Gazette of the United States, & Philadelphia daily advertiser. (Philadelphia [Pa.]), 1797-06-12 00:00:00

Gazette of the United States, AND Philadelphia Daily Advertiser.
By JOHN FENNO, N o 119 Chestnut Street.
NUMBER 1485.]
PHILADELPHIA: MONDAY EVENING, JUNE 12, 1797.
[VOLUME XI.]
For St. Thomas, THE SHIP Ann and Mary, Captain BILLS; WILL sail in ten days. For freight or passage apply to E. COPPINGER. No. 221, South Front Street.
For Sale, The Brig ACTIVE, On the 20th inst. at the Coffee House, at 7 o'clock, P. M. as the same from sea; she is known to be a fast sailer. Any particular information may be had on application to Capt. Bingham on board said brig, at Messrs. Jesse and Robert Waln's Wharf, to John Plankhorn, or Thomas Stewart. Inventory to be seen and terms of payment to be made known at the time of sale.
For London, THE SHIP WILLIAM PENN, James Josiah, Master. WILL sail with all convenient speed. For freight or passage apply to Jesse & Robert Waln.
For Sale, The cargo of the brig Enteprixe, Captain Langdon from Bourdeaux, now landing at Morton's wharf, CONSISTING OF 524 hds. of Claret, 217 cases of ditto, 100 cases of Sweet Oil, 110 pipes London proof, 10 pipes of Holland proof. Brandy. Enquire to drawback.
Wharton & Lewis, No. 115, South Front St. Said Brig, WILL take a FREIGHT for the West-Indies or Europe, falls fast, burthen about fifteen hundred barrels, is in complete order, and will be ready to receive a cargo in a few days.
For Sale or Charter, THE SHIP WARREN, Benjamin Church, Master. OF about 280 tons burthen. Enquire of Jesse & Robert Waln.
For Hamburgb, THE SHIP AERIAL, John Tarris, master. A GREAT part of her cargo is engaged, and she will sail in ten days. For freight or passage apply to Capt. Tarris, at Willings & Francis' wharf, or to GURNEY & SMITH.
For Freight or Charter, To any part of Europe, The Swedish Ship Alexander Magnus, Capt. CARL G. EHSMAN. ABOUT 350 tons burthen, in this port; and also the Danish Ship FREDERICK JULIUS KAUS, of 450 tons, now lying in Hampton Roads. Apply to JOHN VAUGHAN.
For Freight or Charter, THE Brig Fame, FRANCIS KNOX, Master. A strong, excellent vessel, has been just sheathed and ready to receive a cargo. She will carry 2,000 barrels, has good accommodations for passengers. Apply to Capt. Knox, or to Kearny Wharton.
Household Furniture. NOW selling by private sale, No. 17 Dock-street—consisting of chairs, tables, looking-glasses, bureaus, hand and fire irons, bedsteads, feather-beds, carpets, bedding, window curtains, bed and table linen, kitchen furniture, &c. The whole in good order, and has only been a few months in use.
This Day is Published, And sold by H. & I. KAMMERER, jun. No. 24, North Third-street, also, by Mr. HENRY SWITZER, No. 85, Race-street, (Price half a Dollar neatly bound) The Man of real Sensibility; Or, THE HISTORY OF SIR G. ELLISON. Founded on Fact. The elegant Edition of the Elements of Morality, in two vols. illustrated with twenty copperplates, may also be had as above, price, full bound and gilt, two dollars and fifty cents. H. & I. K. jun. have on hand a quantity of No. 1 and 2 Writing Paper.
HAY. A Quantity of excellent Old and New Hay to be had at Peck Hill Farm on the Wissahickon Road, about 2 miles from the City. Also, A QUANTITY OF BUILDING STONE.
WINDOW GLASS, Of Superior Quality, and cheaper than any other in the City. OF VARIOUS SIZES, From 8 by 6 to 19 by 14. By the single Box or Quantity, may be had at the store of the Subscribers, corner of Arch and Front-street. James C. & Samuel W. Fisher.
A Quantity of Brandy, FIRST & 2d proof, Gin, of 4th proof, in pipes Jamaica Spirits, 4th proof, in Hhds Old Hock, in cases of 40 dozen each Glass Tumblers, in pints and half-pints Window Glass, in boxes, of different sizes Hazelnuts, in facks Whiting Copperas White Lead Spanish Brown in hds For Sale by PETER BLIGHT.
Ross & Simson, Have for Sale, A QUANTITY OF PRIME St. Domingo Cotton, Superior Old Lisbon Wine in Pipes Excellent India Market Teneriffe Wine, In Madeira Casks A few Quarter Casks best Fresh Hylon and Hyson Skin Muscovado Sugars in Hogheads, and Coffee in Tierces.
