Gazette of the United-States. (New-York [N.Y.]), 1790-06-30 00:00:00

Gazette of the United States.
PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS AND SATURDAYS BY JOHN FENNO, No. 41, BROAD-STREET, NEAR THE EXCHANGE, NEW-YORK.
[No. 23, of VOL. II.]
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30, 1790.
[WHOLE No. 127.]
THE TABLET.—No. CXXVII.
(CONTINUATION.)
“The multitude, in all countries, are patient to a certain point.”
GOVERNMENT can never be so far reduced to a science, as to render it proper for Legislators to act, on all occasions, by general principles. Some particular cases may be involved in such singular circumstances, that natural sagacity becomes a better guide than principles or precedents. And it will frequently be a point of great delicacy with a legislator to determine, how far his conduct should be controlled by the public opinion. It is apt to be supposed that the sentiments of a free, enlightened people, are seldom founded in error. This idea must be a little qualified, before it can be adopted as one of those specific maxims which rest on immutable truth. I will dilate briefly upon the subject, and leave the reader to form such a result as his own reflections may dictate.
The general sense of the community is always too solemn to be trifled with; and it is often too powerful to be resisted. But this solemnity and force can only prevail in situations of a very momentous nature. Most questions that are discussed are not obvious or interesting enough to affect the touch of the great bulk of mankind. If a legislature happen to pass laws contrary to natural justice, or illy accommodated to the adventitious state of the people, they will probably excite uneasiness, and ought to be repealed. In times of great disorder, the current prejudices of the day may be favorable to laws that are capricious or unjust; but the operation of such laws will soon become unpopular. So on the other hand, in a disturbed irregular state of society, a temper of opposition, in the public mind, against a just and honorable mode of procedure, will imperceptibly give way to the progress of justice and good order. There is a right and wrong in the nature of things; and it will be found that popular prejudice will not long support the one, or resist the other. Society must dissolve itself when the people can be drawn into a serious opposition to measures founded in wisdom and rectitude. The complaints therefore of discontented men should never divert public rulers from such pursuits as are in themselves honest and prudent. Though some people may murmur, the great mass of the community will obey.
The multitude, in all countries, are patient to a certain point. They will generally bear, as much as they are to be borne by human nature, before they refuse obedience, and fly to wars and insurrections for relief. There are few or no revolts where the error has been principally on the side of the oppressed. Perhaps some circumstances of disrespect or provocation may attend the opposition, but the fundamental maxims of a revolting people will gain advocates in proportion as they are discussed. Clamors and suspicions may originate in trifles, and often deserve no notice.—But deliberate disaffection among the mass of the people, must be redressed by the government, or it will redress itself.
To cherish the caprice of an individual, or community, is a ready way to incur ill will and contempt. Opinions that have no reasonable foundation will be transitory. They may safely be disputed and moderately opposed. There can never be any danger in bringing them into public examination. Nothing tries the merit of public regulations better than to bring them to the test of an experiment. If they shrink from the trial, it is an evidence that they contain some false materials; but still the clamor excited against a measure under contemplation is no sufficient proof, that it will not turn out favorable in the experiment. There is an essential difference in the sentiments of any people relative to a law, before and after it is put into execution. While a law is in agitation, a thousand feelings and prejudices may give it too bad or too good a coloring; but when it takes effect, it begins to be examined among the people, more upon the ground of its own merit, and will finally stand or fall, as its real character deserves. The chief enquiry a legislator should make, is, what the real interests of the community require of him. Having ascertained this point, he will do well to enquire whether the popular opinion will probably sanction the plans he is about to adopt. If he finds the current of prejudice against him, he will, by degrees, be able to reconcile the feelings of the
people to their true interests. It is a matter of a good deal of discretion to counteract errors that may exist in society, against the public good; but the difficulty of the task will never deter a firm and virtuous legislator from making attempts. Moderation is compatible with firmness, and he will not, if he be a prudent man, defeat his purpose by rashness, any more than he will lose it by delay. Discretion is as much a public virtue as honesty or patriotism; but it can never be discreet to flatter people in their prejudices and faults, when it would promote their prosperity to lay them aside.
TRANSLATED FOR THE GAZETTE OF THE UNITED STATES. ADDRESS of the NATIONAL ASSEMBLY to the PEOPLE of FRANCE.
FEBRUARY 11th, 1790.
(CONTINUED.)
SUCH is our work, people of France, or rather such is yours; for we are but your organs, it is you who have enlightened, encouraged and supported us in our labors. What period can be compared with the present? What an honorable inheritance you are about transmitting to posterity! Raised to the rank of citizens, admissible to every employment, enlightened censors of the administration! Although you are not the depositaries, you are certain that every thing is done through you, and for you, who are equal in the sight of the law; free to act, to speak, to write, accountable to no man, but only to the common will. What condition can be fairer? Can there be a citizen, deserving that name, who dares cast a look behind, who would wish to dig up the ruins with which we are surrounded, to rebuild the former edifice?
But what has not been said? What has not been done to weaken in you the impression which so much good ought to produce? We have destroyed every thing , they say: that means, that every thing ought to be reëstablished. And what is there to be regretted? Would you wish to know? of all the objects that have been reformed or destroyed, let such persons be interrogated, as are not interested; let even the candid opinion of such as are interested be required; only except such, as to enhance the afflictions of personal interest, commiserate at this hour, the fate of those who at other times were indifferent to them; and we shall see whether the reform of each of these objects does not comprehend the general wishes of the public.
We have acted with too great precipitation; and many others reproach us with having acted too slowly. With too much precipitation! Are they ignorant that it is only by attacking and overturning abuses all at once, that we may hope to see ourselves effectually delivered; that then and then only, every person finds himself interested in the establishment of order; that slow and partial reforms have always ended in reforming nothing; in short, that the abuses which are preserved, become the prop, and shortly the restorer of such as were supposed to be destroyed?
“Our Assemblies are tumultuous.” To what purpose this complaint, provided the decrees issued by them are wise? We are however, far from wishing to present to your admiration, the detail of all our debates. We have more than once been afflicted by them ourselves; but we have at the same time perceived that it was too unjust to endeavour to take the advantage of them; and after all, this impetuosity was the almost inevitable effect of the first engagement that ever perhaps took place between principles and errors.
