Portland gazette, and Maine advertiser (Portland, Me.), 1809-03-20 00:00:00

PORTLAND GAZETTE, And Maine Advertiser.
PORTLAND, PUBLISHED BY ARTHUR SHIRLEY... F.F.H-STREET.
No. 49, of Vol. XI.
MONDAY, MARCH 20, 1809.
[Whole No. 569]
MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH,
Upon his motion to amend the Resolution offered by Mr. GILES, by striking out that part which is in Italics. Delivered in the Senate of the United States, Tuesday, Feb. 14, 1809.
MR. GILES' MOTION.
Resolved, That the several laws laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States, he repealed on the 4th day of March next, except as to Great Britain and France and their dependencies; and that provision be made by law for prohibiting all commercial intercourse with those nations and their dependencies, and the importation of any article into the United States, the growth, produce or manufacture of either of the said nations, or of the dependencies of either of them.
IT will be perceived, Mr. President, by the motion which I have made to amend the resolution, offered by the honorable gentleman from Virginia, that I do not approve of the course which it seems to have been intended to pursue. The honorable gentleman has told us it is not his plan, and I give him credit for the fairness and candor with which he has avowed the measures to which he would have resorted. He would have raised the embargo, and declared war against England. Being opposed in this scheme, by a majority of his friends, his next proposition was to issue letters of marque and reprisal; finding however that the other House had refused to go even so far, he had on the principle of concession and conciliation with his friends, agreed to take the course proposed in the resolution, in hopes that our vessels going upon the ocean and being captured under the orders in council, would drag the nation into a war; when he presumed the war being made upon us, we would agree to fight our enemy. Sir, it is upon this very ground, and considering this as its object, that I am opposed to the resolution. England is not our enemy, nor does a necessity exist to make her so. I am not going to deny that we have many, and heavy complaints to make against her conduct, nor that I contend that causes do not exist which might justify a war; but I mean to say that policy forbids the measure, and that honor does not require it.
The gentleman has painted in very glowing colors, the wrongs and insults which we have suffered from British violence; he has recorded in his catalogue the offensive acts of British agents, as well as the injudicious pretensions and orders of the government. I mean not to defend nor even to palliate any aggression, public or private, against the rights or honor of our country; but, Sir, I cannot conceal my surprise, that this gentleman, so much alive to British wrongs, should be insensible to every thing which we have suffered from France. The gentleman has exhausted the language of terms of invective and reproach against the British government and nation, but he has been silent as the grave, as to the French. How can it be that what is wrong in Britain is right in France? And wherefore is it that the same acts of France are borne with patience, which proceeding from Britain, excite such a spirit of indignation? You have the orders of council to complain of, but have you not the decrees of his imperial majesty? We are told that the orders in council give us laws, regulate our commerce, and degrade us to the state of colonies; but do they contain more, or do they extend as far as the imperial decrees? Do they make us more the colonies of Britain, than the decrees make us the colonies of France? And are we to invoke the spirit of liberty and patriotism to assist us to Britain, while we are tamely yielding ourselves to French bondage? We are told of our vessels being forced into British ports and compelled to pay tribute; but nothing is said of their being forced into French harbors, and then seized and confiscated.
With all the complaints against the British orders, and the silence as to French decrees, ought we not to be surprised, in discovering that the orders are exceeded in severity and injustice by the decrees? Let it be remembered that this system of outrage upon neutral rights originated on the part of France in the Berlin decree—that decree in effect, forbids neutrals to trade to England or her colonies, or to purchase, or to carry their manufactures or produce. In commencing this system, France justified its principle and compelled her adversary to retaliate by acts of the same injustice against neutrals who submitted to it. Tell me which we have first and most to blame, the one who set the example, or him who followed it?
It is a consideration also of great weight, that of great weight, that at the time when the Berlin decree issued, France was bound to the United States by a solemn treaty to permit the trade which that decree prohibited—a treaty, signed by Bonaparte himself, and expressly providing for the freedom and security of our commerce with his enemy, in the event of war—and if the orders in council are a violation of the law of nations, they are not like the French decrees, a breach of plighted faith. The orders leave to us the direct colonial trade. Our intercourse is not interrupted with the colonies and dependencies of France; but the decrees interdict all neutral commerce with the colonies and dependencies of England, as well as with the mother country. Your very ships, which enter an English port, are denationalized, and are liable, after the lapse of any time, though performing a voyage otherwise innocent, to seizure and confiscation.
Another feature of injustice and iniquity distinguishes the decrees from the orders. By the orders, our merchants are apprized of the commerce which is interdicted. Full time for notice of the prohibition is allowed, before the property is exposed, by a transgression of the orders, to be confiscated or seized. No such forbearance can be discovered in the decrees, which are to be indiscriminately executed upon the innocent and the guilty; upon those who never heard, or could have heard of them in the same manner as upon those who knowingly violate them.
I hope, sir, it will not be understood that I mean to defend the orders in council, or to advise this nation to submit to them; but I could wish to direct some portion of the warmth and indignation, which has been expressed against them, against those decrees which produced them, and which exceed them in iniquity and outrage.
The avowed object of the honorable gentleman from Virginia—is a war with England. On this subject I make but one question—is it possible to avoid it with honor?
If this possibility exists, the war ought to be avoided. And it is my opinion that it does exist. To this opinion I am, in a great degree, led by a want of confidence in the sincerity of the disposition of our executive to settle our differences with Great Britain. Your measures have not been impartial as to the belligerents, and your negotiations have not been sincere as to England. The gentleman from Virginia has called this charge of insincerity a miserable vision. I believe, sir, it is a miserable and melancholy fact—and if you will have patience with me, I will furnish proof enough to support the belief of the most incredulous.
I mean to shew, that your government has had it in its power to secure peace with Britain, by the settlement of the differences between the two nations, and that the means have not only been neglected, but means employed to prevent such a settlement from taking place.
It will be necessary for us to consider what those differences were. They may be referred to three heads:— 1st. The rule as it is called, of the war of 1756. 2d. Constructive blockades. 3d. Impression of seamen on board of American merchant vessels.
I do not mean to say, that there were no other causes of complaint, arising from the jurisdiction and insolence of British commanders; but they had not the character of national differences, and would probably have been ceased and been forgotten, if the points of controversy between the governments had been amicably arranged. To settle the differences, which I have stated, a negotiation was opened in London in 1803, and carried on till December, 1806. It is remarkable, that while this negotiation was depending and progressing, our government had recourse to a step in its nature calculated to repel, instead of to invite, the British government to a friendly settlement. In April, 1806, they passed a law prohibiting the importation of certain British goods. The acknowledged object of this law was to coerce Britain to agree to our own terms. Did this law evidence a disposition to be friendly upon our part, or was it calculated to inspire a friendly temper on the part of England?
It was fuel to the flame of discord. The British government is no less high-spirited and proud from our own, and the attempt to force them to terms was the likeliest course which could have been pursued, by provoking retaliation, to widen the breach between the two countries.
This measure enforced, when negotiation was going on, and promised a favorable result, is no final proof in my mind, that the executive was satisfied with the form of negotiation, but wanted no treaty with England.
I proceed to inquire whether our differences with Britain were not of a nature to be compromised; and if our government had been sincerely disposed,
whether they might not have retained the relations of amity with that power. First, as to the rule of 1756. This rule was founded on the principle, that a neutral nation could not acquire a right to trade by the collision of one belligerent in time of war which did not exist, but was withheld in time of peace. The rule was supported on the principle that a neutral could not come in aid of a belligerent and cover its property on the ocean, when it was incapable of protecting itself.
I am not going to defend this rule, nor to inquire into its origin. Thus much I will say, that if it was the British rule of 1756, it was the express rule of the French maritime code in the years 1704 and 1744. I will not trouble you with reading the decrees of the French monarchs which I have on the table, made in the years mentioned, and which prohibit to neutrals any but a direct trade to the colony of an enemy. Though the rule of 1756 may not be an ancient rule, yet we must admit that it was not a new rule introduced in the present war, and contrived to ruin or injure the American commerce.
France was unable to trade with her colonies; the United States became her carriers, and under our flag the manufactures of the mother country were safely carried to the colonies, and the produce of the colonies transported to Europe. This trade was certainly as beneficial to France as preferable to the United States. Britain only was the sufferer, and the rule of 1756 was revived in order to take from French commerce the protection of a neutral flag. Our government were certainly right in claiming the free enjoyment of this profitable trade, but the only question is whether the neutral and belligerent pretension did not admit of adjustment by each side making an equal concession of points of interest.
The treaty of 1806, which the President rejected, fairly compromised the dispute on this subject. The 11th art. of that treaty secured to the United States the carrying trade of France and her colonies, subject to terms somewhat inconvenient to the merchant, but rendering it not less beneficial to the nation. The treaty requires that goods exported from France or her colonies in American vessels shall be entered and landed in the United States; and when exported from France through the United States to her colonies, shall be liable to a duty of one per cent. and from the colonies to France of two per cent. to be paid into our own treasury. This regulation of benefit to the government by the duty which it gave to it was of little prejudice to the trade, and there is no room to doubt that the trade, thus secured from the spoilation to which it was before subject, would have flourished beyond its former limits.
Our differences therefore, as to the carrying trade so much harassed by the British rule of 1756, not only admitted of compromise, but was actually settled by an arrangement in the treaty of 1806, with which the nation would have been perfectly satisfied.
The second head of dispute regards the practice of constructive blockades. The complaint on this subject was, that blockades were formed by proclamations, and that neutrals were compelled to consider ports as blockaded before which no force was stationed. That the principle of blockades was extended to unwarrantable limits, is most certainly true, and there is no question as to our having just cause to complain of the vexatious interruptions to which it exposed our trade. The present war between France and England is without a parallel between civilized nations; it is not a struggle for renown or for ordinary conquest, but on the part of Britain for her independence and existence. Principles of neutrality or of right have been little regarded upon the land or upon the ocean; and that question with the belligerents has been less what the law of nations permitted them to do, than what their strength enabled them to accomplish. It is unlawful for a neutral to attempt to enter a blockaded port—but a port cannot be considered as blockaded unless a force adequate to the end is stationed before it. The blockades therefore, which England created simply by a proclamation, were an abuse of which neutrals had just cause to complain.
The United States did complain, and these complaints were listened to by the British government. The 10th art. of the treaty of 1806, has made provision on the subject; and though England has not renounced the principle of which we complain, yet it is qualified by the notice, and before she is exposed to seizure and confiscation. The provision in the treaty, would no doubt have complied in a considerable degree the abuse from which we had suffered, and it was our policy to have waited for better times for a complete remedy for the evil.
