National gazette. (Philadelphia [Pa.]), 1793-02-09 00:00:00

National Gazette.
By P. FRENEAU: Published WEDNESDAYS and SATURDAYS, at THREE DOLLARS per annum.
NUMB. 30 of VOL. II.]
SATURDAY, February 9, 1793.
[Total No. 134.]
[Correspondence between Mr. ADDISON and Mr. CLYMER; continued from our last.]
Copy of a letter from Mr. CLYMER to Mr. ADDISON.
Pittsburg, Oct. 1, 1792.
SIR, I AM favoured with yours of the 29th of September, and am sorry to observe in it the several grounds of objection to a compliance with the request made in mine of the 28th.
I did not mean you should act under a delegated power, having no power myself but to point out to the Magistrate certain witnesses, who might be examined by him. This, Sir, I presumed might have been done by me as well at a distance of twenty miles, as in your immediate presence; that presence, nevertheless, I should have sought, but for an opinion founded on the general apprehension here, and which you will pardon me in saying, your letter is by no means fitted to remove; for if in the performance of a judicial duty not voluntarily engaged in, but properly called to, you, who stand so well with your people, could not hope to escape the odium, what ought the prompter himself, and one too in my predicament, to expect? something beyond the passiveness of hatred. Neither to avoid this hazard, would I so much affront my character as a public agent, as to accept the protection, which you say may be had of any of those persons composing the assembly at Pittsburgh, who, in putting the officers of the revenue under the ban of society, by which they necessarily cease to act, and a law to operate, have in effect undertaken to annul the law itself; for the law exists but through its officers and in its execution. Thus beginning the measures of opposition, where the most decided enemies of government would have ended in a bold and open hostility to its authority.
But could I really propose safety to myself in a place, where the name of him under whom I profess to act—a name loved and revered throughout the whole civilized world! has within a few weeks past, according to proofs in my hand, been publicly treated with the utmost scorn and contumely?
I am not so competent to examine the constitutional motive assigned for declining my request—a doubt entertained of the judicial rights of a federal court in this business, though I can discern through it another battery raised against the United States: but it must seem plain to the plainest understanding, that it must be an indispensable act of any government to have the cognizance of crimes committed against itself, and not to be obliged to devolve on any other the care either of its honour or of its defence; neither do I well comprehend, why an offence against the union can be an offence only, as it may happen, to disturb the peace or order of one of its component members; for on this ground, Sir, can the pretensions of the states individually, to exclusive jurisdiction, only rest.
But, Sir, were my personal apprehensions got over, to what purpose does your invitation to Washington tend; for proposing to act only through you as the most respectable magistrate, how could the shortening any distance between us change any the circumstances which have disinclined you to serve me.
I am, &c. GEO. CLYMER.
Mr. ADDISON to Mr. CLYMER.
Washington, Oct. 2, 1792
SIR, I HAVE been favoured with your letter of 1st of October by captain Faulkner: I might have understood your meaning, and better conveyed mine, had your first letter any thing resembled your second. It was your commission and not my own that you requested me to execute, and that so far as you explained it to me was to take depositions and engage one or two of the best informed witnesses (having provision made for their expence) to go to York before 11th of October, when the circuit federal court will begin its session. And your reason for making this request was not drawn from any obligations of duty, but from the danger of the business and a desire of substituting to this danger my person instead of yours.
This Sir, is as faithful an abstract of your first letter as I can make. In justice to your second, I must acknowledge it is
free from those objections which I made to the first, and as it contains an argument, on my answer, the respect which I entertain for your judgment, draws from me a few observations.
In speaking of your personal safety and in suggesting the gentlemen of the committee as a reasonable source of confidence, I spoke my opinion without any design to deceive or insult. And in declining your commission, I gave no evidence of danger for I argued from your fears, not mine. Whatever fears I may have, I am a stranger to myself, if they are capable of restraining me from duty.
Your argument as to the powers of the federal courts, might be conclusive, if it were the right, and not the expediency of its exercise, that I question. Whatever battery you may think this against the United States, it is not raised for the present occasion. From the first moment that I saw the constitution, I believed as I yet believe, that the judicial system was impracticable if the state judiciary and the essential privileges of the citizens were to be preserved. That the power is plainly given by the constitution and laws of the United States, I have no doubt; that it never ought to have been given, I have none, also. And you may call me a croaker, but I will venture to predict, that if ever these powers are brought into exercise, the consequences which I have stated will ensue. Judge then if with these sentiments, and in my station, I should deserve to be thought either a good officer or a good citizen, if without necessity or urgent reason, I contributed to such effects.
That the name of the President of the United States, has in this place, and within a few weeks past, been publicly treated with the utmost scorn and contumely I never before heard. There may be mobs and blackguards in every place, and in this place there may perhaps be less of that silly adulation with which that great man hath been punished and insulted, than in many other places; but I will venture to say, that in no place can there be more true respect for his virtues or more manly gratitude for his services, than here, and that such expressions were not used here by any other person, or in any other circumstances than might be found in the High Street of Philadelphia.
I should not take notice of your expression, my invitation to Washington , but that coupled with other parts of your letter, it insinuates an intention to deceive. I with a man whose understanding I esteem, to think otherwise of me, and in truth I assure you that I should be very glad to see you in this place; and I hope you would then think better of us, than upon report (and am sorry we have given too much reason for it) you may do; but I gave no invitation, I only attempted to remove those obstacles in your way to this place that I understood you complained of.
Language receives different meanings according to the previous impressions of different persons. This may make both you and me discern a sentiment in the expressions of each other which neither of us intended to convey. You will not understand me right, if you do not believe that I am with respect,
Sir, yours, &c. &c. ALEX. ADDISON.
Treasury Department, February 4, 1793.
SIR, I HAVE lost no time in preparing, as far as has been practicable, consistently with the course of facts, the several statements required by the resolutions of the House of Representatives of the twenty-third of last month; and I have concluded to add to them such further statements as appeared to me necessary to convey fully the information, which is understood to be the object of those resolutions. It was my first intention to submit these statements collectively, with such explanatory remarks as the occasion might demand. But finding on experiment, from the extent and variety of the matter involved in the resolutions, that more time will be requisite for a full development of it, than I had anticipated, considerations of weight in my mind have determined me to present the different parts of the subject successively. Among other advantages incident to this course of proceeding, will be that of having it in my power to give a more accurate and mature view of the intire subject, without too great a dereliction of the current business of the department. In executing the task I propose to myself, I shall rely on the indul-
gence of the House to a latitude of observation, corresponding with the peculiar circumstances of the case.
The resolutions to which I am to answer were not moved without a pretty copious display of the reasons on which they were founded. These reasons are before the public, through the channel of the press. They are of a nature to excite attention—to beget alarm—to inspire doubts. Deductions of a very extraordinary complexion may, without forcing the sense, be drawn from them.
I feel it incumbent upon me to meet the suggestions which have been thrown out, with decision and explicitness. And while I hope I shall let fall nothing inconsistent with that cordial and unqualified respect which I feel for the House of Representatives; while I acquiesce in the sufficiency of the motives, that induced, on their part, the giving a prompt and free course to the investigation proposed—I cannot but resolve to treat the subject with a freedom, which is due to truth and to the conscientiousness of a pure zeal for the public interest.
