The enquirer — Richmond, Va., 1805-03-30 00:00:00, page 3

&)U*Crf!nUU.
yF.rrouautics.—On the 22nd of ln(l month an
experiment was made at Vienna, before their
royal bighnefies the Archdukes Charles, John,
Lewi®, Rainer, Randolph, and Ferdinand, and
their fans, as well as a numerous afTemblage «»f
the public; with a parachute of ProfefTor R »
bertfon’s invention ; the form of which is con
venient, and may hr applied to fave m oole from
fire, if propeily difplayed before it (inks down.
The parachute was of taffuty, only twenty feet
in circumference, and opened at the fummit;
the gondola, or bore, was verv final!, and fur
rnunded bv a filk drapery, which difplayed it
fr’f in the fail, forming another little parachute
round about the perfon. M. Michaud, a nu-oil
•f ProfefTor Robertfon, afeended to a eonlidcr
able heiebt. On a fiynal given by two guns, be
cut the firing to which the little boa’ was fa.'ten*
ed. His fall was verv rapid at firlt; hut the
parachute foon opened majcflicallv, and he de
fcemled in the park, in fight of the numerous
fpe«3ators, without experiencing any inconveni
ence. This Tpeiflacle made the mod lively irn
prefiion on the minds of the fpeltatnrs; and
ProfefTor Robertfon received a conliderable pre
lent from the court, on this occafion.
A QUES T ION FOR ASTRONOMERS.
There is a man now living in II irif >rd coun
ty, between forty and fifty years of age, who
has had but nire birth days.
In what year and month, and on what day of
the month was he h »rn ?
An improvement in blading rocks with gun
powder ha i been recommended. After drilling
s liolc and charging it with powder as ufual, a
draw filled with p iwdtT is then to be introdu
ced, t<> keep up the communication, by way of
priming, and the hole filled up w.th fand.
A poem, entitled The Triumph of Mufic,
from the pen of Hayley, is announced at Lon
don, as ready for publication.
From the American Daily AAvertifi r.
Mr. Pouf/bn.—The prnfperity and rapid in
creaf- of Philadelphia, is perhaps, not exceed
ed by any other city in the world ; in 1783, a
Lout a century after it was founded, there were
in the city and fuhurhs 6000 houfes, and 40,000
people. At the prefent time it is computed to
contain 13,000 houfes, and 80,000 people.
You will pleafe to infert the following enu
meration of new buildings for the lali three
years. I could widi the public might be fur
nifhed wi h a fimilar account from the other
large cities in America—as it would be fatisfac
tory to the prefent and future years.
March, 1805.
1802 1803 1801
-«£ R -sj R <e I:
•ss § .is § .£ §
s i k C i. C
cqk.cqfc.aqti:
North & S. ftrerts 106 li 88 4 45 9
Eft&W. ftrects 144 so isl 20 105 8
City weft of !2rh ft. 6 15 15 2() 1C *0
Northern Liberties
to the 1 ft m. (lone 59 53 44 55 26 34
Southwark 23 18 15 S3 12 8
Brick ------ 338 0 | 283 O 204 O
Franc. 126 0 | 102 O 69 O
Total. 461 0 | 385 0 273 0
During t*>< fame years 'here '"err alfo cre-X
ed, fix build -gs for worth ip ; and a number of
warehoufes, not included in the foregoing enu
meration.
Covent Garden, Jan. 29.
Laft night the Youne Rofcius again appeared
before the public. This joyful event occafioned
the more pleafiire from the reports which have
been lately in circulation, that lie was not only
very id, but that he would never more be able
to tread the boards. There is now every res
fo’i to hope that he will continue to give increa
sed delight fora long ferieS of y ars. Notwith
ftanding the ihortnefsof the notice, and the bad
ftate of the weather, the avenues to this theatre
wereajmoft as much crowded as wlu-n he was
to make his dehut• \\ ien (lie doors were open
ed, tile mill into all pirts of the houfewaspro
diginus, and tnuiy mir >wly efcaped having bro
ken limbs. The piell'ure in ‘he Pit was fo great
as to produce feveral fainting tits. However,
from the regulations adopted, excellent order
was pr ferved, and after the commencement of
the performance, the audience had nothing to
divert their attention from the hufinefs of the
f e:te. The firft aX, very dull in itfelf, fiemed
doubly fo from the general impatience for its
tinnination. Mafter Re'tey at laft ftepped for
ward, in the girb of a Scotti h warrior, with
his fpearin his hand, and his claigmore by his
fide. We are happy to ftate that he looked ex
tremely well. He is a good deal thinner than
before his indifpolition, but his colour is frefti,
and his eyes fparkle.—He appeared taller, which
could only arifi. from his being flenderer. He
was greeted with every mark of admiration and
attachment. In making his acknowledgments
he difpMyed not a little fallibility. It would be
fupcrfluotiH in ns to lay more of his perform
ance, than that he went through the part of
Douglas with as much ability arid effeift as una
ry tormer occafion. NvVer did lie recount his
own hiftory with more mode fly ; taunt Olrnal
von, with more tnrtnefs, return tlie careffes of
his mother with mo? tendernefs ; h~>r of hij
nolile birth with more ardent delire to emulate
the deeds of his anceftors, or fall with a more
deep-felt regret that he was cut off in the ca
reer of glory. His dying feme was indeed af
fixing beyond all powers of defeription. H ■
v is admirably well fupported by the other per
formers.—Mrs. Litchfield, as Lalv Randolph,
w <s never more forcihlc and imprefii - e. Co -ke
played Glenalvon in his btft fti.e, and Murray
was not unfti .-cefi-.ftil in Lord Randolph.