But, Sir, the last head of dispute which I enumerated was made the chief and most important ground of complaint against the British government—I mean the searching American vessels for British seamen. The right claimed by England was to seize her own seamen on board our private vessels. The right to search a public vessel, or to seize an American sailor was never asserted by the government. The claim, however, which was insisted on, involved a point of equal interest and delicacy to both countries. There is nothing novel in the pretension, that a nation engaged in war had a right to recall her subjects from foreign countries or from foreign service to assist her in the war.
Every nation in Europe has claimed & exercised the right. Our government has not denied it; but the consequences of the manner of exercising it have formed the ground of our complaint. Has a belligerent a right to search a neutral vessel for her seamen? I should suppose not. This question between other nations is of small importance; between the United States and Britain, it is of great magnitude.
The sameness of manners, habits, language and appearance, render it always difficult and sometimes impossible to distinguish between an English and an American sailor. If the right to search for British seamen were admitted, there would no longer be security for the American sailor; the right admitted, I have no doubt our navigation would be ruined. As an American therefore, I would never concede the principle. Let us see however how the case stands in relation to Britain. Her navy is the shield of her salvation—whatever impairs its strength diminishes her power and safety. Tenacious as she has ever been of personal liberty at home, yet when men are wanted for her fleets, the habeas corpus sleeps. Her sailors are her right arm, which withers as she is deprived of them. From the seductions of our maritime service she has every thing to dread. Our merchants can give her seamen a dollar for every shilling which she is able to afford them.
They shall be better fed, more gently treated, and exposed less to hardships and danger. Let them find a secure asylum on board our merchant ships, and how soon will the decks be thinned of the English ships of war. Which has the most at stake on this subject, England or America? I will not decide the question; but this is evident, that neither will ever unconditionally relinquish the principle for which she has contended. At the present crisis it was impossible for our government to expect the formal abandonment by the British government, of this right of search. What course then should they have pursued? They should have temporised on the point, as Britain was willing to do, and waited for a more propitious epoch, for the final arrangement of the dispute.
Your commissioners who negotiated the treaty, found that it was impracticable to obtain the cession of the principle for which they contended, and upon their own responsibility, to their great honor, to preserve the peace of the two countries, accepted assurances from the British ministry, which, in their opinion, and I have no doubt in fact, would have effectually removed the abuses of which we complained. I beg pardon of the Senate for reading an extract from the letter of Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney, of the 3d of January, 1807, which contains the assurances to which I refer: "We are sorry to add, that this treaty contains no provision against the impressment of our seamen; our despatch of the 11th of November, communicated to you the result of our labors on that subject, and our opinion that although this government did not feel itself at liberty to relinquish formally by treaty, its claim to search our merchant vessels for British seamen, its practice would nevertheless be essentially, if not completely abandoned. That opinion has been since confirmed by frequent conferences on the subject with the British commissioners, who have repeatedly assured us, that in their judgment we were made as secure against the exercise of their pretensions, by the policy which their government had adopted in regard to that very delicate and important question, as we could have been made by treaty. It is proper to observe however, that the good effect of this disposition, and its continuance may depend in a great measure, on the means which may be taken by the Congress hereafter, to check desertions from the British service. If the treaty is ratified, and a perfect good understanding produced between the two nations, it will be easy for their governments by friendly communications, to state to each other what they respectively desire, and in that mode to arrange the business as satisfactorily as it could be done by treaty."
Such was the footing upon which our commissioners were wisely disposed, to leave this delicate affair. And would to God that our President, wishing as sincerely as his friends profess for him, to accommodate the diff-
ferences between the two countries, had as prudently agreed to the arrangement made for him by his ministers! What has been the consequence of this excessive anxiety to secure our seamen? Why, that your service has lost more sailors in one year of embargo, than it would have lost in ten years of impressment.
But, Sir, in this lies the secret—a secret I will dare to pronounce. Your President never meant to have a treaty with Great Britain. If he had intended it he would have taken the treaty of the 31st of December, 1806. If he had intended it he would never have fettered the commissioners with sine qua non which were insuperable.
It was an invariable article in the instructions, to form no treaty unless the claim to search merchant vessels for deserters was utterly abandoned; this was never expected, and at the arduous crisis at which it was insisted upon, it was impossible to expect it. And yet rather than temporize on the point, rather than accept the natural abandonment of the principle without its formal renunciation, a treaty, the work of years, negotiated by his favorite minister, and calculated to appease the animosities existing between the two nations, is rejected.
You will bear with me, Sir, while I say that this precipitate and fatal measure is the cause of all the embarrassments which we have felt, which we are feeling, and which we are likely to suffer; I ask, why was this treaty rejected? We are told for two reasons:
1st. Because it contained no engagement against the impressment of American seamen on board merchant vessels. 2d. Because of the collateral declaration of the British commissioners, that England retained the right to retaliate upon France the principles of her Berlin decree, if the United States should submit to its execution.
I have shewn from the public documents furnished to us by the President, the footing upon which our ministers placed the point of impressments.
Our commissioners considered the assurances given them by the British ministers, a better pledge for the safety of our seamen than a formal provision in the treaty. But if these assurances had even not been given, the treaty would not have compromised our rights or prejudiced our interests on the subject, in the mean time it would have induced more friendly relations and prepared both countries for such further concessions as their mutual interest might require. To me it is a matter both novel and surprising to discover in our President this strong and unyielding attachment to the highest points of our maritime rights. I had thought before, that he was not so friendly to our navy, to our merchants, and to our commerce.
I had thought that he would rather our ships were exchanged for farming utensils and our seamen converted into husbandmen. But now, Sir, it seems so highly does he value our navigation, that he prefers hazarding all the calamities of war rather than suffer one feather to be forcibly plucked from the wing of commerce.
Can any one believe that our government seriously intended to conclude a treaty with England, when our commissioners were instructed to make no treaty unless Britain formally consented, that our merchant flag should protect every deserter from her navy?
The insinuation of this sine qua non in the instructions is sufficient to satisfy my mind, that there was no sincerity in the negotiation which was carried on with the British government.
We have been asked by the honorable gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Giles) whether it can be imagined, that such men as King, Monroe and Pinkney would have colluded with the executive, or if they would not have borne evidence of his insincerity, if such had been the fact. Mr. King, he tells us, is a federalist to whom we have lately given proof of confidence and attachment. Mr. Monroe he represents of a disposition lately not to be guilty of concealment through affection for the administration, and Mr. Pinkney is said also to be a federalist.
All this the gentleman may take as true.—But Mr. King, Sir, was never engaged in this negotiation—and as to Mr. Monroe and Mr. Pinkney, I most clearly acquit them of any collusion with the President; because so far from colluding with him, they have acted against his secret and express instructions. To have acted against his secret and express instructions, is to incur the responsibility of acting against their orders. No, my charge of insincerity against the executive is founded upon the documents a long time secret, now public, and upon the nature of the objections which have uniformly obstructed the adjustment of our differences with Britain.
The second impediment to the ratification of the treaty, was the declaration of Holland and Auckland which accompanied it. What did this paper impose upon us? Resistance to the Berlin decree: and will you permit me to ask, whether it was ever your intention to submit to that decree; you do not mean to submit to the orders in council, and does not the Berlin decree go to the extent of those orders? Are you better prepared, or more disposed to submit to France than to England? No, I hope we shall agree to fight before we consent that either of those powers shall give laws to the ocean.
I know at one time it was pretended, that the Berlin decree was designed only as a municipal regulation; municipal when it declared England and her dependencies in a state of blockade, and their manufactures and produce liable to capture. It is true that the minister of the U States in France, got some such explanation of the decree from the French minister of marine. He did not consider it as derogating from the treaty of 1800, between France and the United States. But when the emperor is applied to, by the grand judge, his answer is, "that since he had not thought proper to express any exception in his decree there is no ground to make any in the execution, with respect to any thing whatsoever." When the minister of marine was applied to for his construction of the decree, he gave his opinion, but affected not to be the proper organ of communication on the subject. In this you see that craft and force were both united for the most destructive execution of the decree.
The decree was allowed to sleep for nearly a year—a public minister delivers his opinion that it was not to infract our treaty—and after our property, to an immense amount, is allured by these deceitful appearances into French ports, his imperial majesty declares, in effect, through his minister of justice, that the treaty with the United States was not expressed as an exception in the decree, and therefore its provisions were to form no obstruction to its execution. So, Sir, we have probably lost some millions of dollars by our anxiety to consider this decree as a municipal regulation. Suppose, however, it had not designed what its terms so plainly express,—the blockade of the British isles. In such case, what embarrassment would our government have incurred by agreeing to the proposition of the English commissioners, to resist the decree if executed against our neutral rights? If France had confined the execution of the decree to her own ports, Britain could not have complained of the execution of her own law, within her own jurisdiction, and we should have had nothing to which we were to oppose resistance. But suppose the decree had been executed on the ocean, and you had become bound to oppose its execution by force—would your undertaking have been greater than the offer you lately made to England, in case she would repeal her orders in council?
I shall hereafter have occasion to view this subject in another point of light; but at present I ask, did not Mr. Pinkney mean to tell Mr. Canning, under his instructions from the President, that if Great Britain would repeal her orders in council, the United States would resist the execution of the French decrees? This is stated in the letter of Mr. Canning to Mr. Pinkney, of the 23d of August, 1808, and admitted, as it is not denied, in the letter of Mr. Pinkney to Mr. Canning of the 8th of October in the same year. Your government, then, would now agree to the terms which they so indignantly repelled when first proposed to them, and on the ground of which, in part, they refused the treaty which their ministers had negotiated. It would seem then that no other material ground remains for the rejection of the treaty, than the want of a formal clause to secure our merchant seamen against impressment.
Is it your intention ever to have a treaty with Britain, or are the nations always to continue in a state of strife and contention? You were offered the treaty of 1794, and you rejected it. Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney negotiated a treaty in 1806. The president rejects it, and insists on a point in the most obnoxious form, which he knows will never be conceded, and without the concession of which, no treaty is ever to be made. Does all this look like a sincere disposition to adjust our differences with England?
It is of importance, Mr. President, to consider, in the late negotiation, who were the men in power in the respective countries. Can our President expect ever to see an English administration more disposed to treat upon favorable terms with this country, than the Fox administration? The name of Fox is the most grateful English name that is known to an American ear. From my childhood I have heard that Fox was the friend of America. He was the early champion of our rights, when Britain first attempted to deprive us of them. His voice was always raised in our
Handwritten notes at the bottom of the page: 28 5 8 8 8 28

favor, in opposition to the power of the crown. Fox was at the head of the ancient wing interest of England, and a firm supporter of the principles of freedom. He was, too, a philanthropist, and deemed in sentiment, by some, a citizen of the world. He was additionally, sir, a French citizen as well as our worthy President.