I begin with the last of the four resolutions; because it is that which seeks information relating to the most delicate and important of the suggestions, that have been hazarded.
Here however I have to regret the utter impossibility of a strict compliance with the terms of the resolution. The practicability of such a compliance would suppose nothing less, than that since the last day of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, all the accounts of the collectors of the customs and other officers of the revenue, throughout the whole extent of the United States, could be digested, made up and forwarded to the Treasury, could be examined there, settled and carried into the public books under their proper heads: in a word, that all the accounts of this extensive country could have passed through a complete exhibition, examination and adjustment, within the short period of twenty-three days.
It was made (as I presume from the result) satisfactorily to appear to a committee of the House of Representatives, who were charged during the last session with framing a direction to the Treasury for bringing forward an annual account of receipts and expenditures, that the course of public business would not admit of the rendering of such an account in less than nine months, after the expiration of each year; in conformity to which idea their report was formed, and an order of the House established.
I need do nothing more to evince the impracticability of an exact compliance with the resolution in question, than to observe, that it is even more comprehensive, though with less detail, than the order of the House to which I have alluded.
To evince nevertheless my readiness to do all in my power towards fulfilling the views of the House and throwing light upon the transactions of the department, I shall now offer to their inspection sundry statements marked A, AB, C, D, E, F, which contain as far as is at this time possible, the information desired; and with sufficient certainty and accuracy to afford satisfaction on the points of inquiry involved in the resolution.
The statement A, shews in abstract the whole of the receipts into and expenditures from the Treasury, commencing with the first of January and ending with the last of December one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, corresponding with the accounts of the Treasurer. These accounts have been regularly settled up to the end of September, and copies have been laid before the two houses of Congress. The account for the quarter terminating with the year, has not yet passed through the forms of settlement, but is under examination, and will, no doubt, be settled as it stands—the manner of conducting the business, and the usual care and accuracy of the officer concerned, leaving very little room to apprehend misstatement, or error. A copy of this account is herewith submitted in the schedule marked C.
This statement takes up the balance of the general account of receipts and expenditures to the end of the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, as reported to the House of Representatives within the first week of the present session, and continuing it down to the end of one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, shews a balance then in the Treasury of seven hundred and eighty-three thousand four hundred
and forty-four dollars and fifty-one cents.
The statement B, is a more comprehensive document. It is a general account of INCOME and expenditure. It shews not merely the actual receipts of money into the Treasury, but the whole amount of the national revenues, from the commencement of the present government to the conclusion of the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, as well out standing as collected—the proceeds of domestic loans—the whole amount of the sums which have been drawn into the United States, on account of the foreign loans—and all other monies from whatever source, which have accrued within the period embraced by the statement.
These items form the debit side of the account, amounting to seventeen millions eight hundred and seventy-nine thousand eight hundred and twenty-five dollars and thirty-three cents.
The credit side consists of two items: I. The whole amount of the actual expenditures to the end of the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, as stated in the general account of receipts and expenditures before referred to. II. The whole amount of the actual expenditure during the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, as specified generally in the statement A, and particularly in the several quarterly accounts of the Treasurer, amounting to twelve millions seven hundred and sixty-five thousand one hundred and twenty-eight dollars and eighty-three cents.
The balance of this account of income and expenditure is consequently five millions one hundred and fourteen thousand six hundred and ninety-six dollars and fifty cents; which corresponds with the excess of the public income (including the proceeds of loans, foreign and domestic) beyond the actual expenditure, or more properly, the sum of the receipts to the end of the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two . This of course is exclusive of those parts of the proceeds of foreign loans, which have been left in Europe to be applied there; the amount, application and balance of which are exhibited, as far as they are yet known at the Treasury, in the statement No. I. of my late report on foreign loans.
This balance as noted in the statement B, is composed of the following particulars.
   I. Cash in the Treasury [per statement A.] Dollars 783,444. 51   II. Cash in the Bank of the United States and the offices of discount and deposit of New-York and Baltimore, not yet paid to the account of the Treasurer, [per statement AB.] 605,83. 08   III. Proceeds of Amsterdam bills remaining in deposit in the Bank of North-America, including the sum of one hundred and fifty-six thousand five hundred and ninety-five dollars and fifty-six cents advanced by the bank without interest, which is credited in the general account of receipts and expenditures [statement A.] 177,998. 80   IV. Proceeds of Amsterdam bills sold, but not yet received. 614,593. 02   V. Cash in hands of collectors of customs, [per abstract D] 151,851. 25   VI. Bonds unpaid at the end of the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, on account of the duties on imports and tonnage, and falling due between that time and May one thousand seven hundred and ninety-four [per abstract E.] 2,442,869. 15   VII. Uncollected residue of duties distilled within the United States [per abstract F] 341,057. 19   Making together, Dollars 5,116,897  
This aggregate somewhat exceeds the balance of the account; but in a case where estimates must necessarily supply the deficiency of ascertained results, differences of this nature are of course. It is at the same time satisfactory to observe, that the estimates which have been heretofore com-

municated are proved by the official documents already received, to have been essentially correct.
It will no doubt readily occur to the House, that a very small part of the excess which has been stated is a real surplus of income. There remain to be satisfied numerous objects of expenditure charged upon the fund by the appropriations, which have been made, that cannot fail ultimately to exhaust it, probably within four or five hundred thousand dollars; which will be embraced in the appropriations for the service of the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three. A further explanation on this point is reserved for future communication.
A due comprehension of the statements now presented must obviate every idea of a balance unaccounted for; in whatever sense the allegation may have been intended to be made.
If there was before any obscurity on the subject, it was certainly not the fault of this department. Till the last resolutions, no call has been made upon it which rendered it proper to exhibit a general view of the public monies and funds—or to shew the amount and situation of such as were unapplied. Particular calls for particular objects were made, which as I conceive were complied with; but they were not comprehensive enough to embrace a disclosure of that nature.
It could not therefore with propriety have been alleged, that there was a balance unaccounted for—To infer it from documents, which contained only a part of the necessary information, was not justifiable. Nor could it otherwise happen, than that conclusions, wholly erroneous, would be the consequences of taking such imperfect data for guides.
It may be of use, by way of elucidation, to point out some of the most palpable features of the error which has been entertained.
The following items are stated as the basis of the supposed deficiency:
  Residu of the proceeds of the foreign bills supposed to be unapplied (after deducting the sums furnished for St. Domingo, and the amount of the debt to the foreign officers) Dollars 1,668,190   Surplus of sinking fund, meaning I presume that part of the surplus of the revenue to the end of the year 1790, which had not been applied in purchases 400,000   Surplus of revenue of the year 1792, as reported 277,385   2,345,575   Deduct in bank, meaning I presume the balance of the Treasurer's cash account, 790,642   Balance not accounted for 1,554,933 
It appears in the first place, to have been overlooked, that in statement No. 3 of my late report concerning foreign loans, mention is made, that on the 3d of January, there remained to be received of the proceeds of the foreign bills, six hundred and thirty-two thousand one hundred and thirty-two dollars and two cents; consequently that sum could not be considered as in the treasury, and ought to be deducted from the supposed deficiency.
