Portland gazette, and Maine advertiser (Portland, Me.), 1808-05-09 00:00:00

PORTLAND GAZETTE, And Maine Advertiser.
TWO DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
PORTLAND (MAINE) PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY ISAAC ADAMS, No. 7, FISH-STREET.
[PAYABLE YEARLY.]
No. 4, of Vol. XI.]
MONDAY, MAY 9, 1808.
[Whole No. 524.]
Interesting Correspondence.
Our readers will recollect that two letters from Col. PICKERING to Gov. SULLIVAN, together with Gov. S's reply to the first, have appeared in the Gazette. We have been favoured with Mr. Sullivan's second answer and Mr. P's reply to it: the former, follows entire—the latter will be continued as our room may permit.—The ample justice which Col. Pickering has done this very elegant and candid epistle of "his Excellency," renders a momentary glance necessary.
Gov. SULLIVAN to Col. PICKERING. BOSTON, 13th MARCH, 1808
SIR. I YESTERDAY had yours of the 9th instant. It was sent to me from the post-office. I had intended to have neglected your letters in the post-office, merely because I would avoid being drawn into an epistolary controversy by a man, who from his situation can better pursue it, and from his inclination and habits can better attend to it than I can: but the letter was brought by the post-boy, and I opened it.
I cannot but pity the chagrin with which the propriety of my conduct in returning unread, your former letter, has involved you. I will first notice your ungentlemanlike, insidious and even profane remarks on the proclamation I have issued for a day of publick fasting and prayer. Your professions to have read that production with pleasure can never be considered as founded in sincerity, while you are evidently attempting to disturb and subvert the devotion of all the men, who are engaged in commerce, of all who are engaged in the fisheries, and consequently of all who depend upon commerce for a market for the produce of their hands: and in fact to destroy the temper of mind, which as day has a claim to; and which the circumstances of the country afford to it.
When I invited the people to pray for a blessing on their enterprises by sea and land, I did not expect that this would be improved to urge them to sedition and rebellion against the government of the nation, if an embargo or any other restriction upon or regulation of trade should be deemed necessary as a measure of national safety, you cannot but observe that the introductory part of that draft is on general publick principles, and that our peculiar situation at this time is very slightly touched upon. Your temper, urged to an extreme by your disappointment at not having been favoured with a full publication of the majority of Congress, has carried you too far.
As to my treatment of your former letter in returning it unread, the more it is considered the more it must be approved. You, indeed, found your claim upon me as being the organ of your communication in your being a senator; but you will recollect that there is another senator from this state besides you, and that there are seventeen representatives. The world knows that your view of national affairs, and that of your colleagues are widely different: and that your sentiments would be directly contradictory to each other. We are unfortunate enough to know that there is among our representatives as great a variance in opinion, more especially on the subject of your letter, which I returned unread, the embargo. You acknowledge in your letter of the 9th, that all of them have an equal claim with you to make the governor an organ of communication; and you must confess, and if you do not, it is a fact well known that their statements of our national affairs, more especially as to the present embargo, would be widely different from yours and from each other. If the governor of this commonwealth was obliged to communicate what every member should direct him to do, what would be the consequence? Would he not transfer all the debates of the national legislature from Washington to Boston, where they would remain under fruitless inoperative discussion; where decisions could have no efficacy, and the means of correct information, and the voice of all concerned, as parties interested, must be excluded. Each state having the same claim, the national compact must cease to exist.
I have read your letter in print since I returned the manuscript. It was printed, I find, before I received it by the mail. Had I read it on receiving it, I should, independent of your extraordinary claim, have refused to lay it before the legislature of this state, as a public document. The communication from the governor of this commonwealth to its legislature, must be always of something which he believes to deserve their attention, and to be within their authority to act upon as a legislature. I do not conceive that your letter was within this description. It appears to me on reading it from the press, to have been a seditious, disorganizing production. The people of Massachusetts called me to the head of this state under the expectation that I should consolidate the commonwealth, and strengthen the national union and energy; I shall not, therefore, be made a tool of by you, for effecting directly opposite purposes.
If we are any thing, we are a nation under the organization of the general government. I will not waste time here to inquire whether that government is right in regard to the embargo or not. No government is always right. You may take it for granted, you please, that the embargo act was an error, yet it was a constitutional act. It was the exercise of a power which must, from the nature of things exist, in the national government. What then was your appeal from the sovereign power of the nation to the authority of one of the states for, but to disunite, divide, and dissolve the nation? Are you not one of the men who were
later so very vociferous against disorganization? If the senators of Massachusetts, when they happen to be in a minority in Congress, can appeal to their state, why cannot Rhode-Island, Connecticut, New-Hampshire, and those of the other states do the same? And where will this end but in an overthrow of the national government? This dissolution you will deny to be an object with you; but yet you will not deny that there is in existence such a character as Aaron Burr. You will not deny Miranda's expedition, or Burr's plot. You will not hesitate to own that several millions of dollars have been by them expended, or that more than half of it was expended by Burr, who had no money of his own. I do not call on you to say where this money was obtained; you do not know. But this you know, that success in that plot would have been the destruction of the United States, and that his plan would have divided the nation, and placed the northern part of it under the dominion of a foreign power. You certainly know, Sir, that the first principle in the social compact of a republick is, that the voice of a constitutional majority shall govern; the moment you depart from this practice, that moment you dissolve your government, at least as far as you depart from it. What then is the sum of all your labours, but an attempt to excite uneasiness, discontent, and divisions in the nation, because the minority of whom you happen to be one, cannot govern the majority in a great national question? If there ever was an attempt in its nature and consequences tending to rebellion and sedition, this is one. I write freely, Sir, the situation of the country demands it.
If the legislature of Massachusetts could, on the communication of even both its senators, jointly made, by the governor, as their involuntary organ, control the national councils in regard to our concerns with foreign powers, why should not the legislatures of each of the other states do the same? And does not this completely dissolve the national compact? Is this what you and your party are after? If it is, come forward and avow it openly, and we shall know where to meet you.
I request that this may close our correspondence. I have no time to waste in this way. I can gain the end of my political year as governor without your aid; and as a private citizen I want no information from you. I have already assured you that I will not be the organ of your communication; and I now assure you that I will not be the object of your address in matters evidently tending to the disorganization of the United States.
Your letters are evidently intended for the press. That of the 9th I apprehend was under the type before it reached me; and will be published before you have this. Why do you not send them immediately to the printer, and let me rest in quiet? We are wrong if we quarrel with our political existence. We are a nation; and tho' there were not a few who were fed daily on the publick rations that from timidity or some other cause, doubted the propriety of the declaration of independence, yet we shall now be wretched beyond description or example, if we divide ourselves among the European nations. We shall in that case fight their battles, and pay the expenses of their wars. We shall in each state have one or more tyrants for leaders, in cruel wars amongst ourselves. Look at Poland and other nations who have trusted in foreign protection. Indeed, Sir, let our national government be bad or good, we have nothing but that under God to save us from aggravated ruin; and yet your exertions appear to me to tend directly to its subversion. Instead of the insidious jealousies your letters are calculated to spread, you ought as a senator to express your mind freely on measures; and when there is a majority against you, you ought to submit until the strength of your calm reasoning shall bring them over; or circumstances and events shall point to your superior wisdom. This dictatorial temper cannot be indulged to any man; it is opposed to the first principles of the social compact.
I do not go into the question, whether the embargo act, which you make, or would make the apple of discord to set this commonwealth in an uproar against the federal government, is right or wrong; it is enough for me that it is a constitutional act of the supreme power of the nation. If it proves to be wrong on experience, the same power can repeal it.