To be Sold at Public Vendue, At the Merchants' Coffee house, in Philadelphia, on the 15th day of June, at 3 o'clock in the hour of 12 o'clock in the forenoon, if not before disposed of at private sale, 40,931 1-2 acres of land, on the waters of Wheeling and Fishing creeks, in Washington county, Pennsylvania. The soil is remarkably fertile; and besides a large body of meadow, there are considerable improvements on the premises. These lands were patented in 1787. On payment of part of the purchase money, a reasonable credit will be given for the residue. Enquire of the printer.
Richard Bayley & Co. Late JOHN WHITESIDES & Co. No. 136 Market-street. HAVE received per the ships William Penn and Star from London, a large and fashionable assortment of the following articles: viz. Chintzes, and printed Cottons, of the newest patterns Furnitures Dimities and Chintzes Ginghams, plain and figured, Mullins, printed and embroidered Do. tambour'd, plain, check and fringed Do. tambour'd, of a very superior quality Fine Book, Jacquet and Decora Handkerchiefs Dimities and mouselins Damask table-linen, in sets and in the piece Diaper ditto in Cloths and in ditto Holland and Russia Sheetings Loop'd Hollands and Irish Linens Long Lawns and Cambrics Satins and Silks, plain and figured Ribbons and Gloves Crapes and Gauzes Straw, Chip, and Paper Hats and Bonnets, new shapes Fancy trimmings, &c. With a variety of articles in the Linen-Draperies and Haberdashery line.
Printed Calicoes. JOHN MILLER, Jun. & Co. No. 8 Chestnut-street, Have for Sale FIFTY TRUNKS neatly assorted, very low on short credit.
Pennsylvania Population Company, NOTICE is hereby given to the Share Holders, that a further assessment of NINE DOLLARS is levied on each share, payable as follows, viz. Six Dollars immediately, and Three Dollars on the 1st of July next. Which they are requested to pay to the Treasurer of the Company, at the Company's Office, No. 53, North Fourth-street, agreeably to the times above mentioned; and they are further informed, that on their neglecting to pay the same as above directed, the several forfeitures will be exacted. By order of the Board, SOL. MARACHE, Treasurer.
Just Arrived, In the Schooner Dove, Captain Paul, from St. Thomas, and for sale by the subscriber. Mulcovado Sugar in hds tierces and barrels. St. Croix Rum in hds. and Laguira bides. ALSO ON HAND, Imperial, Hyson, and Sherry and Malaga Hyson Skin Teas. Yellow Nankens. Do. Glass ware. Canton Cloth. Do. Cheefe. Lutecings. China Ware. Silk Hankerchiefs. Window Blinds. Sewing Silk. Rheubarb. Cotton in bales. Quicksilver, &c. Peruvian Bark. JOSEPH SIMS.
Grattan and Comp. Respectfully inform their friends, that they have imported from London per the ship Star, a large assortment of PERFUMERY, Which is now opened for sale at their House, No. 193 Market-street. Also, a new assortment of ready-made gentlemen's linen, shirts from a dollars each to 8 dollars, &c. &c. Ladies and gentlemen are accommodated with board and lodging at ten Dollars each. Those Gentlemen who have their own private lodgings, may be accommodated with dinner only, by the week or month.
NOTICE. THE co-partnership of William Young, John Mills, and John Mills, jun. Booksellers and Stationers, under the firm of W. Young, Mills and Son, is this day dissolved by mutual consent. All persons indebted to the co-partnership are requested to make payment to William Young, and those having demands are desired to produce their accounts for settlement. William Young, John Mills, John Mills, jun. Philadelphia, June 6th, 1797.
W. YOUNG Continues the bookselling and stationery business at the usual place, wholesale and retail, where he has now a very large assortment of Writing and Printing Papers and Books, Of which catalogues with the prices affixed are delivered gratis. June 6. d7p
Wanted, A person well qualified in the bookselling and stationery business. Applications will be received till the first July next, at No. 58, fourth Second-street, corner of Chestnut-street. June 6. d7p
The subscribers, have for sale, the following Goods, viz: OLD Madeira Wine, in pipes Port do. in pipes, hogheads & qr. casks. Malaga do. in hogheads and qr. casks. Sherry do. in quarter casks. Claret do. of excellent quality, in bottles. Ruffia Duck. Do. Diaper and Huckaback. Coarse Toweling. Ruffia Glass, first sort. Ruffia white Soap, cut in small bars. Mould Candles, in boxes of 60lb weight. London Porter, in bottles. 100 barrels of good beef. A wrought-iron Book-Cafe. PHILIPS, CRAMOND & Co. Philadelphia, 2d June, 1797. d.
