The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1800-11-21 00:00:00

The National Intelligencer,
AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. I. WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, NEW-JERSEY AVENUE, NEAR THE CAPITOL. No. X.
FIVE DOLLS. PER ANN.
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 21st, 1800.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
COMMUNICATION.
BUONAPARTE.
The powers exercised by the First Consul of France are so interesting, not only to that country, but to the whole world, that his character is well worthy of the consideration of every individual who wishes the welfare of mankind. It particularly merits an attentive, cool and deliberate examination, as his military exploits have surrounded it with a lustre that dazzles common observation.
If he possess the disposition to do good, if he is superior to personal aggrandizement, if he pursues the path of true glory, there can be little doubt of his ability to accomplish many great and useful results; but should he on the other hand, like most of his predecessors, promote his own personal views, regardless of the public good, the injuries he will inflict on his own country, and through her, on all Europe may be as mournful as any presented by history.
It will be agreed that the character of a man is generally to be deduced from his actions, and not from his professions; when the one differ from the other, the inference is irresistible, that views dictated by a dark policy, that dreads an avowal of its purposes, are entertained; and no less irresistible, generally, is the inference that such views are hostile to the public good. It will be proper previously to making any animadversions, to state a few of the prominent features of Buonaparte's life.
Born in Corsica in the year, he had not attained much eminence at the commencement of the French revolution. He does not appear to have had any agency in those measures which subverted the monarchy and erected a republic in its room. The first indications of superiority furnished by him were entirely military, and he enjoyed but a moderate portion of fame before his Italian campaign. Italy became the seat of his glory. By the astonishing, if not unprecedented vigor of his operations, he completely conquered that country. After overcoming all resistance, and clearing the road to Vienna, he arrested the career of his arms, and formed the peace of Campo Formio; a pacification that in its effects has not realised a single promise which it held out. Nor should it ever be forgotten, in estimating the character of Buonaparte, that he was the negotiator who through state policy, altogether uncontrolled by any imperious necessity, subverted the freedom of Venice, and restored it to the despotic government of Austria. The act was reprobated throughout the world. French faith fell prostrate beneath it. The attachment of the nation to republicanism was rendered equivocal; and talents, prepared, through the whole extent of Europe, to exert themselves in the advancement of freedom, under the conviction that France was her friend, and that her honor, once pledged, would triumph over all seduction, were palsied by this fatal blow. When the nature and consequences of this measure are fully weighed, every laurel that adorned the brow of the hero of Italy fades and perishes, his pretensions to the character of a republican become ridiculous in the extreme, and his talents as a statesman sink below mediocrity.
Between the era of his Italian exploits and the Egyptian expedition, we heard nothing of Buonaparte, but the vague sounds of panegyric. We do not contemplate him participating in the discharge of civil duties; he continues still in the character of the soldier. So little is yet distinctly understood of the origin of the expedition to Egypt, that we hazard much in saying who were its authors. As it failed in the objects contemplated to be achieved, no man in France is ambitious of the reputation of having planned it. We know from unquestionable authority that the conquest of Egypt was long since contemplated by the French government as an object of immense importance; and we also know that this importance rose to an almost incalculable height, on the loss, or perilous state, of the
French West India islands. It is probable, therefore, that the measure would have been attempted by any set of men, either republican or monarchic. But it is not equally probable that a man, whom no event of his life has exhibited as deficient in self-confidence, a man who, by one daring act, has thrown himself in the scale against the whole government and outweighed it, is probable, nay is it possible that such a man would be a dupe of his enemies, and suffer himself to be driven into inglorious exile: No such belief can rationally be entertained. Buonaparte was impelled by an insatiable thirst for military glory. He beheld in the conquest of Egypt the first step to Eastern dominion, unbounded in extent. To be the founder of a new Empire has ever been the favourite vision of military madness. Nor could a scene be opened, calculated to awaken more ardour of imagination, or intoxicate with more splendid visions, than the unresisted progress of the French arms in the East.
But, no one expectation that was excited by this celebrated expedition has been realized. Gallic valour has triumphed over accumulated difficulties. But it has been compelled to yield to a succession of disastrous circumstances, too powerful to be overcome by any spirit.
The French forces wasted away without gaining any substantial advantages. The future presented no other prospects than such as were more gloomy than the past. In the midst of these discouraging circumstances, commanding an army, surrounded by danger, and in want of every comfort, Buonaparte abruptly returned to France.
How did he return? Was it with the permission of the government, of which he was the agent, and whose commands he had sworn to obey? Or was it in direct opposition to its authority? These questions have never been answered; though they have been often put. The silence which follows then constitutes the strongest presumptive evidence that his return was his own act entirely; for if not his own unauthorized act, why conceal the instructions that produced it; when such instructions would demonstrate his obedience to the civil power, and prove, that in this instance at least, he merited the character of a good citizen. No false delicacy would have prevented him or his friends from claiming this merit, if facts justified it. No such claim having ever been made is proof sufficient that no such claim can be made with effect.
Until, therefore, more transpires than is yet known, we must contemplate Buonaparte in the light of deserting an army confided to his care, an army in the greatest distress, and encompassed by the greatest dangers; an army, whose establishment in Italy had covered him with his brightest glory.
For this daring act what were his motives? were they personal, or were they derived from an ardent love of his Country?
Confide in his professions, and you must believe they were the latter; examine his actions, and you will not hesitate to consider them as the former.
Physical power is always resorted to in the attainment of ends which truth and reason condemn. When these are our friends we seldom draw the sword. It is necessity only that dictates this last step, and this necessity seldom exists when truth is on our side.
When Buonaparte reached the capitol, the grand principle of republicanism remained unimpaired. Whatever may have been the misconduct of the Directorial government, it was, notwithstanding, the representative of the nation. The power which the nation had conferred, it possessed the constitutional right to revoke, and to place in such hands as it pleased. An abuse of power might be redressed without convulsion or violence. The public opinion was either friendly or hostile to the existing system. If friendly the acts of the Consul violated, instead of consulting, the national wishes. If hostile, an early change in a constitutional way might have been relied upon. In either case violence would be detrimental.
But the Consul, regardless of these considerations, resolved to subvert the whole political edifice. For the first time under the republic, the military power rose triumphant over the civil; and its triumph sprung from the consolidated energy of the combined military talents of all the armies. It was not simply the appearance of this force that produced the subversion of the republic; it was its actual application. The nation beheld the gloomy spectacle of the bayonet, dispersing the depositaries of its confidence.