Mr. Fox, Mr. Grey, and G nrral Pitzoafriok
v/ere in the Dtichef* of Devonfiiife's box.—Vlr.
Grey, we undirftand, when the Motifc of Co o
rnons br--ke up, informed Mr. Pitt that he was
going with Mr. Fox to fee the Young Rofcius.—
Mr. Pitt rep ied. that they could not fpend their
time belter, lor lliat he wi« a protiigy.
LIFE OF WASHINGTON.
By the recent irrval* from England w? have
received fev -ral of the latcft reviews, magazines,
ttc. In the L ind in Literary Journal for Sep
tember l.ift we find a review of the fecond vo
lume of Judcc Mrfhall’s life of Wafhington.
Fhe following is the concluding remark of the
reviewer.
“ O i the whole we arc much better ph afed
with this than with the f >rmer volii ne. It af
fords a coufiJcrahlc addition to the material*
A . » hilt.irical pic -c, it n-« doubt fill* great!,
below our Weft hiftoricai perfofrna’ie"*. a* thofe
ot ’In ne, Robertlon, Gibbon, &<•. rt'O it will
appear to advantage in 4 com .arifon with fuch
•u,hors as Dr. Bi.TVtt or Mr. Adolphui.”
U. S.
1
The f/Ilo ivi ntf article is extra fled from a Paris
fititier of Nov. 3.
“ Doon the m mnbiin of Geneva an ohelif!
is Treated in Vonorof Naooleon th«- firft, as an
'"no ror of France. If we are to uH*re from
tl>c number of monument-. A".*, the wifi torom
memoratelhe ocriod of this fortunate xm with
the name of hi* m.tiefty, no fnvercigu befor •
was ever fo much beloved by his people. In
different parts of France, within 10 months 0?
flatues and 24 ohelifkshave been rretftcil in
honor of his majefty : 52 cities ami towns have
demanded the honor and favor of changing their
names into that of Napoleon, 220 Napoleo
or Bonaparte fqunre* exift already, and the I
mimherof Napole m or Bonaparte ftreefs n
monnt already fo upwards of 6 wo. Already
1702 municipalities and 44 nrefeftarics have
been grarioufly honored with his majeftr’s
ni ftnre. During the years of 11 and 12 alone
(l*'!» and 1SP4) according to *he regifters of
the clergy, a ; well as of the P dice. 10504 chil
dren hive been baptized either Napoleon or
Bonaparte: add to t*efe great numbers of mu.
f<*a, lycra, perit.anees, colleges, fr.hools, pala
ces, hofpitaN, mountains, bridges,rivers, lakes,
(hips of the line, frigates, cutters, privateers,
gun-boats, public gardens, plints, plT’ets,
fi.irs. See. all honored with his imperial mnjefty’s
chrillian or family name.”
Fran a late London paper.
EXTRACT
From the will of as old Bachelor.
Who died at the age of 37.
Trjnfated from the G.rm.in, try Madame de Monto
lieu.
-Love,hope, and even fear, ought by
turns to agitate the human bread, to prevent our day s
from palfing over in an infipid uniformity. It is to
efcape this infipidity, fo infupportable to man, that
he employs himielfin a thoufand trifbs, a thoufand
follies; one plays at chefs, another builds houfes_
one learns to warble like the birds, another to decy
pher ntufic—this man learns to cultivate flowers, the
other to write bonks, &c.