Just Received, From Batavia (via Providence) 170 Sacks of Java Coffee of first quality 200 half Sacks do. do. A few Boxes of Spices, consisting of Nutmegs, Cloves and mace For sale by WILLINGS & FRANCIS, Penn-street. may 30 dff
Pennsylvania Population Company, NOTICE is hereby given to the Shareholders, that a further assessment of fifteen dollars is levied on each share, payable in the following instalments—viz. One quarter immediately. One quarter on the 1st of June. One quarter on the 1st of September. One quarter on the 1st Dec. next. Which they are requested to pay to the Treasurer of the Company at the Company's Office, No. 53 North Fourth Street, agreeably to the times above mentioned; and they are further informed that on their neglecting to pay the same as above directed, the several forfeitures directed by the Constitution, will be exacted. By order of the Board, SOL. MARACHE, Treasurer. May 15 $1m
To be Sold, A large and convenient Three Story Brick House; SITUATE at the north-east corner of Arch and Fourth-streets. It contains eighteen rooms—and is in every respect well finished. For particulars enquire of M. Kepple, No. 138, Chestnut-street. May 31. $
Erskine's View of the War. JUST PUBLISHED, By ROBERT CAMPBELL & Co. No 40 South Second Street, [Price 31 Cents] A View of the Causes and Consequences of the present War with France. By the Honorable THOMAS ERSKINE. May 15. $
Maurice Moynihan, No. 81, North Second-street, A few doors above Arch-street, INFORMS his friends and the public, that he has for wholesale or retail, on the lowest terms, a general assortment of Queen's Ware, gilt and cut tumblers, plain and flowered quart, pint, half pint and half gall. do. exact measures, decanters and wine glasses; gallon, half gallon, quart and pint bowls, and china in sets and separate; pocket bottles; Schuykill and Jersey country quart and half gallon bottles; Dry Goods, &c. &c. N. B. Crates put up with care at the shortest notice. May 11. dff
JOHN CRAIG HAS just imported from Rotterdam, via St. Thomas, and for sale on reasonable terms by the package Platillas Royal Harlem and German linens Rouens Post and Pre Patria Paper Wafers Quills Oziers for Hoops, in Bundles Coffee Bags He has also for Sale, Best Red Clover Seed Old Madeira Wine, fit for immediate use Teneriffe Wine of first and second Quality Coffee in Bags and Hogheads Jamaica Spirits Connecticut Turpentine Soap Window Glass Two Trunks of best Patent, Silk and Cotton Hosiery April 18. 43w
NOW LANDING, From on board of the ship GEORGE BARCLAY, Capt. CHARLES M'ALESTER, from Calcutta, the following GOODS, viz. Coffas Panjum Cloths Hummums Gurrahs Guze-nahs India Calicoes Emecties Cotton Checks Mamoodies Mulmuls Sahans Red and Blue Bernagou hks Tickeries Patna do. Jolls Sandpore do. Carridaries Plain, striped and flowered fine mullins Maraganes Ginghams Baftas, various sorts Taffeties Sattin Romals Bandanno red hks. A L S O, 300 Cakes Sugar 40 Boxes do. 165 Bags do. 70,000 lb. weight heavy black Pepper 40,000 lb. weight Ginger 20 Tons Hemp in Bales 9 Pipes East-India Spirits For sale by PHILIPS, CRAMOND & Co. May 4. dff
THIS DAY IS PUBLISHED, (Neatly bound and lettered, price 2 dols. 25 cts.) By G. DECOMBAZ, BOOKSELLER & STATIONER, No. 48, North Third Street, The Adventures of Telemachus. French and English, 2 vols. 12mo. AMONG the books which daily fall into the hands of the youth of both sexes, none have a higher claim to their attention than Telemachus. The most interesting lessons are here conveyed in the vehicle of an interesting Poem, replete with the finest touches of the true pathetic, and embellished with all the graces of a beautiful style. The fatal effects of indulging the passions are exemplified in the most striking manner; and the happiness attending innocence and virtue painted in the liveliest colours. Whatever can incite to virtue or deter from vice; whatever can enlighten the understanding, charm the imagination, and improve the heart, is to be found in this interesting work.