Mr. Adams, your colleague, is quite opposed to you in his opinion of the embargo. He voted for it, and still considers it as a wise measure, and as a necessary one. I have his letters before me upon it. I know nothing peculiar in you, that ought to make your opinion the standard of my judgment, or the rule of this state; more especially when it appears to be intemperately set against the whole government of the United States.—I am,
Your very humble servant, JAMES SULLIVAN. The Hon. TIMOTHY PICKERING, Esq. a Senator in Congress, United States.
Col. PICKERING to Gov. SULLIVAN. CITY OF WASHINGTON, Apr 22, 1808. SIR,
SO much time has elapsed since your Excellency sent me your letter of the 18th of March, you may imagine that I have forgotten you. But for many reasons that letter demands my notice. It was evidently intended for the press, to promote your reappointment at the approaching election. But a review of the copy, replete with unsearchable calumnies and rudeness, probably satisfied you, or your friends advised you, that a publication of the whole might rather prejudice than promote your interest; and therefore you suppressed the
greater part. But fearing no charges which your Excellency has brought or can bring against me; and thinking it proper that the whole letter should be known; I shall publish it entire. Those who will be at the trouble to compare the paragraphs you have chosen to publish as extracts, with the letter itself, will see that they are so compounded, and with such alterations and additions, as to be, in fact, a studied imposition on the public.
In examining your letter, I observe many extraordinary passages calling for animadversion; but to notice all of them, would too severely tax my own, as well as the reader's patience. In my remarks, it may sometimes be difficult to adapt my language to the subject, without wounding the public sense of the decorum proper to be observed in a writing intended for the public eye. But it shall be my endeavour not to transgress that bound.
Your Excellency perceiving that doubt or disbelief had arisen, relative to your assertion, that you returned my first letter "unread," seems resolved, in your last, to remove all doubt, and to enforce belief, by repeating, directly or indirectly, five or six times that you did send it back unread. Now, a plain man, conscious of having told the truth, would have rested on a single assertion.
You suggest that the governor's communication to the legislature "must be always of something which he believes to deserve their attention, and to be within their authority as a legislature:" but that "you do not conceive that my letter was within this description." This opinion of my letter you appear to have formed since you acknowledge that you have read it. And how could you undertake to decide that point, as by your own statement you did, without reading it? Was it not possible, was it not probable, that in the actual state of things, the information it contained might afford matter proper for the consideration of the legislature of Massachusetts, relative to the embargo, which was peculiarly injurious to that state? Will your Excellency maintain the servile doctrine that as freemen they might not even take into consideration their grievances, resulting from the measures of their national rulers? May not the legislative body of a state make known to the national legislature the sufferings of the whole people of a state, as individuals exhibit their private wrongs? Is it lawful for legislative bodies only so far to interfere as to express approbation, and never, however forcible the call, their disapprobation of national measures, by making application for a change?
Has your Excellency forgotten that, during this very session of Congress, as governor of Massachusetts (and as you state, "with the unanimous request of its legislature,") you presented to Congress a strong memorial in behalf of some of the citizens of that state who had been purchasers of lands under grants from Georgia? And did the essential interests of all her citizens, deeply affected by the embargo, less merit the attention of your Excellency and the legislature than the claims of a small number of those citizens? Perhaps you will say that the legislature had already adopted resolutions approving of the embargo. True; and I approved for it on the supposition, very naturally to be entertained by the legislature, That the assembled wisdom of the nation, at Washington, would not have adopted so terrible a remedy but for evils of the greatest magnitude, which an embargo alone could avert. Now the great design of my letter was, to satisfy them that the embargo was not, in the national legislature, the offspring of wisdom: for wisdom cannot exist without knowledge: and I still affirm that Congress were not informed of any adequate cause for the embargo: and therefore, instead of implicit approbation, the embargo demanded examination, and perhaps a remonstrance, with a view to effect its repeal.
But you say "Mr Adams, my colleague, is quite opposed to me in his opinion of the embargo. He voted for it, and still considers it a wise measure, and a necessary one. You have his letters before you upon it." True—he did vote for the embargo; and I must now tell you your Excellency how he advocated that measure. It is not willingly, Sir, that I speak of him in an address to the publick. Though often opposed in opinion, on national measures, there has never existed for a moment any personal difference between us. But as you have now contrasted his opinion with mine, to invalidate my publick statements; you compel me to relate the fact.
In my first letter I informed your Excellency of the haste with which the embargo bill was passed in the senate. I also informed you that "a little more time was repeatedly asked, to obtain further information, and to consider a measure of such moment, of such universal concern; but that these requests were denied;" and I must now add, by no one more zealously than by Mr. Adams, my colleague. Hear his words. But even your Excellency's strong faith in the President's supreme wisdom may pause, while independent men will be shocked at the answer of my colleague to those requests. "The President (said he) "has recommended the measure on his "high responsibility: I would not consider. "— "I would not deliberate: I would act. "— "Doubtless the president possesses such "further information as will justify the "measure!" Need I give to your Excellency any other proof (though other proof abounds) of "blind confidence in our rulers?" Need I give further evidence of "the dangerous extent of executive influence?"—When the people of Massachusetts see a man of Mr. Adams's acknowledged abilities and learning advancing such sentiments; when they see a man of his knowledge of the nature of all governments, and of his intimate acquaintance with our
own free republican government, and of the rights and duties of the legislature; especially of their right and duty to consider, to deliberate, and according to their own judgment, independently of executive pleasure, to decide on every public measure: When, I say, the people of Massachusetts see this; will they wonder if a majority in Congress should be overwhelmed by the authority of executive retrenchment? And had I not reason to be alarmed at "the dangerous extent of executive influence," which to me appeared to be leading the publick mind, by its blind confidence, to publick ruin?
Without commenting on the very exceptionable language in which your Excellency has judged it not improper to indulge, in respect to my remarks on your proclamation for a day of publick fasting and prayer, I feel myself called upon to repel the charge, that my "professions to have read that proclamation with pleasure, can never be considered as founded in sincerity."—You, Sir, may affect to doubt my sincerity: but no persons acquainted with my life and conversation will suspect it. These persons know I am not a hypocrite in religion: and by this time I believe your Excellency is convinced that I am not a hypocrite in politics.—But, Sir, I must avow to you, that I am incapable of profaning any religious institution. With perfect truth, I repeat to your Excellency, that I did read your proclamation for a fast "with great satisfaction." And, I further assure you, that my friends here, delegates from Massachusetts manifested the like satisfaction: we all approved of the religious sentiments you expressed. But your Excellency knows, and the world knows, that such a proclamation may be issued, and other external marks of christianity be exhibited, and "the weighty matters of the law be omitted."
This leads me to another passage in your letter. Having refused to lay my letter before the legislature, you and your partisans have laboured for reasons as well to justify the refusal, as to decry the letter itself. Among other things, it has been reported to be "an electioneering letter." And your Excellency, as if to give your sanction to that report, has said, that my letter was printed before you received it by the mail.
If at a momentous crisis, to exhibit a plain, unvarnished tale of truth before the eyes of a people misled by the partial statements or misrepresentations of pretenders to republicanism and patriotism, be in itself proper, ought my letter to be censured as an electioneering project? Why do we boast of the freedom of the press, but for its usefulness, in a free country, to convey correct information to the people? Certain newspapers had long been the vehicles of misstatements and falsehoods, calculated to deceive the people. It was at such a time that I thought it my duty to come forward with a statement of the situation of our publick affairs—so far as we were permitted to know them—and to vouch for the truth of the statement with my name. I knew that this would disturb the hornet's nest, and put the insects on the wing; and that with increased venom they would dart at me their poisoned stings: but armed with truth, as with a coat of mail, I had nothing to fear from their attacks.