The great mass of mankind derive their estimates of character from the measure of success which attends individuals. We should not, therefore, be surprised at finding Buonaparte the idol of the multitude. Heretofore success in the most unlimited extent has crowned all his military operations, excepting those in Egypt.
No deduction can, however, be drawn from his present popularity as to the duration of it. The French nation appear to be very desirous of peace. The first Consul thinking that by making a peace he will increase his reputation, and willing perhaps, to supercede all rivalry for military glory, which might arise from continuing the war, appears sincere in his wishes and unremitted in his efforts to bring the pending negotiations to a successful close.
Whether he succeeds in this object or not, it is highly probable that in either event his popularity will be impaired.
If he does not procure peace, the disappointment of the nation will be extreme. The failure of the negotiations will be ascribed either to the insincerity of his professions, or to his want of talent. If he obtains peace for France, his army will be taken from him, and with its removal will disappear, in all probability, the fear which at present keeps in subjection his enemies. The power which he has usurped derived its avowed justification from the alarming crisis in the affairs of his country. That crisis being past, the people will expect to be reinstated in the rights surrendered but for a season.
Whether this effect will be produced by the calm expression of the public will, or whether its price will be a civil war, time only can divulge.
LEGISLATURE of PENNSYLVANIA
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Monday, November 10, 1800.
The Bill, for appointing Electors of President, was called up, read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole; Mr. Snyder in the Chair.
In the Committee, several Amendments were moved by Mr. Penrose; the blanks filled up for the meeting of both houses in the Representatives Chamber, on the 15th inst. and agreed to, without opposition.
Upon the motion for adopting the Preamble, Mr. Preston moved to strike out the word joint, and to insert in its place the word concurrent; seconded by Mr. Scott.
Mr. S. W. Fisher rose and said, that he was much surprised to find the present bill introduced as it had been, without any one reason why, or upon what grounds, it should be adopted. The House had heard the bill read, and not one member had expressed an opinion or argument; but the House was called upon to adopt it silently. It was to be expected, that, when a measure of this kind, new and unusual, was offered to the representative Body, some motive should be assigned, some incentive given, upon which to ground a decision. Those who had introduced it must have thought, and thought deeply, upon the subject; and they must have been prepared, with a string of forcible reasons, for introducing it. Why were these reasons withheld? Why were they not openly and fairly declared, in order that men who had not made up their minds, should have some grounds upon which to vote?
Difficulties, he was free to confess, had arisen in his mind, upon this important sub-
ject. Were we called upon to perform a legislative, or a ministerial act! Why has not this been explained? Was it to be expected, that the Legislature would proceeded to a measure, tending to its own dissolution? How would this measure appear to the Senate? What would they say to it? If it was encumbered with such difficulties; if it was not prescribed or directed by the Constitution; how came it to be referred to a committee of the whole? The opinions of some of our Constituents have been expressed, in Petitions and Memorials laid on the Table. Would it not be, at least, respectful to our Constituents to state their sentiments, on introducing this Bill, and to accommodate our proceedings to their will? But not a word is uttered: A profound silence prevails. Why not give us reasons; why not comment upon those Petitions? Let us have the reasoning of our Constituents, or some other sort of reasoning.
For his part, his mind was open to conviction. Let him see good reasons for his vote, and he would vote: He was ready to do it explicitly. But he was ready to confess, that he did not think the Bill would answer the end, or meet the judgment of the Legislature. In a legislative capacity there can be no joint vote. Either, then it is a legislative, or a ministerial measure. If the former, the bill is informal: If the latter, it is given in such a mode as, perhaps, the Senate cannot adopt. The Memorial on the Table, from Millerstown, calls upon the Legislature to vote. This bill goes directly in opposition to the Prayer of that Petition; For, the Legislature cannot vote jointly; and the amendment proposed is, therefore, necessary to accommodate the measure to the spirit of the Petition. The Constitution will not carry this bill through. He had given his sentiments, to draw forth the reasons of those who have introduced it; and because he did not wish to give any vote, without some sort of reasoning. He was in favor of the amendment.
Mr. Boileau said, the Gentleman, when he rose first, undertook to censure us for not giving our reasons. Was the Gentleman really unacquainted with our reasons? The matter had gone through his mind, he said. We can assure him, that it has not merely passed through our minds; but has been brought forward on grounds the best founded, and after considerations the most deliberate and solemn. But, with what consistency has he made this charge on us? Why did that Gentleman and his Friends suffer this bill, if it be so exceptionable, to pass through to this stage, without the shadow of opposition or Investigation? Why were not its errors and objectionable parts—its unconstitutionality and insufficiency before noticed or shown? We might, if disposed to cavil, retort upon those Gentlemen, in the same strain. You have brought forward an Amendment to a bill, which you did not oppose before: And without offering a single reason, for altering our deliberate judgment, you call upon us to adopt this Amendment, hastily brought forward. But such cavils are beneath us.
The importance of the occasion supercedes them. The eyes of the union are fixed upon us. And not only our own country, but foreign nations take an interest in the interesting question which now agitates Pennsylvania. Deeper interests were perhaps never involved, in any season, since our existence as a people. It is not a mere question between this party and that party of men; but whether our constitution shall be administered in the spirit of republican government, and purified from abuse; or that it shall mean any thing, or nothing. This is the light in which it is viewed by our constituents; and it is upon this sense we are expected to act. The duty we owe to our constituents compels us to regard their will; and, when we consider that we are acting under the impressive obligations of an oath to discharge our duty faithfully, no honest man can deliberate long upon the vote which he is to give.
But gentlemen wish to have reasons. Did they suppose we were not ready, or unwilling to answer them? It appears, that they already agree with us in the necessity

of giving to the state its legitimate weight in the union. They are entitled to the credit of the acknowledgment; but they object to the mode proposed in the bill. He was ready to confess that the choice of Electors by the people was the mode which he preferred to all others. But he could not accuse himself, nor his friends, of having deprived the people of that right; nor of having slighted the wishes of his constituents on that score. The present state of things did not admit of such a mode of election. It was a necessity, to which he was driven, to adopt the measure proposed by the bill, rather than the state should lose its weight; or than the constitution of the United States, and of this state, should be disregarded. It was therefore a case of necessity, which perhaps those gentlemen did not think so seriously called for this measure: But, in his mind, it was imperative; because it was called for by the people; rendered obligatory by oath; and enjoined by the two constitutions.