THE NAVAL GAZETTEER; Being a complete Geographical Dictionary, containing a full and accurate account, alphabetically arranged, of all the countries and islands in the known world; showing their latitude, longitude, and stations for anchorage; with a particular description of the several Bays, Capes, Channels, Coves, Creeks, Currents, Gulfs, Harbours, Havens, Lakes, Oceans, Races, Rivers, Roads, Rocks, Sands, Shoals, Sounds, Straits, Tides, Variation of the Compass &c. Together with a particular relation of the shape and appearance at sea, of the several Headlands, Illmus, Peninsulas, Points, Promontories, and whatever is of use or importance to the Master, Pilot, Commander, or Seaman of any ship or vessel, in navigating the watery element. Also Comprehending Ample Directions for sailing into or out of the different Ports, Straits, and Harbours of the four quarters of the world; and for avoiding dangers on the various and extended coasts; in which more than twelve thousand distinct names of places, are treated of and explained. With a correct set of Charts, 2 vols. 8vo. price 6 dols. By the Rev. JOHN MALHAM, This has been pronounced the most useful and the cheapest book published in America. June 9. dff
COLUMBIA HOUSE Boarding School for young Ladies. MRS. GROOMBRIDGE with much pleasure and respect, returns her sincere acknowledgement for the liberal encouragement she has received during four years residence in Philadelphia; and assures her friends and the public, so far from intending to decline her school, she has made a superior arrangement for the more convenient accommodation of her scholars. Every branch of useful and polite education is particularly attended to by Mrs. Groombridge and masters excelling in their respective professions. Corner of Spruce and Eleventh Streets. June 1th, 1797. $1m1f
For Sale, ON board the ship MOLLY, John Frost, master from Liverpool, laying at Walnut-street wharf 6000 bushels of fine stoved Salt, And QUEEN'S WARE, well assorted, By PHILIP NICKLIN & Co. WHO HAVE IN STORE, ALSO FOR SALE, 100 Boxes White Havana Sugars Imperial and T I T E A S 17 tubs Quickilver 2 casks Bandanno Handkerchiefs A few chests Manchester Goods well assorted in corduroys, thickets, ginghams, mouselins, dimities, &c. 2 Trunks black fewing silk, 180 Crates queens ware, well assorted, 10 Tons fleet lead, Nails assorted, flat and sharp points, London particular and } Madeira Wine in India market } pipes and hds. 30 pipes, 10 hds. Teneriffe Wine, 10 pipes choice Port ditto, 34 casks yellow paint, 7 boxes 12 bundles writing flutes, 1 box ink-stands & note presses, Sail canvas assorted No. 1 & 2. May 4. dff
Millinery Room, No. 136 Market-street. MISS CHRISTAL TAKES an early opportunity of acquainting her Friends that she has received by the WILLIAM PENN, a variety of NEW MILLINERY, &c. which she hopes to be able to show them in a few days. May 18 $30t
A FEW BOXES OF Bologna Sausages, OF A SUPERIOR QUALITY. To be sold at No. 199 South Front-street. April 10. colf
The Commissioners FOR carrying into effect the TWENTY-FIRST Article of the Treaty of Friendship, Limits, and Navigation, between His Catholic Majesty and the United States of America, hereby give information to all Persons thein concerned—That, in order to terminate all differences, on account of the losses sustained by the Citizens of the United States, in consequence of their Vessels and Cargoes having been taken by the Subjects of His Catholic Majesty, during the late War between Spain and France, that they are ready to receive (at their Office, between the hours of ten and one o'clock, daily) all complaints and applications, authorized by the said Article, during EIGHTEEN MONTHS, from the day of the date hereof, and that they have power to examine all such persons as some before them, on oath or affirmation, touching the complaints in question, and also to receive in evidence, all written testimony, authenticated in such manner as they shall think proper to require or admit. By Order of the Commissioners, PETER LOHRA, Secretary. Commissioners Office, No. 109, Mulberry-street, Philadelphia, May 17th, 1797. 20-34w
The Commissioners FOR carrying into effect the sixth article of the treaty of commerce and navigation, concluded between his Britannic majesty and the United States of America, on the 19th day of November, 1794, having this day constituted their Board, pursuant and agreeably to the said treaty, do hereby give notice, that they are ready to proceed to business accordingly and they desire that all claims under the said article (which so far as the same describes the cases thereby provided for, is hereunto annexed) may be lodged with their Secretary without delay. They further desire that all such claims may not only state in what manner the several cases come within the description of the said article, but also specially set forth the nature of the evidence by which the claimants respectively undertake to substantiate the same. Extract from the said article, "Whereas it is alleged by divers British merchants, and others his majesty's subjects, that debts to a considerable amount, which were bona fide contracted, before the peace, still remain owing to them by citizens or inhabitants of the United States; and that by the operation of various lawful impediments, since the peace, not only the full recovery of the said debts has been delayed, but also the value and security thereof have been in several instances impaired and lessened, so that by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, the British creditors cannot now obtain and actually have and receive full and adequate compensation for the losses and damages which they have thereby sustained: It is agreed that in all such cases where full compensation for such losses and damages cannot for whatever reason be actually obtained, had and received by the said creditors in the ordinary course of justice, the United States will make full and complete compensation for the same to the said creditors; but it is distinctly understood, that this provision is to extend to such losses only as have been occasioned by the lawful impediments aforesaid, and is not to extend to losses occasioned by fraud, insolvency of the debtors or other causes, as would equally have operated to produce such loss, if the said impediments had not existed; nor to such losses or damages as have been occasioned by the manifest delay, or negligence, or wilful omission of the claimant." By order of the Board, GRIFFITH EVANS, Secretary. Philadelphia, Commissioners' Office, No. 3 South Sixth-street, May 29, 1797. 16-51m