In your Excellency's letter to me of the 18th of March, you say, "I have read your letter in print, since I returned the manuscript. It was printed, I find, before I received it by the mail." Really, Sir, with all my previous information of your character, I was astonished at this declaration to me; and in writing under your hand, which will preclude all evasion; and when the falsehood of the assertion was of so easy detection. I will state the facts.—My letter bears date the 15th of February. On the 20th I put it into the post-office at Washington. In your letter of March 3d, you acknowledged its receipt on the 2d.—On the 21st of February I put into the post-office here; the copy of my letter of February 16th, addressed to a friend in Boston. This friend, in his letter of March 3d, acknowledged the receipt of that copy. He said also, that after waiting as long as decorum required, for a communication of it through the medium of the legislature; the press would give the letter to the people in a pamphlet.—A short address to the reader, prefixed to the printed letter, is dated at Boston the 9th of March—the very day on which I received at Washington your letter of the 3d.
But your Excellency was not contented with the positive assertion, that the letter was printed before you received it by the mail: you meant to induce belief in the assertion, by suggesting some ground for it. Your words are, "It was printed, I find, before I received it by the mail:" as if your Excellency had made a previous inquiry for the purpose of ascertaining the fact. And of whom would your Excellency, as a lawyer—of whom would any man of common sense, make the enquiry? Certainly of the printers who set their names on the title page of the letter: and if you had inquired of them, you would have found that it was not printed before you received it, nor until you had acknowledged the receipt of it. The facts which I have stated, demonstrate the impossibility of what you assert. This will enable every reader duly to estimate all your other evasions.
Your Excellency unquestionably intended to print the whole of your letter, and if, by a bold assertion, you could have satisfied the people that mine was printed before you received it, it would have countenanced the report of your friends, that it was merely an electioneering letter, and unworthy of credit. But reflecting afterwards on the certainty of detection, you concluded, to
keep out of sight the greater part of your letter, and particularly the part on which I am now commenting; hoping that, deterred by your extraordinary charges against me, comprehending those of exciting sedition and rebellion, I should not dare to publish it.
You suggest that I have perverted your invitation to the people to pray for a blessing on their enterprises by sea and land, and used (or to take your own word) "improved" it to urge them to sedition and rebellion against the government of the nation: That my letter appears to you to have been "a seditious, disorganizing production:" That it was designed "to disunite, divide, and dissolve the union:" That "the sum of all my labours was to excite uneasiness, discontent, and divisions in the nation:" That "if there ever was an attempt in its nature and consequences tending to rebellion and sedition, this is one:" That my "address evidently tends to the overthrow and dissolution of the United States as a nation:" And that, "Let our national government be bad or good, we have nothing but that, under God, to save us from aggravated ruin; and yet your exertions appear to me to lead directly to its subversion."
These are heavy charges; and your Excellency, though yourself a lawyer, would perhaps have acted prudently to have taken counsel before you advanced them. To answer and repel the whole—seeing you do not point to a single passage in my letter to support them—it might be sufficient to say, that they are all unfounded.—If my letter were "seditious, and disorganizing, and tending to excite rebellion"—it is very wonderful that your Excellency should have been the first and only person to make the discovery. If I needed any authority of opinion against yours, I could quote that of statesmen and lawyers of the first distinction in the United States, who have honoured me with their approbation and thanks. But however gratifying this unjustified praise of highly respectable individuals, I need not stop here. My letter is before my fellow citizens in Massachusetts: it is indeed before the nation: and the decided approbation of the thousands who have read it, demonstrates not only the extreme anxiety of the publick mind to obtain the information I gave: but that the facts stated carried conviction of their truth and importance, and justified my inferences. I say not these things boastingly: for I feel no other emotion than what every man must feel who aims to serve his country, and finds his labours have not been in vain.—Your reproaches, Sir, and the reproaches of other men like you, det. A. N. B. L. N. O. M. P. Q. R. S. T. U. V. W. X. Y. Z. Impedire outopari, Vindari etc. And let me assure your Excellency, that although this kind of praise will not make me vain, it will never make me angry.
I shall pass over your Excellency's doctrines of passive obedience, and blind confidence in our rulers; that the free citizens of the only remaining republick on earth, ought fiently to submit alike to a bad government and a good one; and that it would be a waste of time to inquire whether the embargo is right or wrong: only remarking, that avowing such servile tenets (now alike fashionable in France and Turkey, in respect to their despotic masters) you characteristically pronounced my plain history of the embargo, an attempt "to disunite, divide, and dissolve the nation."
I could fill a volume with just remarks on your Excellency's letter; but I fear tiring those who may take an interest in our correspondence; and therefore pass unnoticed many subjects of animadversion. But there are two prominent ones which I must not omit.
The first is a plain insinuation, of a nature to excite abhorrence, that I was done with Aaron Burr, in the conspiracy with which he has been charged! I now understand your Excellency's letter to me of the 24th of last January; which being remarkable for nothing but its absurdity, I had thrown by, and nearly forgotten—I had sent you the printed papers laid before the Senate, in the case of John Smith, senator from Ohio, accused of having been concerned in that conspiracy. Among the papers was the report of the committee in the case, drawn up by my colleague, Mr. Adams, the chairman; which, I remarked, "could not fail to attract attention; especially of gentlemen [like your Excellency] of legal information." And you must have observed, that it has attracted very great attention; as will every thing from the pen of Mr. Adams, whether it merit censure or applause.
After thanking me for the communication; which I thought would be interesting to your Excellency almost wholly on account of my colleague's report, you dash away in the following strain. "I have long been convinced, that Burr's expedition was the hand detachment of Miranda's; and both under a foreign influence: that both were intended to dismember the union, and to place the northern part of the United States, either civilly or politically, under the guidance of the British cabinet. There are many who co-operate in this project without knowing it. Burr must have had large funds. And I have no doubt but that a great part of it went from this northern hemisphere. The few who have our forms of government have had address enough to conceal their principles from their followers."
On such rodomontade, comment would seem to be thrown away. I certainly should never have noticed it, had not your Excellency, in your letter of March 18th, presented me with a new edition, with additions.
After suggesting that the tendency of my letter was to overthrow the national government, you thus adds me. "This disunion you will deny to be an object with you; but you will not deny that there is in existence such a man as Aaron Burr. You will not deny Miranda's expedition, or Burr's plot. You will not hesitate to own that several mil-
* The manuscript was received by us on the 5th, and the work expected to be published on the 9th—a few of the first copies however, were exported from us on the evening of the 8th. Greenough & Seckbins.
* A paragraph in the Chronicle of the 24th April, signed Cato, fully confirms the truth of the opinion of Col. Pickering—Esq.

tons of dollars have been by them expended... that more than half of it was expended by Burr, who had no money of his own. I do not call on you to say where this money was obtained; you do not know. But this you know, that there is in this plot what has been the destruction of the United States; and that his plan would have divided the nation and placed the northern part of it under the dominion of a foreign power." All this your Excellency advances with the assumption of profound political sagacity; and with as much apparent gravity as if you expected to be credited.
No one will be foolish enough to deny, what all the world knows, "Miranda's expedition" - unwarrantably commenced in this country, and defeated in the manner which is generally known, but not a man in the world, your Excellency excepted, will suppose that Miranda's object in landing three or four hundred men in South America, was to influence the United States.