A gentleman has endeavored to avoid this measure, as an invasion of the constitution, as an annihilation of one branch of the legislature. If no cases of a similar nature existed under our constitution, there might be a specious pretence for doubt on this point: But, taking it in another, the foundation of all free government; the will of the majority; it will not be questioned, that the minority are bound to yield to the majority, when the will is ascertained. That will then has been recently ascertained. An election has taken place, which has placed us on this floor; and in a manner so decisive, as to leave no question, with any man, on which side the majority lies. The will of the majority of the legislature is unquestionably the will of the people. The late election was made with an immediate and direct view to the choice of President and Vice-President. No voice could be more explicit, than that of Pennsylvania.
It is unbecoming to torture the meaning of a petition, as it has been done, to a sense different from its intention. The sense of the people is for an election, according to the spirit of this bill; because no other means are left to express the public will, on the great question which concerns the nation. Then, if we are not at all disposed to regard that will seriously; if we are not, indeed, determined to disregard that will, and the constitution we are sworn to administer; we must do it by a joint vote, as the only mode of declaring the will of the majority.
It may be objected, that this bill goes to make this house predominant over the senate. Admitting, for a moment, that such a design were contemplated; yet will it not be admitted, that even the sense of the majority would be declared. But the objection is futile. The mode of proceeding prescribed in this bill is already familiar to the practice of our legislature, in other cases.
They may further object, that, by this bill, a great part of the community will be unrepresented. But is not this objection pointed at the fundamental principle of society itself? It is a difficulty which cannot be obviated; for the minority must yield in every case; else confusion, disorder and anarchy ensues. In this house, the cases of the minority submitting are familiar and memorable. It is not very consistent, to oppose the principle on this occasion. This is moreover, no ordinary question. It is not a matter originating in an individual, and going to numbers. It originates in the many, and terminates in an individual. Here there can be no division of parts, to accommodate the passions or prejudices of the few. The vote must be concentrated and decisive upon one person. We cannot have an heterogeneous president, who like Nebuchadnezzar's statue, is made up of gold, brass, and clay. We must unite upon a vote for an individual; though we do it through the secondary medium of electors; and the majority must decide, who that individual shall be.
Upon the question of Legislative and ministerial acts , it appears that the gentleman handsomely surrendered the opposition to this bill; and objects to it only as to time. He has confessed the constitutionality; but objects to the circuitry of the proceeding. But he has not gone far enough. If the spirit of accommodation and conciliation recommended in the governor's speech, to be really regarded, it must be by the conduct and temper of those who have been adverse to such a temper heretofore. We have nothing to concede. Any overture made to us we are willing to adopt, but an opposition to the only means by which the will of the people can be expressed, does not appear to us to be strictly in the spirit of concession or reconciliation.
There are two grounds, upon which the present bill is maintainable; expediency
and precedent . The expediency of an election is acknowledged by gentlemen who oppose this bill: but they attempt to give it a form, upon which they are aware we cannot agree, without relinquishing the obligations of our oaths, and disregarding the will of our constituents. Their mode is to give a representation to the minority, where the object is an individual. On the ground of precedent, the examples are abundant; but two are sufficient. Upon particular occasions the governor is elected by joint vote; and the State Treasurer, always. Yet the gentleman says, that, if this house and the senate were to vote jointly, the latter would be annihilated. If not annihilated in these two very striking and analogous cases, surely they are secure in the ministerial act proposed by this bill.
He says, we ought to do what the senate will agree to. We say, the senate ought to do what the people will. We will suppose the senate to be composed of reasonable and conscientious men. If so, they will regard the voice of the people, and their oaths. The voice of the people they cannot mistake. It is too clearly and unequivocally expressed. By voting for the bill, in the present form, they not only obey the voice of their constituents, but fulfil their obligation; and maintain the constitution and that immutable principle, that the majority should prevail.
These are the grounds we stand upon, and such are the reasons which ought to influence an unanimous vote in favor of the bill. We must hear something to obviate our reasons before we can alter our opinions. We are ready to hear them if they can be offered. Let gentlemen come forward and show us better grounds: we shall hear them patiently and respectfully. If they convince, we shall act accordingly. If they do not, we shall, we hope, answer them liberally and plainly. Unless they do this, we cannot vote for this amendment.
The Yeas and Nays being called, on the amendment proposed by Mr. Preston, were, Yeas, 21. Nays, 55.
PROJECT
For a Perpetual peace by ROUSSEAU.
(Concluded from our last.)
I look upon it, as demonstrated, that, if the European congress were once established, there would be no danger of future rebellions; and that though some abuses would probably be introduced, they never could proceed so far as to elude the design of the institution. It remains now to inquire, Whether that design will be properly effected by the institution itself.
To this end, we shall consider the motives which induce princes to take up arms. These are either to make conquest, to defend themselves against invaders, to reduce a too powerful neighbour, to protect the injured to decide disputes that cannot be amicably adjusted, or, lastly, to enforce obedience to treaties. There can be no cause or pretext for war that may not be ranged under one of these six heads: now it is evident, that not one of all the six can subsist in the new state of things under a confederacy.
In the first place, all hopes of conquest must be given up, from the impossibility of making any; it being certain, that whoever attempts it must be presently stopped in his career by a superior force; so that he will risk the losing his all, while he is sure he cannot gain any thing. Every ambitious prince, desirous to aggrandize himself in Europe, does two things: he begins by strengthening himself with good alliances; after this, he endeavours to surprise his enemy unprovided. But particular alliances will avail nothing against a general and stronger one always subsisting; while princes, having no longer any pretext to take up arms, they cannot take up arms, they cannot take such a step without being perceived, prevented, and punished by the confederacy, which is constantly in arms.
The same reason which takes from each prince the hope of conquest, takes from him also the fear of being conquered: his dominions, guaranteed by all Europe, being as well secured to him as the estates of private subjects in a well governed kingdom; nay more so, even in the same proportion as their sovereign, their sole protector, is less powerful than the potentates of all Europe united.
There would no longer be excited a desire to reduce a neighbouring power, from whom there be no longer any thing to fear; nor would there even be any temptation to it when there would exist no hopes of success. With regard to the maintenance of the rights of each party, it may be remarked, at first view, that a
deal of chicanery, with many obscure and confused pretensions, will be annihilated by the third article of the confederacy; which definitively regulates all the reciprocal rights of the allied sovereigns, on the footing of their actual possessions. Hence all possible pretensions and demands will become clear for the future, and be determined by the congress, as they occasionally arise. Add to this, that if my rights are infringed, I ought to defend them by the same means. Now as no one can encroach upon them by force of arms, without incurring the ban of the congress; so it is no longer necessary that I should by force of arms defend them. The same may be said of lighter injuries, wrongs, and reparations, and of all the foreseen differences that may arise between sovereigns. The same power which protects their rights, ought also to redress their grievances.