Among the official papers, which it is intimated were consulted, was an original account, rendered by the bank of the United States, of the sales of Amsterdam bills, shewing a sum of six hundred and five thousand eight hundred and eighty-three dollars and eight cents, as having been received by the bank and two of its offices of discount and deposit, for the proceeds of those bills. Had that document been understood, it would have been known, that this sum was in bank over and above the balance of the Treasurer's cash account; and this also would have served to account for a large part of the supposed deficiency; namely, six hundred and five thousand eight hundred and eighty-three dollars and eight cents. The course of this transaction will be hereafter explained.
But among the misconceptions, which have obtained, what relates to the surplus of revenue of the year 1792, is not the least striking. The Laws inform (and consequently no information on that point from this department could have been necessary) that credits are allowed upon the duties on imports, of four, six, nine, twelve months, and in some cases of two years. Reason dictates, that a surplus in such case, must be considered as postponed in the collection or receipt, till all the appropriations upon the fund have been first satisfied. The account of receipts and expenditures to the end of 1791, in possession of the House, shews that at that time, no less a sum than one million eight hundred and twenty-eight thousand two hundred and eighty-nine dollars and twenty-eight cents of the antecedent duties were outstanding in bonds. How then could it have happened, that the surplus of 1792 was sought for in the treasury, at the very instant of the expiration of the year?—I forbear to attempt to trace the source of a mistake so extraordinary!
Let me however add, that of the surplus
in question, one hundred and seventy-two thousand five hundred and eighty-four dollars and eighty two cents are not payable till April and May 1794, as will be seen by the abstract [E.]
Thus have I not only furnished a just and affirmative view of the real situation of the public account, but have likewise shewn, I trust in a conspicuous manner, fallacies enough in the statement, from which the inference of an unaccounted for balance is drawn, to evince that it is one tissue of error. In this, I might have gone still further, there being scarcely a step of the whole process, which is not liable to the imputation of misapprehension. But I will not unnecessarily weary the patience of the House.
Another circumstance, to which importance has been given, and which was noticed in connection with the suggestion last discussed, is a disagreement between a memorandum in the Treasurer's bank-book, and the statement reported by me of the amount of bills drawn at the treasury upon the foreign fund. A disagreement no doubt exists, and to the extent of five millions seven hundred and sixty thousand one hundred and thirty-eight florins or guilders.
But the following circumstances contain the solution of this disquieting appearance.
There will be found in the statement [A] two several credits each for two millions of dollars, as for monies received into the treasury with corresponding debits of equal sums, as for monies paid out of the treasury.
But neither the one nor the other did in reality take place. The whole is a mere operation, to accomplish the purposes of the 11th section of the "Act to incorporate the subscribers to the bank of the United States; without an inconvenient and unnecessary displacement of funds."
That section authorises a subscription to the stock of the bank, on account of the government, not exceeding in amount two millions of dollars, and provides for the payment of it out of the monies, which should be borrowed by virtue of either of the acts of the fourth and twelfth of August 1790, the first making provision for the public debt, the last for reducing it; enjoining at the same time, that a loan should be made of the bank to an equal amount, to replace the monies, which were to be applied to the payment of the subscription.
It is evident, that nothing could have been more unfeigned, (at the same time that it would have been attended with obvious disadvantages to the government) than actually to draw from Europe out of the monies borrowed there, the sum necessary for the payment of the subscription to the bank, and again to remit out of the loan, which was to be obtained of the bank, a sufficient sum to replace such monies, or such part of them as may have been destined for the foreign object. Loss upon exchange, in consequence of overlooking the market with bills—Loss in interest by the delays incident to the operation; and which would necessarily have suspended the useful employment of the funds for a considerable time. These are some of the disadvantages to the government. To the bank alone could any benefit have accrued, which would have been in proportion to the delay in restoring or applying the fund to its primitive destination. Such an operation therefore could only have been justified by an indisposition on the part of the bank to facilitate the principal object, without the intervention of actual payment.
But no such disposition existed. On this, as on every other occasion, a temper liberal towards the government has characterised the conduct of the directors of that institution.
It was accordingly proposed by me, and agreed to by them, that the object to be accomplished should be carried into effect, by a merely formal arrangement. In this however it was necessary to consult the injunctions of law, and the principles of the constitution of the treasury department.
These points then were to be effected—a payment of the subscription money to vest the government with the property of the stock—possession of the means of paying it, which were to be derived from the foreign fund, and of course were first to be in the treasury, before payment could be made—the replacing what should be taken from that fund, by a loan of the bank.
The following plan for these purposes was devised and executed by previous concert.
The Treasurer drew bills upon our commissioners in Amsterdam for the sums requisite to complete the payment on account of the subscription. These bills were purchased by the bank, and warrants in favour of the Treasurer upon the bank served to place the proceeds in the treasury. Warrants afterwards issued upon the Treasurer, in favour of the bank, for the amount of the subscription money, which was receipted for on the part of the bank, as paid. Other warrants then issued in favor of the Treasurer upon the bank for equal sums, as upon account of a loan to the government; which warrants were satisfied by a re-delivery to the Treasurer
of the bills that had been drawn upon the commissioners. In the last place warrants were drawn upon the Treasurer to replace the monies supposed by the arrangement to be drawn from the foreign fund, which perfected the operation. But from the detail which has been given, it will be seen, that in fact no monies were either withdrawn from or returned to that fund. The bills were cancelled, annexed to the warrants, and are lodged in the treasury, as vouchers of the transaction.
These bills were for two separate sums, each two millions four hundred and seventy-five thousand guilders, equal to a million of dollars; the payment having been divided into two parts, upon certain equitable considerations relative to the dividend of the first half year.
This transaction explains four millions nine hundred and fifty thousand guilders of the sum which forms the disagreement between the memorandum in the Treasurer's bank book and the statement reported by me.
The residue is thus explained. The sum of one million two hundred and thirty seven thousand five hundred guilders, directed to be drawn for on the thirtieth of November, was directed to be comprised in one or more bills, as the bank should desire. It was at first placed in one bill; but this bill was afterwards returned, with a request that it might be converted into smaller sums. The bill returned was cancelled, and in lieu of it, there had been furnished prior to the first of January of the present year, nine hundred and thirty four thousand five hundred guilders—the balance three hundred and three thousand then remaining to be furnished—The sum of nine hundred and thirty four thousand five hundred guilders consequently appears twice in the memorandum.
These two sums of four millions five hundred and ninety thousand and nine hundred and thirty four thousand guilders, exceed the difference in question by one hundred and twenty four thousand three hundred and sixty two guilders.
The Treasurer informs me, that there are two bills not included in the memorandum, one for one hundred and twenty three thousand seven hundred and fifty, and the other for six hundred and twelve guilders; which make up the above mentioned excess. The former of these two bills was furnished to the Secretary of State, for the purpose contemplated by the third section of the act of the last session, entitled, "An act making certain appropriations therein specified."