If the object contemplated by Mr. Burr was to dismember the union, to detach the western from the Atlantic states, he must have known it to be altogether impracticable, without the general concurrence of the western people. He knew that some leading men in that country (all professing themselves to be republicans) had formerly contemplated such a separation; and had been intriguing with the Spanish government to accomplish it. It is now known that some of these men were pensioners to Spain. Is it not probable that Mr. Burr, in his visit to the western country, in 1805, conversed with men of influence there, who might be disposed to a separation? and that he milked their ideas of it for the sentiment of the people at large? and thence conceived the project of a separation to be feasible?
But instead of several millions of dollars being at Mr. Burr's disposal (which you have permitted yourself to say that I shall not hesitate to own - plainly insinuating that I know, and know as a partaker in his plot) every man of information, in the Atlantic states, knows that Mr. Burr's want of credit was such, that no person (certainly no federalist) could have been found to advance him, on his own security, even a small sum. But when he was in Kentucky, where his true character was not generally known, some of the inhabitants were surprised, as I have understood, into an acceptance of his bills, to the amount of forty or fifty thousand dollars, drawn on places where he had no funds to discharge them. And would any man, with several millions in his hands, resort to such dishonourable means to raise that comparatively trifling sum? But your Excellency has farther allowed yourself to say, not only that Burr had several millions (or more than half of several millions) at his disposal, but that you have no doubt that a great part of his large sums went from the northern hemisphere! as, with your characteristic perception you call the northern states. Is it possible for your Excellency to mention one solitary reason, or shadow of reason, that could induce federal men of property (for surely you would not implicate any of your own party) in Massachusetts, for instance, to advance a great part of several millions of dollars to any man, much less to the man whom they detested - as a Catiline, an unprincipled, profligate man - and for the purpose of detaching the western from the Atlantic states? This is such an absurdity as would expose any character of less weight than your Excellency's to derision. Yet absurd and incredible as it is, that Burr should have had several millions in his hands, you have proved yourself capable of insinuating that I knew where he obtained them!
That Mr. Burr, in 1806, formed some project injurious to the United States, I have no doubt. And yet the state of the country, the good disposition of the people, and his absolute want of means, presented such insuperable difficulties to the execution of a project so extensive as the dismemberment of the union, or the invasion of Mexico - that the conception of one or the other, by a man of Burr's understanding, could be accounted for only from a consideration of his forlorn condition. I think it was in January 1807, when at Washington, where Burr's plot almost engrossed the public attention, that in writing to a friend, in order to avoid the imputation of weak credulity, as to the existence of a project so manifestly impracticable, I thought it necessary to state the grounds of my own belief: such as, that Mr. Burr was a bankrupt in fame and fortune; that he saw the impossibility of ever retrieving either in the United States; while his ambition had no bounds; that whatever might be the issue of his enterprise, his condition could not well be worse: and that reduced to desperation, he might form the wildest projects; knowing, that if by any possibility he could succeed, he might again become an important man; and if he failed, that he might be eased of a life which a man of his aspiring mind, reduced to poverty and destitution of power, might consider worse than death.
Such, Sir, was my view of the man and his project with which you have the temerity to insinuate that I was connected! A man who I believe could so easily accommodate his principles to his ambition! A man to whom as President of the Senate, I had, indeed, manifested the usual civilities demanded by our relative official situations; but from whom I had withdrawn, during his last year's presidency of the Senate, at personal regard. Yes - I had purposely withheld my hand from him, then reeking with the blood of the murdered Hamilton.
Hear me farther. A few days before the close of the same session of Congress, a bill was brought into the Senate, to grant to Mr. Burr the privilege of sending and receiving letters and packets by the mail, free of postage, during life. Mr. Burr was in the chair; and his presence is imposing. Nevertheless, the bill was opposed. The opposition was begun by Mr. Hillhouse and myself. But the bill was passed in the Senate, by a majority of 16 to 13. In the house of representatives it failed at once, by an indefinite postponement.
And yet, Sir, with this man, thus detested, and finally withheld to the face, in a favourite measure, which by me as one of the p-l-offices would have facilitated his projects, whatever they were, and perhaps even then in contemplation - with this man you were desirous to have it believed that I was an associate! - What language of reprobation would be too strong for such injustice to my character? Doubtless you intended that the people of Massachusetts, and of the United States, as far as your letter should travel, should believe, or at least suspect, that I was concerned in Burr's conspiracy! For whoever reads your whole letter will see that it was designed for the news-papers; but your own reflection,
or the advice of friends, restrained you from the publication of a part. One word more. You say that success in your plan would have divided the nation and placed the northern part of it under the dominion of a foreign power. Will your Excellency have the goodness to inform the people of Massachusetts, and of the United States, how a separation of the western states would have placed the northern states under the dominion of a foreign power? To men whose minds have the ordinary powers of discernment, this is quite incomprehensible. Who but your Excellency would have imagined that such a separation would induce the Atlantic states further to diminish their strength, by a division into a northern and a southern section? On the contrary, would not the northern and the southern states then cling more closely together? These are the thirteen United States, which, with half their present population, dared defy the power of Britain, and finally achieved their independence. Where, then, is the danger, of their being now brought into subjection by the same power? [TO BE CONTINUED.]
Tenth Congress..... 1st Session.
In Senate, April 19, 1808. The additional Embargo Law (No. 4) passed to be enacted. - Yeas 21. Nays 5. - The nays were Messrs. Goodrich, Hillhouse, Mitchell, Pickering and White. In the debate on this bill, Mr. Adams advocated the restrictions on the Coasting Trade ; and observed on the probability that before the 1st November, France or England would declare war against the U. States . If the great object of the Embargo Laws is the preservation and protection of our shipping and seamen ; what necessity can exist for destroying the Coasting Trade , in which no risks can be run; and the interior trade in which neither is employed? Do give us an answer, Messrs. Embargomen .
APRIL 21. Mr. Adams, from the committee to whom was referred the petition of sundry inhabitants of Boston , praying liberty to export a quantity of dry & pickled fish which they have on hand made the following REPORT: -
"THE petitioners represent that they have on hand a large quantity of dry and pickled fish, which unless exported before the summer heats, will be liable to perish. And they state the peculiar hardships to which they will be liable under the operation of the embargo, by the necessary destruction of their property, while the rest of the community will be effected only so far as to interrupt their customary commerce.
"The committee perceive and regret the extraordinary pressure with which this important national measure must operate upon those citizens who hold perishable articles for exportation. But as this is not exclusively the case with the petitioners, but extends to many other classes of citizens, and to other articles of exportation, and as both Houses of Congress have recently manifested the determination of adhering to the general policy of the embargo, for the present, as the only remaining hopes of the nation, for averting the more aggravated evils of war, the committee do not perceive any admissible principle upon which the prayer of the petitioners can be granted.
"As however a conditional power of suspending the embargo, in whole or in part, and under such restrictions as may be found necessary, has been given to the President of the United States, to be exercised during the recess of Congress, the committee believe that if any circumstance should occur, which can justify a relaxation of the embargo, in any respect, the case of the petitioners will be among the first entitled to consideration and relief."
The intelligent reader will not fail to remark, after perusing the above, the "twistings and turnings" of the inveterate authors and abettors of the Embargo, in their attempts to bolster that worse than unnecessary and ruinous measure. - When it was first adopted, all the pens of retainers of the Administration were employed in describing it as a " strong measure ," the object which was to coerce foreign powers, to a compliance with our demands; and if it failed to do this, it was to prove a leading article in the case of War Preparation; and in consequence, these retainers almost made themselves hoarse in bawling out War Inevitable , and calling upon " Israel to take the field and encamp ." Finding they had set the tune too high, and that the people would not carry it out, the pitch is lowered; and now the dear Embargo is characterized as a mild measure , and as " the only retaining hope
of the nation for averting the more aggravated evils of War!" Fic, fic, on such time-serving trimming.