THE SUBSCRIBER having been appointed by the Essoy Extraordinary and Minifter Plenipotentiary of his Britannic Majesty, General Agent for all British creditors, and such particular agents as they may specially authorize, in prosecuting their claims before the commissioners for carrying into effect the sixth article of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between his Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, hereby gives notice that he has opened his office at his house the south east corner of Chestnut and fifth streets, Philadelphia, where he is ready to receive all claims or instructions for claims with the vouchers and documents thereof, for the purpose of bringing forward the same agreeably to the rules and orders which the board may think proper to prescribe. And as it will be for the interest of all concerned, that the several claims be to be stated, and supported, as to prevent the delay which would arise from the necessity of obtaining further information, or additional materials, from persons residing at a distance, the general agent thinks it his duty to add, (for the direction chiefly of those, who, not having employed particular agents, may leave the prosecution of their claims to his charge and management) that all such claims ought in particular to set forth— 1st. The proper description and situation of the creditor or claimant, and original debtor, respectively. 2d. The date or nature of the original contract or debt. 3d. When, in what manner, and to what extent, the creditor or claimant was prevented or impeded, by the provision, operation or defect of law, the decisions and practice of courts, or restraint of execution, from recovering payment of the debt in question. 4th. The loss and damage incurred or sustained, in consequence of such impediments, whether the same may have arisen from the insolvency, change of situation, or death of the debtor, the loss of legal remedy from lapse of time or other causes impairing the value and security of the debt, which would not have operated if such impediments had not existed. And 5th. The particular grounds and reasons on which the claimant maintains, in the terms of the treaty, that "by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, the creditor cannot now obtain and actually have and receive full and adequate compensation" for the losses and damages to him sustained. The general agent thinks it his duty further to suggest that the several claimants ought to be accompanied and supported by the affidavits of the claimants duly sworn and regularly attested, both as to the existence of the debt claimed, and such other circumstances as may be within their own knowledge respectively. And wherever the claimants in stating the nature of their evidence (which must in every instance be the best of which the case is capable) have occasion to refer to the testimony of witnesses, it will be proper to apprise the general agent of the names and places of residence of such witnesses and the facts to be established by their testimony. Wm. Moore Smith. Philadelphia, June 8th, 1797. dim
New-England Rum, In Hogheads and Barrels, for sale by EZEKIEL HALL. June 7. 4t

Advertisement.
PURSUANT to an Order from the Orphans' Court, will be sold at PUBLIC SALE, at Cranberry, on Wednesday, the 18th day of June next, all that valuable REAL ESTATE, late belonging to the Rev. Gilbert T. Snowden, deceased, lying in and near Cranberry, in the county of Middlesex, township of South Berwick, State of New Jersey, upon the lower road leading from Philadelphia to New York. A very elegant frame house in a beautiful and healthy situation, painted white, with Venetian window shutters, thirty feet front and thirty-eight feet deep, two rooms with a handsome hall or entry on the first floor, three rooms on the second floor and two well-finished attics. In the rear of the house is an excellent two-story building consisting of a dining-room for work people, spacious pantries and a large kitchen, with every convenience, and over both are three chambers for servants. To the right is an additional building consisting of a chamber below and a library above, under which are very fine cellars paved with brick. The house is entirely new and finished with taste. Every room is hung with bells that lead both to the yard and the servants' apartments. There is a pump in the yard, and a fine and brick pavement round the whole house, which is enclosed with a handsome railing, with three gates in front. The farm consists of one hundred and sixty seven acres, with a proportion of woodland and meadow, under excellent fence; a garden with pale fence; a large barn, flails, carriage-house, corn-house, &c. all new, and built in the best manner, with a young orchard of 200 grafted trees. Nearly adjoining said farm is a lot of woodland of the best quality, containing 37 acres. Also a tract of land within seven miles of Cranberry, containing one hundred and fifty acres, three-fourths meadow and the rest excellent timber. This will be sold in lots or together, as will best suit the purchasers. The payments, one third cash—one third in one year—and the remaining third, one year following, with interest on the two last payments, and approved security. For further particulars enquire of Nathaniel Hunt, Esq., or Dr. Ralph Lott, Cranberry; of Isaac Snowden, at Princeton; or of Isaac Snowden, Jun. No. 141 South Second Street, Philadelphia. May 25. $6mvs85
COTTON.
A few bales just arrived, for sale by JOHN CLARK, No. 55 North Water Street. June 10. conf.
Lancaster, Harrisburg, Carlisle, Shippenburg and Sunbury STAGES.
THE public are requested to take notice, that the partnership which has for some time subsisted between Mathias Slough of Lancaster, and William Geer, is now dissolved; but, not as M. Slough intimates to the public without just cause; as will more fully appear by a letter on the subject from M. Slough to W. Geer, dated the 29th December last. A recital of which is not now deemed necessary. Any gentleman who wishes to be more circumstantially informed of the merits of this business, by applying to W. Geer may have the perusal of M. Slough's letter, and then can be at full liberty to determine whether or not W. Geer is not perfectly justifiable in attaching himself to any other person in the prosecution of the Stage conveyance from Philadelphia to Shippenburg, or any other place. Now from the liberal and generous support the public were pleased to confer on the first effort in this business, William Geer, in conjunction with Messrs. Reily, Weed and Wimer, is determined to prosecute and carry it on, with every care, attention and dispatch that a zeal to oblige the public can possibly exert. The above company, who are amply provided with carriages, horses, and every appurtenance to render the passage safe and commodious, inform those who wish to patronize and encourage the undertaking, that they can take their seats at George Weed's, the sign of the White Horse, Market Street, Philadelphia, on every Monday and Friday, to proceed to Lancaster, Harrisburg, Carlisle and Shippenburg. The fare as hitherto established. For the further accommodation of the public, a Stage will start every Wednesday from the house of Samuel Elder, in Harrisburg, arrive at Sunbury in Northumberland county, every Thursday, and return from thence and arrive at Harrisburg every Saturday, so that passengers destined for Lancaster or Philadelphia, may proceed on Mondays.