As to the last article, its solution is evident. It is plain, at first sight, that as there is no aggressor to be feared, there is no need of any defensive treaty; and that, as none could be formed more solid and effectual than that of the grand confederacy, every other would be useless, unlawful, and of course null and void.
It may indeed be said, that sovereigns will, by this project, be deprived of the right of doing themselves justice, or of doing injustice to others, when they please; they will be deprived of the power aggrandizing themselves; they must renounce that formidable pomp of power with which they delight to terrify the world, and that glory of conquest from which they now derive honour. In fine, they will be reduced to the necessity of being just and peaceable. What will be their indemnification for the loss of all these?
I will not venture to reply, with the Abbe de St. PIERRE, that the real glory of princes consists in their promoting the public good and the happiness of their subjects; that their true interest depends on their glory, and that the glory they acquire in the opinion of the wise is proportioned to the service they are of to mankind; that the project of a perpetual peace, being the greatest that ever was formed, ought to confer immortal glory on its author; that the putting it into execution, being in like manner, the most useful to subjects, would be still more glorious to sovereigns; that this enterprize would be particularly the only one unfulfilled with blood and rapine, with sorrow and execration; and in fine, that the most certain way for a prince to distinguish himself among the herd of kings, is to labour for the public good. Such are the sentiments which, broached in the cabinet of princes, have brought ridicule on the author and his projects. But let us not, like them, despise his reasons: we have nothing to do with the virtues of princes; let us speak of their interests.
If all Kings are not yet convinced of the folly of making conquests, it appears, at least, that the wisest of them begin to see that they cost more than they are worth. Without entering into a thousand distinctions on this head, which might lead us too far out of the way, it may be said, in general, that a Prince, who, by enlarging his territories, loses as many old subjects as he acquires new, becomes weaker by his acquisition; because, with more territories to defend, he hath no more subjects to defend it.
I now leave the reader, to his examination of all these articles, and to form a comparison between the state of peace resulting from the proposed confederacy, and the state of war which results from the present impolitic state of Europe.
If we have reasoned rightly in laying down this project, it has been demonstrated, first, That the establishment of a perpetual peace depends solely on the consent of the respective sovereigns, and that there is no other obstacle to it than their opposition. Secondly, That this establishment would be every way useful; and that no comparison is to be made, even with regard to them, between the inconveniences and advantages resulting from it. Thirdly, That it is reasonable to suppose their inclination will agree with their interests. And, lastly, that this establishment, if once formed on the plan proposed, would be solid and lasting, and perfectly answer the end designed. We cannot, indeed, take upon us to say, that the sovereigns of Europe will actually adopt our project, (who can answer for the judgment of others?) but we can safely say, they would adopt it, if they knew their true interests: for it should be observed, that we have not supposed men to be such as they ought to be, good, generous, disinterested, and public spirited from motives of humanity; but, on the contrary, such as they really are, unjust, avaricious, and
more solicitous for their private interest than that of the public. The only supposition we have made, is, that mankind have sense enough in general to know what is useful to them, and fortitude enough to embrace the means of their own happiness. Should our project, nevertheless, fail of being put into execution, it will not be neglected because it is chimerical, but because the world is absurd, and there is a kind of absurdity in being wise among fools.
LANCASTER, Nov. 14.
Messrs. Boileau, Penrose and Wilson, of the House of Representatives, waited on the Governor this day, and presented the following answer of that body to his address.
To THOMAS M'KEAN, Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Sir, THE House of Representatives, impressed with the importance of the extraordinary occasion, on which you have convened the Legislature, take this early opportunity to express their approbation of so seasonable and patriotic an interposition of the executive authority.
While the motives, by which you have been actuated, justly increase your claims upon the public confidence and esteem, we anxiously hope, that the honorable example of your conduct will produce a cordial co-operation in all the departments of the government, to rescue Pennsylvania from the stigma of neglecting the performance of an important constitutional duty, and endangering the energy and stability of the union.
We concur, Sir, in the general opinion which you have announced, that the appointment of the electors of a President and Vice President of the United States, by a general choice of the people, is the truest, safest, fairest exposition of the constitution; and we sincerely lament the necessity, which, even in a single instance, has imposed a departure from that rule: but as there is no alternative except a legislative appointment, or a dereliction of the right of election, the good sense of our constituents will discern the dangerous and disgraceful consequence of the latter course, and justify a resolution to perform the former. Under this conviction, we have given a prompt attention to your address; and guided in the present instance by the precedent which our sister states have established; by the obvious spirit of the constitution and laws of Pennsylvania, in similar cases; and by the very nature of the subject—we trust, that whatever may be the issue of this interesting session, there will be no cause, on our part, for self-reproach, or public censure.
We shall receive your future communications, on the general state of the Commonwealth, with merited respect: and be assured, Sir, that all the means in our power will constantly be employed to preserve that liberal and harmonious intercourse between the departments of the government, which is so essential to the advancement of our private happiness, as well as to the execution of our public trust.
To which the Governor returned the following reply:
To the House of Representatives Of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Gentlemen,
AS it is my constant study to merit the approbation of the Legislature in all my official proceedings, it affords me a sincere satisfaction to receive the present testimonial of confidence and esteem from the House of Representatives.
That the occasion on which you are convened is an important one, appears to be the unanimous opinion of every private citizen, as well as of every public officer. It involves the fulfilment of a solemn obligation to our sister states, and the discharge of an indispensable duty, which we owe to our constituents. Though, therefore, it is no longer in your power to pursue the most eligible mode of appointing electors, I am happy to find, that you consider the appointment as an act, that must at all events be performed, in any mode that the constitution will allow. Convinced as I am, that the virtual secession of Pennsylvania, by refusing or neglecting to give her vote, in the organization of the federal government, will be a vital stab to the union, under which it may, perhaps, long languish, but from which it can never perfectly recover, I wait with inexpressible solicitude, the ultimate determination of the legislature.
Yet, gentlemen, I cannot allow myself to despair. If the voice of the people is at all regarded; if their welfare is contemplated; if the honor of the legislature, as

a body, is consulted; if the blessings of a quiet conscience are to be preserved to its members, as individuals; and if the applause of all good men is an object of pursuit—Pennsylvania cannot fail to be rescued from the impending danger and disgrace.
THOMAS M'KEAN.
WASHINGTON CITY.
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 21st, 1800.
