as no
thing has given more disquietude to the United
States tlun the necessity which has impelled
mem to tin- adoption of this measure, so nothing
will give them mode satisfaction, than to see that
necessity cease. It is in the spirit ami sincerity
ol this declaration, that the undersigned is in
structed to add, that any interpretation ol the Im
perial decree s of the twenty-first of November,
1806, and seventeenth of December, 1807, wlu.-.ii
shall have the effect of leaving unimpaired the i
maritime rights of the Union, will be instantane
ously followed by a revocation of the present
act, and a re establishment of the ordinary com
meici'd intercourse between the two countries
“ 1 offer l o' your cr'cr.l rncy, Kre. for.
(Signed) JOHN A RMS l'RONG.
I " Mis excellency Count Chtrmpagny.”
j Extract of a letter from the Secretary nf State to
li'iaiam Pinkney, Esq minister plenipotentiary
of the Unitea Sinter in J.on,Ion, dated Depart
me-1 of State, March l.>, 1809.
“ Tlv proceedings of Congress at their 1a*c
session combined with the Executive communica
t,f*ns affording as they do, ndditionai proofs oftlie
pacific disposition of this government and of its
strict observance of whatever the laws of neu
trality require, you will not fail to avail yourself
ol the just arguments thence dcducible in urg
ing the equitable claims of the United States
1 lie 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4lh, lltli and 17th sections ot
the act interdicting our cornrru rcial intercourse ,
with Orsit llritainaad France, will in tliatview,,
claim your attention, and especially the eleventh
section, authorising the Executive to renew our
commerce with the nation withdrawing the ope
ration of i's illegal edicts. And you will be rare
fbl to let it (» understood, that tire authority thus \
vested, will of rottrse be exercised in the evont
staled in the law.”
Extracts from a letter of Mr Pinkney, minister
plenipotentiary of the United States, at London,
to Mr. Smith, reartary of state, dated
“ London, May 1, 1R09.
"Upon receipt of jour letter of the loth of
Mat'd', it became my obvious duly to ask a con
ference with Mr. Canning It took place accord
ingly on Monday the 1/ th of \pril.”
" W th a view |o do justice to the character
and tendency of the law oftlie lirst of March, 1
railed the attention of ulr. Canning in a partii u
la manner In the Dili section, which provides
tor the renewal of commercial inlercouse with
the power revoking or so modifying its edicts as
they should reuse t ■ violate toe neutral com
tn*. rce of the United States ; and in obedience to
my instructions l assured him that the aulliority
vested in the Ih i »;dent to proclaim suc h rrvoca
t.on or modification, would not fail to be exercis*
ed »» tlie case occurred.”
“ I entered into a inoutte explanation ofthc law
of the first of .March, and in the course of it a
vail«d myself of every inducement of interest
which it could be supposed to furnish to this
government to retract :*s orders in council, and
of the proofs with which it abounds of tlie sin
cere desire of the American government to cul
tivate peace and friendship with Great Britain,
even while it was repelling what it deemed en
croschments and injuries, the most pernicious &.
alarming.”
T U 2 A S U IIV DeFARTMFN I,
February 16, 1810.
Sir,
I have the honor to pr-Inse a statement
transmitted hy the Collector of Boston, in relation
to the ship Arno which entered Tsnniiigeu wifli
a forged sea-letter
Exclusively of the cases r^ppecting forged tna- j
rim; papers widen have from time to time been !
communicated by the Depirtnient of" 5-tate, one
only has come to the knowledge of ih*- Treasury,
tlie particulars of which are explained hy the en
closed letter irnm the collector of New-York, and
the papers accompanying the same.
1 have ttie honor to be. &c.
ALBERT GALLATIN.
( 7 he Pretiden* nf the U S.
The above documents, »nd others accompany
ing tbe message, were ordered to i>e printed.
Baltimore, February 20.