I hope it will not be thought that I mention with any invidious view, this last circumstance—I state it only for the material purpose of showing the community of character between these great men, which recommended them to the fraternization of the French people. If Mr. Jefferson was not willing to accept the treaty which Mr. Fox offered him, from what Administration in England can he ever expect a better? And may I not ask also if he can look to other men in the United States in whom he will have more confidence, for their skill and integrity, than in those whom he employed in the late negotiation? We have all heard that Mr. Monroe was his early and bosom friend, and we have all seen that he has been his favorite minister.
Let us also not forget the time when the treaty was concluded—no time could have been more propitious; it was at the moment when England was sinking under the triumphs of her adversary. Bonaparte had just broken to pieces the power of Prussia, driven the Russians to their frontier, and converted their emperor from an enemy into an ally. If you are not satisfied with the terms which England was willing to grant you at a moment of depression, can you look for better when she has less to fear from your enmity, or to hope from your friendship?
You find, Sir, that your President was favored by every circumstance in the negotiation of the treaty which he finally rejected.
It is not a little remarkable that he should have undertaken to reject this treaty without consulting the Senate, his constitutional advisers. He was in possession of a copy of the treaty while the Senate were in session—they were not allowed to see it: he would not trust their opinions upon it. They might have approved it; and the responsibility would have been still greater to have rejected it after they had agreed to it. You will pardon me for speaking plainly—it is my duty to express my conviction, though I may happen to be wrong.
To me it has always appeared that your President was taken by surprise when he found a British treaty laid at his door. His instructions to his ministers precluded the possibility of a treaty, and it never entered his head that they would have been daring enough to conclude a treaty against his orders. But the ministers having obtained what they considered the substance, disregarded the form, and sent a treaty as little looked for, as desired.
I do not mean to contend that the President was bound to lay this treaty before the Senate, but in exercising the power to reject it without their advice, he took upon himself a great responsibility, and is answerable for all the consequences of an act exclusively his own. To this act, in my opinion, may be attributed the present embarrassments of your country. Had the treaty been accepted, our trade would have flourished as heretofore, and with it our agriculture, manufactures, and the fisheries. But it pleased our chief magistrate to reject it, and every day has since added to the gloom which has spread over our country.
In this condition was the state of our affairs when an unexpected event occurred, calculated to inflame to the highest pitch the animosity of our citizens against the British government. I allude to the attack of the Leopard upon the Chesapeake, in June, 1807. In relation to this outrage the people of America felt but one sentiment. A more wanton, flagitious, and perfidious act was never perpetrated. It is an act which America never will nor ought to forgive, till it is expiated by adequate satisfaction. But still, Sir, we must restrain our indignation while we inquire whose act it was, and who is answerable for it. The material inquiry is, was it or has it become the act of the British government?
The British minister, as soon as the news of the occurrence reached him, voluntarily and unasked, declared that it was unauthorized by the government. He disavowed it in parliament, and the king himself confirmed the disavowal.
It rested then as the act of admiral Berkeley. The nation however were bound to make us satisfaction for the injury done us by their public servant. If they refuse adequate satisfaction they adopt the act. The government were sensible of this obligation and they took steps to comply with it. They sent a special minister for the sole purpose of making reparation for the injury we had suffered. This minister we received, and agreed to consider the outrage which had been committed, as the act of Berkeley. Considered as the act of government, it would have been an act of open war. You commence a negotiation as to the terms of reparation; but here the same spirit which rejected the treaty, baffles every effort to accommodate this new cause of offence.
When informed of the attack upon one of our public vessels by a British man of war under the orders of an admiral, our government had reason to apprehend that no individual, however high in rank, would have hazarded so daring an outrage without the authority of his government.
With this view, and to preserve peace and tranquility in our harbors, we may consider the President as justified in issuing his proclamation, interdicting the entrance of British armed ships into the waters of the United States. But, Sir, the moment it was known that the British government had disavowed the act, the proclamation ought to have been withdrawn. Are you permitted to punish a nation for the acts of its subjects in which it does not participate? The law and the practice of civilized nations on this point is explicit and uniform. When the subject of one power offends against the sovereignty of another, this will not justify a nation upon other subjects of the same power with the one who offended. It has uniformly been our own doctrine, and it is the common interest of mankind to maintain it, that in such case you must apply to the sovereign of the party offending, and abstain from any act of hostility till he refuses you reparation. This course our government did not pursue; for the act of an individual they retaliated against his nation.
Upon the grounds which have been stated, you may excuse the issuing of the proclamation; but what excuse is there for its continuance, when we acknowledge ourselves, in treating for reparation, that the act complained of is the act of an individual, and not of his government?
A proclamation like the one issued, without adequate cause, was a breach of neutrality, and a just cause of war. For to admit into your ports, and grant succor to the armed ships of one belligerent, while you exclude those of the other, is not consistent with that impartiality which belligerents are entitled to claim from neutrals. The point was so understood, and so felt by the British government—and they required, as they had a right to do, that as they had not committed the act complained of, that the proclamation which had an operation or appearance of hostility against them, should be recalled. If they refused reparation, we had a right to redress ourselves—but had we a right to take the redress into our own hands, and at the same time to require them to make us reparation? When you ask justice, you must expect to do it. A nation should be as ready to perform its duties, as to insist upon its rights. The British government had given sufficient evidence of a disposition to grant satisfaction for the injury done us, by sending to the country a special minister for the purpose; that minister was instructed to make voluntary reparation, but to grant none under the coercion of the proclamation. In his first communication to the Secretary of State, he informed him that his powers did not allow him to make reparation, unless the proclamation was withdrawn. The affair was then managed with sufficient adroitness to catch the popularity of the country, when it was known that the proclamation must be first withdrawn, its revocation and the reparation, were proposed by the Secretary as simultaneous acts. Why was this proclamation so tenaciously insisted on? If you had revoked it, and the reparation offered was deemed insufficient, you would have had no difficulty in renewing it. It is no task to our President to issue a proclamation; at most, we contend only for a point of etiquette, a thing important perhaps in a monarchy, but very little respected among us republicans. Give me leave to say, that in this negotiation, I soon became persuaded that the difference in question, was not to be settled by itself, but was to stand open in the general account. If there had been a sincere desire to settle it, the paltry measure of the proclamation would not have formed an obstacle for a moment.
I have here a new and great proof that the executive is not sincerely desirous of a full and friendly settlement of all differences with England. It may be difficult to trace the motive which governs—but I can plainly discover the same spirit now, which agitated the nation in 1798—a spirit then subdued by the mighty influence of Washington, but which has since risen with increasing strength, and now dominates.
I consider, Sir, that the measures of the administration have been not only inefficient, but extremely feeble; they will not settle their differences with England, and yet have not courage openly to quarrel with her; they pass a non-importation act to punish the impairment of seamen and the aggressions upon our carrying trade; they exclude by proclamation, British armed ships from our waters, to avenge the outrage on the Chesapeake; and what benefit to ourselves or detriment to our adversary have these measures produced?—They are calculated to increase the animosity between the nations, but I know of no other effect they can produce. So far, indeed, have they been from contraiting Britain to accede to our terms, that they have rendered her more regardless of our rights and interests. She has since given us new and more feeling causes of complaint, by her order in council of the 7th of January, and the 11th of November, 1807. These orders take from us the trade of nearly all Europe. They are the counterpart of the French decrees. God forbid that I should justify them! I will never admit that France or England have a right to make laws for the ocean; nor shall I ever hesitate, when they insist upon the execution of such laws, to declare myself for war. I am as free as any gentleman in this Senate to protest against submission to the decrees of France, or the orders of England; but is not submission to the decrees as disgraceful as submission to the orders? The gentleman from Virginia laid nothing of the decree—nothing of a war with France—his resentment was confined to Britain. [Remainder next week]
SUMMARY OF FOREIGN NEWS—From the Boston Gazette.
In our last paper, we gave London accounts to Dec. 22, announcing among other events, the capitulation of Madrid, which took place on the 4th. This affair was officially stated in the 13th Bulletin of the French army in Spain. Since which, accounts have been received from England to the 3d Jan. furnishing many additional articles of interest, and many rumours and surmises, of great "flit and moment." The French bulletins are to No. 16 the last of which is dated in Madrid, Dec. 3th, and exhibits the most sanguine predictions that tranquility and confidence would be completely restored in the capital.
Since the battle of Tudela, there appears to have been no hard or desperate fighting; or at least, there has been no official and definite accounts of any such engagements received in this country.—By the foreign journals, it appears, that in all the actions which have occurred ever since the arrival of the Great Napoleon in Spain the Spanish armies, which have been engaged, have never been subdued, though in most of the general ones they have been defeated. Even Blake, who was assailed by a powerful superiority of numbers, and compelled by some mistakes in the execution of his orders, to seek positions, extremely disadvantageous, effected nevertheless, an honourable retreat, and is now in great force in Leon ready to co-operate with the neighbouring armies. Castanos also, who was repulsed at Tudela, by the superiority of the French light artillery, after many struggles, in which he frequently caused the enemy to retreat, retired with the utmost security, taking new positions, and effecting new objects of great importance. At the battle too of the pass of Somosterra, the Spanish troops, when they had ascertained the number of their assailants, and the strength of their artillery adopted the policy of retreating, from a certainty, that their efforts, however long protracted, must eventually prove fruitless; their retreat was undoubtedly well conducted, anything in the 13th bulletin to the contrary notwithstanding.—From all these actions, as in all the other military events which have taken place in Spain, since its invasion by the Grand Tyrant of Europe; we see exemplified the remark of an elegant writer, "that though the armies of Spain may be broken into many fragments, still each member, like the parts of a dissected polypus, will sprout up into a new and formidable engine of opposition."
The British, who by the defeat of Gen. Blake, were prevented from joining their forces, are said to have advanced, and actually formed a junction with Marquis Romana's army.
The report of the massacre at Madrid, stated under the Plymouth head of Jan. 3, may possibly be true. The Spanish dates, communicating this intelligence, not being mentioned, its probability must rest on the circumstances which are connected with the report: among these it will be recollected, that even the French accounts state the security in which the dwelling houses of the people had been placed; that among the more wealthy inhabitants, great dissatisfaction was expressed, of the manner in which the city had been surrendered; add to these, the immense population of the place, and the departure of several divisions of the French troops, as mentioned in the bulletins: From these facts, united to the circumstance of the reports having reached England, through two distinct sources, we may be permitted to place some reliance on its authenticity.
With these accounts, as originally published in the Philadelphia Aurora, Duane presents the public with a cock-and-bull story of the blindness of his Britannick Majesty—of a Regency, to be composed of the Queen, Prince of Wales, Duke of Portland, Lord Chancellor, and the Bishop of Canterbury—of Mr. Canning's removal from office, and the appointment, in his stead, of Lord Melville. Duane however, has the modesty to say, that this news is the mere verbal report of a passenger in the Union. It is only necessary for us to say, that our files of London papers to Jan. do not even squint at any one of these events.