Is it not truly matter of regret, that so formal an explanation on such a point, should have been made requisite? Could no personal inquiry of either of the officers concerned have superseded the necessity of publicly calling the attention of the House of Representatives, to an appearance, in truth, so little significant? Was it seriously supposable, that there could be any real difficulty in explaining that appearance, when the very disclosure of it proceeded from a voluntary act of the head of this department.
With perfect respect, I have the honor to be, Sir, Your most obedient and most humble servant ALEXANDER HAMILTON, Secretary of the Treasury. The Hon. JONATHAN TRUMBULL Esq. Speaker of the House of Representatives.
P. S. Another statement of income and expenditure having been made which presents the subject under another aspect, but agreeing in the result with the statement [B.] is herewith also submitted, marked [Ba.]
For the NATIONAL GAZETTE.
To DAVID JONES, Minister of the Gospel; Teacher of Love, Peace, and Good Will to all Men,
FRIEND DAVID, I HAVE read thy several publications in the National Gazette, wherein thou hast stated thy opinions on the causes of the present Indian war, and the manner in which it ought to be conducted. As to the first thou art certainly right, in my opinion; for I have often asserted, as thou hast, that the war is a just one; and as thy mode of conducting it is the most economic, humane, and effectual, there can be no doubt but the commander in chief, instructed as he now is by thy publications, will adopt it, and dictate peace on the plan thou hast proposed, until we can prosecute thy method to civilize and baptize the whole race of savages. It is true thy several attempts among them have not been perfectly successful, either as to thy acquisition of lands or communicating thy holy religion: but a good flogging may dispose the wretches to both.
Unfortunately, when I have asserted, as thou hast, that the war is just and necessary; that Indians are faithless people; that they have no reason on their side for defeating our armies; and that "the present war with them is a remnant of the British war," &c. my neighbours laugh at me, and tell me, that in its com-
mencement, it was the war of the governor of the Western Territory; who, too hastily, and ignorant of the consequences, first declared it by virtue of the powers very imprudently vested in him; and that now it is the President's war, because he, as imprudently as unwisely, has been induced to send threatening messages to the Indian nations that he would chastise them, &c.
Let me repeat my opinions ever so often, and quote those of the Secretary at War and of the leading members in Congress (who they say make long speeches about what they seem not to understand) my neighbours ask me for reasons and proofs! Thus have I been confounded over and over again by many of our town's folks; and more especially by several of our clergy, who quote many authorities to shew that the war in question is unjust in its foundation, and foolish in practice. Nay, some of them go so far, as to pray in their pulpits, that God may dispose the hearts of our rulers to justice and peace with our brethren, the natives of America!
When I first read thy publications, meant to encourage and excite the war, I was delighted with them, and hastened to a town-meeting, where I had often heard this subject discussed; but alas! it is always settled contrary to thy opinions and method! The town clerk read thy writings aloud, for the instruction of the company: but to my utter astonishment, Justice Trueman, and others, ridiculed thy opinions most unmercifully; and related thy land-jobbing visits , in 1772 and 1773 among the Indians; for thus he denominated thy several christian attempts to civilize them; and he related their threats against thee; thy fears; thy hair breadth "escapes"; and thy consequent hatred to them and their friends; in terms which I will not repeat. But one thing I will tell thee, because I was surprised at it beyond measure. It is this: The Justice says, that in the whole of thy publications, thou hast not quoted one single authority for any of thy assertions; and that they rest alone upon thy opinion; which is founded in thy ignorance: Thereupon I read over thy publications again and again; and I protest to thee, friend Jones, that thou hast omitted to quote thy authorities, chapter and verse: wherefore I request of thee, to expound these matters, more at large, according to thy knowledge; for I confess to thee, I have, myself, no reasons or authorities whereby to establish the justice of the war, other than the convenience and excellent quality of the Indian lands, which thou well knowest; except indeed it be the interest and dignity it would give to our great officers of government to be " the sole and absolute sovereigns " over all the Indian nations and their territories; as Justice Trueman says our Indian commissioners insultingly declared to them, we are. The Justice, as insultingly, asks—Who gave this sole and absolute sovereignty? and whether, after our having made this claim and declaration (for which he refers to the several treaties published with the laws of the United States) there was ever any thing more ridiculous than to impute the enmity of the brave natives against us, to any other cause than these instances of our insolence and injustice? And yet, says he, we want to make our citizens believe that we have made fair purchase of the Indian territory we are fighting for. He asks, "Is it not laughable, after this insolent declaration of our sole and absolute sovereignty over all nations, north-west and south-west of the Ohio, to say that "the present is a remnant of the late British war!" as though this insolent declaration was not sufficient cause?" And he does not hesitate to declare it his opinion, that the promoters of the present Indian war aim at titles and other aggrandizements, not attainable but by means of a standing army! Or why, says he, do they thus squander millions which the people will soon feel the evil effects of? I have been thus particular, friend Jones, in order to explain to thee the general opinion of all I converse with; and to shew the necessity incumbent on thee to quote thy authorities, as thou art a man of learning and a teacher in Israel, for what thou hast published—and to refute those of Justice Trueman and others, if thou canst: for, as the Justice says, it is in this Indian war business as in philosophy and in religion; A free and full examination is always favorable to truth, but fatal to error. Therefore, I beseech of thee to peruse the treaties held at Fort-Stanwix, Fort-M'Intosh, Miami, &c. above referred to, and expound them if thou canst, to the confusion of all lovers of peace; and more especially, justify to the world, I beseech of thee, the following paragraphs in those treaties, which the Justice calls insolent, viz.
"The United States of America give peace to the Indian nations, and receive them into their protection" under certain conditions; one whereof is, that "The Indian nations do acknowledge the United States to be THE SOLE AND ABSOLUTE SOVEREIGNS of all the territory described in the treaty of peace between the United States and Great-Britain in 1784." At this the Justice laughs intolerably; as he says the Indians do. SOLE AND ABSO-

LUTE SOVEREIGNS! GIVE PEACE AND PROTECTION! Ha! Ha! Ha! Further— "The United States allot certain boundaries of this their territory, within which the Indian nations must live and hunt, &c." Here he laughs again, at the idea of our prescribing boundaries to the Indians in which they must live and hunt! As to Justice Trueman himself, I should regard his sentiments as unworthy notice, did not all our town-meeting unite with him in wishing justice to be done to "our brave brethren, the Aborigines of America," as Parsons Goodman calls them: for between thee and me, I have heard it whispered, that the Justice is himself of the native blood of America; and that he is even proud of his pedigree; which, it seems, is from the old chief who protected William Penn and his followers in the year 1681—& that chief was of one of the tribes we are now at war with, called the Lenappii, or Delawares. Hence no doubt his friendship for them! Fare thee well, friend David—Be strong: Let us prove the Indians have not, and never had, any rights but what we please to allow them. Justice Trueman says they have offered to treat with us and to make peace, on sufficient proof that we will be honest, and not insult them as heretofore, with our claims of sovereignty over them: And this proof, it seems, is to admit solemn witnesses, of their nomination, at our treaties, in whom they have confidence, to explain to them the full force of such writings and treaties as we may ask them to sign. But in my opinion we had better continue the war to the end of time than thus put it out of our power to impose such treaties as may be most for our interest!