F.xtrac. of a letter from an officer at Aexv
Orteans, to a gentleman in Baltimore,
dated Jan 20, 1810.
"Gen. 11 i l kin son is ex/ierted herefrom
Aatchez in a few dans, and after he is
married—which will take filace in u few ;
days after hi a arrival, to Miss-, •
a French lady, it is exfiected he will set j
out for the scat of government. Gen.
I lam (non has taken command. Some chan
ges of the troofia are exfiected.”
2NQUIREK OFFICE, Feb. 27.
FEDERAL MISREPRESENTATIONS.
J\ro. I.
The enemies of the administration hare
made considerable clamour about the min
ister 10 Russia—It is, say they, a prelude to
Ian alliance with France, tkc. The follow_
!ing is a complete refutation of these suspi
cions
Extract from Washington, Feb. 22.
“The noise made about the Russian mis
sion is only a part of the federal tale of
French influence. The federalists affect at
present to view this mission with great jea
lousy—They dwell on tl e circumstances
under which the appointment was made—
so sudden, so unexpected. These men, not- |
withstanding their speeches in Congress,
know well the circumstances which produc
ed this mission.
I “In the year application was made to
| Colonel Monroe, our minister at London, by
directions from the Emperor Alexander, to
know how the government of the United
States would view the appointment of a mi
nister from Russia- The subject was fic- !
quently urged on Colonel Monroe, and final- j
[ ly in such terms, that he stated as his opi- I
nion, that such a step, on the part of the i
i Emperor, would be considered as a mark of j
his friendly dispositions towards the United I
t States. A statement to this effect was made
l in a letter from Colonel Monroe to Mr.
Madison, while Secretary of State. These
circumstances are known to all who were
members of Congress in the year When
| it was afterwards found, that the Emperor I
Alexander was aoout to appoint a minister j
here, it was thought good policy to treat with j
respect this manifestation of friendship on -'
his part, and to send one in return. All the •
J stuff ahout the Northern Confederacy and:
the connection of Adams’s mission with that i
object, may he added to the list of federal i
falsehood and misrepresentation.”
Besides the manifestation ot this wish on I
the part of the Russian Emperor, to inter- J
[c-hage ministers, was it not of some impor- t
tance, in the event of a genera' fteacc in ;
Eurofie, to have a minister at the. court of
Alexander, who was acquainted with the
course of France, would have an important ,
agency in adjusting the affairs of the world, I
and might have an opportunity of manifes- j
ting towards the United States a portion of 1
that friendship he had repeatedly express- j
ed ? The 1st. appointment during the re_ j
cess of Congress was produced by events in !
Europe, which seemed at that time to ten- j
del* prouable a general peace.
A’o. II.
We all know the enmity of the federalists
towards General S. Smith.-Amongst o
ther proofs of their attachment, is a report
in circulation, that lie sent off one or two
despatch boats, trn days before the first
public annunciation of the rupture with
Mr. Jackson.
We have the strongest assurances, that
“there is not the slightest foundation for
“the report-Thai he neitherseut ades
“ patch boat, nor did he know that one had
“ been sent by any other person.”
From iho Alexandria Gazette we learn, that on
Thursday Mr Macon’s IhU passed the Senate,
Ayes26, woes 7—in such a form, as leaves only
the sections winch prohibits public armed vessels
from entering our waters, and die section repealing
the non intercourse Item—On the same day it was
sent to the H of K. where various motions
were made *o postpone the Consideration of it
till Saturday, * It Thursday week, till the
next day. No question taken, when the
Gazette went to press. We know nothing of its
probable fate, but from the following extract of
a letter, from a member of tbe It. of R, dated
Feb. 22.
“A vote wm taken yesfprday in the Se
mite on Mr. Macon’s bill—All to the restrict
ive clauses were struck cut, and only those
preserved which repeal the non intercourae.