Thefe various means of efcaping ennui had nothing
i n them to captivate my fancy. In examining the
different interefts which arofe in my view, t found
that which alone had power to attach me to life, and
make it valuable, were the extatic tit s of hufband and
father; celibacy never made a part in my fehetnes
ol happinefk ; I loved in good earned ; my vows
were always fincere and honorable, as I only afpired
to become a good hufband and a good father of a fa
mily. 1 have been in love feven times—is not that
enough ? and it is not unfortunate that I have not
found a wife ? Ah ! my friend—:ny firil afFe&ions
alone have power to make tny tears flow ! A gen
tle innocent girl, who was to me ntoft only a firft love,
and who returned my paftion as tenderly_death
fuatched her from me, and I was near following her
to the grave. Never (hall I forget that amiabl ti crc.T
ture!
After fome years of grief and indifference, a very
pretty fair one animated iny heart; I exerted all my
afliduities with kindne's—fhe liiulhed. and cart down
her eye* with a tnoughtful air. This is fhe who is to
be the companion of my life, thought I, with tranf
port, and 1 difdofedto her inypaflion ; (lie interrupt
ed mv firll words, by alluring me of her tender friend
(hip, of which Ihe was about to give me a proof. She
then told me, in confidence, that Ihe had a long time
been Itrongly attached to a young man, and never
would marry any other than him. In thus renounc
ing my tender and pretty fair one, I did not renounce
t he hope of being one day happy in marriage. I of
fered my vows to a third; a young lady who was
beiutiful as an angel; (he received my declaration
wirh expreinons of elleem, hut fhe received them as
the homage due to her charms. Amelia, (for that
was her name) was proud of her beauty and wit, and
only thought of multiplying her conquells, confidering
it beneath her to f.icrifice thcfc to the happinefs of
one man only. When I merely talked of' love, (lie
willingly heard me, but w hen 1 pronounced the word
marriage, I was repulfed. I left her, and went home
much mortified b) her refufal : but as I had beeu
more dazzled by her charms, than touched by her
character, 1 ielt more refentment than grief.
Nothing is more fuffocating than anger and vexati
on ; I opened my window to get air,’ami my eves
were mechanically call upon the ftreet. In that mo
ment, a young brunette, neat and fniart croffed it ; I
recollected to have feeti her before, but (he had never
drawn my attention ; the general elegance of her
air (truck me, and,as a flafhol lightning, itoccurred to
nty mind, to avenge myfelf on the haughty Amelia,
by paying my court to this young perfen. This fug
geltion quickly ripened into a Settled projcJi, and, as
ufual, was combined with the idea of marriage, which
(till more embellilhed in mine eyes the objvdl of my
new flame. I found means to introduce myfelf at her
houfe; I followed her with afliduity ; I fuffered no
opportunity to efcape to make known my feutimenfs,
w Inch Ihe appeared well inclined to return, when sud
denly her .parents {aid to me “ That my frequent vi
iits to their houfe did them much honour; that they
begged I would continue them, and remain always a
friend to the family ; but they believed they ought to
apprife me, that their daughter had been long before
promised to a very rich man of the next town ; that
his arrival was expe<51ed, and they hefought me as a
(riend, not to offer him any offence.” My young
friend gave me to underhand, that (lie would have
preferred me, but that (be inufl obey. He was barid
fome, he was amiable, and I foon perceived that my
young brunette obeyed without redundance.
•You may eafily imagine that I became timid and
fufpicious after all thefe disappointments ; hardly d <re !
I look at a woman, left I fiiould become enamoured ;
but the diftafe quickly banifhed my fears. I became
again in love, and this time I was very ferioufly fo. I
loved with pallion, but with fuch diffidence, fuch an '
appre.ienfion of not (ucce.eding, that I dared not to a- '
vow my fentiments to her who had infpired them ; I
regularly palled before her windows three times a d ay, j
and when Ihe appeared, I bowed with fhe moil tender
and refpeiftiill air, uhnoft touching the ground wirh
my hat.—During fome days, (lie appeared there more
frequently, and I even remarked, that when (he faw
me at a t! ilanre, (lie fixed herfelf ill her balcony, and
anfwered my (alutarions with a fvveet fmile. 1 was
overwhelmed with ]#y, and employed my thoughts
on the means of making myfelf known to her, when
one day that I puffed, a* ufual, before her houfe, and
wa* walking (lowly to prolong the pleafnre of being
!!• ar her, I heard her hurft into a fit of laughter, and
(ay, “ Come, I pray, my dear friend, come and look
at this ernging fellow ! he is of all beings on earth
the moft ridiculous” A young fnnn approached her,
and parting hi* arms roun d her waift, laughed heartily
with her, as their eyes fo.lowed me.