The Union is said to have brought despatches from France and a speedy accommodation of all matters in dispute.
APPOINTMENTS.
The following gentlemen have been appointed to the offices respectively affixed to their names; having been nominated by the President of the United States, and approved by the Senate:—
 ROBERT SMITH, of Maryland, Secretary of State.  WILLIAM EUSTIS, of Massachusetts, Secretary of War.  PAUL HAMILTON, of South Carolina, Secretary of the Navy.  THOMAS SUMTER, jun. of South Carolina, Minister Plenipotentiary to Rio Janeiro.  HENRY HILL, Consul at St. Salvador, in Brazil.  DAVID HOLMES, of Virginia, Governor of the Mississippi Territory.  JOHN BOYLE, of Kentucky, Governor of the Illinois Territory.  NATHANIEL POPE, Secretary of the Illinois Territory. 
Among the nominations, made by the President, was we understand, that of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, as Minister Plenipotentiary to St. Petersburg, on which no vote was taken in the Senate, they having resolved—Ayes 17—Noes 15—that such a mission was in their opinion unnecessary.—The Senate adjourned on the 7th instant, sine die—National Intelligencer.
Massachusetts Election.
TO THE ELECTORS OF MAINE.
FELLOW CITIZENS, Permit a plain unlettered man who now cultivates the soil, but one who shouldered his musket in '76, and joined the American army to oppose the oppressors of his country, to address a few observations to you in relation to approaching election. Among the many privileges you obtained by the establishment of your independence, that of electing your Chief Magistrate, was an important one; and by the constitution of your state, this duty devolves upon you yearly—and the first Monday of April next is the day you will be called upon to exercise it. Two of your fellow citizens are nominated as candidates for your suffrages to fill the important office of Governor of this Commonwealth, the Hon. CHRISTOPHER GORE is the federal republican candidate, and the Hon. Levi Lincoln is the democratic one. If both these gentlemen were of like political sentiments, it would not be of so much consequence to the people which of them should obtain the election; but this is not the case. They differ as much in regard to what measures ought to be pursued in order to secure the safety and prosperity of Massachusetts, as our political situation, at the present moment, differs from what it was at the close of the Washington administration.
A short examination of the public conduct of these men will at once settle the question in the mind of every honest man, as to which should be supported. The form of government, when properly administered, under which the citizens of this state live, is unquestionably fully adequate to ensure them the full enjoyment of all the blessings of civilized society; and when our federal and state constitutions were administered by federal men, by men professing the same political principles as Mr. Gore does, you did enjoy these blessings. Then you were as a nation respected abroad, happy and prosperous at home. The farmer was enabled to sell his surplus produce at a high price, he could increase his stock and improve and enlarge his farm. The mechanic could obtain constant and profitable employment, and the merchant was rewarded for his enterprise and anxiety in the profits of a general commerce.
In short all classes and professions of citizens, from the cottage to the dwellings of the rich, were increasing in wealth and independence.
Notwithstanding your country exhibited this universal scene of prosperity, there were men in every section of the state constantly proclaiming in the ears of the people that their liberties, and even property were not safe whilst federal men were entrusted with the administration of the government. These men stiled themselves the only "true republicans," the "disinterested" and "exclusive" friends of the people, at the same time charging all those who opposed their ambitious and unprincipled views with being "old tories" and enemies to the country. These revilers of the heroes of the American revolution, and all those who adhered to the political principles of the immortal Washington were, unfortunately but too successful, in deceiving the people; who, honest themselves, considered the professions of the leading democrats, as flowing from a pure spirit of patriotism, when in fact all their boasted regards for the public welfare were made for the sole purpose of obtaining power and office.
The sufferings and privations which have resulted from the triumph of democracy, and the effects of the measures of that party, afford melancholly proof of the truth of the foregoing remarks. And it is wholly owing to the firm and patriotic stand taken by the federalists in this and other states of the Union, that the democrats in congress have not before this, plunged the country in all the horrors of war and blood shed.
Democratic rulers have wilfully departed from that system of policy which gave you peace and free trade with the whole world. They have pursued measures which have involved the country in difficulties and embarrassment with every commercial nation; and Levi Lincoln approves of this conduct, and makes every exertion in his power to continue such men in office as will continue to pursue similar measures. He has been a zealous advocate for the embargo, that curse of the country, which has despoiled the farmer and mechanic of the fruits of their labor, and deprived the merchant and mariner of their natural and constitutional rights. He exercised an unwarrantable stretch of power, to enforce, at the point of the bayonet, these oppressive and tyrannical laws. He has refused his assent to an act to secure the property of the citizens of this Commonwealth, from unjust and arbitrary seizure—which shows that Levi Lincoln is totally regardless of the safety and security of the peoples' rights. These compose but a few of the objections which render this man unfit for the office of chief magistrate.
On the other hand, Mr. GORE is the very opposite to the foregoing character; and Mr. Gore's political opponents do him the justice to acknowledge, that he is a man of superior talents, of great political knowledge, and unshaken integrity. The only objection which the venal and prostituted writers in the democratic papers make, is, the stale and worn-out electioneering slang of the party, that he is under British influence. The greatest fool and knave that is capable of writing two words in English, can make this charge against any man in the United States. The same base hirelings who accuse Mr. Gore with being under British influence, made the same infamous and false insinuations against General Washington, John Adams, Caleb Strong, and many others. But it is a settled maxim with the supporters of democracy, that a lie stuck to, is better than the truth wavering, and they have determined to keep up the cry of "British influence," but they point their readers to no proof of this disposition.
In what act of Mr. Gore's life do you find him exercising an undue partiality towards any nation? Does it consist in his taking a zealous and able part in the debates in favor of adopting the federal constitution in the convention of this State? Does it consist in his being an uniform friend and advocate of the policy and measures of your beloved Washington? Is it because he possessed the confidence and esteem of the political saviour of your country, who appointed him U. S. attorney for Massachusetts, and afterwards one of the commissioners for prosecuting the claims of American merchants against the English government? Is it because he has viewed the embargo policy as unnecessary, oppressive, unjust and ruinous—a sacrifice of our independence, and a cowardly abandonment of our commercial rights?—If to have devoted his time and talents as a member of the Legislature in support of the natural and civil rights of the citizens of Massachusetts, and at the same time, be the firm and undeviating opposer of tyranny and oppression, from whatever quarter it should proceed, constitute foreign partiality—then, and not till then, will there be any truth in making the charge against Mr. Gore. In the mean time let the citizens resolve to do the things that make for their peace and prosperity—let them turn out and give their votes, for Governor, to the
Hon. CHRISTOPHER GORE. A SOLDIER OF '76.
To the Electors of Lincoln, Hancock and Washington.
ON the first Monday of April you will be called upon to give in votes for Governor, Senators, &c. for the ensuing political year. The maxim "as you sow so you must reap" will be literally verified. Every man will readily allow that the present is an important and critical period in our public affairs, and it is of the highest moment that you bestow your suffrages on those characters who are distinguished for their talents, their integrity, their virtue, and above all for their attachment to, & zealous regard for your civil rights and privileges. Men who will disdain to yield their support to the measures of the democratic party, which have spread ruin and distress throughout your district.
I have noticed that the Federal Republican ticket for Senators in Lincoln District, bears the names of the Hon. THEODORE LINCOLN, and Hon. MARK L. HILL. These gentlemen are universally known as the undeviating supporters and advocates of your commercial rights; which your democratic rulers have long, unjustly deprived you of.
Their exertions in the legislature, the year past, to check that ruinous course of policy pursued by Congress, which has involved thousands of you in poverty and distress, & to induced the administration of the general government to permit you to carry on your coasting trade, and pursue foreign commerce, entitle them to your confidence and support. Let me conjure you, therefore, by all you hold dear and valuable, to unite heart and hand in electing these men; otherwise you must be represented in the Senate by such men as William King and Francis Carr. Let me ask what are the qualifications, and upon what principles are these men recommended to your favor.
For a moment review the conduct of the consistent William King, who was once a federalist—but left the party because they had too much of the spirit of freemen to submit to his dictates.—What has been his conduct since he joined the ranks of democracy? Has it been regulated by a spirit of candour and moderation—by a regard for the interests and rights of the people? No. On the contrary, he conducts with an iron sway towards those who are below him, and lends himself as the servile tool to those above him in office. To keep up his popularity, he condemns the anti-commercial measures and embargo policy, in private—and has done every thing in his power, as a member of the Senate, to approve and support them. Recollect his conduct towards Major Wood, and others, the past winter, when a proposition made by himself, was agitated for applying to government for relief from oppression. But Mr. King has his private and personal objects in view, and all other considerations must yield to them. His an-

tion is proved. I will mention one instance. His project of dividing a division of the militia, and procuring for himself the appointment of major general, when but a private in the ranks, and without the least pretension to military knowledge, was a gross insult to every officer in the division. He can never be the soldier's friend, who will wound the soldier's honor.
But fellow citizens, Mr. King comes before us as a Senatorial candidate in conjunction with Francis Carr! In the language of the "greatest man in America," [Mr. Jefferson,] permit us to ask you, is Francis Carr "honest? is he capable? is he faithful to the constitution?" Do you know the reasons which induced him to leave Haverhill, the former place of his residence? Ask those acquainted with the history of this man's character before you entrust him with the important office of Senator.
To the honor of many of the democratic party be it said, that they had too much regard for their own characters to bestow their votes on this man at the last election; and there are many at this day, notwithstanding they are threatened with denunciation from their leaders, who will show themselves superior to the trammels of party, by voting for such men as are friends to their prosperity, and opposed to the destruction of their commerce—such as THEODORE LINCOLN and MARK L. HILL, Esquires.
An Elector of Lincoln District.
Mr. SHIRLEY, I was gratified to see in the last Gazette, the old faithful friends of the people, the
Hon. Lothrop Lewis, and
Hon. Ammi R. Mitchell, again nominated as candidates for Senators for Cumberland and Oxford District. It only requires the "long pull, the strong pull and the pull altogether" to ensure their election. As they are friends to free trade and against embargos and non-intercourse; as they always have and will continue to use their best endeavours to obtain a revival of commerce and continuance of peace, so that we farmers may be able to sell our produce for a good price, and are themselves deeply interested in agricultural pursuits, we are determined to give them our united support.
A FARMER.
Paris, March 16.
FEDERAL NOMINATIONS.
GOVERNOR, Hon. Christopher Gore. LT. GOVERNOR, Hon. David Cobb.
SENATORS.