It is understood, that nothing is to lie insert
ed in lien of the Clauses struck out—In the
Committee of the Senate, to whom the bill
was referred, a proposition was made to in. !
sert convoy and arming in place of the res
triedve part-It was lost by a great ma
jority. A naked repeal of the non inter
Course is all that is left of the bill, and in
this form it will pass the Senate. It will, ,
1 think, be finally lost, ifihe Senate adhere
to their amendments—If the bill be finally
rejected, we shall be left in statu <juo—If,
on the contrary, tbe part of it repealing the
non-intercourse passes into a law, the ques
tion of our Foreign Relations is settled—The
Representative# having nothing afterwards
to do, but to reduce the Army, Navy, and o
tiicr expcnces of th government within the
narrowest compass, and leave the people to
reap the benefit of savings, produced by a sa
crifice of their rights — I lear the vote in the
Senate is the precursor of a naked submissi
on. ”
Al)\ E.U 1 ISEMENT—Agreeably to the laaf.
W ill and Testament of Col. Janies Calia
way. deceased, late of Bedford oountv, his Exe
cutors oiler the following LANDS for sale.
Several Lots and Houses in the town of New
London--amongst which is a large and commo
dious house, completely finished and new, and
w ii erected for h Tavern, than which none can
be better calculated. The stand is good, the si
tuation «degant and commanding, with a good
garden, and large and fertile lots attached to it,
with 400 acres of good Land contiguous, which
will he either sold with or without i!ic houses.
One thousand acres of Land on Sycamore creek:
in the county of Pittsylvania ; this land is well
calculated lor raising tobacco, wheat and coni,
the common produce of the country; it has a
plantation with an overseer’s house, tobacco
houses, See.
Several tracts in the codnty of Montgomerv, of
different i-izes, all-fine, for grass ami small grain,
surrounded with a range equal to auy in the
state
The Carroii Iron Works in the countv of Frank
lin, consisting of a Furnace and Forge, with se
veral thousand acres of Land The advant gcx
of this establishment can be but ill described in
an advertisement, but is strongly recommended
to such as wish to engage in the business. It is
indeed considered as unnecessary to say much
about the property now offered irt the public at
tention,for howevt r valuable it may be, no person
will wish to purchase without first viewing and
making himself acquainted with it.
The terms of sale will be reasonable and ar.-‘
commodating, and made known by applying to
either of the Executors, who will shew the pro
perty.
t/M CALLAWAY, 1
CHKISTk CLARK, |
JAMES S n.r I OE, ^ Executor*
JOHN CALLAWAY, |
GEORGE CALLMVAYJ
Bedford County, Feh 27. wl2wfl
. —- ■* t - „
SALES AT AUCJ ION.
rpHIS DAY at twelve o’clock, will he sold on
I Jenk’s v/harf, without rcucrrt, for cash, for
(lie receipt of the Underwriters and others eon-s
corned,
2.> hi ids. Tobacco (narked W.
4 do. TMH.
I do. M S.
f» l do. 1) ft.
-damaged on hoard the stoop OVantre.
Capt. Jink* H
i'Aosuxr C' mo y cure, Am\*.
Richmond, Fenriiary’27. It
THIS DAY TS PUBLISHED,
A New Theory,
the DTUtlN.il. HOT AT ION OF THE
EARTH:
Demonstrated upon Mathematical Priheinles,
from the properties of the Cycloid ainJ/lhe. t oil
Cycloid, r
WITH
AM APPI.TCATrow Of THF. ? H KpR 4,
To the explanation ol the various Hieiy.ni'-na of
the Winds, Titles ami ol those S'onv anil Me
tallic Concretions which have fallen Itym Hf«
venupon the surface of tin- Earth.
Thy JOHN WOOD,
Author of Element* M / (r ■ futcfivc, fir in*
ted in London, m iryy,
Decern*** f
The Council ofappoin* m»nt, in ii. Y is ?*■;•>*>'•
in# the Decks- the federalists arc s’: V'*ul in, m .if
directions—Jacob Rad'lif}', is appointed Mayor
ol ffew-York, vice DeWitt Ctin'o*, reniote'ii
Jcc. tkr. Ik':. Yet these men compUit of demo
cratic persecution.