Last evening a very unusual fall of snow occurred in this city. It continued snowing without intermission from 4 o'clock P. M. till after midnight. It appears to be about three inches deep.
PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATURE.
On the 13th of November, the House of Representatives took up the amendments of the Senate to the Electoral bill, which gave the appointment of eight electors to the House of Representatives, and seven to the Senate. After considerable debate the House non-concurred, and returned them to the Senate.
On the 14th instant the Senate took into consideration the decision of the House of Representatives with respect to the Electoral Bill, and resolved not to recede from their amendments, 13 to 11.
In the afternoon the House of Representatives appointed a committee of conference to meet one from the Senate, if it should appoint one, on this subject.
The committee are Messrs Whitehill, Boileau, Logan, Penrose, and Snyder.
The Senate have appointed a committee of conference, consisting of Messrs Gurney, Ewing, McClellan, Johnson, and Barton.
The Committees have had several meetings without effecting an agreement on any plan of accommodation.
A numerous meeting of the Republican members of the legislature of New-York & other citizens from different parts of the State convened at Albany on the 8th inst. agreed to recommend GEORGE CLINTON, as a Candidate for the office of Governor.
In the several counties of George-Town, and Cheraw districts Benjamin Huger has 603, and Samuel Benton 411 votes, for a Representative in Congress for South Carolina.
The legislature of the Territory North-West of the Ohio, convened on the 3d inst. at Chillicothe, and on the 6th, chose two delegates to represent the Territory in the congress of the U. S. viz. William McMillan in the room of W. H. Harrison, to serve till the 4th of March; and Paul Fearing to serve for two years from that day.
Federal Representatives for Massachusetts.—Dr. William Eustis, Col. Joseph B. Varnum, Hon. Levi Lincoln, Nathan Reed, Esq. Rev. Dr. Cutler.—The three former Republican, the two last Federalists.
Benjamin Goodhue has resigned his seat in the Senate of the United States.
From the North Carolina papers it appears that in the county of Bladen, Wilmington, district, General Brown, the federal candidate for elector, had 341 votes, and Samuel Ashe, the republican candidate, 6 votes.
In Newbern district, William Sheppard, the federal candidate, has a majority of 70 votes, exclusive of Wayne & Johnston counties.
New-Jersey Legislature.—A petition from Matthias Williamson, and others, praying leave to present a bill for incorporating a company to improve the Great Post Road between Philadelphia and New-York, by turnpikes, has been read and committed.
The Legislature of New-York, has adjourned, to meet again on the last Tuesday in January next.
BENJ. HUGER is elected a member of the House of Representatives U. S. for South Carolina by a majority of 136.
MR. BROWN, the federal candidate, is chosen an elector for North Carolina.
MR. ROBERTSON, the federal candidate, we are informed, is chosen elector for Maryland, and not Mr. Lynchcomb, as stated in our last.
Messrs. L. Williams, P. Wadsworth,
and Sheppard, federal, and Mr. Bacon, republican, are elected members of the House of Representatives U. S. for Massachusetts.
NORFOLK, Nov. 11.
Extract of a letter from New Providence to a gentleman in this borough, dated October 28th.
"Before this can reach you, you will have heard that the British cruisers have orders to capture all neutrals with cargoes, the production of a country the enemy of Great Britain, unless bound home where they belong, or to Great Britain or Ireland. This, I am afraid, will cause great uneasiness in the United States. There are several vessels sent in lately, merely because part of their cargoes were sugar and coffee, bound to Spain."
Letter from THOMAS COOPER to ALEXANDER HAMILTON.
SIR, I came to New-York for the purpose of asking general Hamilton, in person, whether he was the author of an attack on the character of President Adams, which bears his name; and to say that I mean to use that information for the purpose of instituting against you, Sir, a prosecution under the detestable act of Congress, commonly known by the name of the "Sedition Law."
Under this law, passed through the influence of a party, of which you are (and I think justly) regarded as the head, I have suffered six months tedious imprisonment, and paid a fine of 400 dollars. I therefore have a right to retaliate: I have a right to try the experiment, whether Republicanism is to be the victim of a law, which Aristocracy can break through with impunity.—There have been many petty offenders in this respect, among what is called the federal party; but I have nothing to do with the Fennos, the Waynes and the journeymen of federalism. You are worth trying the experiment upon.—Your energy and your talents have rendered you a conspicuous object of praise and blame.
I therefore have determined that in one way or the other you shall be brought before the public on this account; and I did so far calculate on your character as to suppose, that you would not deny what you have really written and sanctioned with your name. I expect by your answer (directed to me at Lancaster, Pennsylvania) the same information which I should have hoped for personally. I came to town last night between 7 and 8, and sent to you immediately. I write this hastily at eight this morning to send by the stage. I shall make no use of that opportunity of professed till I hear from you, which I expect by return of post. The answer I have no doubt will be such as becomes your character.
I am your obedient servant, THOMAS COOPER, of Northumberland. To Gen. A. Hamilton, at Albany.
FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE.
PARIS, OCTOBER 1.
It is said that Joseph Buonaparte counsellor of state will alone be charged with the interests of the French republic at the congress.
OCT. 2.
A treaty of friendship and commerce between the French republic and the United States of America, was signed yesterday by the French ministers plenipotentiary Joseph Buonaparte, C. P. Claret Fleurieu, and Roederer, and the American commissioners Oliver Elsworth, W. Davie and W. V. Murray.
OCT. 3.
The news of a treaty of alliance between the French republic and the United States, which was yesterday circulated as doubtful, is now confirmed, and consoles us for the loss of Malta, which is now out of doubt.
On the 27th at night the citizens Joseph Buonaparte, Fleurieu, and Roederer, plenipotentiary ministers of the French republic, on the one part, and Messrs. Elsworth, chief justice, Davie, governor of Carolina, and Murray, resident minister at the Batavian republic, all three of them plenipotentiary ministers of the United States, on the other, signed at Paris, a treaty, which re-
establishes amity and commerce between France and the United States of America. It was a less matter of concern to come to an understanding on the part, than to revive between the two nations connections at once useful and honorable for both; the treaty effects this object.
ALGIERS.
Citizen Dubois Thainville, sent to Algiers by the first Consul, in order to negotiate an accommodation, concluded there, on the 20th July, the following armistice.—
Unlimited Armistice.
Concluded between his excellency Mustafa Pacha, Dey of Algiers, and citizen Charles Francis Dubois Thainville, commissary-general of commercial relations, furnished with full powers by the first Consul of the French republic, in order to treat for a peace with that regency. ARTICLE I. From the 19th July, year 8, all hostilities between the two nations shall cease.