JONATHAN JUSTICE.
P. S. Justice Trueman having just now visited me, I read to him what is above written: He requests of me to ask the following questions, viz.
1st. Hast thou, friend David, ever conversed with any of the leading men of the present hostile tribes on the causes of their present hostilities?
When? Where? and what said they? 2d. If, as he asserts, thou hast not, how comest thou to know they have no cause for hostilities?
3d. What means of knowledge hast thou had of the Indian character? How wast thou qualified to obtain a knowledge of their character? He asserts that thy principal object amongst them having been a land-jobbing affair, and they having detected, detected thee and thy weak attempt to explain religious mysteries to them, by way of civilizing them! that thou knowest nothing of their language nor manners, and employed interpreters who made it their amusement to hum thee! That thy imprudence, in land matters, induced the Indians to drive thee out of their country, &c. &c. &c. He supposes that thou rememberest thy hiding under the peltries & deer-skins, in the loft of a log house, in very sultry weather, and thy consequent sweat. He declares thy interpreter made up the matter with the Indians to give thee that sweat, and to frighten thee off; for they desired not thy blood—they accomplished their wish, the Justice says, without it.
4th. The Justice says, thy censures of the President, of the late Commander in Chief, and of the Secretary at War, being very pointed, in charging them with silly operations, and rendering the United States contemptible; and thy having undertaken to dictate that our whole force should be collected at Presqu' Isle, there to build as many vessels as would be necessary to waft our whole army into the heart of the Indian country, and sail up the Miami of the Lake (the Justice wishes it could be called by its proper name, the Ottawa river) or land on the Straits this side of Detroit, induces him to ask thee, friend Jones, whether thou hast ever been to either of those places, Presqu' Isle? Lake Erie? Miami of the Lake? or on the Straits of Detroit? He asserts thou hast not: but if thou hast, he recommends to thee to explain the practicability of, and the ease with which thy measures could be prosecuted; and wishes to see thy estimate of the expence of each item of the account, for twelve months only? If thou hast never been at any of those places, the Justice says thou must be as great a stranger to the route thou proposest as the President is, or the Commander in chief was when he attempted to find out a short cut from Fort-Washington to the Miami village, when he was about to depoit the men's knapsacks, &c. in expectation of surprising the enemy at that village, in about 15 miles march, at a time he was four times the distance from it, and had wandered far out of his road, and knew not what course to steer to the village, whether E. W. N. or S. The Justice therefore asks thee to be candid, and explicit in thy answers; and requests thou wilt not be angry with him, for expressing his doubts of thy experience. He pretends to great knowledge in these matters, and says thy whole plan is a mere dream, as thy pretensions to an acquaintance with the Indian character is. Farewell—I pray of thee to silence the Justice, if thou canst, or enable me to do it.
J. J.
Chester County, February 1st, 1793.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, Feb. 5.
The bill in favour of Thomas Withart was ordered to be engrossed, having been reported without amendment.—A committee was named to bring in a bill for fixing the salaries for President and Vice-President—also, a committee, to meet a committee from the Senate, for counting the ballots for President and Vice-President on next Wednesday. Reported, without amendment, the bill to exempt the inhabitants of Post St. Vincennes from the charges of resurveying their lands: ordered to be engrossed. Read the third time and passed, the bill respecting fugitives from justice, &c. The report of a committee on the petition of W. and J. Simms, was read and agreed to: a bill was accordingly ordered to be brought in to indemnify them for duties on a cargo lost in coming round from New-York to this port.—The Secretary of the Treasury's report on the petition of Jacob Bell, was agreed to and a bill ordered to be brought in.—A committee was appointed to report a bill for granting 7 years half pay to the widows and orphans of officers of the army killed since June 4, 1784; leaving, however, both terms blank. A message was received from the Senate, signifying their non-concurrence with the bill for the further assumption of the state debts—also that they insist upon their amendment to the bill for regulating claims to invalid pensions, disagreed to by the house—also, another message, that they have concurred in the foreign intercourse bill, &c.
PHILADELPHIA.
FEBRUARY 9.
Heads of Intelligence from the Madrid Gazette to December 14th—just received.
"The Duke of Aludia is appointed first Secretary of State, in the place of Count d'Aranda, who remains head of the council—The duke of Brunswick has retired, and lieut. general Kalkstaine succeeds to the command of the Prussian army. General Montequieu, to avoid an arrest, retired to Geneva, and being demanded by the French resident, fled across the lake. Kellerman, who succeeded him, was preparing to march to Rome.—In the battle of Halle and Andoerloo, near Brussels, Nov. 16, the French were completely successful. The duke of Saxe Teschen desired of general Dumourier a suspension of arms, and to go into winter quarters, which was refused. General Valence took possession of Namur without opposition on Nov. 21—Le Moliere entered Antwerp without resistance on Nov. 18; and gen. Labourdonnaye was to arrive there on the 19th with the main army: the citadel, however, had not yet surrendered—Prince Kaunitz is dead and field marshal Lacey ill—It was understood in Vienna (Nov. 5) that the king of Prussia had signified to the emperor his desire for a conclusion of the war, and that the emperor inclines to a compromise with France: but if the war continues, their armies will act independently of each other. Facts seem to indicate war, but this would be the case even if peace were intended. Lord Auckland, British ambassador at the Hague, had declared officially by orders of his court that his master would scrupulously adhere to his stipulations in the treaty of 1788, and recommends the suppression of every attempt to disturb the interior tranquility of the provinces—The imperialists lost 5000 men killed in the battle of Mons."
Paris Dec. 1. "The ministry of France has ordered general Dumourier to pursue the enemy's army into whatever country gives them an asylum, and to destroy them before they are re-inforced, or in a state to renew their attack on France.—General Dumourier was approaching Liege, and within five leagues of it on the 25th of November. Custine was at Marbourg on Nov. 13, and had gained some small advantages over the Prussians."
Lisbon, Dec. 21. "The French are in possession of Ostend, and have declared their design of opening the Scheid—Labourdonnaye has resigned on a misunderstanding with Dumourier, and lieut. gen. Miranda succeeded to his command—The ambassador of France at Naples, has received orders to retire from the capital—Gazettes are forbidden to be read in Coffee houses and other public places in Lisbon. M. Calonne had arrived in Lisbon with an intention to make some stay; but he left it in three days, on intimation from the court, as is supposed."
Extract of a letter from a gentleman of respectability, in Annapolis, to a person in this city, dated 2d February instant.
"While I was writing the above, Mr. — called upon me with a manuscript account of a dreadful revolution in London, which began on the 14th December.—This
account was brought by a vessel arrived at Norfolk in 35 days from Havre de Grace, in France. The vessel left Havre the 18th of December.