George Canning is, then, first I,nrd of the
Treasury, alias Prime Minister of Eniland.-l.et
the U. S. look out for squ.dU. #
Marius, Lucius, C-r pos'pnnedto it rake way
for the Debate m the H. of R.
Married—On Thursday the li*h inst.
hy ttie Reverend ./<♦/;« D. Blair, Mr. Ricu
akuC Gillum to the amiable MivsJ'kax
t.t.s Pa tt k sok, daughter of Colonel David
Patteson, all of Chesterfield.
TO THE E OlTOIl OK THE E N *i.U 1 It k It.
Sir,
It certainly is not my intention to 'Jnak a
any reply to M. \V. Hancock's last publication,
the only charges against me contained in it, sus
ceptible nl detection, being completely disproved
by Mr. Randolph’s letter to you—and, i stilt re.
spect myself too,much to put my word id com
petition with his bare declaration, unsupported by
“ authority ”
Your most obedient servant,
HARRY uiTH.
black Heath, Feb 25, Idly.
T-hnding that Mr Heth has determined tr>
make no reply to Mr. Hancock’s last publican,m
through your Gazette. 1 feel myself bound in
justice to Mr. Hcth’s character, as well us to
my own feelings, to correct that part of Mr. Han
cock’s publication, which goes to ubpeacli Mr.
Hetji’s veracity on my authority—Mv. Hancock
sis’- s that Mr. Helh has endeavored to induce a
belief tuat the deficiency of coal (if any) had been
settled by Nicotson and’M ell,'s bond conditioned
for the paymentuf such deficiency—“ this (he
says) is not founded on fact”, “ and 1 have Mr.
“ Randolph’s authority to say that no such bond
“was ever required or ever given.” Mr. Hart
cock certainly never had no authority from me
to make that declaration.
1 believe that Mr. Hancock was led to make
this assertion from my telling him the bonds al
luded to were not executed—at til* same time
there is no doubt on niy miiul but Mr. Heth
verily believed they were executed,from their ha
ving been so long in my hands.
It is tiue that'll die course of ourncgociation the
necessity of those cross bonds did not originate
with me, but with Mr Heth, and to his propo
sition to have such bonds exented, / certainly did
assent, and received the bonds from him in De
cember last, in order to have iliem executed_
It was moreover agreed between us that in ease
the coal should fall short, the amount of such
deficiency should be lodged by him in bank for
me irt time to meet the notes, or, that I should
make out new notes for the precise sum, deli
ver them to him and take in the old ones—’! he
second instance is what Mr. Hancock states
that a friend of Mr Helh, (font wasto me he
alluded) waited on him to convince him that ho
had brought his suit erroneously, anu that Mr.
Helh replied, “ if I do not get* £ 2000—l shall
get S 1000, the amount of Mr Jlancorfc’s propor
tion of Granbury and Hancock’s profits on 'that
piece of property ” In this again Mr. Hancock
mm, have misunderstood me-as <tcriainly I
never did hold such a convers-.tuon with, or re
ceive such a reply from Mr Helh.
Mr. Heth and mveelf have had frequent con
versations on th:. subject of the diflertnce be
tween him and Mr. Hancock, and 1 well fecollect
his saying that " if be could be convinced thar
the Falling Creek F.ti did cost Mr. Hancock
S 40i*O, that he felt himself bound to pay that
sum.”
I hope, Sir, that in the discharge of this act
of duty to myself, while 1 rclieietiie feclii rs of
Mr. Heth, 1 shall no,t wound those of Mr. flan-*
oock.
Yours, Sic.
RICHARD RANDOLPH*
Richmond, February 2d, 1810.
- ■ —■ ■ ________ k