II. Orders shall be immediately given by the Dey to the corsairs of that regency to respect the French flag; as citizen Dubois Thainville engages that his government shall forbid all armed vessels of the republic to molest those of Algiers.
III. All vessels taken by one or the other after the 19th of July shall be given up, together with their cargoes and crews.
IV. Until the conclusion of a definitive peace, all Algerine vessels shall be received in the ports of the republic, as shall all French into the ports of the regency.
V. In case of a rupture of the present armistice, it is agreed that notice shall reciprocally be given thirty days before the re-commencement of hostilities.
Algiers, July 30, 8th year of the French republic—and the 28th of the Moon Sefer, the 1215th year of the Hegira. (Signed) MUSTAPHA PACHA, &c. DUBOIS THAINVILLE.
WASHINGTON BOOK-STORE. RAPINE, CONRAD, & CO. Corner of South B. Street and New Jersey Avenue, near the Capitol.
HAVE just received, and for sale at the above store, Letters from Alexander Hamilton, concerning the public conduct and character of John Adams, Esq. President of the United States.
Also, just opening, a choice assortment of books in History, Law, Medicine, Divinity, Arts and Sciences, Classics School books, Novels, Romances Biography, &c. &c.—With a good assortment of super royal, royal, medium, demy, and foolscap writing paper, thick and thin blue, blue & common wrapping paper, best Dutch quills, wafers, sealing wax, ink powder, red and black ink, black lead pencils, parchment, playing cards, blank books, &c. &c. All which they will dispose of at the very lowest prices.
Public officers and others, who will please to favour them with their custom, may rely on having the strictest attention paid to their orders. Nov. 17th, 1800.
JOHN BARNES, FROM PHILADELPHIA, Has just opened for sale the following articles at his store opposite Mr. Semmes's tavern, in Georgetown, a general assortment of Fresh Teas of the first quality, viz.
Imperial, Large Hyson, Young Hyson, Hyson skin, Souchong and Bohea.
SPICES.
Nutmegs, Mace, Cinnamon, Cloves, Four bags fresh Almonds.
LIQUORS.
Madeira, six years old, Dry Sherry & Port, Brandy, 4th proof Jamaica spirits, and Holland Gin.
COFFEE.
Pennington's best refined sugars. With a handsome assortment of gentlemen's fashionable London Hats and trimmings.
He has likewise for sale, ten cases well assorted STATIONARY, consisting of writing paper of different qualities, Quills, Wafers, and Ink powder, in packages from 80 to 180 dollars on the most reasonable terms for cash or approved notes.
English and American playing cards, Pasteboard per gross, Wrapping paper per ream, A case of 7-8 and yard wide Irish Linen per piece. Nov. 14th, 1800.
FORTY DOLLARS REWARD.
FOR Apprehending and securing in any Goal, so that the Subscriber gets him again. A NEGRO MAN named NACE, ran away some time in the month of October, aged thirty years, about five feet high, light complexion, wears his hair queued, a well set trunkey fellow. I have cause to believe he is in the City of Washington. It is unnecessary to describe his Clothing as he will have it in his power to change them. I will give TWENTY DOLLARS if ten miles from home, THIRTY DOLLARS if twenty miles, and the above reward if a greater distance.
ZACHARIAH SOTHORON. Charles County near Benedict, October 31.
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, Nov. 20, 1800.
The Speaker informed the House that Mr. Condy, the Clerk, was in such a state of health, as rendered it necessary for him for a short time to return to Philadelphia, where his family resided. For which purpose he had requested him to obtain leave of absence for three weeks, which was granted.
On motion of Mr. S. Smith a Committee of Claims, and a committee of Revival and unfinished business, were appointed.
On motion of Mr. S. Smith, a Committee of Ways and means, consisting of nine members, was appointed.
No additional members of the SENATE having arrived, the House adjourned till tomorrow.
FRIDAY, Nov 21.
The Speaker read a letter from the Door-keeper of the House, stating that in consequence of the dispersed situation of the members, he found it very inconvenient to discharge his usual duties without additional assistance, and requesting the attention of the House to several provisions connected with the convenience of the members.
Referred to a committee of three.
MR. NICHOLAS observed that he had submitted, during the last session, certain propositions to amend the Constitution, as far as it related to the choice of Electors of President and vice President, and to the election of members of the House of Representatives.
But having found that they clashed with the opinions of many members, and not having then maturely considered them himself, he thought it best at that time to waive a conclusive consideration of them. Deeming the object of great importance, and considering the present a fit time to discuss it, he offered two amendments, which he wished to lie on the table for consideration.
The first amendment directs that after the 3d of March 1801 Electors shall be chosen in each state in districts, which shall be equal to the number of electors that each state is entitled to, and that the choice shall be made in each state by those citizens who vote for the most numerous branch of each state legislature; in such manner as the legislature of each state shall prescribe.
The second amendment directs that after the 3d. day of March 1803, the members of the House of Representatives shall be chosen in each state by the citizens entitled to vote for the most numerous branch of the state legislature in districts equal in number to the number of the representatives; in such manner as the legislature of each state shall prescribe.
MR. HARPER was of opinion that the necessary propositions on this subject would require more detail than those just moved. He therefore moved their reference to a select committee.
Referred to Committee of five, and ordered to be printed for the use of the members.
Mr. A. Foster made a motion for the appointment of two chaplains of different religious denominations, one to be appointed by each house, to interchange weekly; which was agreed to.
It was afterwards moved by Mr. Thatcher, and agreed to by the house, to strike out those parts of the motion which prescribed that the chaplains should be of different denominations, and should interchange weekly.
A message was received from the Senate, informing the house that they had formed a quorum, and had elected JOHN T. HOWARD, President pro-tempore.
A Committee, consisting of Messrs. Griswold, S. Smith, and Craik, was appointed to unite with a committee of the Senate, to notify the President, that the two houses had formed, and were ready to receive any communications from him.
The committee, appointed on the part of the Senate, are, Mr. Tracey and Mr. Wells.
The joint committee, appointed to wait on the President, reported that they had performed the duty assigned them, and that the President had replied that he would meet the two houses in the Senate chamber TOMORROW AT TWELVE O'CLOCK.

STATEMENT of the grounds of Difference between the American and British commissioners, under the 6th article of the British Treaty.