From Washington, April 23. "The debates of yesterday evening, and this day, have been of so tumultuous and defultory a nature, as to render it impossible to give any regular account of them. After stating the result of what little public business was done, I shall select from our papers some of the remarks of members, which although unconnected, may afford amusement, if not information to your readers. On the force of business then: The Supplementary Embargo Law, (No. 4) has passed the house with three amendments, one of which authorizes the Collectors, in cases where any unusual deposit of provisions, lumber, or other articles of the growth or manufacture of the United States, are found, to take the same into custody and to detain them, until bonds with surety be given for their delivery at some port or place within the United States - The second amendment secures to the Indian tribes their usual fur trade; the third amendment allows vessels from the southern ports to pass laden northward, without being compelled to reland their cargoes, in order to give accommodation as fore vessels.
"The bill, authorizing and requiring the President to equip and prepare for service the frigates and other armed vessels of the United States, was the principal subject that occasioned the tumultuous proceedings alluded to. The final question was taken this afternoon at 3 o'clock, by postponing the bill indefinitely.
"Extracts of debates from the papers. "Mr. Randolph moved to dispense with the reading of the bill authorizing the President to equip the U. S. ships of war, &c. The speaker considered this motion out of order, and read part of the bill, when Mr. Nelson appealed from the decision of the chair, and demanded the ayes and noes. The house refused to take the ayes and noes. Mr. Garnet moved an adjournment, which was negatived. Mr. Randolph spoke some time against the decision of the chair, Mr. Holland then moved an adjournment, on which the ayes and noes were called and returned. The adjournment was negatived - 37 to 39. Mr. Macon and Mr. Pitkin supported the decision of the chair, and Mr. Randolph opposed it. Mr. Randolph spoke against doing business in the night, without calling the ayes and noes, and when it was so dark that the members could not be correctly counted. He disliked this mode of slurring the business of legislation; important bills were agreed to in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, and sent up stairs to the senate before one could lay Jack Robinson. Mr. R. concluded his speech by moving to adjourn, which was negatived 29 to 47. Mr. Nelson observed that he did not wish to embarrass business, and as he had never been himself any great stickler for order, he would withdraw his appeal from the decision of the chair. The bill being read through, Mr. Stanford moved to reject it. Mr. Nicholas immediately moved to adjourn which was agreed to - ayes 59. The house was quite disorderly and tumultuous throughout the session. The speaker often suspended business to preserve order and decorum in the house; but his admonitions seemed to produce little effect.
COASTING TRADE. "A letter, from Washington, of the 22d April, states, "that the new supplementary Embargo law, as amended by the House, renders the Coasting Trade so difficult that it will not be of much worth - Among other new sections are, that no clearance shall be allowed from one district to another unless the lading is under the inspection of a Revenue Officer; and 2dly, Collectors are to detain vessels laden, if he suspects [& may not our Collectors suspect anything] the object is to evade the Embargo, until the will of the President shall be known. The real object appears to be to entirely break up the Coasting trade; and they would now do it, if they dare. Many of the majority, in conversation, say they wish to do it, and would vote for such a proposition, if it were brought forward,
THE FRUITS OF PATRIOTISM.
Communication from Washington, Saturday April 23. "You know that a brother in law Stephen Roe Bradley, president of the late grand caucus, has been appointed a secretary in the Michigan territory. I have to relate other instances in which devotion to the executive magistrate has met with its due reward. James Witherall, a member from Vermont, who has all this session voted through thick and thin to support the executive, and who was also one of the caucus men, is appointed judge in the Michigan territory. Benjamin Park, delegate from the Indiana territory and a caucus man also, has been appointed a judge in his own territory, to supply the vacancy occasioned by the death of the celebrated Mr. Davis from Kentucky.
"But you have yet to learn a more flagrant instance of the advantages of patriotism. The house of representatives have passed a bill, purposely to accommodate one of their members, who had the modesty to stand up in his place and solicit the boon from the house. Mr. Cutts, of Maine, stated that he had a ship lying in Carolina, which was partly laden, when the embargo was imposed. He wished for leave to navigate the ship to the northern states, without being compelled to land the cargo, as he would be by the former embargo laws. Mr. C. being a good democrat and a brother in law of Mr. Madison, the house very readily
granted the indulgence, and an amendment was yesterday introduced into the supplementary embargo law in order to suit this particular case, and Mr. Cutts' name stands recorded in the journal among the ayes who voted for this bill. A quere for the flaxseed merchants. If the honorable Mr. Cutts had had a ship loaded with flaxseed, would not your memorial to congress have been treated with a little more respect? Might it not possibly have been granted! O! what a fine thing it is to be a patriot in these times!
CONGRESSIONAL AMUSEMENT
The United States Gazette, in announcing the last days proceedings of Congress, gives the following pleasant statement of political trifling.
"Mr. Bibb, (Geo.) introduced the following resolution, which he hoped would be unanimously agreed to.
"Resolved, That the Members of the House of Representatives will appear at their next meeting, clothed in the manufactures of their own country.
"Mr. Macon, (N. C.) would never agree to a resolution which they could not enforce. Congress have nothing to do with this subject. He could not conceive what effect this resolution could have. If it was intended as a pledge, he was not willing to give it; if to have force he denied their authority to enforce it.
"Mr. J. Rhea, (Tenn.) said, if the House adopted the resolution, he should pay no regard to it. He would appear in what clothing he chose, this resolution to the contrary notwithstanding.
"Mr. Epps, (Virg.) admitted that the resolution could have no force; it was intended to express the feelings of the House. He should rejoice to see every member of the house and every man in the nation, clothed entirely in the manufactures of this country. It would establish an independence of the best kind. The proposition was a valuable one, and he wished to God that the ladies could be placed in a situation to adopt a similar resolution. If he were to appear in the manufactures of his own state, he must be confined to a homely garb; but if the resolution passed, he would before the next session, have cloth manufactured for his use in his own family. Mr. E. calculated that a million of men in the United States wore broad cloth coats, and if they were all manufactured in this country the saving would be immense.
"Mr. Macon, did not conceive it fair that those who like him had no wives at home to make them coats, should not only be reproached for their misfortune, but pointed at as sinners. He had during this session bought himself a suit, but he was not able to obtain American manufacture. His friend from Maryland, (Mr. Nelson,) had procured him a hat, and that was all that he could obtain of American manufacture. As to the ladies, if they were to legislate on the subject, he did not believe that the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Epps,) fond as he is of the ladies, would persuade one in the house, or in the nation, to agree to such a resolution. Had I a wife, I should be willing to see her dressed to her own satisfaction. The ladies have a right to dress as they please, and he did not care who knew it. The gentleman from Virginia reminded him of a neighbour who used often to say, O, how rich we might be, if it was not for the expense of eating and cloathing!
"Mr. Bibb, said he had hoped that the resolution would be at once adopted unanimously. He did not wish to provoke debate, and therefore withdrew his resolution.
"* During the debate the western gallery was crowded with ladies. When the resolution was withdrawn, a member had prepared and was about to offer an amendment, "that during the recess, no member should either eat or drink any articles except the growth or produce of the United States."
On the evening of the last day of the late session of Congress, (and only one hour before the adjournment) Mr. Randolph asked, and obtained leave of absence. Previous to his leaving Congress Hall, he went round, and in the most impressive and affectionate manner, shook hands with each without a single exception, the speaker continually calling him to order, which however, had no effect on Mr. Randolph.