"Notwithstanding the very particular and circumstantial account given of this dreadful revolution, and the murders of particular persons mentioned, the destruction of the King's palace—queen's house—minister's—and of the Bank of England, I can scarcely give credit to it. That such a report was circulated in print when the vessel left Havre, I have no doubt; there was time also for the news to reach Havre from London; but the atrocities said to have been committed are too great for belief—If the above news should be true, a national bankruptcy in England will be the consequence."
Since the above letter was received, it is said that by a letter of a subsequent date from the same gentleman, that the information contained in it is without foundation.
A correspondent wishes to be informed, through the medium of the National Gazette, "whether from the manner in which the late militia law is worded, bound apprentices are not exempted from duty?—The insertion of the word FREE, in the law, could not have been intended merely to exclude negroes, because it is specified that the persons who come under the law must be white as well as free.—The words are, "each and every free able-bodied white male citizen." Now, the question is this, Is there any bound apprentice who is a FREE able-bodied white male citizen?"
Mr. Barlow, of Connecticut (now in London) has published a letter to the National Convention of France, on the defects of the Constitution of 1791. This work is spoken of in high terms of approbation in the European prints.
A conference was held about two months since at St. Mary's river, in Georgia, by the agent of the United States with a considerable number of representatives of the Creek Indians—at this conference, it was agreed, among other matters, that all United States prisoners, with the Creeks, should be immediately delivered up to the agent—the Indians to steal no more horses, or other property, from the frontiers; and to join no other Indian nation, at war with the United States.—There is, from accounts last received from Georgia, a prospect of a peace, somewhat permanent, with the Creeks.
On the 4th instant the debate was taken up in the Senate of the U. States for opening the doors of their house—and on the question being put it was determined in the negative, yeas 6—nays 21—Yeas, Burr, Butler, Edwards, Monroe, Potts, and Taylor—Nays, Bassett, Bradley, Brown, Cabot, Dickinson, Elsworth, Foster, Hawkins, Henry, Johnston, Izard, King, Langdon, Morris, Read, Robinson, Rutherford, Sherman, Stanton, Strong, Wingate.
On Wednesday last, the 6th of February, being the anniversary of the alliance between France and America, the same was celebrated in this city, with every demonstration of joy and festivity suitable to so brilliant an occasion. The governor of the state, officers of the city and state militia, the foreign ministers, &c. &c. met at the state house for the purpose of commemorating this glorious day, and the recent successes of the French nation. From thence they proceeded to the city tavern, where an elegant entertainment was provided; after partaking of which, a number of toasts were drunk, excellently adapted to the day. Having passed the afternoon in the greatest harmony, the company proceeded from the city tavern to the house of the minister of France, from whence, after giving three cheers, and playing ca ira and Yankee doodle , they were dismissed to their homes.
By a vessel that arrived at New-York, the 5th instant, in 54 days from Cork, we learn, that the court of Great-Britain had ordered 47 sail of ships of war, into service, against France, and that press warrants had been issued for the purpose of manning this fleet—the English parliament met on the 6th of December, but were adjourned to January 3d. The king and queen of France had been tried and acquitted.
It is to be hoped, the intestate laws now existing in most parts of the United States will be so amended, that the children of intestates, and even collaterals to the first degree, may inherit, share and share alike. The further this doctrine is carried, the more consistent with republican principles, so as not to embarrass titles to lands. Equality in estates is a great security to a republican government. Governments, like morals, are seldom stationary, and our grown wealth in the hands of individuals, leads to dissipation, ambition and oppression. It is, probably, out of the reach of legislative power to prevent, altogether, the undue influence of wealth, consistent with those fair principles that ought to govern a free country. The legislature may however, so form and regulate the rules that govern property, as that our posterity may have
the best chance of an equal enjoyment of it. The same dangers are not to be apprehended from large personal, as from large real estates; the former being less permanent, and more liable, from the casualties of human affairs, to change their possession. These reflections have in some measure, been occasioned by the information of the large sales of lands made to a Holland company, which affords an additional reason in favor of the above change.—Guarded as liberty is, by the constitution of the general government and that of the individual states, without frequent recollection of first principles, those written charters will be no better barriers to liberty, than the scriptures are to morals.
[From a correspondent.]
The lovers of our Union must behold with the highest satisfaction and joy, the fraternity of sentiments (the best cement of the Union, as being a union of hearts) which is evincing and opening itself from north to south and from east to west, in celebration of the glorious victories and triumphs of liberty under the banners of the brave republican allies of the United States. No longer can it be believed in the south that their eastern brethren are hankering after monarchy and aristocracy, or the titles and trinkets that belong to, and may be the forerunners thereof. No longer let it be pretended in the east that their brethren of the south are selfish in their politics and views, or enemies to freedom, in their hearts. Truth is great, and is already prevailing over all the calumnious arts by which an interested speculating faction have divided, deceived, and would impoverish and enslave the great body of freemen who inhabit the extended territory and varied climes of this vast country.—Ye citizens of the north and citizens of the south—Ye citizens of the east and ye citizens of the west, be brethren in affection as ye have been brethren in affliction; and as ye are bound together by a compact of government, so be ye united in the bonds of mutual confidence, harmony, and brotherly kindness. For be assured that ye have a common interest at stake in the preservation of the Union, and that the truest way to secure the same is to cherish those noble sentiments of Liberty, Equality, and true Republicanism, which the present occasion has called forth into a symphony of voices, founding from every State in the Union, and gladdening every heart that beats with love to the sacred rights of man; whilst it grates in the ears and thrills in the heart of aristocracy, and is a doleful warning to the sons of avarice, to the band of money-changers and paper jobbers, who have long, too long, profaned the sacred temple of Liberty!
MR. FRENEAU,
AMONG the volunteer toasts of the officers of the Philadelphia militia, an orator is held forth who signalized himself wonderfully in New-Jersey. It was scarcely necessary to travel so far back for a specimen of his oratorial flourishes, for so lately as the sitting of the convention of this state for the formation of our present constitution, did he exhibit his prowess in the powers of the tribune—His talents had there a full opportunity for a display; they might have shone forth in defence of equal principles; but excepting on one or two trifling occasions, he never attempted to astonish the convention with the thunder of his declamation, or the lightning of his argument. I will do him justice—he strove to be sure, as far as his ingenuity and a certain cast of disposition would allow, to remove the power of appointing senators from the people to a body of electors! but in this attempt upon equality, upon the inherent, the unalienable rights of the people to appoint their own legislators, he was foiled by the genuine talents and republicanism of a Wilson and a Findley—His oratory on that day will never be obliterated from my memory; but for his own honor, as well as for the honor of principles which he professes, it would have been better that he had been born without a tongue. It is gratifying to hear a man commended for talents that he does not possess, and for principles which he is a stranger to—As a bon vivant he has peculiar merit, but as an orator and a statesman his station is very subordinate.
VERITAS.
Feb. 8, 1793.
*** Several favours from Correspondents are unavoidably postponed till Wednesday.
THREE POUNDS REWARD.