We are accused with having aspired after a chemical perfection . Foolish reproach! Which is plainly but a thin disguised wish to perpetuate abuses—The National Assembly has never attended to such servile interested & pusillanimous motives: It has had the courage or rather the reason to believe, that useful ideas, necessary to mankind, were not necessarily destined to adorn the pages of a book; and that the supreme Being, by giving perfeñtibility to man, the particular attribute of his nature, did not prohibit him from applying it to SOCIAL ORDER , which has become the most universal of his interests, and almost the first of his wants.
Is it possible, they say to regenerate an old and corrupted nation. Let them learn, that none are corrupted but such as wish to perpetuate corrupt abuses; and that a nation will renovate, the day
it resolves to renew its liberty. Mark the rising generation; whose hearts already palpitate with joy and hope! How pure, noble, and patriotic are its sentiments! With what an enthusiasm do we observe it endeavouring to have the honor of being admitted to take the citizens oath! But why answer such a miserable reproach! Shall the National Assembly be reduced to excuse itself for not having despaired of the French people?
Nothing has yet been done for the people, they have dared to say—And yet it is the people's cause which every where triumphs. Nothing done for the people! And does not every abuse which has been destroyed, prepare or secure consolation for them? They did not complain—because the excess of their misfortunes stifled their complaints. At this time they are unhappy. Say rather they are still unhappy. But they shall not long be so; we pledge our oaths for it.
(To be continued.)
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, JUNE 21.
Mr. Gerry's motion on the assumption of the State debts, which was inserted in this paper of the 26th, under consideration.
Mr. AMES:
I AM obliged to obtrude my sentiments upon the committee, under circumstances which stifle the hope of procuring for them a welcome reception. The curiosity of the assembly in the first stages of a public debate, will procure some indulgence and administer considerable aid to him who has to support a part in it.—But this subject has been debated till it has become tedious; there is very little remaining to be said which can excite curiosity, or reward attention. The feelings of the committee will procure me belief when I say, that I obey the duty of attempting to obviate the objections which have been urged by the gentleman from Virginia, and which I think is imposed upon me by the nature of some of them, with an unaffected reluctance. I will hope, however, that a candid condescension to the necessity of my situation, and a sense of public duty, will overcome, or suspend for a time, the disgust which has attended the revival of this debate.
The zeal of the gentlemen, on both sides, has led them to draw aid to their cause from very remote sources. But all the objections against the assumption may be comprised in these two—that the measure is against justice, and against policy. Both sides of the question have been maintained with an uncommon warmth of conviction—in candor, and probably in strict truth, this ought to be mutually understood as the evidence of a sincere zeal for the public good.
To evince the justice of the assumption, I take, as the ground of my reasoning, a proposition which is admitted on both sides; that the expenses of the war ought to be made a common charge upon the United States.
It will illustrate my argument, to observe, that this war was between this country and Britain, and not a war of particular States—All America, Congress in their resolves, the act appointing commissioners to settle the accounts, the late amendment (Mr. Madison's) to the proposition for assuming the State debts, and the objections to that proposition corroborate the idea that the expenses of the war ought to be equalized. Assume the debts, and settle the accounts, and this is effected. There is an end to the inequality as soon as this is done.—This answer is so plain and conclusive, that it is attempted to take off its force by saying, that the accounts will not be settled. If this assertion is true, the non-assumption is plainly unjust—For the burden is confessedly unequal now, and the only reason for refusing to take this burden off some of the States, is the certain assurance that they will be relieved from so much as shall be found to exceed their share, when the accounts shall be settled. But if the accounts are not to be settled at all, the States, which are now overloaded, have no justice to expect but from the assumption. It cannot be known with certainty which will be a creditor, or which a debtor State, at present. If the accounts should not be adjusted, we must remain in ignorance; we ought therefore to exclude all consideration of the other claims, because it would be useless, and apply the principal of equality to the State debts.—The debts to be assumed are either duly proportioned among the States, or they are not. If they are so proportioned, then it is certainly politic, and not unjust, because it would be equal to assume them. If they are now unduly proportioned, it is even in terms against equality to leave them upon the States.
If the war has made a random distribution of debts upon the States, it is best to make the amount which is to be left unsettled, as little as may be. For the probability is, that as you diminish the unsettled amounts, you make the inequalities less. This will serve as an answer to those also who say, that supposing a settlement to take place two or three years hence, a State may be relieved from a light burden of its own debt, and be obliged to bear, as its proportion of the assumed debt, one more weighty. For it is not certain that it will have in that case more to bear than its part, and if it should turn out to be more, the balance may be known almost as soon as the interest will commence—The assertion that the accounts will not be settled, has been made with confidence. To judge how far we ought to guide our conduct by it, it is enough to examine what States it comes from. Let the gentlemen who make it ask their own hearts, let them look round and ask one another, whether their States are the more clamorous for their dues, or apprehensive of a settlement, which will expose their delinquency. In this place, where facts are known, this question will be an argument.
But what ground is there for saying that the accounts will not be adjusted? This was positively engaged by the former government. It is improper for Congress to act as if Congress was not to be trusted. Commissioners are employed in the business? A motion to extend their time and powers has met with no opposition, and it is maturing into a law. Who will oppose it? Not New-England! we wish it—we have pledged ourselves to support it; you ought to believe us, when it is so easy to bring us to the test. I have myself moved resolutions—the best I could devise—which I thought would facilitate—would force a settlement. I

am ready to revive them.—Surely those who urge that the accounts will not be settled, do not propose to fulfil their own prophecy.
It is certain therefore, that if there is a disposition in this house to prevent proper measures being adopted to procure a settlement, it will be disappointed—I wish to remove this ground of objection, by urging the business of liquidation forward. If then provision is to be made for liquidating the accounts, the argument which I deduced from it remains in full force. All pretence of inequality is removed by it. It is a full answer to several other objections—it becomes unnecessary to ask whether State notes remain debts against this government after they have been received into the State treasuries; whether the United States are obliged to assume before the balances are found on a settlement: and whether the debts were wisely or unwisely contracted? It becomes immaterial to calculate how many parts in an hundred New-Hampshire, and how many Connecticut will pay; and how much Virginia has paid, and will now have to pay. What was wrong in the distribution of the burdens of the war will be rectified; and as to future payments, all the citizens will be upon a footing. As the gentleman from Virginia reasons with great candor, I am sure he will be sorry that in his observations he has wholly neglected, certainly through inadvertency, to notice an argument which seems on both sides, to be considered as absolutely conclusive. When I say that both sides allow this argument to be conclusive, I presume my meaning is understood as I formerly expressed it. For the answer to it is, that the accounts will not be settled; which admits the force of the reason, and rests the decision upon a point of fact.