N. York Gaz.
Gratitude of Republics. - On motion of Mr. Nelson, the House of Representatives on Monday last, went into committee of the whole on the bill for the relief of infirm and superannuated officers and soldiers of the army of the United States. After about ten minutes spent thereon, the committee rose, reported progress, and the House refused to leave to sit again. Thus the bill is lost - Huzza for Jefferson and the Republic! - New-York Spectator.

Late Duels.
NEW-YORK, APRIL 19.
A duel was fought yesterday evening about sun set, near Pawles Hook between Dr. A. B. Ford and Anthony V. Denton, lately of the U. S. Navy. They exchanged 7 shots, 4 at 7 paces distance, 2 at 5, and 1 at 3 paces. The former at the 3d and last fires received slight wounds in the leg and arm, when the battle ended. It is said the contest originated in a political dispute.
FROM A VIRGINIA PAPER.
Duel between Mr. Burke and M. Coquebert. The causes which led to a misunderstanding between M. Coquebert and the deceased, and which finally produced so distressing a catastrophe, were of a political nature. In a conversation at a public table, sometime during the last week, as we are told, the subject turned upon the letter of the French Minister, Champagny, to Gen. Armstrong, lately published. The deceased expressed himself with considerable warmth—reprobated the conduct of the French Government towards the U. S. and painted in strong colours the insolence of its Ministers. M. C. being a native of France, conceived himself individually assaulted by the words uttered, as well as insulted by the epithets applied to his nation and government. He demanded an explanation of the object of the speaker. Very few words however passed between M. C. and the deceased. The explanation required was not given, and the former in a few moments left the room. Soon after a challenge was sent by M. C. which was accepted, and early on Monday morning the parties, with their seconds, met in a field adjoining the town. On the first fire M. C.'s pistol snapped, and Mr. B.'s was discharged ineffectually. The second fire proved decisive. M. C.'s ball passed through the heart of his antagonist, who expired without a word or a groan. Mr. B. had a very splendid funeral. We have not heard of the arrest of the Frenchman. Burke was of the democratic party—and formerly edited a paper on that side in Boston, and afterwards one at New-York.
A young rattle-headed fellow, who has the honor to conduct a branch of Duane's Aurora in Baltimore, has taken up three queries which I gave you a few days since, and has headed them "shocking mockery." For my part I know the whole business to be a shocking mockery , for the bones of the dead which have slept thirty years in peace, to be raked up to inflame the people and to answer electioneering purposes, can be called nothing less than shocking mockery . But as this young fellow has thought proper to give three replicatory interrogatories , I shall here give three questions in rejoinder.
1st. Have the bones in question been bleaching on the "sea-beaten shore" for thirty years past?—2d. If they have, is it any "enviable honor" to the citizens of New-York, "whether of American or foreign birth," to have their neglect of those bones sounded throughout the world, and to put words into the mouth of the scoffer to this effect, "if it had not been for party spirit, the bones might have been bleached there to the day of judgment?"—And 3d. Can such consummate hypocrisy as is displayed in the case of these twice murdered victims, have any termination but a tragical one ?— N. Y. Spectator.
NOTICE.
ROBERT STRONG , having taken a partner in trade, business in future will be conducted under the firm of STRONG & QUINBY , who have received a fresh supply of GOODS in their line:—viz. Brands of the first quality; Gin; Old Jamaica Spirits; Claret Wine; English and American Porter; Wines of the first quality, and a general assortment of groceries. Cider per bbl, or in bottles of superior quality for shipping or family use; Vinegar per Pipe or smaller quantity. ROBERT STRONG, LEVI QUINBY. Portland, April 26, 1808.
TO LET.
FOR one year, if applied for soon, that noted Farm lately owned and improved by George Peirce, Esq. deceased, situated on the westerly side of Long Pond, in Otisfield, and on the high road leading to the interior of the country; together with the large and commodious house standing on the same, with two barns, a convenient store, and other buildings, the whole being in a complete state of repair, and is as good a stand for a tavern and keeping a store as the country affords, having been improved for both those purposes. For further particulars apply to either of the subscribers in said Otisfield. OLIVER PIERCE, BENJA. PATCH. April 22.
WET NURSE.
A YOUNG Married Woman, who has lost her infant, wishes to take a Child to nurse,—Enquire of the Printer. April 18
Charles & John Fox. No. 4 & 5, South Side Long-Wharf. OFFER for sale on very liberal terms Eleven Pipes excellent GIN, Few dozen Warranted SCYTHES. Wanted a good New Milch Cow. Enquire as above. (6w) May 2
Partnership Formed. THE subscribers inform their friends and the public they have formed a connection in business under the firm of Griffin & Porter, which commenced on the 3d of February last They intend keeping a large and good assortment of BOOTS & SHOES, of the newest fashion, which will be disposed of at the lowest cash prices.—The least favor will be gratefully acknowledged BENJAMIN GRIFFIN, JOSEPH S. PORTER. May 2. tf
Particular Notice! ALL persons having accounts open with the subscriber are requested to call and settle the same (by Cash or Note) without delay. BENJAMIN GRIFFIN. May 2. (2m)
NOTICE! ALL persons indebted to the estate of the late capt. Jacob Adams , are requested to call at the office of Stephen Longfellow, jun. Esq. and have them adjusted immediately; otherwise they will be put in suit. SAMUEL ADAMS, Administrator on said Estate. May 2.
Portland Academy. THE Trustees of the Portland Academy in the county of Cumberland, are notified that their annual meeting will be held at the subscriber's office in Fifth-street, (Janet's Row) on Tuesday, the 10th day of May inst. at four o'clock P. M. GEORGE BRADBURY, May 2. Secretary.
CHAISE FOR SALE. FOR sale, very cheap, handsome and well built CAISSE, with plated Harness complete, not two years old.—Enquire at this Office. May 2.
TO LET. A Convenient two story DWELLING-HOUSE, situated on Back-Street—for terms apply to THOMAS SANDFORD. May 2.
TO LET. ONE half of a large and convenient three Story DWELLING HOUSE, very pleasantly situated on Back Street at the head of King Street; lately occupied by Mr. Adams, Printer of Portland Academy. ALSO—A very convenient two story DWELLING HOUSE, situated on Fore-street, next door to Mr. Chadwicks Tavern.—For particulars enquire of JOSEPH CROSS JR. No. 16, Long-Wharf. May 2.
Bowdoin College. THE Trustees of Bowdoin College are notified, that their next meeting will be held at Brunswick on Tuesday the seventeenth day of May next at ten of the clock in the forenoon. CHARLES COFFIN, Sec'y. Brunswick, April 27, 1808.
To Sell or Let. A Two story DWELLING HOUSE, with out Houses situated on Federal and Fiddle Streets with a good Garden. For terms apply to Capt. SAMUEL COLBY, near the premises or Wm. COBB, Gorham. 5ib Mo. 2d.
Take Notice!! ALL persons indebted to the estate of GEORGE PIERCE, late of Otisfield, Esquire deceased, are hereby informed that unless payment shall be made to the subscribers, or J. D. HOPKINS Esq. their Attorney, on or before the thirty first day of May next, the demands will be put in suit without further notice. For the accommodation of those who are indebted the subscribers will attend with their Attorney at the Dwelling-house of the deceased on the said 31st of May, and on the first day of June next. OLIVER PIERCE, BENJA. PATCH. Otisfield, April 29, 1808.