YORK DISTRICT. Hon. Joseph Leland, Nahum Morrill, Esq. CUMBERLAND DISTRICT. Hon. Ammi R. Mitchell, Hon. Lothrop Lewis. Lincoln, Hancock & Washington, Hon. Theodore Lincoln, Mark L. Hill, Esq. KENNEBEC. Hon. Nathaniel Dummer.
Portland,
Monday, March 20, 1809.
We have so often been called upon to counteract the falsehoods circulated by the democrats, of an embargo administration, to serve the vilest purposes, that we almost regret the necessity which duty imposes at this time; but as we have correct information that an artful, secret and villainous plan is laid to deceive the people; we hold it a solemn duty to forewarn our fellow citizens of the plot.
Except the usual slang of democracy, that sort of stuff with which the Argus is always teeming—which could do no mischief while an opportunity is afforded for detection or refutation, we did not anticipate any danger from the lying arts of an expiring faction. But we were deceived—Notwithstanding the party have been dumfounded for some months past, and they have not dared openly to advocate the ruinous policy of the administration—notwithstanding great numbers of honest democrats have renounced their errors & their party, and are determined to support the federal interest—notwithstanding so many democrats have publicly given up their cause in this commonwealth, as too desperate to be supported any longer, and the whole party except a few hungry, greedy seekers after the offices of profit and emolument, in order to SINECURE the people, appear to be hopeless of success—Yet a few of the leaders of the party have lately assembled in midnight conclave, and resolved to make one more (we
hope it will be their last) desperate effort to try the power of lying upon the citizens whom they have so often deluded. And although they have been repeatedly detected, another experiment, it seems, is to be tried. The plan laid upon is briefly this—to circulate reports that France has repealed her decrees, and Great Britain retracted her orders of council; and that Mr. Jefferson's embargo has humbled these two powerful nations, and his gun-boat administration secured the rights of neutral nations, and established the freedom of the seas.—That the embargo is raised and we have a free trade—that our produce will command a high price—that our commercial prospects are brightening & will soon be equal to our wishes!
It was not intended that this should be discovered until it had produced its full effect upon the ensuing election for Governor and Senators, lest the falsehoods should be detected; but it often happens that the devil leaves his votaries, even those who best serve him, in the lurch.—We could hardly suppose that such stuff as this could deceive, but the projectors of the plot appeared to have great hopes of success—we therefore notice their diabolical project, that we may not be accused of a neglect of duty, in case any honest but uninformed citizen should be deluded into a belief that these things are true.—Would to God they were true; but they have no more foundation than a thousand other lies circulated by the faction, by the unhappy influence of which our country has been and still is driven to the brink of ruin! Perhaps some other lies were invented for circulation; but our information of this secret plot extends no further—except that some falsehoods had been already circulated respecting Mr. GORE, which it was expected the friends of truth would not have an opportunity to correct it—such as, that he is an Englishman—an English agent—that he resides most of his time in Quebec, and some other stuff of a like kind, the falsehood of all which is so well known in our seaport towns that great care was taken to give the currency only in the remotest country towns in the Commonwealth.
The office holders and office seekers who are striving to march to power and place on the ruins of New-England, are sounding the praises of their democratic ideals in Congress, for passing a law which they call a repeal of the embargo. Now if it was a fact that this detestable measure, with its thousand hideous features, was actually done away, they would deserve no more credit than the thief who steals his neighbors pocket book, keeps the money, and afterwards returns one of the apartments which contained the cash. If our democratic rulers were disposed to allow the citizens of Maine the enjoyment of their natural and constitutional rights, they would have passed a law for the total repeal of the embargo. They would have opened a trade with every port where there was a market for the lumber and produce of our farms. But they forbid our vessels from every island in the West-Indies, but two. They prohibit our merchants from sending the lumber and other articles to Liverpool, where they are in demand and would command a high price. But our democrats tell us we ought to be satisfied, for our vessels are permitted to go to Holland. Now mark the Frenchified act of our impartial rulers. They refuse the citizens of New-England to trade to English ports, which afford the only market for their produce, and open a direct trade with places under the immediate control of Bonaparte! To trade to Holland is an indirect intercourse with France. But Mr. Jefferson and the Southern members and those under their influence in Congress, had another motive for their conduct, equally clear, if not more so than that of pleasing the tyrant of the world. The nabobs and planters of the south will find a ready market in the Dutch ports for their cotton, tobacco, and rice, which compose their staple commodities, whilst the people of this and the other northern states, are almost wholly deprived of their commercial privileges, and still doomed to see their Beef, Pork, Ashes, Lumber and every other article of exportation wasting, perishing on their hands, or compelled to send it to the Islands of St. Bartholemews, and Cuba, and suffer the loss of having it sacrificed in a glutted market at the will of speculators.
EMBARGO LAWS—NOT REPEALED.
As a report, which may prove injurious to the rights and liberties of the people, is circulating through the country, that the embargo laws are repealed, it is deemed important to call their attention to the late War Act, interdicting commercial intercourse with Great Britain and France, from which alone such report is grounded.—Read the act, and it will be found that those laws "as they relate to Great Britain & France or their colonies or dependencies or places in actual possession of either," are, with all their arbitrary tyrannical and unconstitutional provisions, yet in full force.
New-Hampshire Election. Tuesday last, the Election for State Officers was held in New-Hampshire, returns from 61 towns give Judge SMITH, the federal candidate 5718 votes, and Gov. Langdon, the tory candidate 6100. In the same towns at the election for members of Congress when the federal ticket succeeded by a majority of 3000, the votes were fed. 5134, tory, 5504. No doubts are entertained of the success of the federal candidate.
DEMOCRATS vs. DEMOCRATS. At a meeting of the Tories and friends of the embargo in Lewiston among other resolutions passed by these cut-throat geometry is one censuring the proceedings of the Legislature of this State in granting a state tax. These ignoramus would represent this as a party act when the truth is it was a unanimous vote. Democrats as well as federalists will receive this money for travel and attendance. If these seceders had censured their democratic rulers for appointing such a man as Thompson J. Skinner, whereby the Commonwealth is deprived of upwards of 58,000 dollars, there would have been some consistency in their conduct. The people of Massachusetts will remember that they are now paying interest at the Bank for 50,000 dollars, hired to meet the current expenses of the government which is in consequence of this democratic defalcation. If the democrats had retained a majority in the Legislature, this system of plundering the public money would have extended to hundreds of thousands, for every democrat voted for Skinner at the May session when it was generally known that he was a public defaulter.
The law for raising the Embargo partially—(every thing seems now to be done partially)—affords no relief to the citizens of the District of Maine—while the Southern States are enabled to dispose of their staples—Georgia, being bounded by a Spanish Province, will, through that Province, enjoy almost a free trade, while the towns on our eastern frontiers continue cruelly deprived of all commerce, and annoyed by a military force. By the non-intercourse system, the dealers in lumber remain without a market for that important article; and Congress have only raised them for a moment with false hopes, and dropped them again into misery and despair. The purchased city of New-Orleans is privileged, while our old territory, Eastport, is destitute of the common immunities of other towns in the Union.
[Palladium.]
Married,
In Wells, Mr. Isaac Pray, mcr. to Miss Martha Huggens, of Berwick; Mr. John Bourne, to Miss Joanna Bourne. In Saco, by the Rev. Mr. Whitcomb, Mr. John Bridges of Portland, to the amiable Miss Mary Floyd, of the former place.
NOTICE TO VOTERS.
THE Selectmen of the town of Portland give notice, that they have passed up a List of Voters in said town, at each of the following places, viz. At the Market House and Marine Insurance Office, at Mr. Freeman's Office, and at Mr. Burnham's Tavern in said Portland; and request that those persons who consider themselves qualified to vote, and whose names are not entered thereon, would give information thereof to any one of them on or before the third day of April next, at 8 o'clock, A. M. at which time, and until ten o'clock in the forenoon of the same day, and also on Saturday the fifth day of said month, from eight to ten o'clock, A. M. they will be in session at Mr. Freeman's Office in said town to receive evidence of their qualifications. SAMUEL FREEMAN, Chairman. March 18. [20]
TAKE NOTICE!
ALL persons indebted to the subscribers either by note or account are respectfully called upon once more to make payment by the 15th of May next, or they will be left with an attorney for collection after that date. J. & A. CARTER. March 20.
FOR SALE—AT S. Patten's Book-Store,
No 10, Jew's Row. 200 Ream's Writing Paper, first quality 200 ditto Wrapping Paper 30 gross Bonnet do. 10 ditto Press Papers TICKETS in Rhode Island Coal, and the 5th class Hatfield Bridge Lotteries. N. B.—Half of a House in a pleasant part of the town, to be let. March 20. [6w]
TAKE NOTICE!
THE subscriber having removed to Gorham, gives notice that his accounts are left at the store of Henry F. Duplee & Son No. 6, Mufley's Row, where those indebted are requested to call and adjust the same immediately. HENRY F. DUPEE.
FOR SALE,
A Schooner of about 40 tons burthen, the hull of which as well as the rigging, &c is in good repair and may be fitted at a small expense. For particulars inquire as above. Portland, March 20.
WANTED TO HIRE,
A GOOD FARM, situated 8 or 10 miles from Portland, with the Stock and Farming utensils necessary to carry on the same—by a gentleman formerly a farmer in Roxbury. For particulars inquire at the Gazette Office. March 20.
Maine Missionary Society.
THE Subscriber gives notice that he has been appointed agent for the Maine Missionary Society, and has for sale at his Store Middle Street, the PANOPLIST MAGAZINE, which will be delivered monthly to subscribers—also subscriptions are received for the above work. NATHANIEL CROSS. March 20.
For Sale, Freight or Charter.
THE Schooner COLUMBIA, eighty four tons burthen, high deck. She is a fine good vessel, having been thoroughly repaired, and well formed, and can be fit for sea immediately, at a trifling expense. She has good room for storage, and is well calculated for the southern or West-India Trade. —ALSO—
For Sale or to Let,
A brick Store, in Fifth-street, with a chamber and cellar, with a Dwelling-House adjoining, and may be had together or separate—inquire of THOMAS LEAVIS, No. 9, Jew's Row. Portland, March 20.
CODFISH.
FOR sale, 1000 quintals CODFISH, in good shipping order.—Inquire of ANTHONY FERNALD, Central-Wharf. March 20.
Travels in Spain.
JUST published, and for sale at the Book-Store of ISAAC ADAMS, Travels thro' Spain & part of Portugal, with Commercial, Statistical and geographical details. Illustrated with a modern map of those countries. "Half a word, fixed upon or near the spot, is worth a cartload of recollection."—Gray's Letters.
CONTENTS OF THE WORK.