I withdrew much quicker than I went, and Conn
learned that the young man had become her hufb-ami
two-lay* before. 1 hi* melancholy adventure, which
ought to have humble .1 me, on the contrary fuddenly
renewed my courage. I rcfolved to be no longer th>
dupe i,f my own fe-ling*. and to marry coft what it
w.niid. ? went into an aflembly of young perfons,
in 1 iHdretl d myfeif to her who pleaftd me the moft,
( alked to fpeak to her apart ; Ihe granted my requeft,
mrl the nett ()ay I went to her houfe, “ Aie you at
liberty ?” laid I, entering. « Yes,” anfwered ft»e,
“ abfolutely free.” Will you accept my lieart and
h :r,J f “ Uo'.h, fai.J (he, f oiling and extending
H'ts. From that moment, I confidercd mvfelf marri
ed : hut this engagement fo fuddenly formed, whs nr
Inddetilv ddlolved.—It would ho too tedious to inform
you of the particular eircnmftancn; happily before
the ceremony, 1 perceived.In Ihott,
fhe was unfaithful, and Ood b * jinifpil Ihe wn not
yet my wife. It require* much precaution, thought I:
one r»u jht to ftudy a long time, and with much at
tention, the woman who i* to he one's comcnnmn
Try Mice nmre. I then made a fev -nth choice, which
wai more wife and reifonabie, a charming young girl,
v»ed flourj.*ed, and who had never h*»en in love,
Thisrinu no one could accul'e me of too much pie
cipitatioo : I carefnily wat&hrd *11 her ft p*. ai* her
a A mux, all her iufenti<*nx, without tmk'njy my decla
••atio t. [ honed incefTaitriy—I wax a' yet only in the
'ourth year of vigilant* and nbCervxtiotl, when in the
moment l l-*afl expected, Ihc wax carried <*iT hy a
young man who knew her only four day*.—This (liali
he my iafi trial, faid 1, I can no more reiolve to be*
gin new amours ; 1 Till love the ladies, but thix Cen
times i« ircrnpa nkd by fuJi timidity, that I cannot
again venture to fj.eak to them.
Additional ia/f<in'-f’3 »/ iou^eii'V*, fin Virginia)
communicated by Mr. F. of the Court of Ap
peals.
1. Thomas Dance, late of the county of Chcf
tcrneld, d'~d about tK- ve1r 1775, aged 125,
years. I frv him at C’'cftcr!te! t election, when
he was 115 years of age, mid Did he had walked
ci/.it miles to the court-lioufe that morning. !
He was born in London.
2. * John H tllowav, an ol 1 f ildier under the
bike of Marlborough at the battle of Blenheim,
in 1 >*04, died in Prince-Ed ward countv about
the year 1791, aged 123 years. He was "born in
England.
Jud^e Jones, when on the Prince Edward
circuit, a year or two before his death, had a
long convocation with him at thecourt-boufe ;
•and publilhed an account of him in the* Virginia
Gazette.
3. John Gillenwater, (an EngliOiman) died
in the county of Amhcrfl about the year 1787,
aged 115.
4. John M'Bride, (in Irilbman, and old fol
dier under the Duke of Marlborough, at the
battle of Blenheim) died in Goochland about
the year 1786. aged 104. He lived and died
within five miles of the place of my nativi
ty.
5. Anne Brown,(horn in Oloucefter county
Virginia) died in the county of II.mover, about
the year 1787, aged 110 years. I made her a
vifit the year before fhe died, and found her
reading in a teftament, without fpeda les;
though Ibe told me fhe had ufed them f*.r more
than fifty years ; but had, for about 8 ytars
preceding rny vifit, enjoyed her light as perfect
ly as >t the age of 40.
6. * Mary Merritt, died near Ground Squir
rel bridge, in the county of Hanover .in the year
1777. Her age unknown, but Ihe lived 83
year* with Merritt, her third hufbiud, w o was
gardiier to Sir William Berkeley, at James town,
when he was governor of Virginia. She furvi
ved her hufbind, but how long is unknown. 1
7. John Pool died in Powhatan county in 17S3, 1
aged 96.
8. Mary Plcafants, moth r of the late Mr.
Thomas Plcafants of Goochland county,
died about the year 1792 or 93, aged 96.
9. Jofeph Pollard, father of the late judge
Pendleton’s widow', 5c Grand father of the pre
fent clerk of Hanover court, died in the year
1788 aged —. He had only one wife, with
whom he lived in the married date 68 years. !
10. Mathew Farley, fate of the county of
Powhatan, born in the year 1700, died in the
year 1791. I wTote his u ill a few months be
1V74 C IIIO 11» '11 11 •
11. Samuel Landrum (my neareft neighbour)
died in Dee. 1803, aged 87.
12. Mary Chaftain, late of Powhatan coun
ty, died in isoo, aged 95.