COME AND SEE! AN excellent FARM for sale, situated in Raymond, in the county of Cumberland, on the country road leading from Portland to Otisfield, Waterford, &c. containing 100 acres of as good Land as any in the Province of Maine, with two good new Houses and a barn thereon, and upwards of three hundred apple and other good fruit-trees thereon, and is under good improvement—is a good stand for 2 mechanics or a farmer.—Also, one other good FARM, with good buildings and a young orchard—will produce upwards of twenty tons of English Hay annually, and capable of large improvements at a very small expense. Also—One other new Farm, which will produce about 6 or 7 tons of English Hay, with about 10 acres more that is fell; intended for corn or grain the present year—with a very fine privilege for a Saw and Grist mill thereon, with the Frame, Irons and Running-gear for a Saw-mill, complete, near the spot. The last mentioned lot contains 100 acres of excellent soil. Also—Several Lots of unimproved Land, with a quantity of Pine-timber thereon. All the abovenamed Farms and Lots except the first, are situated on or very near Crooked river (so called) in said Raymond, and on a country road.—The above lands will be sold on very reasonable terms, and payment may be made very early, as a great part of it may be paid in West-India Goods, neat stock, country produce, or even in Bank-bills, if genuine.—For further particulars inquire of LEWIS GAY, or I. MARCH GAY, on the two first mentioned premises. Raymond, April 4.
Factory Cotton. Henry Smith & Co. No. 4. Muffey's Row, HAVE for sale a large assortment of factory, Wharp and Filling, and two threaded whitened Cotton. July 13, tf
Henry Smith & Co. No. 4. Muffey's Row, HAVE for sale a large assortment of factory, Wharp and Filling, and two threaded whitened Cotton. July 13, tf
FRESH GOODS. Tappan & Sewall, HAVE received by the Sally from Liverpool, Manchester and Scotch Goods, which will be opened for sale in a few days at their Store in Tufts's Buildings, Middle-Street. Among them are Umbrellas, Braces Dimities, Patent Nankeens Thicksets, Velveteens, Jeans, Printed Jeans and Princes' Cord Sarpuetted Calicos, Shawls Cambric and Book Mullins, and A great variety of Fancy Mullins. On hand—A large assortment of Fine and Superfine Broad Cloths Kerseymeres, Stuffs, Baizes, Flannels, Colrain Linens—few Brown Linens British Cottons, Prints, Hosiery, Shawls—a few 6-4 fine twill'd Cambric Cotton Bandannas; Madras and other Handkerchiefs, India Cottons, Pins, Sewings, Silk and Cotton, Twists, Laces Gloves, Suspenders, Bindings, Plain and fine Parfint Gauzes, Cales Windsor Soap &c. They expect further supplies from London. May 2.
Charles & John Fox, No. 4 & 5, South Side Long Wharf, OFFER for sale, on liberal terms 6 tons round Iron 1 do Plough-Share Moulds 10 do Nail Plates, 50 Bbls clear, navy mfs and No. 1, Pork 50 do first quality Ship Bread 50 bags stowed Liverpool Salt 20 tons Liverpool Coal 200 quintals Cod-fish ALSO—A complete assortment of Ship Chandlery and Cordage, as usual. (6w) April 11.
TAKE NOTICE! FOR sale in Turner, a Dwelling House, out houses and Store, conveniently situated for a Trader, being the property of Samuel Spear of Bethel.—For further particulars enquire of the subscriber in Portland. Oct 12 EZEKIEL WHITMAN.
NOTICE! FOR sale in N. Gloucester, at the lower corner, the Dwelling house, Office and Store belonging to the estate of Asa Mitchell, Esq. deceased being an excellent stand for a trader as the Country affords—The whole will be sold at private sale on a liberal credit of several years if required, the interest being paid annually.—For further particulars enquire may be made of the subscriber in Portland. Oct. 12. E. WHITMAN.
PARTICULAR NOTICE. WANTED a Young Man of correct habits, to attend in a Small Family. Such a one may find encouragement by applying to the printer. (6w) April 11.
TO BE SOLD, A DWELLING-HOUSE, forty feet by thirty-two, two stories high, with a commodious Stable and other out-buildings, with about half an acre of Land, situated near the bridge in Topsham, accommodated with excellent water by Acqueduct from an unfailling source, which abundantly supplies the house, stable and garden in the driest seasons. The house has been built about ten years—the other buildings not three years since. They stand in a flourishing village, within one mile of Bowdoin College, in Brunswick and about sixty rods from the Court House in Topsham. To a person who wishes to be concerned in the lumber business, to the trader or industrious mechanic, the opportunity to purchase a good stand, may be worthy attention. Further information may be had of the subscriber at Bath. JONA. ELLIS. April 25. (4w)
WE the subscribers, Commissioners appointed by the Hon. Samuel Freeman, Esq. Judge of Probate for the county of Cumberland, to receive and examine the claims of the several creditors to the estate of JOSIAH TUCKER, late of Portland, in the county of Cumberland, trader, deceased, give notice that six months are allowed to said creditors to bring in and prove their claims: and that we shall attend that service at the dwelling house of Enoch Ilsey, Portland, on second Tuesday of May, inst. and the five following months, from 2 to 6 o'clock P. M. each day: ENOCH ILSLEY, LEMOUEL WEEKS. May 2.
THE subscriber hereby gives public notice to all concerned, that he has been duly appointed and has taken upon himself the trust of an Executor of the last will and testament of NATHAN MORSE, late of Gray, in the county of Cumberland, yeoman, deceased, by giving bond as the law directs—he therefore requests all persons who are indebted to the said deceased's estate, to make immediate payment; and those who have any demands thereon, to exhibit the same to OZIAS MORSE. April 27. (M 2)
WE the subscribers, Commissioners appointed by the Hon. Samuel Freeman, Esq. Judge of Probate for the county of Cumberland to receive and examine the claims of the several Creditors to the estate of CALEB RANDALL, late of Portland, in the county of Cumberland, Housewright, deceased, give notice that six months are allowed to the said creditors to bring in their claims; and that we shall attend that service at the house of Enoch Ilsey, in said Portland on the last Tuesday of this and the five following months, from two to six o'clock P. M. on each day. ENOCH ILSLEY JONATHAN BRYANT jun. April 18.
THE subscriber hereby gives public notice to all concerned, that he has been duly appointed and has taken upon himself the trust of an Administrator on the estate of EBENEZER PARKER, late of Cape-Elizabeth, in the county of Cumberland, yeoman, deceased, by giving bond as the law directs—he therefore requests all persons who are indebted to the said deceased's estate, to make immediate payment; and those who have any demands thereon, to exhibit the same for settlement to WILLIAM T. VAUGHEN, Attorney to her MARY PARKER, Administratrix. march April 26.
BOWDOIN COLLEGE. THE overseers of Bowdoin College are hereby notified, that their next meeting will be held in the College Chapel in Brunswick on Tuesday the seventeenth day of May next, at ten o'clock. A M. JONA. ELLIS, Secretary. Bath, April 16, 1808.
Dr. Thorndike INFORMS his friends, that he now resides at the house of Mr. J. S. Shaw, near Gorham Corner, where he will be happy to receive their commands as usual, in the line of his profession. Gorham, April 20, 1808.
NOTICE. THE copartnership existing between ROWE and KEUS is this day dissolved by mutual consent, and Theo's Keus is authorised to settle all demands belonging to the firm—Those that are indebted are requested to make immediate payment. TIMO. ROWE, THEO. KEUS. Portland, April 11, 1808.
Taken up adrift, ON Friday the 15th inst. a YAWL BOAT, between 13 and 14 feet long. There was in said Boat a Rug Coverlet and Blanket—The owner may have her again by proving property and paying charges, on application to EZEKIEL CUSHING. Long Island, (Portland) April 25.
BENJAMIN WILLIS, HAVING been driven from his late stand in Haymarket Row, (by the late fire) has taken the store lately occupied by Mr. John Dean, opposite Messrs. How & Evans' Store, where he has now for sale, a large assortment of English, India & West India Goods; which were laid in at reduced prices, and shall be sold at a very small profit—and made satisfactory to purchasers. Feb. 1.