The fourth article of the definitive treaty of peace is in these words; "It is agreed, that creditors on either side shall meet with no lawful impediment to the recovery of the full value in sterling money of all bona fide debts heretofore contracted." As complaints were made on the part of Great Britain, that this article was infringed, a remedy was provided in the sixth article of the treaty of amity, negotiated by Mr. Jay, as follows; "Whereas it is alledged by divers British merchants, and others of His Majesty's subjects, that debts, to a considerable amount, which were bona fide contracted before the peace, still remain owing to them, by the citizens or inhabitants of the United States; and that by the operations of various lawful impediments, since the peace, not only the full recovery of said debts has been delayed, but also the value and security thereof have been in several instances impaired, and lessened, so that by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, the British creditors cannot now obtain, and actually have and receive full and adequate compensation for the losses and damages which they have hereby sustained; It is agreed, that in all such cases where full compensation for such losses and damages cannot for whatever reason be actually obtained, had and received by the said creditors in the ordinary course of justice, the United States will make full and complete compensation for the same to the said creditors: but it is distinctly understood, that this provision is to extend to such losses only, as have been occasioned by the lawful impediments aforesaid; and is not to extend to losses occasioned by the insolvency of the debtors, or other causes, as would equally have operated, to produce such loss, if the said impediments had not existed, nor to such losses nor damages as have been occasioned by the manifest delay or negligence, or wilful omission of the claimant.
"For the purpose of ascertaining the amount of any such losses and damages, five commissioners shall be appointed, and authorised, to meet and act in manner following, viz. Two of them shall be appointed by His Majesty, two of them by the President of the United States, by and with the advice of the Senate thereof, and the fifth by the unanimous voice of the other four; and if they should not agree in such choice, then the commissioners named by the two parties shall respectively propose one person, and of the two names so proposed, one shall be drawn by lot, in the presence of the four original commissioners. When the five commissioners, thus appointed, shall first meet, they shall, before they proceed to act, take the following oath or affirmation in presence of each other, which oath or affirmation being so taken and duly attested, shall be entered on the record of their proceedings, viz. I, A. B. one of the commissioners appointed in pursuance of the sixth article of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation, between His Britannic Majesty and the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will honestly, diligently, impartially and carefully examine, and to the best of my judgment, according to justice and equity, decide, all such complaints, as under the said article shall be preferred to the said commissioners: and that I will forbear to act as a commissioner in any case, in which I may be personally interested.
"Three of the said commissioners shall constitute a board, and shall have power to do any act appertaining to the said commission provided that one of the commissioners named on each side, and the fifth commissioner shall be present, and all decisions shall be made by a majority of the voices of the commissioners then present; eighteen months from the day on which the said commissioners shall form a board, and be ready to proceed to business, are assigned for receiving complaints and applications: but they are nevertheless authorised, in any particular case, in which it shall appear to them to be reasonable and just, to extend the said term of eighteen months, for any term not exceeding six months, after the expiration thereof. The said commissioners shall first meet at Philadelphia, but they shall have power to adjourn from place to place as they shall see cause.
"The said Commissioners in examining the complaints and applications so preferred to them, are empowered and required, in pursuance of the true intent and meaning of this article, to take into consideration all claims, whether of principal or interest, and to determine the same respectively, according to the merits of the
several cases, due regard being had to all the circumstances thereof, and as equity and justice shall appear to them to require. And the said Commissioners shall have power to examine all such persons, as shall come before them, on oath or affirmation, touching the premises, and also to receive in evidence according as they may think most consistent with equity and justice, all written depositions, or books, or papers or extracts thereof; every such deposition, book, or paper, or copy, or extract, being duly authenticated, either according to the legal forms now respectively existing in the two countries or in such other manner as the Commissioners shall see cause to require or allow.
"The award of the said Commissioners, or any three of them as aforesaid, shall in all cases be final and conclusive both as to the justice of the claim and to the amount of the sum to be paid to the creditor or claimant; And the United States undertake to cause the sum so awarded to be paid in specie to such creditor, or claimant without deduction; and at such time or times, and at such place, or places, as shall be awarded, by the said Commissioners; and on condition of such releases or assignments, to be given by the creditor or claimant, as by the said Commissioners may be directed; provided always that no such payment shall be fixed, by the said Commissioners, to take place, sooner than twelve months from the day of the exchange of the ratification of this treaty."
Under this article, his Britannic Majesty appointed Thomas M c Donald and Henry Pycroft, Esq rs. and the President of the United States appointed Thomas Fitzsimons and James Innes Esq rs. Commissioners. The said British Commissioners proposed John Guillemand, Esq rs. and the American Commissioners proposed Fisher Ames, Esq rs. for the fifth Commissioner; and Mr. Guillemand was drawn by lot. Afterwards, upon the death of Col. Innes, the President appointed Samuel Sitgreaves, Esq rs. in his room. Among the claims which were exhibited to the commissioners were those of British creditors, whose debts were confiscated, during the revolutionary war. These, which were to an immense amount, were contended to be revived by the fourth article of the treaty of peace, and recoverable against the United States, under the sixth article of the treaty of amity. The case of Andrew Allen was one of the class. It was before the board July 9th, 1799; and is thus stated.
"Claim for losses, arising from the non-recovery of debts due to the claimant being a subject of his Britannic Majesty through the operation of an act of attainder and confiscation passed against him as a subject of Pennsylvania, by the representatives of the freemen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on the sixth day of March, 1778; for the crime of high treason, in having contrary to the allegiance which he owed to the said state, joined and adhered to the army of the King of Great Britain, the said act of attainder and confiscation being a lawful impediment, which operated against the fourth article of the treaty of peace, and within the meaning of the sixth article of the treaty of amity.