13. Judith Bingtey of Powhatan county, now
alive, aged 101.
14. Charles Burton (now living inChcfterfield)
born in Sept. 1700.
In the time of Cor nwallis’s invafion in
1781, heferved a three months touras a vo
lunteer in theChefttrfield iiitia.
15. I laft Saturday vdit-d a n«*ar neighbour,
Mr. Edward Wooldridge, and found him chat
ting with his wife, to whom, he told me, he
was married in the year 1742. They were both
in good health.
I was perfonally acquainted with all the per
fons heforc mentioned, except the two marked
thus *. ,
I was told, two years ago, by Mr. Mirfton
CIark>*, who lives near Louifville in Kentucky,
that he had 27 brothers and 2 lifters. That his
father had been thrice married, anti was then
living in Lunenburg county, Virginia.
ExiraS from Lord Littleton’s tour thro’ Wales.
in 1772, pubUjhed in the /lnual Reri/ler of
1774.
“ Not lor.g ago, there died, in the neighbor
“ hood of Feftiniog, an honift VVelfti farmer,
“ wiio was 105 years of age ; by his tirft wife
“ lie had thirty children, ten by his fecund, four
“ by his third, and feven by two concubines ;
“ his youngeft fon was 81 years younger than
“ his eldeft ; and 800 p rfons, defcentlcd from
“ his body, attended his funeral.”
i; s? 3>
i-ri> o a uLii.
RICHMOND, MARCH so, 1805.
THE PRESENT POLICY OF THE FEDE
RAL PARTY.
No. III.
Thefe divifions have fprung up among the
republicans themfelvrs, without any efiential
difference about abjlmcl principle, or adivc
interference of the federal party. But the ef
fects of fuch divifions upon the frderalifts, were
too uncertain and remote to excite any very ex
alte.i hopes of retrieving their affairs. They
knew that a long time mull ehpfe before thefe
jarrings could wean the republicans from each
other, and lead one portion to form a combina
tion with themfelves. What then was their
policy? To feize upon fome principle,
whofe importance was acknowledged by all,
which had no direct bearing upon the political
fvfirms of parties, or upon the meafures
of the adminifiration, and in the fupport of
which they might expert a union with fome part
of the republicans. But fuch an object ap
pears now to be within their reach. They now
cry out that the conftitutionisindangrr ; 8c they
call upon every lioneft republican to join them
in defending it.
“ The Conftitution is in danger.” Have the
federalifts then forgotten thofemelancholy days,
when they alfo were charged with a dsfign of
violating this conftitution ; and when thefe
charges were not founded upon vague rumours
or conftrudive copiedurcs ? Have they forgot
ten that in the very face of the introduiflory '•
words” Wc the People;” in fpite of that fo
lemn recognition, tha» ail legitimate power
flows from the people, John Adams, then Pre- !
tide lit of the United States, fneeringly afferted,
• bat ” a Republican C/ovcrnment meant any
tbing or nothing ?” Have they already forgot
ten the certificate of Thomas Seymour of Con-!
nedicut, of Odobcr 25, 1801, in which the ce- •
lebrated John Allen of that ftate is find to have 1
exclaimed in the prefence of the Council at
Hartford, that “the conftitufinn is good for I
nothing: kick it to tbh Devil?” Have they
forgotten tiie far-famed fedition ad, wliich in
I’pite of the rcTporrfible nature of our g ivcrn
r.ent ; in fpite of the ltt and 9th amendments
to t.ie federal conftitution, pretended to Uccnfc
the production, of tire pr is? Has its iiluftrious
companion the a!i« n law.a'fo p ifled beyond the
nt *brir memory ; a law whit h, in viola
iou of t lie 9'. h fret ion ot the conftitution, and
>t the 6th amendment, expo fed tuc alien to one
. I
ofthe heavied.pumfhments, without admitting
hi n to the privilege of a trial, or the fna!itn
chance of eicape, and dofrd the door of niv-a-'
fio-i nnon the inhabitants of Euro e ? Have
all thefe memorable fails efrnped the attention
of the federal ills, or are we now to he deluded
into the belief that the republicans alone have
meditated an at»n:k upon the vital principles of
the conditution i
“ The Conditution in danger ?” And is it
come'to this then, t:>at no changes can be pro.