WILLIAM GEER.
Lancaster, Jan. 27, 1797. N.B. This Line of Stages starts from the house of William Ferrae, in Lancaster, on every Tuesday and Saturday morning at 6 o'clock, proceeding to the westward; and from the house of Mr. Samuel Elder in Harrisburg every Wednesday morning, on the same evening arrives at Patrick Cochran's in Shippenburg, and returns from thence on every Thursday; performing the same routine daily as in its tour from Philadelphia. mwf
Venereal Complaints,
PUNCTUALLY attended to in every stage of that disease, without the use of mercury or restraints of diet, in any case recent and simple, on application at No. 113, Chestnut-street, opposite the United States Bank, or at No. 170, South Water-street, between Spruce and Pine-streets, where he has opened an office for the better accommodation of his patients. But in Lues Venereas confirmed, Doctor Morgan pledges himself, that no system of cure (however specious) can be effectual without mercury, and that all the known rules of practice for these two centuries past, and united experience affirms, that any substitute for it is but nugatory, and any mode of practice to the contrary must be futile and deceptious. Nevertheless, he undertakes, however complicated the case, to effect a cure without inconvenience or injury to the patient's constitution, and in time not generally experienced or expected. N.B. Regular attendance at the office in Water-street, from the hour of nine o'clock in the morning until one, and from three o'clock in the evening until seven; but any one at his dwelling house, in Chestnut street. May 16. dit
A Cow Stolen
FROM the owner at the corner of Ninth and Arch streets. She is a deep red brindle with some white, about ten years old and very gentle. The person who secretes her had best turn her out, as if legal evidence can be obtained, he may expect a rigorous prosecution. TWO DOLLARS reward will be given to any person who will deliver the Cow, or give such evidence against the person keeping her, that he may be convicted of the fact. Apply at No. 218, ARCH STREET. June 9. taw3w
Now Landing,
At Pratt's wharf, FROM on board the ship Thomas Chalkley, Capt. Raper, from Bourdeaux, CLARET in cask. White Wine Vinegar Red Skins in boxes Per Bale by Randle & Leech. May 15
CONGRESS.
THURSDAY, JUNE 8. (Concluded from Friday's paper.)
Mr. SWANWICK said, that as the question was to insert the word West Indies in the resolution, it might not be amiss to make a few observations on that trade. Much had been said about the restrictions which should be laid on vessels going out, that they should carry no contraband articles, of English or French property, and that therefore they could not be legally stopped; but he asked under what regulations vessels were to be put on their return? What documents could a vessel bring from any port in the West Indies ? Every person who was acquainted with the West India trade knew, that it was a continued source of distrust, lest the French or English should export their property under cover of American property, and, in either case, where the fact appeared, vessels were looked upon as good prizes. This collusion, he said, had been carried on in a variety of ways, some of which he explained. He knew of no method by which this could be prevented, and still he believed more vessels were taken coming from, than going to the West Indies . Mr. S. saw no advantage from arming, because, he believed, we should not only lose our vessels, but also the arms on board: and those vessels would probably be made use of as privateers against our own trade. But why, said Mr. S. is so much said about the French in this debate? This arming, he said, would operate principally against Great-Britain, as a greater number of our vessels in the West Indies were taken by the British than by the French; because we had much more valuable trade with the French, Spanish, and Dutch islands, than with the British. France would rather be pleased than offended at our determination to protect our trade, because the want of that protection had been one of their causes of complaint, and they would know that in a fortnight after we sent our armed vessels to sea, they would be fighting with the British. So that this measure would be like a two-edged sword, and cut a contrary way from that which its movers and supporters intended. It was asked how long we should submit to the degradation of our vessels being convoyed by the armed ships of Great-Britain? He would answer that these convoys were confined to their own ports, and did not extend to the French, Dutch or Spanish ports. If the French had a sufficient force in that quarter, they might also convoy our vessels from thence. When he spoke before on this question, he said the expense of this measure was of itself a measure was of itself a sufficient objection to it; when it was answered that this was no objection, because if merchants did not find their own account in it, they were not obliged to go into the measure. But it was not only on this account that he objected to the plan, but because it would give rise to collisions of the most dangerous kinds, and all regulations which could be thought of, would be insufficient to prevent them. It had been said, if this measure was not gone into, our coasting trade would be ruined. Was it then expected that French privateers would come and take our coasting vessels? If so, were our coasters to be armed? This he could hardly suppose, as no transportation could support the expense of such a measure; and if not, what became of the argument on this ground? Mr. S. concluded by saying, he had shown that a regulation of the kind proposed could not effect its object, that our vessels would not be able to cope with the force they would meet with, and that it would lead to war. He believed we must determine upon one of two things, viz. either to continue our trade, as at present, by means of insurance, or give it up altogether. And this might be left to regulate itself; because whilst the profits arising from it were sufficient to make it worth the attention of merchants, it would be carried on; when it was not, it would be declined. Mr. POTTER hoped the amendment would prevail, and that we should have the question, as he thought there had been more