CH. I. Arrivals at Barcelona; The Port; Cathedral; Custom-house; Theatre; Expenses of a journey to Valencia; The king's visit to Barcelona in 1802; Villas; Academy of Arts; Monjoich canon foundry; Palace of commerce CHAP. II. Road to Montserrat; Vale of the Llobregat; Martorel; Arch of Hannibal; Ascent of the Mountain; The Convent; Hermitages; A learned Spanish Monk; Modern Miracles; The holy Image; The Prince of the Peace; Feast of the Holy Ghost; Days of Indulgence; Officers of the Monks; Return through Tarragona to Barcelona. CHAP. III. Environs of Barcelona; Plain of Villa Franca; Roman Antiquities; Tarragona; Late Archbishop; San Carlos; Barran Track; Castle of Almenara; Plain of Valencia; Saguntum; Valencia The Theatre. CHAP. IV. Valencia; Its Buildings; Convent of San Francisco; Cathedral Archbishop; View from the Tower; Religious Concert; Corpus Christi Day; Processions at Valencia and Madrid. CHAP. V. Route to Madrid; Almazan; A new Ventadefert Country; Banditti; Lar Mancha; Country Church; Ocaña; Aranjuez; Approach to Madrid. CHAP. VI. Madrid; Heat Royal Armory; Plaza Mayor; Cabinet of Natural History; The Younger Foser; Theatre; Prince of Peace; Buen-Retiro; The Prado and striking Spectacles there; New Palace; Bull fight; Comedy of Lope de Vega; General View of the Metropolis. CHAP. VII. Sr Ildefonso; Old Castle, Segovia Cathedral; Alcazar; Aqueduct; Guadarama Mountains; Park of the Escurial; The Convent; The Casa Retre. CHAP. VIII. The Escurial and Madrid continued; Manners at Madrid; Commercial and Statistical Details of the whole Kingdom; Different Sketches of the general Manners of the Spaniards, and of the state of the Army, CHAP. IX. Road to Toledo; The City; Fonda; Lorenzo; Buildings; Eve of St. Peter; Organs; Treasures; Productions of the Province of Toledo; Climate; Travelling; Roads; Posts; horses; Lisbon; Ciutad.
SCHEME OF THE
Fifth Class of Hatfield Bridge Lottery. 1 prize of 8,000 Dols. 8,000 Dols. 1 do. 1,000 1,000 3 prizes of 500 are 1,500 100 do. 100 10,000 100 do. 50 5,000 125 do. 20 2,500 3500 do. 7 24,500 52,500 12,000 Tickets at Five Dollars each are 60,000 Dollars. Capital Prizes determinable in the following manner, viz. First drawn blank on the 5th day of drawing entitled to 500 dollars. do. 10th do. 500 do. 15th do. 1000 do. 20th do. 5000 do. 24th do. 500 The last drawn blank of every day's drawing entitled to 100 dollars, and also every fiftieth number on the last day's drawing (except the last drawn number which is provided for above) entitled to 100 dollars. Five hundred numbers will be considered one day's drawing, and the fortunate blanks determined accordingly. The drawing will commence, at Boston, on the twenty-fifth day of May next: after the fifteenth of said May, tickets in the hands of vendors, will be considered as retained at their risk, and rise to 5 dollars 50 cts. Tickets unsold may be returned to either of the Managers, Mellers, Gilbert and Dean, of Boston, or Mr. Isaiah Thomas, Jun. of Worcester. Prizes less than 500 dollars will be paid in thirty days; of 500 and 1000 dollars in sixty days; and the highest prize in ninety days after the drawing is completed, in current bank bills. Prizes not demanded in one year after the drawing is completed will not be paid. Tickets for sale by the Managers, and at the usual places. SAMUEL PORTER, } Managers. ELIJAH DICKINSON, } ISAAC ABERCROMBIE, } SAMUEL F. DICKINSON, } JOHN HASTINGS, Jun. } February 28, 1809. Tickets and Quarters in the above Lottery for sale by ISAAC ADAMS, No. 7, Fifth street. Prize Tickets taken in payment.
SALE BY AUCTION.
THIS DAY, at 10 o'clock A. M. at E. GREELY & Co. Office, without reserve, for Cash. SUPERFINE Broad Cloths—Kerseymeres—Silk Vesting—Satin—Silk Velvets—Camos—white and check'd Pocket Handkerchiefs—Morocco Shoes, &c. &c. —ALSO— 1 Pipe Brandy—4 hds. Rum, 1 Chest Hylon Tea—1 do. Hylon Skin, 1 Cask 20d Nails—1 Cask Bacon. March 20.
Equity of Redemption.
Cumberland, ss.—Taken on Execution, and will be sold at Public Auction, on the 21st day of April next, at 11 o'clock, A. M. at the office of E. GREELY & Co. Portland. ALL the right in equity of redemption in and to the following described, mortgaged Real Estate situated in Portland, containing four Acres, more or less, being one tenth part of all the dower of the Widow; Karenhappuch Brackett, situated between Maine-street and fore river, containing forty five acres, or thereabouts, as set off and assigned unto her out of the homestead of her late husband, Anthony Brackett, died (referencing thereof of said one tenth part one quarter or an acre, lying in the Northwesterly corner of said dower, now owned by Isaiah Thomas and Mary his Wife) being all the right and title of said Isaiah and Mary in the aforesaid dower (saving the reservation aforesaid)—also one other lot containing one tenth part of said—Karenhappuch Brackett's dower aforesaid, being part which fell to her as heir to her son Samuel Brackett, died—Also one other containing three fourths of one tenth part of the dower of the Widow Karenhappuch Brackett aforesaid—all in common and undivided. JOS. M. GERRISH, Deputy Sheriff. Portland, March 20, 1809.
To the Hon. Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in General Court assembled at Boston, on the last Wednesday in May, A. D. 1809.
HUMBLY, the subscribers, Directors of the Maine Turnpike Association, that by an act of the Legislature, passed March 8th 1803, the said Maine Turnpike Association was vested with the right and power to erect and make a turnpike road from the line of New-Hampshire to Portland, and the further right to erect and keep in repair such bridge and bridges as might be necessary on said route. That said Corporation has laid out and located a part of the route from Portland to the line of New-Hampshire, but before that part of the route so located can be fully completed a bridge must be erected from the bank of fore river in Portland, over the said fore river to Malams neck (so called) in Cape-Elizabeth and the expence of building said bridge will be so great, that no encouragement at present under the existing act is offered for erecting the said bridge, as the toll which the Corporation might receive now, provided said bridge was erected, would not be sufficient to keep the bridge in repair and of course be no remuneration for the large sum of money which must necessarily be expended to complete it. Your petitioners further beg leave to state to the Honorable Legislature, that repeated applications have been made by various persons to complete the most difficult parts of the route, for the toll now granted by the act of incorporation, but owing to the magnitude of the undertaking of building said bridge, and for merely the consideration of receiving such toll as is now granted, this part of the route is unfinished, and the residue of the same remains also unfinished. Your petitioners therefore, humbly pray, that your honors, (if on due consideration it should be thought expedient) would pass an act authorizing the Maine Turnpike Association aforesaid to receive such reasonable toll from those who may pass said bridge (when it shall be completed) with their teams, horses, carriages or otherwise in addition to the toll which they might now receive, were the bridge erected, as in their wisdom they may deem equitable.—And as in duty bound will ever pray. JOHN THRASHER, RICH'D. HUNNEWELL, HENRY F. DUPEE. Portland, May 1808.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
IN SENATE, FEB. 3, 1809. ON the Petition aforesaid, Ordered, that the Petitioners cause an attested copy of their petition, with this order thereon, to be published in the Eastern Argus and the Portland Gazette, printed at Portland, three weeks successively, the last publication to be thirty days, at least, before the second Wednesday of the first session of the next General Court, that all persons interested may then appear, and show cause (if any they have) why the prayer of said petition should not be granted. —Sent down for concurrence. H. G. OTIS, President. In the House of Representatives, Feb. 4th 1809. Read and concurred TIMOTHY BIGELOW, Speaker. A TRUE COPY—Auth. N. COFFIN, Clerk of the Senate.
THE Copartnership of Noyes & Robinson, House-Right, is this day dissolved by mutual consent. DANIEL NOYE. March 17. DANIEL ROBINSON.
THE subscribers being appointed by the Hon. Silas Lee, Judge of Probate for the county of Lincoln, Commissioners to receive and examine the claims of the several creditors to the estate of ROBERT DOW, late of Boothbay, deceased, represented intestate, and six months being allowed said creditors to bring in and support their claims, do hereby give notice that we will attend the business of our appointment, at the dwelling-house of William McCobb, Esq. in said Boothbay, on Monday the twenty-seventh day of March instant, and on the fourth Monday of the five following months, from one o'clock P. M. until five o'clock P. M. WM MCCOBB, JOHN M. FARLAND } Commissioners. Boothbay, March 10, 1809. (29)

Postscript. To the Editor of the Portland Gazette SIR—On perusing the Eastern Argus of 10th of February, I was surprised to observe a misstatement of facts in that paper, relating to a town meeting in Woolwich, held on the 8th day of said month. Although I am not influenced by any party spirit, I think it a duty incumbent on me, to rectify that misstatement.
A very severe snow storm, prevented a full meeting of the inhabitants on that day. Twenty-six freeholders only, met. They then chose a moderator, and a committee of five, the meeting was adjourned for a short time; at the expiration of which, they met again, and the committee made their report, by producing some resolves, expressive of their feelings on the present alarming and distressed situation of the country, and the causes which produced them—Also a petition to the Legislature of this Commonwealth, praying for redress of grievances. After some observations on the resolves, by a respectable gentleman on the opposite side, they were accepted, with the exception only of four dissenting votes. The votes in favor of the petition were unanimous.
The session was considered too far advanced to admit of adjourning to a future day, as the Legislature had been some time in session. The foregoing is a true statement of the proceedings on that day. If the editor of the Argus should doubt the veracity of the subscriber, he is at liberty to satisfy himself and the public, by applying to the moderator of said meeting. I am respectfully yours, M—R—, Town Clerk.
OBITUARY NOTICES.
DIED at Charleston, S C on the 19th ult Mrs. ELLA BOWNE, consort of Walter Bowne, Esq. of New York, and daughter of the Hon. Robert Southgate, of Scarborough, Maine aged 25 years.
The bereaved husband and infant children—the afflicted parents, brethren and sisters; and the numerous respectable friends and acquaintances, by whom she was so justly respected and beloved, for her talents and virtues, will deeply mourn this early, signal trophy of the king of terrors. But they will not "sorrow as those without hope." Her immortal spirit, liberated from the body, is, we trust, already admitted to a clear and perfect, an immediate and positive, a soul-transforming and eternal vision of God and the Redeemer.