Perhaps for the sake of simplicity and perspicuity, I ought not to pursue the enquiry as to the justice of the assumption any further. Tho' I mean to rely upon the argument I have stated, it will furnish an answer to some objections to urge another. It is said there are State debts, Congress has nothing to do with them.
When the war commenced, Congress had neither money, nor troops. They were so far from having a right to tax the States, that they had neither the powers of a government, nor a rule by which to require contributions. They appealed to the good will and patriotism of the States, and entreated them to furnish supplies to the extent of their power. The calls upon the States were not taxes or debts—but advances or loans to the public. This is explicitly and formally declared by the resolves of Congress. I have made some attempt to examine the journals in order to shew from them how totally unfounded the assertion is that these constituted debts against the States. But I found that the titles only of the resolves would fill a sheet of paper. Nothing can be more fully proved than the contrary, not only by the letter of the resolves, but by the conduct of Congress. In some cases, no regard was paid to the conjectural ratio by which the States ought to furnish men and supplies. In other instances some of the States were wholly omitted, and not unfrequently a single State was called upon for supplies. One of the most signal proofs, however, is that in the resolve of Feb. 9, 1780. It is expressly stipulated that if the States should furnish more than they are called upon for, the United States will stand charged with it. The resolve of Jan. 5, 1783, even in terms, recognizes the troops whom the States were to settle with as the creditors of the union, for whom good security must be provided.
This is an enquiry into the justice of the assumption. I reject therefore the forms of the transaction, and ask, whether, if the war had been confined to a corner, instead of spreading over the continent, and one State had incurred the whole debt of 80 millions, it would be just to leave the burthen upon that State? Consistently with the resolves I have mentioned, and the known sense of America, could it be called a State debt? I am sure of my answer, for the question extorts it—The difference between the case I have supposed, and that which is in debate is only in degree—there is none in the principle.
It will be answered, perhaps, that it is true we owe the States. They are not finally to bear the burthen—let them pay what they owe and we will pay them—This is a dangerous concession to those who make it, if the accounts are never to be settled, as it is urged by those who contend against the assumption. For it amounts to this—the debt is binding and yet it will never be paid. It presents them a choice of difficulties, it forces them to confess either that the assumption will not wrong you, or that the non-assumption will end in cheating such of the States as are your creditors.
It will be said it is true however, that, the United States stand indebted to the States, but the creditors of the States have no just claim upon the United States.
There is a great difference between the justice that will be done by the assumption to the States, and to their creditors.
The States were called upon during the war to make advances. Accordingly they procured something by taxes, and still more was procured by paper money, which died in the hands of the possessor. They have also paid some part since the peace. So far the States as such, actually made advances—But the principal part was obtained either by borrowing, or seizing private property, or by drafting men. So far the advances were made by individuals—and at periods so critical, and under such circumstances of violence and hardship, as to give a peculiar sanction to their claim upon the justice and honor of their country.
Justice plainly requires that these persons should be repaid, their interest at least, in all events, and without delay. Their claims, in every view, are perfect—most of them are original holders. But neither the justice of the case, nor the engagements of Congress require that the States should be repaid till the extent of their demand can be known. For I readily admit that nothing more than the balances of their actual advances are due from the United States to the individual States. This has been urged against the assumption, but without foundation—If a State paid more than its proper share the surplus should be repaid. But if a payment was only promised and is still to be made justice is due to the creditors and not to the State. The idea may be illustrated by considering the States as agents or contractors for the union, what they paid they claim for themselves, what they barely promised should be paid by their employers, who had the benefit of the debt, especially if the agent cannot or will not pay—I cannot think it necessary to give any further answer to the question, so logically proposed with regard to the nature of the debts when redeemed; add in the State treasuries.
What remains due ought to fall not unequally upon States, but upon the whole society—It ought if not paid sooner, to fall upon posterity. If some States should lose wealth and people, and others increase, if new States should join the union, or spring up within it, and the western wilderness be thronged with people, the burthen will be equalized upon all the citizens.—Liberty and independence were procured for the whole, and for posterity—why then should not all contribute to the price?
As it respects the army debt, the very terms of the bargain bind the United States. Congress promised to pay the men, but called upon the States to raise them. Afterwards, when the paper failed, the States were requested to make up the depreciation—State notes were given for it, which remain due. Probably all the States cannot pay. In this instance not only justice, but your plighted faith require you to pay them; you have asked their services, and had them; you have promised to reward them, and they remain unrewarded. I have already supposed the case of the whole debt being thrown upon one State. If instead of the whole debt, its zeal or the necessity of its affairs had pressed a State forward to exceed, and in its distress to disregard, its ability to pay, and accordingly had run in debt three times as much as it can pay—that the war had scattered its citizens and wasted its property—are the officers and soldiers who expelled the enemy, and who did not care which State line they served in, to be told, you served the United States; but you are the creditors of South-Carolina? It is true, you shed your blood for us—by your valour, we fit here—we have seen your wrongs, and when it would do
you no good, because we had no power, we told the world how deeply we lamented them. But go home and starve—Would not this wring drops from their hearts, and plant thorns in our own?
The like reasoning will apply to another description of the debts to be assumed—to the certificates given by the commissioners and other officers of the United States, and since assumed by the particular states. You cannot deny your own by calling them state debts—A great part of the debt of South-Carolina is said to be of that kind. Is that state to be crushed with a weight which it cannot bear, or are the creditors to be ruined because the state will be undone, if they are not? Or how will this comport with the principle admitted on both sides of equalizing the expenses of the war?