"The board finding that the objection, in limine, thus taken and argued before them, precluded all farther investigation— took up the question, so far only as it was necessary to the determination of the national character, and right to claim. And after a full argument and discussion, and with reference to opinions, which had been solemnly delivered by the judges of the United States, a majority of the board
proposed a resolution stating, among other things, that the only difference between the question in this case, and that which is stated in the preceding resolution,* consisted in the different words of description, contained in the two several acts, but as the act of Pennsylvania could not have any greater effect or operation against the fourth article of the treaty of peace, than that of New-York; and as the fact charged to be a crime, viz. adhering to the cause of his Britannic Majesty, was the same in both cases, the mere words of description, assumed in the act of Pennsylvania, could not prove against the character of the party as a British subject; or give efficacy to itself, so as to take the case out of the meaning and operation of the said article— that at the peace, there was no unconditional submission on the part of Great-Britain, to all that had been done— and the authority they had exercised; but a negotiation by solemn treaty containing reciprocal stipulations, as the price of peace, and for the mutual benefit of both countries; by the fourth article whereof, in favor of creditors on either side it was expressly, or in effect stipulated that no act which had been, or should thereafter be done, or passed by or under the authority of the said United States, or any of them, whatever might be its form or import; whatever the terms therein employed; whatever the extent of power thereby assumed or declared; whatever the character thereby ascribed to the individual against whom it was directed; should be suffered to operate as a lawful impediment to the recovery of debts heretofore contracted, to a creditor on the side of his Britannic Majesty, at the date of the said treaty—concluding also in these words, that if the claimant could be said to have any time made his election in favour of the United States, under the declaration of Independence;—and so departed for a time from his native allegiance, (the contrary of which appears to have been the case) his return to, and having been on the side of his said native allegiance at the peace would have secured to him the benefit of the said fourth article of the treaty—that accordingly, having been on the side of his Britannic Majesty, at the date of the treaty of peace and being a natural born subject of his said Majesty, not barred by the acceptance of citizenship, from the right of complaining against the United States, the claimant is entitled under the treaty of amity to complain to this board of the said act of attainder and confiscation before recited, as being a lawful impediment within the description of the fourth article of the treaty of peace, and the sixth article of amity, to the recovery of such debts as he shall prove to the satisfaction of the board, within the meaning of the said treaties.
"And as the ground which had been taken on the part of the United States involved a subject of delicacy, on which they were desirous not to give offence, or be misunderstood, they added that the said principles and conclusions, contained nothing inconsistent with that perfect respect which is due to the Independence of the United States; as the same was recognized on the part of his Britannic Majesty, by the first article of the treaty of peace."
"To prevent a vote upon this resolution, Mr. Fitzsimons and Mr. Sitgreaves withdrew. They also withdrew in other similar cases. Yet the British commissioners entered on the records of the board, that "they held that those acts of secession, which had been practised in particular cases, could not affect the validity or operations of the opinions which they were meant to defeat: for the very act of secession implied what had indeed been formerly minuted, that those opinions were the opinions of the majority which had been declared in a board, completely constituted; and all that the subsequent secession of some of the members could effect, was but to prevent what the treaty did not require, namely, the declaration of the opinions by the formality of a vote: That formality being the accustomed, but not the exclusive mode of ascertaining the fact; which, if prevented by an evasive proceeding, might be supplied by the admission, of other evidence, that such had been the fact. They therefore held that the opinions which had been declared, by a majority of the board, were as much the opinions of the board, under the express provisions of the article as if the form of a vote had not been so prevented."
The reader will see that the main question was on the true meaning of the words, "bona fide debts heretofore contracted" in the fourth article of the treaty of peace
* A resolution relative to Dr. Ingles under an act of confiscation of the State of New-York.
whether it is limited to debts heretofore contracted, but then existing and not extinguished or discharged, according to the laws of the land, as by release, limitation, confiscation, attainder, or any other lawful mode of discharge, or whether it was intended to have a retrospective operation, so as to annul any extinguishment or discharge acquired according to the pre-existing laws of the state, and revive a debt already lawfully dead and buried. The latter was the decision of the majority of the commissioners: and they refer to "opinions, which had been solemnly delivered by the judges of the United States." It would be unfortunate, if in the spirit inspired by a liberal policy, in favor of Great-Britain, at a time when mutual liberality was cultivated and expected on her part, any of our judges may have given such opinions on this point, as can be improved to establish claims to the amount of perhaps twenty millions against the United States, or to embarrass the executive in further attempts to negotiate a compromise of a dispute. For this difficulty has entirely suspended the board of Commissioners. Those of Great-Britain have returned home. And the board of Commissioners, on our claims of damages for commercial spoliations, which was the counterpart of this commission, is in consequence of it suspended in England. Mr. Sitgreaves has been despatched to London, supposed to be charged with a negotiation on this perplexing subject.
TERRITORY OF COLUMBIA, November 14th, 1800.
The Committees of arrangement, for celebrating the approaching Sessions of Congress in the City of Washington, have adopted a plan of procession, which they recommend being formed in front of the Little Hotel, for the purpose of accompanying the President of the United States to the Capitol, on the day he meets Congress to deliver his speech. The plan is calculated to embrace all classes and descriptions of persons who may attend.—It is requested of those who chuse to join the procession in their Corporate, Official, Military, Professional, or Mechanical capacity, to meet at ten o'clock, A. M. when they will receive from the Marshals of the day, the necessary information as to the rank or station severally assigned by the order of arrangement adopted—After the procession a respectful, and appropriate address, or communication from the INHABITANTS OF THE TERRITORY, to Congress, is contemplated.
A MEETING
Of the 14th Regiment of the Militia of Maryland, is requested at Mr. Stille's tavern, in the City of Washington, on Friday the 21st inst. at eleven o'clock, in order to appoint an officer to wait on the General Assembly, to obtain amendments to the Militia law.
It is expected that the Commanding Officers in this state will request a meeting of their respective Regiments, to appoint Deputies to meet at Annapolis on Monday the 24th inst. in order to carry the above laudable undertaking into perfect effect.
CITY OF WASHINGTON. FOR SALE,
Lot No. 9, in Square 122. THE above is inferior to few lots in this city, being but two squares west of the President's Square, commanding an extensive view of the Potomac, it is a corner lot, and fronts 155 feet 10 inches on F. Street, and 59 feet and an half inch on 20th Street.—An indisputable title will be given on receiving the amount of the purchase money. For terms apply to the subscriber a few doors east of the Little Hotel.
JOHN KEARNEY.
N. B. I will also sell Lot No. 4, in Square No. 491, fronting 55 feet 3 inches on the Pennsylvania Avenue, and extending back 150 feet to an alley of 30 feet wide, with the advantage of a 15 feet alley along side of it; and Lot No. 24, in Square No. 378, fronting 51 feet 5 inches on Ninth Street, and running back 107 feet 2 inches to a 30 feet alley. West India goods will be taken in payment for a considerable part of the above property.
I. K. November 17, 1800.
STRAYED or STOLEN A BLACK MARE With a white Streak down her face, with a bunchy Mane and tail. No other particular marks that I know. About thirteen hands high, about twelve years old, very heavy made and in good order, FOUR DOLLARS reward and all reasonable charges paid if left either with the Subscriber, or at JAMES TIMMONS Liberty Street Baltimore,
By JAMES USHER, Greenleaf's Point. Washington City, Nov. 10, 1800.
Notice is hereby given that I have applied to the general Assembly of Maryland for an Act of Insolvency.
PATRICK SIM. Nov. 7, 1800.