Why the most endearing ties of nature should be dissolved, almost as soon as formed—why the dreadful law of mortality should be executed on the most worthy and dearest objects of conjugal, parental, and social love, in the moment of sanguine expectation of reciprocal enjoyment, is among the dark & mysterious questions in the book of providence. The ways of God are inscrutable to men; clouds and darkness are round about him, yet righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne." All afflictive events are readily resolved into the wisdom of God. To his sovereign will reason and religion, duty & interest, require us to bow with reverence.
What a dark and gloomy veil is spread, by the early death of our friends, over all earthly enjoyments!—How tenderly are we hereby admonished not to expect satisfaction in this empty, fluctuating, and transitory state!—How strongly urged to place our affections on things above—to secure an immediate interest in those sublime and durable pleasures, which flow from the service and favor of God, and the prospect of complete and endless felicity in his presence!
DIED at Buckfield, Me. on Thursday, 9th inst. Lieut. ALEXANDER THAYER, aged 38; and on Saturday, was interred, in Paris—Funeral procession proceeding from his late dwelling house, in the following order:—
Capt. Rawson's Company of Cavalry, under the command of Major Joel Robinson, of which Lieut. Thayer was a worthy and much respected officer. Lieut. Thomas F. Chase, Lieut. Samuel Rawson, Capt. William Ryerion, Capt. Seth Morse, Naj Eben. Rawson, & Col. Levi Hubbard, Mourners. Friends and acquaintance of the deceased.
If any thing can add to the disgust which all honorable and manly democrats feel at the folly and madness which have marked the proceedings of their Representatives in Congress, it must be the mean and slavish puffs which are so perpetually played off by the demagogues and scribblers of their party, on John Adams, J. Q. Adams, William Gray, and others—men, whom the same breath puffers have been in the continual practice for 15 years, until since the Embargo, of branding with every mark of guilt and reproach.—Whom they have an hundred thousand times proclaimed to be Tyrants, traitors to their Country, Apostates, Aristocrats, British partisans, royalists, the advocates of slandering armies, 3 per cent loans, alien and sedition bills, &c. &c.—In fine, let any man examine the Aurora , Chronicle , and papers of that stamp, during the twelve years Mr. Adams was in office; and he will see, that no epithets were too vulgar and degrading—no scurrility too coarse—and no charge of political crime too flagrant, to be lavishly bestowed on the Adamses —both father and son. As to Mr. Gray he was always held by them in derision; and never spoken of but with a sneer.—Yet, these men are now roared by these be-spatterers, as "upright patriots" distinguished through all trials and changes—and men of principle
and honor," because they have advocated an Embargo system; which its authors are obliged to abandon with shame; without effecting a single object for which they pretended it was imposed! Alas! to what pitiable depths will not party spirit and party despair descend!—Cent.
New Advertisement.
To the Honourable the Senate and the Honourable the House of Representatives, of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in General Court assembled. HUMBLY SHEWS, EBEN PREBLE, of Boston, in the County of Suffolk, merchant, that in the year one thousand seven hundred and sixty five, his father, JEDIDIAH PREBLE, late of Portland, Esquire, deceased, was proprietor of a lot of land, situate in Middle-street, in said Portland; and sometime afterwards said JEDIDIAH PREBLE sold the same to his son JEDIDIAH PREBLE, jun. who sold to JOSEPH BARBOUR, a part of said lot of land, (being the easterly part thereof as represented in the plan herewith presented.) In the year 1781, the said JEDIDIAH PREBLE, sen. intended to convey to your petitioner the residue of said lot of land, (also described on the plan,) but the person employed to make the conveyance, did not describe said residue, but referred for description to the deed of Arthur Godwin, and to that of E. Knight, to said JEDIDIAH, Senior, when, in fact, a part of the land, in those deeds described, was the same which had been sold by said JEDIDIAH, Junior, conveyed to said Barbour as aforesaid. This mistake was not then discovered, and the said Eben, went into possession of the land intended to have been conveyed, and has been in possession thereof ever since. The mistake has been very lately discovered, in consequence of an investigation of title, by a person who intended to purchase from him. The said Eben further represents, that the land so conveyed, by said JEDIDIAH, Junior, to said Barbour, and which said Barbour, and those claiming under him possess, has been built upon, and has become very valuable, and much more so than that part of the land which the said Eben has been constantly in possession of, and which was intended to have been conveyed to him by said JEDIDIAH, Senior. The said Eben further represents, that he cannot now have his title to said land, which was so intended to be conveyed to him, perfected by deed, because the said JEDIDIAH, Senior, died, leaving numerous descendants, some of whom are in Europe, and some in the southern States, and some of whom are minors; and that although the deed which his father gave him of the same land which had been previously conveyed to said Barbour, was recorded before the deed to Barbour was recorded, and although thereby the legal estate is vested in him, yet neither your petitioner nor the said JEDIDIAH, had any intention to have such estate vested in the petitioner.—Wherefore the said Eben prays, that a resolve may be passed confirming his title to the land which the said JEDIDIAH, Senior, intended to convey to your petitioner; provided he shall release all right and title to the lands which the said JEDIDIAH, Senior, conveyed to his son JEDIDIAH, Junior, who conveyed to said Barbour.
EBEN PREBLE.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In the House of Representatives, March 1, 1809.
ON the petition aforesaid, Ordered, that the petitioner cause an attested copy of his petition, with this order thereon, to be published in the New England Palladium and Portland Gazette , three weeks successively; the last publication to be twenty days, at least, before the second Wednesday of the first session of the next General Court, that all persons interested may then appear and show cause, if any they have, why the prayer of said petition should not be granted. Sent up for concurrence. TIMOTHY BIGELOW, Speaker. In Senate, March 1, 1809. Read and concurred. H. G. OTIS, President.
A true copy— Attest, N. CORBIN, Clerk of the Senate.
NOTICE!
THE Subscriber offers for sale his stock in trade, consisting of a good assortment of Cotton and Woolen Goods, &c. on very low terms for Cash only.
Those persons indebted are called on for payment; and reminded, that no excuse (as good times were not guaranteed by the subscriber) will be taken for longer delay—but all demands which are not paid in a very short time will positively be put in suit for collection. JOSEPH BARBOUR. Portland, Feb. 27. (tf)
William Goddard,
HAS received by ships Globe and Hannah from Liverpool, an addition to his stock of Hard-Ware Goods, which are offered for sale on the most favorable terms, by wholesale or retail. Portland, N. v. 7. (tf)
Joshua Shaw,
INFORMS his friends and the public, that he has removed from his former stand in Fifth street, to No. 1, Middle-street, where he has for sale a general assortment of
Hats, Shoes and Boots, suitable for Gentlemen, Ladies or Children, which he offers on as reasonable terms for cash, lumber, or country produce, as can be purchased at any store in town. Portland, Feb. 27. (tf)
NOTICE!
THE subscriber being about to close business in this place, requests all those with whom he has uncollected accounts to call and have them adjusted; and all those indebted to make immediate payment.
NEHEMIAH CRAM. Portland, Jan. 30. (8w)
N. B. The subscriber offers the remaining part of his stock, consisting of W. I. Goods & Groceries, at reduced prices for cash only. 40, L. 103.
TWO Chambers situated in Court Street—a convenient tenement for a small family. Apply to JOHN PHILLIPS. Portland, Jan. 30. (tf)
NEW PUBLICATION!
Citizens of New-England! READ AND JUDGE FOR YOURSELVES. JUST published, and now offered for sale, at the several Bookstores in this town, (price 12 1/2 cents,) a Political Pamphlet, being Reflections and Critical Remarks on the PRESENT UNHAPPY SITUATION of the United States; comprising a review of the Federal and Democratic administrations of the General Government, with a development of those causes and measures which have involved the country in great and general distress, and pointing to the citizens the course to be pursued in order to regain their former state of prosperity. "If we tell you the truth, believe us for the truth's sake."
NOW PUBLISHING,
By J. T. Buckingham, Winter-Street, Boston, THE ORDEAL: A Literary and Political Journal.
CONDITIONS.
THE ORDEAL will be published every Saturday Evening, each number containing 16 octavo pages, on handsome type and woven paper. Twenty-Six numbers will form a volume, the price of which to subscribers will be two DOLLARS. It will be delivered to subscribers in Boston on the day of publication, and to those at a distance by the earliest conveyance. None will be considered subscribers but such as pay for one volume at the time of subscribing; the paper will be sent to no person living out of Boston after his term of subscription has expired. All orders for the Paper must be addressed to the publisher, post paid. Liberal commission allowed to agents, who procure and become responsible for distant subscribers. Subscriptions for the Ordeal received at the Bookstore of ISAAC ADAMS.
The numbers which have appeared are highly interesting and entertaining, and the work is pronounced by good judges, well worthy of a liberal patronage. March 13.
NEW LAW BOOK.
To the Gentlemen of the Bar, and Justices of the Peace.
IN the Press and will next week be published by MUNROE, FRANCIS & PARKER, at the
State House Book-Store, No. 4, Corabill, Boston, Part I. of Vol. I. of a new work entitled, "A Compendium and Digest of the Laws of Massachusetts." By WILLIAM CHARLES WHITE, Counsellor at Law.
Miscellaneous notes, with just as much, and in a Nitidus.
In this work the compiler has presented a connected view of the Common Law (including the reported decisions of our Supreme Judicial Court,) and the Statutes of this Commonwealth. The subjects treated of are such only as have a direct and immediate application to the jurisprudence of Massachusetts. These subjects are collected under appropriate titles, and these titles are arranged in an alphabetical series.
That such a system, if well executed, is a desideratum, will not be denied. Our Statutes will thereby be rendered not only more accessible to the practitioner, but also more agreeable to the inquiries of the student. But there is, perhaps, no portion of the community who will reap such essential advantages from a work of this kind as JUSTICES or the PEACE. These magistrates have neither the leisure nor the inclination to peruse the expensive and bulky volumes of a law library; the consequence is, that many of them labor under embarrassment in deciding cases, not in any manner distinguished either for their novelty or intricacy. It is therefore confidently believed, that this useful class of magistrates will purchase a work calculated to facilitate a knowledge of the various and important duties incident to their office.
It is also hoped that this work may be found to be not unworthy a place in the library of the private gentleman. It will be comprised in 4 octavo volumes of about 400 pages each. It will be printed on a handsome paper, with a good type. It will be published periodically, in numbers; each number or half volume to consist of at least 200 pages; to be delivered to subscribers, in boards, at one dollar and seventy five cents a number: To non subscribers the price will be two dollars and twenty five cents a number.
The work is already in such forwardness that the publishers hope they will be able to present the public with a number every three months, until the publication is completed. A specimen of the work may be seen at the Book Store of ISAAC ADAMS, No. 7, Fifth Street—Portland, where subscriptions for this work are received. March 13.