The best fund of the states, and hitherto the only one of the union, the impost has been taken away by adopting the constitution. Let the debts follow the funds. Let the world judge whether the generous confidence of the state creditors in the public justice ought to be abused, and whether they ought to be made to repent the cordial support which they gave to the new constitution. The force of this argument may be inferred from the uncommon pains which have been taken to destroy it. The fact is denied, and the issue of the question has been boldly rested upon this point, that the states most urgent for the assumption were not incapacitated from providing for their debts by the surrender of the impost. The impost collected in New-Hampshire is called the amount of that state's contribution to the union, and the ratio by which she ought to contribute is taken from her present representation. I wave, at this moment, all comment upon the unfairness and fallacy of this mode of computation. I proceed to observe, that an uncommon use is made of the result. According to her number of representatives, that state ought to pay one twentieth, and yet no more than an hundredth part of the impost of the union is paid by that state, or rather collected in it—of course, it is gravely said, it will save four-fifths of the sum which it would have had to pay, if the debt had been assessed upon the union before the constitution was framed, and this saving to the state may apply to the discharge of its debt. But, for such requisitions never were paid, and never could have been paid by the states. Experience had taught us, that it was not to be expected, nor was it in their power.—This indeed was one of the principal reasons for adopting the constitution. Are we seriously addressed, when we are told, that the savings of a revenue, which did not exist, that four-fifths of nothing may be applied to pay the state creditors? Without further regarding the ridicule of the argument, let us trace the fact. The debt of New-Hampshire is said to be about 230,000 dollars—The yearly interest at 4 per cent. is upwards of 9000 dollars. The impost and tonnage collected in that state from August to December, is near 8,000 dollars. So that the impost of that state, tho' far short of her actual contribution to the common treasury, will, in the whole year, greatly exceed their interest which assuming her debt will throw upon the United States. Here then the fund surrendered by that state is more than adequate to the debt which ought to follow it. The whole cause has been hazarded on the fact, and here the fact is against him who appealed to it. May I be permitted to ask, whether it is not to be lamented, that, thro' inadvertency or mistake, the whole fact was not mentioned? May I demand why the non-importing states were preferred to the importing states for calculating the impost? Massachusetts collected under a flat law near 150,000 dollars impost yearly. This falls short of her present collection under the law of the union, which is nearly equal to the interest of her debt. The excise would have supplied the deficiency, and that fund you are about to invade. It would be wrong to take away funds, tho' inferior to the discharge of interest, and yet to leave the whole debt upon the state. If the funds surrendered were equal to the debts, it has been admitted that the union ought to take the debts also. The injustice of rejecting the debts, and taking the impost to a less amount, differs only in degree.—But why was New York passed over in silence! The interest of the debt of that state would not equal the impost collected within it. What will you say to that state?
The candour and impartiality of the committee will be exercised in deciding whether the arguments so often urged in favour of the assumption, that you ought to take the debts with the impost, has lost any thing of its force by this investigation of facts: What is asserted on one side, and denied on the other, after a strict enquiry, ends in the same point.
(To be continued.)
THURSDAY, JUNE 24.
Sketch of the Debate
In Committee of the whole on the report of the select Committee, on the Memorial of the Officers of the Navy.
MR. SHERMAN observed, that by the memorial, and the report, it appears, that the Memorialists do not pretend to have any claim on the public by virtue of any existing resolutions of Congress. The subject is very fully before the Committee—it lays with Congress therefore to determine, what is proper to be done in such circumstances. The application stands entirely on the basis of its own merits, and he could conceive of no difficulty in deciding on it.
Mr. Stone observed, that it is true there is no claim by virtue of any antecedent contract or promise—nor was Commutation, he believed, promised to the officers of the army. In this view the officers of the navy stand exactly upon the same footing with those of the army. He then entered into a consideration of the merits, services, and sufferings of the Officers of the Navy—and from these and other considerations, urged the justice of their claim, as he could see no reason for the difference that had been made.
Mr. Huntington said, there is but a little consideration necessary to recollect the reason of the difference between the officers of the navy and army.—The officers of the army were first in the public service—the navy was not formed till some time after hostilities commenced—the officers of the navy were put on the same footing in respect to pay as the army—the former had some advantages in point of rank—and they were entitled to a part of their captures.
He then gave an account of the origin of commutation—which was granted on account of the peculiar exigencies of affairs at that time—During the time this business was in agitation, there were very few navy officers in the public service, and no application was made by them for half-pay or commutation—They were ashore, and many of them had retired to civil life—The reason therefore why they were not included in the any necessity for the measure, as the United States did not then want a navy—whereas the public exigencies with respect to the army were such
as rendered the resolution for the Commutation to them absolutely necessary—he however thought the claim of the Navy Officers founded on justice—and justice said he is the strongest plea that can be urged in support of any demand whatever.
Mr. Hartley supported the memorial, he gave the officers great credit for their bravery, services and attachment to the cause of their country—he dilated on the hardships and sufferings they endured—he adverted to the advantages they derived from captures—which he stated to be very inconsiderable—their claims said he, appear to me to be founded on the strictest and most partial justice—he hoped therefore that the report would be accepted, and a committee appointed to bring in a bill accordingly.
Mr. Baldwin, who was one of the select committee which made the report, stated some of the reasons which influenced the committee—also the considerations which were supposed to have led to the distinction between the navy and army, in respect to commutation—one of which was, that the officers of the navy were in the line of their particular calling, and which they were enabled to pursue with perhaps greater advantages than they ever did before.—Other circumstances were mentioned by him tending to invalidate their claim.
Mr. Sherman observed, that if this report is adopted, it will open a very wide door indeed to applications for half-pay or commutation. He then gave a history of the origin of commutation or half-pay—which he said was considered at the time, as a measure of necessity—and not of justice—and has been very much complained of by several of the States. The above necessity did not exist with respect to the officers of the navy—as at the time there were but 2 or 3 ships in service. From this state of facts he inferred that no precedent could be drawn in favor of extending the Commutation to the officers of the navy. He thought that their case was entitled to the consideration of the Legislature on the principles of equity—he should therefore be for the Committee's making full enquiry into the circumstances of the whole business—and making such provision as justice should point out—but he was against the report in its present latitude.
Mr. Burke replied to the observations of Mr. Baldwin, respecting the officers of the navy being in the way of their profession—and from the nature of the service he shewed, that there was little weight in the observation—their circumstances were very much altered for the worse—and that they were now left in a very destitute situation—whereas the officers of the army are enjoying posts and places of honor and profit. Their silence on the subject had been mentioned.—He observed that their dispersed situation had been the principal reason of their not coming forward with their petition before.—Mr. Burke observed, that the officers of the navy were not treated like other prisoners, when they were taken, they suffered peculiarly, not as prisoners of war, but were treated like rebels, whose crimes were of the blackest nature.