Mr. PRINTER—THE following letters I recently received in answer to my request of thewritters, their opinion of Patent New-London Biliious Pills, as a public medicine. 'Tis unnecessary to add that those gentlemen are distinguished characters.—The offices they sustain are sufficient proofs of their respectability, and I trust is the highest evidence I can give the public of the efficacy of my Pills. SAMUEL H. P. LEE. New-London, Sept. 29, 1807.
Copy of a letter from John R. Watrous, esquire, M. D. President of the Connecticut Medical Convention, to the Proprietor. Colchester, Sept. 25, 1807. Doctor SAMUEL H. P. LEE, Dear Sir—I have just received your letter of the 18th inst. requesting my opinion of your Biliious Pills.
From what knowledge I have of them, I know of no deleterious effects, which they have ever produced, but believe them to be a good composition for the use they are designed. I certainly have no objections to their being in general use, and in the circle of my practice, frequently recommend them; and believe the people in general give them the preference to any other Pill in circulation. I am Sir, with much respect, your most obedient, JOHN R. WATROUS.
Copy of a letter from Doctor Wm. B. Hall, a practitioner of much eminence in the city of Middletown, Connecticut—Teacher and Lecturer on the Theory and Practice of Physics: Treasurer of the Connecticut Medical Society, and Fellow of the same; to the Patentee, dated Middletown Sept. 14, 1807, in answer to a letter requesting his opinion of the "Patent New-London Biliious Pills"—as a public medicine. Middletown, Sept. 14th, 1807. Doctor SAMUEL H. P. LEE, New-London. Sir—I duly received your favor of the 9th inst. requesting my opinion of your Patent Pills as public medicine and the experience I have had from using them in my practice—I have to inform you Sir, that I have administered your Pills, more or less in my practice the six or seven years past, and have found them equal, and in many instances, superior, to any preparation I have ever known, in all cases where the stomach and bowels required evacuation by the intervention of a cathartic. I view them peculiarly beneficial in southern climates, where almost all complaints are more or less of a bilious tendency—and in any region where cathartics are adopted as a curative indication, they are in my opinion, the most convenient and efficacious pill of any in use, being safe and easy in their operation. To travellers by sea and land I think they must be eminently useful, having printed directions for using them, which must be a convenience in case where medical aid cannot be obtained. To the public generally, they have another benefit annexed to them, which is of some importance, especially to the poorer class; that is, they are a cheap medicine, and by being prepared by yourself only, they have the best reason to expect that they are well prepared, and with some experience may be able to administer them in their families, with considerable success, and thereby save expense. Finally Sir, knowing as I do the component parts of the pill, I can with confidence recommend them as a useful and false public medicine.—I am Sir your most obedient servant, WILLIAM B. HALL.
The above Pills sold by Erving & Poor. March 28. (e o p 6 w.)
Public Auction. NOTICE is hereby given that the following Shares or rights in the Portland Monument Ground, will be sold at Public Auction on Wednesday the first day of June next, at 3 o'clock P. M. to pay the assessments that have been assessed, and all incidental charges on the same unless previously paid, viz.—Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 18, 17, 18, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 59, 60, 61, 64, 65, 66, 67, 82, 87.—Sale on the premises. JONATHAN STUART, Treasurer. Portland, April 13.
TO LET, A Convenient well finished two story DWELLING-HOUSE, pleasantly situated in Free-street, next door to capt. John Dix.—Apply to JOHN LEAVITT.
HARVARD COLLEGE LOTTERY. Scheme of the Fourth Class. 20000 Tickets at 5 dolls. each are 100000 dls. 1 prize of 10000 is 10000 10 of 1000 are 10000 10 - 500 - 5000 100 - 100 - 10000 100 - 50 - 5000 110 - 20 - 2200 6336 - 7 - 44352 Subject to no deduction—Not two blanks to a Prize.
A part of the above prizes will be drawn in the following manner—viz. First drawn blank on the 1st day's drawing shall be entitled to 1000 dols. Do. 3d, 500 5th, 1000 7th, 500 9th, 1500 11th, 500 13th, 1000 15th, 500 17th, 1000 19th, 500 21st, 1000 23rd, 500 25th, 1000 27th, 500 29th, 1000 31st, 500 33rd, 1500 35th, 1000 37th, 500 39th, 1000 40th, 500 500 numbers will be considered as a day's drawing, and the fortunate numbers, which depend on the days, will be determined accordingly.
The class will commence drawing in Boston on the 30th of May next. The highest prize will be paid in 90 days; other prizes above 100 dollars in 60 days, and all others in 30 days, after the drawing shall be completed; payment as usual in bills generally current in this Commonwealth. Prizes, not demanded within one year after the drawing, will not be paid, but appropriated to the purpose of the Lottery. All vendors of Tickets are expected to return to the Managers all such as they do not take to their own account, on or before the 20th day of May next, after which day the price will rise to 50. John Williams, Nicholas Tillinghast, John Mellen, } Managers. Phillips Payson, John Gardner, Boston, March 7, 1808.
TICKETS and QUARTERS in the above Lottery kept constantly for sale at the Bookstore and Lottery Office of ISAAC ADAMS. Prize Tickets received in payment for un-drawn Tickets. April 25.
DIXVILLE ROAD LOTTERY. Scheme of the First Class. 12000 Tickets at 5 dolls. each are 60000 dls. 1 prize of 10000 is 10000 3 prizes 1000 acres of land each, in the township of Dixville, through which the road passes, are 4500 5 prizes - 1000 are 5000 40 do - 100 - 4000 20 do - 50 - 1000 200 do - 10 - 2000 3785 do - 7 - 26495 4004 52648 Not two blanks to a prize—Subject to no deduction.
A part of the above prizes will be drawn in the following manner—viz. The first drawn blank on the third day shall be entitled to 1000 dols. Do on the 6th, 1000 acres of land, 1500 do Do on the 9th, - 1000 do Do on the 12th, 1000 acres of land, 1500 do Do on the 15th, - 1000 do Do on the 18th, 1000 acres of land, 1500 do Do on the 21th, - 1000 do Do on the 24th, - 1000 do Five hundred numbers will be considered 2 days drawing and the fortunate numbers which depend on the days will be determined accordingly.
The drawing will commence on the thirteenth day of July next in Boston, and shall be completed in thirty days next succeeding. The prize of ten thousand dollars will be paid in ninety days, the prizes of a thousand in sixty days, and all others in thirty days from the time the drawing shall be completed. Payment will be in bills usually current in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Prizes not demanded within one year after the drawing is completed will not be paid. The price of tickets after the last day of June, will be 50.
The township of Dixville in which are the lands for the above mentioned land prizes, is situated thirty miles Northeast of the white-hills within nine miles of Connecticut river, seventy miles from Hallowell, ninety from Portland, and central in the county of Coos; the lands are of an excellent quality, and are located into lots of an hundred acres each; six settlements have commenced, and a saw-mill and a grist-mill, are erected.—The township contains two hundred and eighty lots; thirty lots are taken up for the purpose of settlement; the holders of the land prizes will have an equal chance to draw their lands from the remaining lots, or may choose so many of their lots as they shall make actual settlement on within two years from the time the drawing is completed. Good lots are now worth three dollars per acre, and the value will be much increased by the road. Undisputable titles will be given to the land.
Elijah Hall, Joseph Akerman, jun. } Managers. Timothy Dix, jun. $ Tickets in the above Lottery, for sale by ISAAC ADAMS, at his Bookstore No. 7, Fifth Street. April 25.