pofrd, no a nendmrntscan be introduced, • :t* -
out affediug the very evidence of that indru
meiit ? Are we fo certain 'hat the conftitu ion
is fo perfcid in all i's provifions, that no change
of circumdances, no experience however ex
tenfive, and no politic d feienee however pro
found, may not deteit fume of its defects, dis
tribute the powers of the government up m
fafer principles, and more fully fecure the ref
po fihility of its officers? Is it indeed fo per
fe\5t as to be erected into the ark of our politi
cal covenant, and the man who once touches it,
lb.all no longer fnrvive in the edimation of his
countrymen ? Tiie cry formerly was, that “ th •
Church was in danger and had thefe boding |
been believed, had they arretted the progrefsof|
free enquiry, then eccMiadical eftabliflimenta I
would never have relaxed in their rigour, and j
the advantages of toleration would never have I
been felt. “The mod nfef'i! difeoveries in!
philof iphv, (fays the able Gerald) the mod i n-l
port ant changes in the moral hi dory of man,,
have been innovations: The revolution was an |
innovation ;the reformation was an innovation ; j
ehriffianity itfelf was an innovation.” And
who is there hold enough to all'ert, that even
t'>e conditution of this country docs not re
quire an amendment ?
Yet our conditution is proclaimed to he in
danger : where then, we afk, are the fources of
the aiarm? You will find them, fav the fede
r lids, in the late propofitions of Mcfi'rs. Ran
d Iph and Nicholfon. Mr. Randolph »ifhes to
i icreafe the r< fponlihility of our judges, by fob
jesting them to a removal on a joint vote of
both houfes of congrefs . and Mr. Nicholfon
willies tKe members of the federal fenate to be i
removed at thepleafureofthe date leg’ll itures ?
Admit that thefe amendments are mod impro
vident in themfelvcs ; arethere fuffirientgrounds ’
for the alarm, that the federal party have at-!
ia mjurn in cxr'it* :
1 it flirt (.conclude, becaufe MefTrs. Randolph ,
and Nicholfon areoppofed to tht pivfent tenure j
of the Senate and in li< iary department, that
there is not an article, f.-<5tion, or paragraph of
the conftitution, which is conformable to their !
withes ? Becaufe they do not admire thefe two j
features of the conftitution, that there is not a I
lingle feature of any importance, which they do I
not admire ? That they with to involve the
whole in one undiftiuguithing ruin ? Let thtfe
Unbend inferences be ever fo juft, ftill would it
be fair to extend them to the' whole or to the
majority of the republican party ? Becaufe
thefe two amendments have been propofed by
two tide republicans, is it in reafon to found the
toefin of alarm ; and to proclaim in a voice of
terror and denunciation, that the conftitution
ittelf is in danger ? If this reafoning be cornel,!
aiKj thefe inferences he founded in truth, then i
is the whole fyftem of logic from the age of
Ariftotle down to the prefent day ; the whole
theory offyllogifm, whieh declares that the lefs
can "never comprehend the greater, and that
we muft pafs from the major to the minor :
Then is this pompous edifice of learning naught
but a crumbling heep of (and.
But are ihefe amendments really fo improvi
dent in tliemfrlves, that not a folitary argu
ment can bt adduced in their vindication, and j
that the men who propofed them, could have
been actuated by none other than the cleared
ami molt unjuftifi ihle intention of fubverting
the cor.ftitut on ? Fora moment let us bring
them before the tribunal, not of our prejudices,
but of our underftanding ; and fee what the ex
perience of other Hates, what the theory of our
own government, what recent incidents, could
fiy in their j unification.—Mr. Randolph pro
pofes, that “the judges of the fupreme and all
other courts of the United States fiiall be remo- !
vedl.y the profulcnt, on the joint addrefs of
‘ <>‘h houfes of congrefe r< queuing the fame.”
V/ill it be no inconfiderabie eulogium to this
amendment to fay, that it has long become one J
»"'the fettled principles of the Britilh conftitu*
»ion, “ that moft ftupetulous monument
of human wifdom ? “ In order to mail.tain
both the dignity and independence of the judg
es in the fuperior courts, (fays the able com
mentator on the laws of England) it is enabled
ftatutc is W.c.S, that their commiflions drill
he made (not as formerly, durante bene p/acito,
but) qmmdiu bene ge/ferint, and their Hilaries af
•ertained & eftahlifhed ; but that it may he lawful
•o remove them on addrefs of both houfes of par
liament." Yet of all the departments of the Bri
•ifli government fince the palling of this flatute,
its judiciary has been pre-eminently diftinguith
ed for its talents, its independence, and the
unrivalled accuracy of its decifions. Whilft
the Britilh King has been denounced as the def
pot of his dominions, whilft trie Iloufe of Peers
has been denominated an hofpital of incurables,
whilft the genius and attainments of the Iloufe
of Commons have not faved them fmm the ac
rufations of venality and corruption, the know
ledge St the integrity of the Englifh bench have
entitled it alone to the unmixed admiration of
the world. Can then an organization which
has been found fo fnlutary in England, prove
altogether pernicious in the United States ? Or
vmii tire is. ui any pcctuiariij in inc iinirrurcor a
republican government, which by defeating a
rigorous analogy, fhotlld prevent us from hav
ing remiirfe to the judicial hidory of England ?