Mr. Seney said he was, and always had been, an advocate for the claims of the officers of the navy—he thought their memorial founded on the strictest justice—he introduced the representation to Congress of the "illustrious" commander in chief of the late army on the subject of half-pay and pensions, which he read.
He then entered into a comparative view of the relative merits of the army and navy—and said it was well known that many of them made as great sacrifices as the other description of officers. With respect to prize money, he doubted whether they had ever been benefited by it. In some instances where they had expected the most; they had, through the failure of agents, received only a certificate worth about five shillings in the pound; and that received only for a part of what was due. He replied to the several objections which had been offered, and concluded by saying, it would be unjust and impolitic not to grant their claims.
Mr. Sedgwick observed that no gentleman in the committee had deeper impressions made upon him, by the grateful recollection of the merits and services of those brave men, to whom America owed its freedom, than himself. Yet under the present circumstances of the country, he thought it a duty he owed the people who had confided their interest to his management, to examine, on principle, the demands which were made upon the government for pecuniary grants. The applicants in the present instance did not place their demand on the ground of contract. For the contract under which the services had been rendered, had been complied with according to the specified terms, and performed to the extent of the powers of the government, in the same manner as other claims of a similar nature had been satisfied. It was further, he said, to be noticed, that during the time those services were performing, no dissatisfaction had been manifested by the present memorialists. From these observations then, it clearly followed, that in point of contract, the claims of the officers of the navy were in all respects similar to those of every other individual in the community, who had received satisfaction by the same means. It would

then become gentlemen to reflect on the consequences which would result from the establishment of a precedent, which would go to the invalidation of all the final settlements which had been made.
Mr. Sedgwick said, gentlemen had supported the claim of the applicants from a supposed analogy of their circumstances, to those of the gentlemen of the army. He said there was the difference which arose from the circumstance already mentioned—The commutation was founded in contract, the present claim was destitute of that support. There were also other material circumstances which very widely differed the two cases. The officers of the army were called from pursuits by which they were enabled to support and provide for their families, and to abandon their prospects of establishments by the business to which they had been educated. On the other hand, the gentlemen of the navy were promised handsome wages for continuing in that business to which they had been educated, and for which they were best, if not only qualified; and this too, at a time when, by the destruction of our commerce, many of them otherwise must have wanted employment. They had likewise additional encouragement from a participation in the avails of prizes, while the army derived no emolument from any such source.
That the report of the select committee being unsupported either on the ground of contract, or the principles on which the grant to the officers of the army was made, the application was merely to the generosity of the government. He said it was a principle from which he professed himself determined never to depart, not to dissipate that property in idle or visionary projects of generosity, which is necessary to the performance of justice. That the arduous scenes in which we had been engaged, had imposed the necessity of practising a rigid economy. That the conduct which we might under present embarrassments pursue, it would be improper hereafter to consider as a precedent. That it would indeed be a noble and generous sentiment to compensate all those losses which our friends had sustained by the war. But he asked if such would not be a vain attempt? Can we compensate all the desolation of fire and wanton depredation, provoked from the enemy by the patriotism of particular districts in this country? Can we retribute the sufferings which have been caused by the depreciation of our currency? Or the ruin of thousands and thousands by our delays of payment, and the consequent depreciation of our securities? Can we administer to the relief of the vast number of widows and orphans, who from those circumstances, have been reduced from affluence to want and beggary? Remember too, he said, the fages, who in the hour of danger watched over your security—and who, in their best days, abstracted themselves from every lucrative pursuit, and devoted all their time and talents to the service of their country. These patriots, now in the evening of life, are the most meritorious objects of the generosity of the government, yet they would nobly disdain to ask, or to receive the aid of the government, however necessary to them, until efficient provision was made for the performance of those contracts, which we are under the most solemn obligation, if in our power, to fulfil. And he concluded by observing that when the improving resources of our country should enable the government generously to compensate the sufferings of those several descriptions of persons, then and not till then, might we extend to the memorialists the relief which they now sought for.
Mr. Jackson supported the claim of the officers. He observed that if the country had not derived so extensive advantages from the exertions of the navy, it must be imputed to peculiar circumstances, and not to any deficiency in the officers and sailors—so far as their abilities could be exerted, no men distinguished themselves more. Had ours been a maritime, instead of an agricultural country, the importance of a navy would have struck us more forcibly. Their claims he considered as founded in the strictest justice, and he had no doubt that if they had applied to the old Congress, they would have granted their request—but restrained by a consideration of the embarrassments of the United States, they did not obtrude their petitions upon them—and now this very circumstance is urged as a reason for not granting their petition. In my opinion this did them great honor—since that time they have been scattered through all parts of the Union—and other circumstances have delayed their application to this time—but has not lessened the equity of it. He added many other observations, and concluded by saying, that he was fully in favor of the report.
Mr. Gerry was in favor of the report under certain conditions—which were, that the same be so constructed, as to ascertain the amount of prize money received by the officers, and that the allowance should be extended only to such, as continued in the public service to the end of the war. He adverted to the case of prizes, in which it had been said, the officers had suffered thro the frauds of their agents. If this is fact, it was
a subject which called for redress—and on principles of equity an investigation ought to take place.
Several other gentlemen spoke on the occasion. Mr. Page, Mr. Hartley, and Mr. Seney in favor—and Mr. Goodhue, and Mr. Sherman against the report.
On Mr. Fitzsimons' moving in the House, that the report should be re-committed.
Mr. Boudinot said he was opposed to the re-commitment, as he did not conceive that the relief proposed could be granted under this report. From the reasoning which he had heard on the subject this day, he was convinced, that if the commutation is extended to the memorialists, Congress will have to extend it to above 1000 officers of different descriptions.—It must be extended to the Staff officers, in several departments.—He enlarged on the unpopularity of half-pay and commutation—and said, that if injustice had been done to the memorialists, every instance ought to be enquired into, and determined on its own merits. He was therefore in favor of rejecting the report—and still leaving the memorial open to an enquiry as to the particular cases which may require an investigation.
MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1790.
THE bill to regulate seamen in the merchants service, was bro't in engrossed, read the third time, and passed.
Reports of the Secretary at war on sundry petitions were read, which together with a report of a committee on the petition of Col. Meutges, were referred to a committee appointed to bring in a bill concerning disabled soldiers, &c.