RUN AWAY from the subscriber, on Sunday the 13th of January, an apprentice lad to the blacksmiths business, named John Layton, about eighteen years of age, five feet three or four inches high, had on when he went away, a half worn superfine brown coat, a short drab furtout, buff cassimer breeches a little faded, worsted stockings, his shoes tied with black worsted strings; he is remarkably fond of strong liquor, is very talkative when a little intoxicated, and speaks with a coarse strong voice: whoever apprehends said apprentice and secures him so that his master may get him again, shall have the above reward and if brought home, reasonable charges paid. ISAAC WOODLAND, Georgetown, Kent county, Cross Roads, Maryland. Feb. 4, 1793. IAW. SW.

Reflections on the English Revolution of 1688, and that of France on the 10th of August 1792. By M. Condorcet.
[Continued from our last.] A CONSIDERABLE portion of the people, combining by spontaneous impulse, and addressing themselves to a legal assembly of the whole, depart much less from the common order of law than a particular association of citizens, addressing themselves to a foreign prince; and the influence of the former proportion of the people, armed in their own defence, was much less dangerous to freedom than the presence of a foreign army, devoted to the will of a single chief.
"It was as absolutely and really impossible for the king of the French to resume his functions, as it was for the king of England, after his flight; and the two nations equally found themselves destitute of all government.
"In England the former parliament was not assembled, and could not be convoked but by the king; and as James had dissolved it, and had afterwards retracted the order he had given for its meeting once more, there consequently did not exist any representative power.
"But the English parliament was composed of two houses, the one of which was hereditary, and therefore always subsisting; thus such of the members of the Upper House as happened to be then in London, believed themselves invested, by necessity, with the right of assuming the whole power to themselves. They assembled and bestowed the government on the Prince of Orange. William accepted the gift, but knew that the people of England had some right to be consulted, and that the hereditary senators were but the representatives of themselves. His first care, therefore, was to convoke those members of the former House of Commons, who were then in London, and with them a part of the corporation of the city. This irregular and incomplete representation confirmed the plan of the Peers, and the government was committed to the Prince, one part of which, according to the common law, was the right of convoking parliaments. Accordingly, he hastened to call a parliament, under the name of a convention. This was the name given to the parliament, which recalled Charles II. the term parliament being rigorously confined to those assemblies, which are convoked in the name of the king. But the convention of 1688, like that of 1660, could not but have precisely the same organization as the parliaments, and like them be divided into two houses, the mutual agreement of which was necessary to express the will of the nation. Thus the will of about 200 could assume the right of expressing the will of the whole people; and if there be any who dare still affirm, that an institution like this is not an attack on the rights of natural equality, and such as no power can legalize, they must at least confess it is absurd and tyrannical, when it is necessary to decide on those fundamental questions, which the laws have not foreseen, and on which the national will is not really consulted, unless it be consulted with the most perfect equality.
"In the revolution of the 10th of August, the existence of an assembly of representatives of the people, and the principles which are at present acknowledged by all France, have prevented these irregularities.
"It is not to a foreign prince, followed by an army, and personally interested in the decisions called for, that the executive power has been confided; but to citizens openly elected by the representatives of the people.
"By calling a national convention, far from prescribing forms contrary to natural equality, the forms established for assembling the representatives of the people have been observed; which forms preserve this inequality in its utmost extent. Neither has the power of dictating been assumed, but a simple invitation only was issued; so that the natural and primitive rights of man have been scrupulously respected. Hence the French convention is stamped with a character of legitimacy, which the English convention could not possess; influenced, as it was, by an inequality, (established I grant by former laws,) and by a prince at the head of an army, personally interested in the cause on which they were to decide.
"Two opinions divide the friends of freedom. Some, but no great number, acknowledged the sacred unalienable and imprescriptible sovereignty of the people;
though it has not yet been rigorously analyzed, its powers fully exposed, nor its consequences sufficiently developed.
"According to this opinion, all authority is derived from the people, and may be legally reclaimed and again established under new forms. Kings, like other magistrates, are but the servants of the people they govern.
"The contrary opinion asserts, that an original contract exists between king and people, which is equally binding on both, and which the people cannot dissolve, unless it be first violated by the king.
"In those times when that was decided by authority which ought to have been submitted to reason, when facts and examples were substituted to principles, when claims were founded on titles and not in truth, this latter opinion must have been the most general. History records no people who really gave themselves a constitution: But it relates numerous conventions, made between the representatives of a nation, or the nation itself and the government, which by chance had been previously established.
"Thus the idea of an original contract between the nation and the king prevailed, in the convention of 1688, James II. having violated this contract, was said to have abdicated, or renounced his right; and the national convention had a right to appoint a successor.
"But this opinion of an original contract presents great difficulties in the application of it. If this contract were binding through all generations, could the personal forfeiture of a king dissolve the obligations contracted by the nation as well to his whole family, as to himself? Could there be so much as a right to depose the guilty individual, there being an obligation to follow the established order of succession? Did this right extend so far as to choose another chief; or to establish a new order of succession? In fine, could there be so much as another form of government established?
"It appears, in examining these questions, that the English convention rather confined itself to the necessities of the moment than to those principles of public right which might have resolved their difficulties.
"The majority were inclined to preserve the fixed order of succession; but this order called the son of James II. (then in the cradle and carried into France, where he was to be educated in the Popish religion, and the maxims of despotism) to the throne. It had even been rumoured among the people that this was a supposed child; but the two houses of convention felt how dangerous and how little worthy of them it was, to found a new government on the decision of a question in which, by the very nature of the facts, proof would necessarily be uncertain, and the incidents ridiculous.
"Refort, therefore, was had to the expedient of excluding all popish princes from the throne; and it must be confessed, that the application of this law, to a child of 18 months old, had something in it which was irregular. Nor was this all. Mary, the wife of the Prince of Orange, was to be the substitute of her brother, according to the order of succession: But the Prince of Orange refused to reign in the name of his wife, and would not consent to hold his power of her, nor expose himself to the possibility of descending from the throne, should she be the first to die. His army, his personal talents, and his political influence were all wanted, to defend freedom against the numerous partizans of James, and to subject Ireland, in which the party of the dethroned king prevailed. Thus it was necessary to violate the order of succession, to declare William king, and to attribute the authority to him alone, that they might not resume this order of succession, till after his death.
"Hence the convention assumed the right of adding a new condition to the original contract, as well as that of sacrificing hereditary claims to national interest.
"Applying to the French convention, which is soon to be assembled, not the principles of public right, at present adopted by all enlightened men, not corrupted by the gold of kings, but those of the English convention, we shall find that we cannot, without contradicting these same principles, but grant to our convention the legitimate power of doing all which it shall think necessary for the public good.