Let its fearch alfo into our own Itate corillituti
ou8, and we lltall difeover that there are no lefs
than eight of thefe dates, which have fubjedled
their judiciary to a removal from office, With
out the preliminary form of an impeachment;
and that two out of thefe, viz : New-Hamp
fhirc and MafTachufetts have authorifed thr go
vernor ami council to remove, on addrefsnotof
two-thirds of both lioufes, but of a fimple ma
jority of both houfes. Yet the conditutiono!
neither of thefe dates has been brought into
danger, by the pernicious operation of this dr
flrutli’ve elaufe. Even in the late hidory of the
federal judiciary itfeif, we fhall find no feeble
Confirmation of thefe analogical rafoningi.
The acquittal of judge Chafe hin fdf, much as
it has excited the exultation of his friends,
and triumphantly as they have ch,united
it forth to the honour of his name,
has made very different impreflion* on other
minds ; and has turnifbed the friends of a r«
ftridhd but not a dependent judiciary, wiih a
fruitful fource of meditation and alarm. If a
man like Judge Chafe can efi-ipe the punifh
inont of his fiufdemcanours, where is the judge,
they a Ik, who run be made to expiate hisoffeu
ct sin acourtofimpeachrnent; or wliataretheof
fences, what the ju licial defpotifm,whiehcan be
conceived mighty enough to draw down nnor
him the vengeance of an indignant nation ?
Reafoiiings, fiich as thefe, may have in all pro
bability fuggelted the firft amendment, whicl
has been laid on the tahle of Oongrcfs
And what is the amendment which Mr. Ni
cholfon has propofed ? That “th • letfiflaton o
any 'late may, whenever the fa id legiflaiurc may
think proper, recall at any period whatever,
any fVn.ltor the TTmteft Status who may
have been < leifted by them.” In examining the
propriety of this amcUdrtientj.it becomes us*o
liftingU:!li between the evil to he redrefled. and
the remedy to be adminiftrrenT Is [lieic in fad
inv defeat in this part of the conftituiioit, as it *
n ”v Bands ? The lenators now hold their fiat*
during a t rm ot lix vears. But can no mfon
able obieiftipn he mace »o t' i, long duration of
office ? W ’v do the feptemiial parliaments of
Eng land rxeit'e fuch well-founded clamors in that
country ? It is thattherefponlibilityof theoffic-1
tot he people has been convert > d intoavain i ufe
iefs privilege. Yet a frnator oftiir U. S. holds hi*
featf >r only one y arlefs t ana Briti h common
er. And vtywis t hi a long period of fervice iritro
in.-rd ? Principally to in hire greater integrity,
wiflom Sc experience in th i*- depart neut, which
involves f<> many important fmuftioi’*, both of
an executive, legifiative, an 1 even judiciary na
ture. But are thefe qualifications to be ac
quired :'i no other way? Does not the 3rd lec
tion of the conftitution, which fixes the ««■<• of
a frnator at 31 years, promote this deferable ob
iecB ? Does not the important nature of the trnft;
impofe upon the fovercign legiflatures the ne
cellitv of fcledting the wifeft, the moft experi
en<ed, and moft virtuous men? Hive we not
actually difeovrred that filch feleltions have
been uniformly made, and that the other office*
ot the government have become the political
Gymi’afia for qndifying them for thefe impor
tant duties? Is it not probable then that the
period of fervice may he reduced, without ma
terially detracting from the neceflary qualificati
ons of that body ?
I. -t it then be conceded that this part of the
conftitution requires amendment, where it may
be demanded is the proper remedy to be tppii
ed ? It is to be found in the propofition of Mr.
Nicholfon ; that each fenator fiiould hold at
•will of the ftate Legiff itures ? Moft probably
not; but totheunderftandingof Mr. Niciioih n,
it might have eonfcientioufly appeared the only
fate .nd efficient corrective.
Where then ffiall wc find thofe unanfwera
ble arguments, whieh arc intended to deuiof»
Br.itr, that even Mr. Randolph and Mr. Nl
cho fon are the enemies of the conftitution.? If
the propofed amendments are recommended by
fnme advantages, where let it lie afked is/thc li
berality nr the coi rcClnefs of attributing to their
authors, fuel) a vague and general drfign ? True,
it may be faid ; hut are not thefe propofitions
ev.dentlv rharked by the petulance of pafficn ?