Mr. Wadsworth, from the joint committee who were to consider and report the business necessary to be finished previous to an adjournment, also to report when it would be proper to adjourn, reported, that in their opinion the business necessary to be acted upon may be completed by the 15th day of July next, and that an adjournment of the present session should take place by that time. The report was laid on the table.
The proposed amendment to the bill for extending the enumeration law to the State of Rhode-Island, were taken into consideration and disagreed to. The bill was then ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. Goodhue reported on the petition of E. H. Darby, which was read and laid on the table.
Mr. Ames presented a petition from the inspectors of the ports of Boston, and Charlestown, which was read and referred to the committee appointed to bring in a bill for the amendment of the revenue laws.
Mr. Parker of the committee, to whom the report of the Secretary at War on the petition of Dr. B. Middleton, was committed, presented a report, which was in favor of the petition.—Laid on the table.
On motion of Mr. Thatcher, the report of the Secretary at War, on the petitions of James Berry and others, were read and accepted by the House: These with some other reports of the Secretary, were referred to a committee, who were ordered to bring in bills pursuant thereto.
The House went into a committee of the whole on the report of a select committee, respecting the Virginia cession, and appointed a committee to bring in a bill, for securing the reservation made by that State in said cession. Adjourned.
TUESDAY, JUNE 29.
Mr. Gilman of the joint committee of both Houses, reported, that they had examined the following bills and found them duly enrolled—viz. An Act providing the means of intercourse between the United States and Foreign Nations—An Act for satisfying the claims of John McCord, and An Act for the relief of Nathaniel Twining. The Speaker affixed his signature to the same.
A message was received from the Senate informing that they have passed an Act, authorizing the purchase of a tract of land at West Point.
The bill for extending the enumeration Law to the State of Rhode-Island, having been engrossed, was read the third time, and passed.
Mr. Fitzsimons, of the select Committee on the bill providing the means of paying the interest on the debt of the United States, brought in a report, which was read—and made the order of the day to-morrow.
The report of the committee on the petition of E. H. Derby, was on motion of Mr. Goodhue, taken into consideration; the substance of this report is in favor of extending the time allowed by law for payment of the duties on teas from fix, to twelve months; this report was accepted, and referred to the committee appointed to prepare amendments to the collection law.
Mr. Jackson moved that the committee of the whole should be discharged from any further proceedings on the bill concerning the trade and navigation of the United States—this motion after a lengthy debate was negatived.
Mr. Jackson then moved that the House should immediately resolve itself into a committee of the whole on this bill, which being carried after a short debate.
Mr. Boudinot took the Chair.
This bill contains the discrimination in the duty on foreign tonnage; the first clause being rejected, the substance of the following propositions, moved by Mr. Fitzsimons, was adopted in lieu thereof, viz.
That from and after the day of next, there shall be paid and collected on all ships and vessels not built, or registered in the United States, a duty of per ton.
That on all ships or vessels arriving in any part of the United States, from places at which the United States are not permitted to trade, the sum of per ton.
The remaining clauses of the bill being disagreed to—the committee rose and reported progress. Mr. Heister of the committee appointed for the purpose, reported a bill making further provision for paying the invalid pensioners.—Adjourned.
L O N D O N, June 6. INDIA STOCK.
THE public cannot be too often reminded of the obligation they are laid under to the unwearied attention and solicitude of Mr. Hulley and Mr. Tiernay, whose virtue and preference have at length obtained that information which the public have so long in vain endeavoured to procure. The motions of those gentlemen have brought before the House of Commons such plain intelligible statements of the affairs of the company, as can no longer admit of the smallest doubt but they are ruinous beyond any retrievement. The House have fortunately ordered the accounts to be printed, a correspondent has furnished us with them, and we are enabled thereby to state to our readers the following authentic facts, deduced from these papers, all signed by the Accountant-General of the company.
In the paper, No. VI. it is emphatically acknowledged, that on the 1st of February, 1789, the Company were worse than they were on the 1st of February, 1781, by 12,255,558l.
In the paper, No. III. it is declared, that on the 1st of March 1785 [soon after the Board of Control were appointed,] their goods in warehouse unfold were worth 2,037,894l. whereas on the 1st of March, 1790, their unfold goods amounted only to 772,239l. And by No. V. it is confessed, that their effects are insufficient to pay their debts by 4,762,543l. and by adding 3,700,000l. to make their capital stock equal to its market price, and 1,178,291l. the amount of the last six items of their effects, which it is presumed are desperate, or at least very dubious, the deficiency will be increased to 9,640,834l. to answer which the Company have nothing to reckon upon but what is called their dead stock; which though it has since 1702 cost the company 8,222,970l. (being in truth little more than the accumulated aggregate of all their charges for erecting Forts and Houses of trade,) was, in 1783 admitted to be capable of producing very little, if any thing, on a sale. And yet to serve, no doubt, party purposes, we have seen the Company's stock rarified by stratagem to its present enormous price of 175l. per cent.
THE CONTINENT.
It is not at all surprising that the ostensible Minister of France, M. Necker, and the General Assembly should not be on the best terms—It is the natural consequence of a free constitution. When the French were under the fetters of despotism, they durst not complain publicly, they grumbled in secret. The motions of all Ministers ought to be narrowly watched and their conduct as Ministers strictly examined into
FOR THE GAZETTE OF THE UNITED STATES.
FROM THE FRENCH.
OH, thou young Chief, FAYETTE, the good and brave, Freedom's firm friend beyond th' Atlantic wave; While Glory mentions, France repeats thy name, And Time configns it to immortal fame! Though spots the fame of our first Heroes stain, Since chaining foes, they rivetted our chain: Yet FAYETTE breaks oppression's iron rod, A Patriot deem'd, thence grow a Demigod.
NEW-YORK, JUNE 30, 1790.
APPOINTMENT.—By Authority.
The PRESIDENT of the United States has been pleased to nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate to appoint,
The SIEUR DE LA MOTTE, Vice-Consul of the United States for the port of the Havre de Grace, in the Kingdom of France.
We hear that the bill to determine the permanent, and temporary seat of government of the United States, had a second reading in the Senate yesterday—when New-York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore were negatived, as the temporary residence, and the Potomac stands in the bill as the permanent seat of Government, after ten years have elapsed. The whole subject is still open to discussion.
Extract of a letter from a gentleman in England, to his friend in America.