POCKET BOOK
LOST, on Saturday last, between the Hay-Scales and Ebenezer Lord's Store, near Union-Hall, containing fifty five dollars in bank-bills; also, one note of hand for fifty dollars, with other valuable papers. Whoever has found the same and will return it with its contents to the subscriber, shall receive a reward of TEN DOLLARS. Gorham, March 9. WILLIAM BYER.
United Marine & Fire Insurance Company.
ANNUAL MEETING.
THE Stockholders of the United Marine & Fire Insurance Company, Portland, are hereby notified that their Annual Meeting for the choice of seven Directors for the ensuing year, will be held at their Office on TUESDAY the fourth day of April next, at 3 o'clock, P. M.—By order of the President & Directors, JOHN WATSON, Secretary. United Marine & Fire Insurance Co. Portland, March 13, 1809.
HENRY SMITH & CO.
Have for sale, No. 4, Middle's Row, SUPERFINE Blue and Black BROAD CLOTHS and CASSIMERES. March 13.
FOR SALE—1st
I. Richardson, Hds. and bbls. SUGAR, Barrels Mefs. No. 1 and No. 2 BEEF, Half barrels Mefs and No. 1 BEEF, Portland, March 13.
FOR SALE
By Samuel Trask, No. 6, Long Wharf, 850 Bbls. NEW BEEF 700 half barrels do do of different qualities. 20 half barrels NEATS' TONGUES. March 13.
FOR SALE,
THE Hull of a BRIG, about 150 tons burthen, together with a complete set of Malt, Spars and Blocks. Said brig is new, and built by a good workman, of the best materials. Her timbers are seasoned white oak—the high deck and handsomely drafted; has a patent windlass, and is particularly calculated for a fast sailer. Inquire of Huffey & Winlow, Who have for sale, wholesale and retail, Spermaceti OIL and CANDLES, of the first quality. March 13.
Day & Hiley,
ARE about settling their present line of business, offer for sale the remaining part of their stock on hand—consisting of Hds. of Rum—pipes of Brandy and Gin—Madeira, Cherry, Lisbon and Port Wine—Hds. barrels and bags of Sugar—bags and barrels of Coffee—cheeks of Tea—20 casks Rum—10 bags Pepper—casks of assorted Nails—a quantity of the best of Cheese—barrels of Butter—Hogs Lard—25 barrels Pork—Raisins—Currants—Almonds—Spices of different kinds—100 gin cases—90 Demijohns—a few crates of assorted white Ware—3000 gallons of Vinegar—Allum—Coppers—Brimsstone—Indigo, &c. &c.
Many other articles, all which will be sold at a discount from the cost, on a generous credit for approved Notes—Any person wishing to purchase the whole, or part may meet with a good bargain.—No goods will be sold in the store by retail except for cash only. Unless said goods are sold on or before the 10th of next month they will then be sold at Auction. —ALSO— 98 kegs of Butter, put up in shipping order 18,000 lbs. brown Soap. March 13.
TO BOARDERS.
FOUR or five gentlemen Boarders, may be accommodated with Boarding—For particulars, enquire of JOHN DEERING. Portland, March 13.
GLAZING
AND Repairing Compasses and Quadrants, will be carried on as usual at the subscriber's shop after the Embargo is off—unless a non-intercourse is established between his former customers and himself.—Application at present may be made to him at QUINCY & BAKER'S Store, Fore-street, where the smallest favours will be gratefully acknowledged. March 13. SAMPL M. QUINCY.
NOTICE.
JOHN FARWELL requests all those who have uncollected accounts with him, to call and have them adjusted as soon as possible, as he expects shortly to leave town. Portland, March 6, 1809.
BOARDING.
TWO genteel Boarders may be accommodated in a very healthy and pleasant part of the town—Inquire of the Printer. March 13.
FOR SALE,
IN North Yarmouth, near Broad Cove, a conveniently situated HOUSE-LOT, consisting of an acre and an half of excellent Land—with a commodious two-story Dwelling-House on the same.—Said stand is well calculated for a Trader or Mechanic, and is well accommodated with Water near the house.—For particulars enquire of DAVID STAPLES. North Yarmouth, March 13.
FOR SALE,
AN excellent FARM, situated in Paris, in the county of Oxford, containing upwards of 200 acres, with a house 56 by 28 feet, and a barn 42 by 32 feet—with a young orchard of about 200 apple trees, with other fruit-trees. Said Farm is so situated that it may be easily divided, and will make two convenient Farms. It contains as much as 78 acres of improved Land, well watered, and produces from 30 to 50 tons of hay yearly. The conditions will be one half down, the remainder made easy to the purchaser.—For further particulars, enquire of JAMES MORSE, on the premises. Paris, March 13.
TO BE LET,
HALF of a convenient DWELLING-HOUSE, situated in Free-street, on reasonable terms.—Enquire of WILLIAM GODDARD. Portland, Nov. 7. (tf)
A FARM FOR SALE,
IN the town of Falmouth, in the county of Cumberland, consisting of one hundred and five acres of land, of which thirty is Interval, and lying on Presumpscot River, and five miles from the town of Portland, and on the post road that leads from Portland to Augusta, and into many of the back towns. Said Farm is conveniently situated for a Public House with a large two story House, and Barn, with other houses. The soil of said farm is inferior to none. Ask—In said town, a Wood Lot, containing 60 acres.—Inquire of OLIVER WINSLOW, Oct. 17. (t.f.)
FOR SALT,
A ONE story DWELLING-HOUSE, with five Rooms completely finished on the lower floor, and one in the chamber, together with the lot of land it stands on, with an excellent well of water situated on Cumberland street, occupied by John Light—For further particulars apply to OLIVER EVERETT. Portland, Feb. 30. (6w)
Muffs & Pippets,
A. Cheever & Co.
HAVE REMOVED from their former stand to the store nearly opposite (formerly occupied by N. P. Parris) No. 1, Union Row, where is for sale, a large and elegant assortment, manufactured under their own inspection and warranted free from damage. They consist of every kind fashionable and useful, and will be sold cheaper than can be purchased elsewhere in the District of Maine, at retail or wholesale, as low as can be purchased in Boston.
HATS, they have of their own manufacturing, of every kind, which will be sold and warranted to give the purchaser satisfaction. Household Furniture. New Beds and Bedsteads, with a variety of Parlour and Kitchen Furniture. Cash given for hating & shipping Furs. Portland Jan. 30. (tf)
Factory Yarn & Thread Store.
JOSEPH POPE, informs his friends and the public that he is appointed Agent for Almy & Brown , of Providence, who will keep him constantly supplied from their long known & well established Factory, with a general assortment of Cotton Warp and Filling, White and colored Stocking, 2 & 3 thread, ditto ditto Thread in hanks and balls, Wick Yarn, Cotton Shirting and Sheeting, do. Check and Stripe, Bed Tick, &c. Which will be sold wholesale and retail at the Factory prices. Shopkeepers in town and country may be supplied on the same terms as at the Manufactory, by applying at No. 7, Muffey's Row. (6m) Dec. 19.
PORTLAND ACADEMY.
WHEREAS, Mr DAVIS has declined any further engagement in the Academy after the expiration of the present quarter, the Trustees give notice, that on the first of April next the Rev. WILLIAM GRAY will take charge of the Institution as Preceptor.
Those who wish to place their children or wards under his instruction are requested to make application to the Hon. SAMUEL FREEMAN, Esq. as heretofore.
Tuition, four dollars per quarter. Females will be admitted as formerly; and if a sufficient number should offer, a Preceptress will be procured to take charge of certain branches of their education, in a separate apartment of the Academy. By order of the Board of Trustees. ELIJAH KELLOGG, President.
FOR SALE,
A FARM in Cape Elizabeth, containing about 50 acres of land, well watered, and cutting 20 tons English and some salt hay, and having thereon a two-story brick Dwelling-House, a Barn 51 by 24, well finished, and other out houses. This Farm is very pleasantly situated, having a complete view of the Town and Harbor of Portland; it is also connected with the waters of Fort river and within half a mile of the contemplated Bridge to Malam's Neck. Terms will be liberal.—For further particulars, enquire of NATHANIEL FREEMAN. Cape Elizabeth, March 6, 1809. (tf)
Come and see.
AN excellent FARM for sale, situated in Falmouth, on the main road leading from Portland to Brunswick, in the Province of Maine, and within four miles of Portland.—Said Farm lies between New-Casco meeting-house and Presumpscot bridge within a few rods of each, and contains about two hundred acres by estimation, be the same, more or less. The house on said farm is large, commodious, and very pleasantly situated, commanding a fair prospect of the open sea at the entrance of Portland harbor, as also a very considerable part of that beautiful town.—The barn is 32 by 74 feet. Said farm is sufficient to produce hay enough for forty cattle, contains about eighty acres of good pasture, well supplied with fresh and salt water through the whole season, as it is bounded on the sea shore. It is an excellent seat for a house of public entertainment, and will beautifully accommodate merchants and mechanics with house-lots, in addition to that little near village, above the shipyard, which has already been sold off the farm. Within half a mile of the ship-yard are nearly twenty-five acres of perhaps the best white-oak ship timber in the whole town—Within one mile of the house lie twenty acres of land, well covered with wood and timber. Within two miles of the house, are about twenty acres of good land situated on the abovementioned high-way leading from Portland to Brunswick. There is also a valuable piece of salt-marsh, which produces from six to eight tons of hay in the year, within half a mile of the barn, which may be purchased with said farm.—Farming utensils of all kinds necessary to carry on said farm, may also be purchased. A view of the farm will afford its best recommendation. The terms of payment will be made easy to the fortunate purchaser. For further particulars enquire of DAVID MCGREGORE, of Bedford, N. H. or of ADAMS MERRILL, on the premises. N. B. Now or never; for the farm will doubtless be sold within three months. March 6. (3m)
TO LET,
CONVENIENT DWELLING-HOUSE, Barn &c. with about four acres of land, pleasantly situated, near Gosham Academy—possession will be given on the 24th inst.—For terms apply to DANIEL JOHNSON.
TO LET,
THE subscribers being appointed by the Hon. Silas Lee, Judge of Probate for county of Lincoln. Commissioners to receive and examine the claims of the several creditors to the estate of SAMUEL WOODWARD, JUN. late of Bristol, deceased, represented insolvent, and four months being allowed said creditors to bring in and support their claims, do hereby give notice that we will attend the business of our appointment at the dwelling house of R. Hutton, Esq. in said Bristol, on Monday the 13th day of February next, and the second Monday in the three following months, from one o'clock P. M. till five do. WM. CHAMBERLAIN, JAMES DRUMMOND, JUN. Bristol, Jan. 31, 1809. (FIS)