than enough said upon it. He was afraid no question would hereafter come up, but gentlemen would think it necessary to tell them all they knew about the law of nations, &c. Many gentleman had complained of long speeches and personalities, and immediately made still longer, and been more personal. He could not say whether these long speeches were made to display members own vanity, or from their opinion of the ignorance of the House. Mr. HARPER took notice of what had fallen from Mr. Swanwick on the subject of French and British spoliations. On a former occasion he had said that the depredations of the British were equal to those of the French; but now he told them they were much greater. Mr. H. said, he then called upon him for his proof, and he referred him to the insurance offices. He had accordingly applied to them, and though he had not yet got his information complete; such as it was he would lay it before the committee. From the insurance company of Pennsylvania, he found that since the first of January, the French had taken four ships, five brigs, and three schooners, insured in that office, and the British only two brigs in the same time. From the North America insurance office his account was less complete, as it went back to the beginning of 1796, and ended with the end of it, when the spoliations of the French were not so great as they have been since. The total amount of British captures during that period, was 99,274 dollars; of French, 271,000. But he believed, if the account was brought up to the present date, the French spoliations would be ten times the amount of the British. But of this he should be more certain to-
morrow, as he was promised a statement of them at that time. Mr. S. SMITH said, if he understood the observation of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, it referred to captures of fair and honorable trade, and not to those made of vessels of the United States engaged in illicit commerce. If, when the gentleman obtains his information from the insurance offices, he will get them to state to what place the vessels which were taken were bound, and with what they were laden, the committee would be able to understand what they are about. Philadelphia, he said, was particularly situated in this respect. One of the most respectable houses in the city was one upon whom Mr. Wiggleworth, the British agent, drew all his bills for produce carried for the use of the British government. This gave them an advantage over other parts of the union, and hence it was that there were more depredations committed by the French upon vessels from Philadelphia than from any other port; but much of this trade was illegal, as it was carried on to ports where there were only a few British troops, and which were deemed by the French rebel ports. It was on this account that he had twice proposed a resolution to the house, but had not been able to pass it, to get a particular account of vessels taken in going to the West Indies , since the 1st of October, 1796. This account from the insurance offices, he said, was not a fair one. Many vessels, he said, were captured, taken into British ports, and after being put to great loss and inconvenience, released. These did not come within the view of the insurance office, tho' they were probably obliged to sell their cargoes at 50 per cent under its value. Therefore any account which could be got from insurance offices could not be relied on. Mr. S. said he had this morning received letters from different captains in his employ to and from French ports, who had been carried into British ports, and obliged to sell their cargoes at a price by which he should lose 50 per cent. He learnt that the privateers state their orders to be, to take and carry into British ports all vessels bound to and from French ports. They state that nine American vessels which were taken in this way, were carried into Cape Nicholas Mole, and afterwards sent to Jamaica. These, he said, never came before an insurance office, because they were excepted against in the policy of insurance. The gentleman from Massachusetts had said, why did not the merchants meet, and express their wishes on this subject. The merchants in Philadelphia, Mr. S. observed, consisted of English, French and Americans, and so different were their feelings, that were they to meet, they probably would not agree to any declaration which could be formed. Mr. S. Read the proclamation of Victor Hugues wherein he declares certain ports of the West Indies in a state of rebellion, and forbids trading to them. He thought this provision just, and if persons continued to trade to these ports, after this notice, they must take the consequence. Mr. CHAMPLIN interrupted Mr. S. to enquire whether Martinique was included in the Rebel Ports; because it had been taken after a vigorous resistance. Though, he said, he was no merchant, his friends were engaged in commerce, and from them he had some knowledge on that subject. The gentleman from Pennsylvania had stated that our commerce was stopped to the Havannah, whereas he knew that between 30 and 40 vessels which trade betwixt Rhode Island and the Havannah had arrived safe. They had been searched, and after examination, all of them had been dismissed. Mr. S. SMITH said Martinique was considered as a Rebel Port by Victor Hugues. It was true that Port Royal was bravely defended by French troops, but the island itself was given up to the British without any resistance. But suppose that island was taken fairly, they were cautioned against trading there, and it would afterwards become a matter for discussion betwixt the two Governments, and if it ought not to be considered as a Rebel Port, he trusted we should get redress for the property which had been taken in going there. The property of vessels bound to the regular ports of Great-Britain, Victor Hugues caused to be sold, and the amount placed in the treasury. Mr. CHAMPLIN again interrupted Mr. S. to say that property which was thus taken was sold for one-tenth of its value, and the small sum of money for which it was sold was placed in their treasury—to that the whole value was detained from the owner. Mr. S. SMITH acknowledged that this was true. The goods were sold at vendue (perhaps unfairly) for what they