" SINCE I wrote you last I have been in London, about the which I informed you was detained here by the Collector; he alleging she was not navigated according to law. As you are much concerned in American vessels, I think it necessary to give you a particular account of this transaction, and also to inform you of some very alarming proceedings going forward, on this side the Atlantic, against American shipping in general. You are acquainted that the British Navigation Act, requires, that the master and three-fourths of the mariners on board all foreign vessels trading to England, be subjects of the country the ships belong to. Now it is necessary that the Captain and three-fourths of the mariners of every American vessel coming to England, should be subjects of America at the time independence was granted by England. When the Captain and 10 of the people were really Americans, the remaining three were Englishmen, who had become citizens since the war—according to the present construction of the British navigation act, she had one more real American on board than the law requires, but 5 of the above number were apprentices, which the Collector would not allow to be numbered as mariners, the vessel was in consequence detained till he had the opinion of the commissioners of the customs; but this being too difficult a question for them to resolve, it was referred to the Attorney-General, and after detaining the vessel 7 weeks, with her cargo on board, he gave his opinion that she was navigated according to law. I wish to remark, that apprentices on board English vessels are always allowed to be mariners by the collector, underwriters, and every other person. When an American vessel arrives here, the collector has all the crew up to the Custom-House, and makes them swear where they were born, how old they are, how and where they have been employed, &c. in short, it is a species of inquisition which the collector has instituted against the Americans only, as he makes no such enquiry of vessels belonging to any other foreign nation, and I am sorry to add that this partial conduct of the Collector is approved of by people in power, for I saw a letter from Lord Hawkesbury, who particularly mentioned it; this letter was in answer to one wrote him by the merchants of this place, desiring something might be done for the benefit of British shipping, to counteract the 10 pr. cent. discount, on all goods imported into the United States in American vessels: He recommends that the merchants here should reduce the freight of their vessels, which he says would be only for a short time, and that by their exerting themselves against American vessels, and by the collector's being particularly strict with them, in a short time it must have a good effect, and that as soon as he had gained the necessary information in the business, he promised that something should be done. I have also been informed, that the merchants here have wrote out to America, giving positive orders not to ship any goods on board American vessels; and without something is done in this business, the sooner you get them on fire the better. You will also take notice, that a British subject becoming a citizen of America since the war, cannot hold any part of an American vessel."
The above facts are undoubted, coming from the very best authority.
ARRIVALS SINCE OUR LAST.—NEW-YORK.
 Brig Delight, Leader, St. Martins, 17 days.  Schooner Patty, Lacey, Shelburne, 10  —Sally, Patterson, Shelburne, 14  Sloop New York Packet, Shaw, Rhode-Island, 3  —Polly, Godfrey, ditto, ditto,  —Rambler, Carey, Peterburg 

NEW-YORK, June 26.
The NEW CONSTITUTION of the STATE of SOUTH-CAROLINA.
WE, the delegates of the PEOPLE of the STATE of SOUTH-CAROLINA, in general convention met, do ordain and establish this constitution for its government.
ARTICLE I.
Se ct . 1. The legislative authority of this state shall be vested in a general assembly, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Se ct . 2. The house of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen by ballot every second year by the citizens of this state, qualified as in this constitution is provided.
Se ct . 3. The several election districts in this state shall elect the following number for Representatives, viz.
Table with 2 columns: District Name, Number of Members. Includes Charleston, St. Michael, Christ Church, St. John, Berkeley, etc.
Se ct . 4. Every free white man, of the age of 21 years, being a citizen of this state, and having resided therein two years previous to the day of election, and who hath a freehold of fifty acres of land, or a town lot, of which he hath been legally seized and possessed at least six months before such election, or not having such freehold or town lot, hath been a resident in the election district in which he offers to give his vote, six months before the said election, and hath paid a tax the preceding year of three shillings sterling towards the support of this government, shall have a right to vote for a member or members to serve in either branch of the legislature for the election district in which he holds such property, or is so resident.
Se ct . 5. The returning officer, or any other person present, entitled to vote, may require any person who shall offer his vote at an election, to produce a certificate of his citizenship, and a receipt from the tax collector of his having paid a tax, entitling him to vote, or to swear, or to affirm, that he is duly qualified to vote agreeable to this constitution.
Se ct . 6. No person shall be eligible to a seat in the house of representatives, unless he be a free, white man, of the age of twenty one years, and hath been a citizen and resident in this state three years previous to his election. If a resident in the election district, he shall not be eligible to a seat in the house of representatives, unless he be legally seized and possessed in his own right, of a settled freehold estate of five hundred acres of land, and ten negroes; or of a real estate of the value of one hundred and fifty pounds sterling clear of debt. If a non-resident he shall be legally seized and possessed of a settled estate therein of the value of five hundred pounds sterling clear of debt.
Se ct . 7. The senate shall be composed of members to be chosen for four years, in the following proportions, by the citizens of this state, qualified to elect members to the house of representatives, at the same time, in the same manner, and at the same places where they shall vote for representatives, viz.
Table with 2 columns: District Name, Number of Members. Includes Charleston, St. Michael, Christ Church, St. John, Berkeley, etc.
(To be continued.)
A Description of a curious piece of CLOCK WORK, lately finished by Mr. Walter Folger, jun. (a young man of 25 years of age, and bred to no kind of business) of Nantucket, Massachusetts.
It performs the office of a common Eight Day Clock, but what is most extraordinary, is the Astronomical part, which at once discovers the ingenuity of the inventor:—When the Sun should rise, there is a Sun rises in the machine, comes to the meridian, and sets at the time the Sun in the Heavens should set at all seasons of the year, and exhibits the Sun's declination, place in the Ecliptic, Time of her rising and setting every day of the year; when the Moon should rise, there is a Moon that rises in the Machine, making the same appearance that the Moon in the Heavens should make, comes on the meridian, and sets at the proper time, making all the different appearances that we see the Moon make in the Heavens.
It exhibits the Moon's declination, time of high and low water at all times of the year, and keeps the date of the year for the space of one century without requiring any alteration.
By this machine the curious phenomena of the Harvest Moon, is rendered plain and easy to be understood by the meanest capacity.
It is all performed with forty wheels, and a suitable number of pinions, beside a large number of leavers, coins, &c. and contained between two brass plates, seven inches long, and five inches wide, and between one of the said plates and the dial plate, which is eighteen and an half inches long, and fourteen inches wide; the thickness from the dial plate to the back plate, is five inches; it is kept in motion by two weights of the size of the weights of a common Clock, and that motion kept regular by a second pendulum;—there is one wheel in it that keeps in motion continually, but that motion is so slow as to take up the space of about eighteen and an half years to perform one revolution.