Does not the time of bringing them forwaid,
immediately upon the aiquitt.il of judge Chafe,
prove it ? Now, what a very fair inference t’ is
is! B tea 11ft they were bro’t forward during this
ftiort interval, therefore they were originally
dictated by difappointment and pillion. Would
it not be as fair to fay, that thefe amendments
had been maturely confidered, *erc the termi
nation of the impeachment ; that this was the
great experiment, by which the propriety of
tl'.e prefent conftitntion.il arrangements was to
be decided ; and that the unfortunate iffiie of
that trial contributed to add an trrtfift.ble ar
gument for the propriety of iuch amend
merits ?
But Mr. Randolph, it is (hid actu
ally declared, that “ in a republican govern,
ment there ought tohe no written conftitution.’*
We demand the evidence for thi- aiTeilion: a.d
wc are referred to common report, to vulgar ru
mour, to fome uncandid interpretation of par
ty-fpirit. Mr. R. might have dei iaredtbat a
written conftitution, would he of little avail in
proteding lhe liberties of the people, if the peo
ple did not poftefs vigilance enough, to prevent
its infringement. As he has very eloquently
and truly affirmed : “the pc pie' may goto
reft with parchment under their heads ai d
they will awaken with fetters on their hands.’*
But the federal party have conjured up a new
phantom to alarm the friends of the conftituti
on. Their imagination has connected the pre
sent movements in Pennfylvania with the two
late amendments propofed to the federal con
ftitution ; they have allmmd the fads, that the
advocates for calling a convention in that ftate,
are actuated by the fame revolutionary princi
ples with the movers of thefe amendments;
that thefe me vers are adnated by the fame
principles which operate upon a number of the
republicans ; and they conclude from thefe
vague conjtd res, that a number of the repub
licans arc determined toproftrate the Left prin
ciples of our federal conftitution.
When fads are thus vaguely afTumcd. no
w6nder,the federal party are miftaken in their
concltifions ! “ The advocates of a conventi
on are actuated by revolutionary principles.”
A d arc there no real defeds in their prefent
conftitution, by which we may explain this
mcafure without having recourfe to the opera
tion of revolutionary principles? Among o«
ther amendments they wifli to abridge the ex
orbitant powers of their governor, be fide whom
the governor of Virginia is a povverlefs
ofliccr. “ The fame revolutionary principle with
the movers of thefeamendments.” Where arethe
proofs of this identity of views & combination of
dforts?The2objedsaredifferentintheirtendericy
as well as diiTYrent in the manner of their attain
ment. Fhe friends of two federal innovations
io ih* owainca ny a umpie and caiy procefs,
may be confidently oppofed to the date inno
vations propofed, as well .13 to the calling of a
convention in Pennfylrania which might endan
ger the bed provilions of their conditution.
“Thefe men are actuated by the fame princi
ples, which operate upon a confide nble l um
ber of the republicans.” Is this a fad? Has
the great body of republicans avowed their ap
probation of thefe amendments ? Do you hear
it in private circles ? Do you fee it in the public
prints? Indeed ha9there been tiinccnough to weigh
thisfubjed 5c to colled t c public fentiment r It
is believed in fad, that the republican voice
will be oppof; d to thefe innovations, much as
tluy may approve of the motives of the movers ;
much as they may d- fire the advantages to
which they will lead. Bolides, is itaf«G, tb it
even all the republicans of iVmifylvania are the
advocates of a convention ? Is it not on the con
trary certain that MefTrs. Dallas, Logan, Junes,
Mulenberg and many other republicans have
er. ded themfclves into an affectation of “ con
ditutional republicans” to oppofc this mcafure i
If the republicans of Virginia he confulted, the
number of opponents here will be found even
more confiderable.
Whence then arifes this terror about the
fafety of the conditution ? In tlu re any proba
bility that the propofed amendments will afhet
its exidetiee ? or even that thefe amendments
will Ik adopted by congrt fs and by two thirds
of the date legiflatures, and engrafted upon the
conditution ? Even if there was fucha chance,
would that jultify thetlivifion of the republican
mtered and a partial union with the frdcraliitsf
Time does not permit usto apply at prefent
thefe defdt<<ry remaiks. In our nc:;t number,
we Hiall colled the feat t< red parts of the I hi e
that preceded it ; and throw into one view the
prifent policy of the federal party.
N F. W-HAM PS HIR E EI.F.CTIO N.
1 hr refitlr of die votes received from 13 towns, tn
Governor, give the patriotic LaNGGON THU HE
THOUSAND 15* EHjHT HUNIUED Votes—
GILMAN ore thoufaud and forty lev. n.
1 lint drakes ntt the opiare of ArilTocracy in lbs
North.