"Thus, for example, the English ministry can neither regard this convention as illegal, nor dispute its power of reforming that, which in the constitutional act shall appear to it to be prejudicial to liberty, without, at the same time, attacking the legality of the convention of 1689, and that of the resolutions, which emanated from that convention. The ministers, who should advise such a conduct, must by such advice, confess, 1. That the house of Hanover has usurped the throne of England, and that it appertains to the king of Sardinia; 2. That the English nation has no right to make any change in its constitution, except by the will of the king; 3. That the king may violate the constitution with impunity, and that the nation has no legal means either of opposition or restriction; which opinion no minister could pursue in act, without rendering himself guilty of high treason; nay, they must conclude, that they are certain of having nothing to fear for the preservation of the throne in the house of Hanover, and they must intend to establish it as law, that this house possesses the crown by pure hereditary right; that it has not received it from the people; that all the claims and pretensions of the former kings of England to arbitrary power have been transmitted to the reigning family; and they must further mean to support the opinions of the divine right of kings, of passive obedience, of the dispensing power, &c. and, in a word, all those maxims destructive to freedom, which were formerly held by the Stuarts, and practised by the Tudors.
"In like manner, it was in consequence of this opinion of an original contract, that the United Provinces, and the Swiss Cantons, shook off the yoke of their ancient lords, who were hereditary chiefs, and at the head of the executive power. It was the violation of such contracts, subscribed to by these lords, which was the motive for deposing them; and neither the Dutch nor the Swiss can refuse to acknowledge the legality and justice of the conduct of the French nation, without declaring that they will submit themselves to the heirs of the house of Austria.
"Those men, therefore, who, like the French, love true liberty, who know that it cannot exist without an entire equality, and who acknowledge the sovereignty of the people, are not the only persons who ought to approve the revolution of the 10th of August. All who do not acknowledge an inherent power in kings and princes, independent of the people, of which they cannot be deprived, either by their usurpations or their crimes; that is to say, all those who would not be slaves, must equally approve the present revolution of France and the revolution of England. Both parties, those who would preserve all, and those who wish not to lose all their rights, such as they find them preserved by the laws of their country, must mutually approve the French revolution.
"The creatures of tyrants have dared to reproach the French with the crime of calling on all nations to the enjoyment of the first rights of man, liberty and equality, which are likewise the greatest good; — they accuse them of wishing to subvert the world, because they with the voice of reason to be heard, and of universally kindling the flames of discord, because they are desirous that the torch of truth should begin to blaze.
"At present this respectable zeal, which is so vilely calumniated, is not the question. We do not ask foreign nations to rise to those principles, in support of which we have sworn to meet death; we only request them not to abandon such as men, worthy of the name, have professed these 400 years, in times even of ignorance and superstition; we intreat them not to descend below the standard of the 14th century, and not to whet that tyrant sword which, at present directed against us, will soon return to pierce the hand that drew it."
CHARLES BITTERS,
No. 120, South Market, near Fourth-street,
Has received from New-York, and manufactured by Lot Merkel, A large and general assortment of Muffs and Tippets, Trimmings and Edgings,
Great Coats, Caps, Mitts and Gloves lined with Fur, which he will sell, Wholesale and Retail, at the lowest prices.
Nov. 24.
2aw
METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS.
   JANUARY 1793.   D. H. Bar. Ther. W. nd. Weather.     Tuesday, 29. 7 30. 1 29 WNW Fair.   2 30. 1 37 N. W. do.   Wednesday, 30. 7 30. 05 22 N. E. Snow.   2 29. 8 23 do. do. Hail.   Thursday, 31. 7 29. 7 25 N. W. Cloudy.   2 30. 0 32 do. do. Fair.   Friday, Feb. 1. 7 30. 6 9 N. W. Fair.   2 30. 5 26 W. do. Hazy.   Saturday, 2. 7 30. 3 25 N. W. Rain.   2 29. 9 34 calm. do. Rain.   Sunday, 3. 7 30. 25 33 N. W. Cloudy.   2 30. 35 37 do. do. Fair.   Monday, 4. 7 30. 37 25 E. do. Cloudy.   2 30. 25 46 S. W. do. Fair.  
Just Published,
By WILLIAM YOUNG, Bookseller, No. 5 Second-street, the corner of Chesnut-street, In two large 8vo. vols. neatly bound, price four dollars,
ESSAYS
ON THE INTELLECTUAL AND ACTIVE POWERS OF MAN.
By THOMAS REID, D. D. F. R. S. Edinburgh, Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Glasgow.
IT would be improper for the publisher to mention any thing, respecting the literary talents of an author, so generally known and esteemed. Nor does it appear necessary to request attention, to peruse a work, whose importance is universally acknowledged. Those who have read the ancient systems, and these volumes, will readily perceive, that the knowledge of philosophy, advances from a state of infancy, towards maturity; nor will it appear too much, when it is said, that Dr. Reid has divested moral science, from that veil under which for so many ages it has been concealed, by ambiguous words and the jargon of the schools. Thus he has acted that friendly part to moral science, which the ingenious Newton and Ferguson did to natural philosophy; their united and skillful efforts, render philosophy, not only an useful, but a pleasant exercise, and a more safe introduction to the most important studies.—It is impracticable to insert the lengthy reviews of this work, and to give a part, would be unfriendly to the author and reviewers.
ALSO,
Price, neatly bound in 2 vols. 8vo. 2 dollars 50 cents,
A COMMENTARY
ON THE
BOOK OF PSALMS,
In which their literal or historical sense, as they relate to King David, and the People of Israel, is illustrated; and their application to Messiah, to the Church, and to individuals, as members thereof, is pointed out: With a view to render the use of the Psalter pleasing and profitable to all orders and degrees of Christians. The first American edition, from the fourth British.
By GEORGE, Lord Bishop of Norwich, and President of Magdalen College, Oxford.
ALSO,
Zimmerman on Solitude: Price bound and lettered, 88 cents or 7-8ths of a dollar.—Also, SCOTT'S Force of Truth; price, bound and lettered 44 cents.
Just come to hand, and for Sale, DAVID'S SERMONS
Complete in three vols. 8vo.—price bound 5 dollars and 25 cents.
Jan. 26.
4t. 1aw.
Those gentlemen, in different parts of the Union, who hold SUBSCRIPTION PAPERS FOR THE AMERICAN REMEMBRANCER,
Are requested to make returns of the subscribers' names as soon as convenient—
Messrs. the PRINTERS, also, who have, at my request, published the proposals, will please to send in their respective accounts.
JOHN CAREY,
No. 26, Pear-Street, Philadelphia.
Just Published,
By H. & F. RICE, No. 50, Market-Street, THE SYSTEM OF
Short-Hand,
Used by Mr. Lloyd, in taking down the DEBATES of CONGRESS.
** REPRESENTATION having been made, that the shortness of the period, limited for the subscription, has deprived many gentlemen at a distance, of an opportunity of sending in their names:—The Editor, in order to accommodate them, and to render this publication more extensively useful, has determined not to raise the price to a dollar and an half (as intended) before the fifteenth of March;—making however a discrimination, in favor of the actual subscribers, by printing their copies on superfine royal writing paper. A few remaining copies of this kind will be delivered to the earliest of the non-subscribing purchasers, at the same price as those on the common printing paper, viz. one dollar, in marbled covers; neatly bound, a French crown. Jan. 25. 4t.
PRINTED BY
CHILDS AND SWAINE,
AT THEIR OFFICE NO. 209, HIGH-STREET
NEAR FIFTH-STREET,
PHILADELPHIA.