PITTSBURGH, May 29.
In Messrs. Dunlap and Claypoole's Pennsylvania Packet on the 6th of May last, is a long memorial or representation from the chiefs of the 6 nations of Indians, to the supreme Executive council of this state, stating, that they have no place to trade but at Pittsburgh, and when they come there, they have their camps plundered, and their horses and canoes stole, by the white people, and when they apply for redress no man can understand them, to hear, judge and interpret, so that the wrongs done them may be redressed; and praying, that the great fire of the Quaker State would appoint some person at Pittsburgh to judge and interpret for them; also, that the cornplanter, Half Town and the New Arrow, together with an interpreter, may attend the great fire, to make known their grievances, &c.
On reading the memorial (of which the above is a short extract) observes a correspondent, I was led to reflect a little on the subject, and must confess, cannot see any advantage it would be to the state to appoint persons, as agent and interpreter, to reside in this place, to attend on the Indians when they come to trade; on the contrary, it is well known, that when the Indians have any persons they can apply to for presents, they grow lazy, and will not hunt as long as they can do without it; indeed those who trade at this place, are of that beggarly kind, who continue here after they have sold their skins and devoured what they have got for them, and then depend upon the people of this place and its vicinity for a subsistence for several weeks; or in the season pillage the corn fields of the farmers, of a great part of the crop. If while they are trading they receive any injury, by application to any of our magistrates, they would receive as much satisfaction as the case will admit; and there are many persons in this place who speak Indian well, that would interpret for them on such occasions, without receiving a yearly salary. It is hoped council will examine this affair minutely, before they attempt faddling the state with a burthen so obnoxious to the people.
SAILING CARRIAGE.
The carriage, in which Mr. Slater, who lately went over land with dispatches to the East-Indies, traversed the Arabian deserts, went at the rate of twenty miles an hour, so that it was supposed from Alexandria it would reach Boffora in a few days. It was constructed with broad wheels, and impelled by sails in the same manner as a ship, and so contrived, that it went as close to the wind as any cutter; and carried swivels to guard against the wandering Arabs. When he first set off in this machine, the wind was fair and moderate, and he was accompanied many miles by a considerable number of persons, mounted on camels and fleet horses, whom curiosity attracted; but, in some time the wind freshening the motion became so rapid that they were obliged to give up the pursuit. At Alexandria several ingenious mechanics have improved upon this original mode of progression, and it is said that machines are now contriving which travel even with more expedition, and yet with perfect security.
Table with 2 columns: Item, Price. Includes Jamaica Spirits, Antigua Rum, St. Croix, Country, Molasses, Brandy, Geneva, Do. in cases, Muscovado Sugar, Loaf, Lump, Pepper, Pimento, Coffee, Indigo, Do. French, Rice, Superfine Flour, Common do., Rye do., Indian Meal, Rye, Wheat, Corn (Southern), Do. (Northern), Beef, first quality, Pork, first quality, Oats, Flax-seed, Ship bread per cwt., Country refined bar-iron, Do. bloomery, Swedes do., Russia do., Pig-iron, German steel, Sails American, by cask, N per lb., Do. do. do. 6d., Do. do. do. 8d., Do. do. do. 10d., Do. do. do. 12d., Do. do. do. 14d., Do. do. do. 16d., Do. do. do. 18d., Do. do. do. 20d., Do. do. do. 24d., Pot ash, per ton, Pearl ash, Bees-wax per lb., Mackerel per barr., Herring, Mahogany, Jamaica per foot, Dominico, do., Honduras, do., Logwood unchipped, pr. ton, Do. chipped, 2 inch white oak plank, per m., 1 inch do., 2 inch white pine plank, 1 1/2 inch do., 1 inch do., 2 inch pitch pine do., Do. 22 inch do., Cedar 2 inch do., 1 1/2 inch do., 1 inch do., Pitch pine scantling, Cyprus 2 feet shingles.
PROPOSALS,
For printing by SUBSCRIPTION, on a fine paper, with a new and elegant American letter, cast by JOHN BAINE, and Co.
TRAVELS
Through North and South-Carolina, Georgia, East and West Florida, the Cherokee Nations, and through the extensive Territories of the Mississippi, or Creek Confederacy, and the country of the Chactaws:
CONTAINING An Account of the soil and natural productions of those regions, together with observations on the manners and customs of the Indians.
By WILLIAM BARTRAM, Botanist, of Philadelphia, who was employed from 1773 to 1777, by the celebrated Dr. Fothergill of London, to explore the extensive countries above-mentioned.
CONDITIONS.
I. It is expected the work will contain between five and six hundred pages of letter press, carefully executed, price to subscribers two Spanish milled dollars, in an handsome octavo volume, neatly bound and lettered. II. Whenever names are obtained for two hundred copies, the work will be put to press. III. The work will be interspersed with six or eight elegant copperplates, descriptive of the plants, animals, &c. peculiar to the countries through which the writer travelled, the best of the long warrior Micho-chulucco, chief or great king of the Siminoles, or Lower Creeks, executed in a masterly manner, will be given as a frontispiece. IV. Every subscriber for twelve copies, shall be entitled to a thirteenth gratis.
Subscriptions are received by James and Johnson, the printers; Philadelphia. And by the principal printers and book-sellers on the Continent.
CONTINENTAL
AND STATE SECURITIES,
BOUGHT AND SOLD, AT NO. 196. WATER-STREET.
A generous price will be given for Military Rights of Land and Jersey Paper Money.
CASH, and a generous price given for Continental, New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Rhode-Island securities, of every denomination, by EBENEZER THAYER, jun. No. 59, Water-Street. New-York, April 17, 1790.
The Mail Diligence,
FOR PHILADELPHIA,
LEAVES the Ferry-Stairs, at New-York, Ten minutes after Eight o'clock every morning except Sunday. Stage Office, City Tavern, Broad-Way, New-York June 5, 1790.
To be LET, and possession given immediately, THE HOUSE No. 27, Front Street, — A part of the FURNITURE will be sold, on reasonable terms, to accommodate the Tenant, if required. Apply on the premises. June 12, 1790.