would fetch. Mr. S. here mentioned the case of a ship of his taken by Victor Hugues, which had been misrepresented to his disadvantage. It was the ship Jane, chartered by him, the supercargo of which was cruelly treated and placed in prison, from an idea that the vessel belonged to a Scotch merchant in Baltimore of the same name with his supercargo; but on the mistake being cleared up, and finding on the trial, that the vessel belonged to a real American, who was in the habit of trading to French ports, and that she was bound for Martinique, and not for Guadalupa, she was released. This account of the transaction was at the time fairly represented in the American Daily Advertiser, but from some cause or other had got misrepresented to his disadvantage in other papers. He apologized to the Committee for having troubled them with this fact, but as it had been alluded to by different Gentlemen, in the course of the debate, he thought it necessary in his justification to state it. Mr. BROOKS said the committee had long been amused with matters no way connected with the subject under discussion. He should confine himself to it, that an individual had a right to arm his vessel for self defence was very clear; it was the practice not only of this, but of every other nation. The next consideration was, whether it would be expedient at this time to go into the measure. Gentlemen had talked about what had been done on a former occasion, when another nation captured our vessels, which he thought had nothing to do with the present question. Heretofore our vessels had been captured by vessels of considerable force; but of late, the principal depredations committed upon our commerce were the acts of small vessels without authority. He thought, it was therefore a question with the committee whether they could not so modify the resolution, as to lessen the evil, without any danger of offence to other nations. He thought they might. Attempts had been made to terrify them with the cry of war; and that they must not pursue that or the other plan, for fear of offending the French Republic or British Nation. He thought when they were considering the best mode of defending our merchants against pirates and buccaneers, no nation had a right to take offence at them: and if matters of vessels transgressed their orders they must be accountable. Mr. GILES reproached the idea of masters of vessels being accountable, and at placing the peace of the United States at risk upon a merchant's bond. The gentleman might be very bold about war; he could not help saying he dreaded it. Why, he asked, did they all at once feel this obligation; they had all the information last session which they had at present, except as to the insult offered our minister; yet he believed, if any man had come forward with a proposition like the present at that time, he would have been deemed a MADMAN. And now commissioners are appointed to settle our differences, they were about to lay the foundation for a thousand fresh disputes. He found himself much alarmed at this, because he knew this country had all to lose, and nothing to gain, by war, and nothing increased his apprehension more than the language of gentlemen on that floor. The proposed scheme, he said, was a visionary one, and pregnant with mischief. They all knew there were complicated difficulties with respect to the law of nations, and it would be the height of folly to arm our vessels to consult the point with any foreign power. Nor did Mr. G. think our present situation so calamitous as some gentlemen had affected to state it. He believed it was as good as it ever would be in any time of peace. The best criterion was the price of produce. Much mischief, it was true, had been occasioned by spoliations upon merchants property at sea; but he believed much greater had been occasioned by wild speculations on land. And it was no wonder, that when individuals were out of humour from their losses, that extravagant measures should be thought of; but that they should be seriously urged in a Legislative body, was surprising. He trusted there never would be a House of Representatives so lost to the interests of its country, as to agree to a measure like the present. Mr. GALLATIN said, that the question having been so frequently called for, he would not again have troubled the committee, had he not considered the present amendment to be of great importance, as any question that was likely to come before them during the present session. It was nothing less than to declare that our merchant vessels armed in the West India trade, should be under certain restrictions. It had no relation to whether the right existed or not; but whether they should give the power, if it did not exist, or restrain it, if it did. He meant to contend, that if the measure was adopted, it could not be productive of one single advantage, but that it would produce great evils, modify it as they pleased. If the power of self defence was employed against search or capture it would transgress the laws of nations. To prove that resistance to a search was ground of capture he read passages from Vattel and Martan. If resistance could be used at all then, it must be to resist illegal search. This would depend upon treaties of commerce which might be in existence. By our treaties with France, Holland, and (he believed) Spain, the modes in which searches shall be made have been pointed out. No vessel of war was allowed to come nearer to our vessels than gun shot, and were not to oblige our vessels to send out their boats, but were themselves to send their boat with a certain number of men on board. If one of their vessels should attempt to search an American vessel contrary to these stipulations, it might be called an illegal search, and the provision of self defence might be carried into effect, and in this case alone. And he wished to know whether any advantage was to be derived from being authorized to resist, in such a case? It might produce an engagement, but could never prevent a vessel being taken; because one of two things would happen, the privateer would either comply with the regulations, or go on to fight and take the vessel. He said it was not possible to prevent the vessel from being taken. The gentleman from South Carolina had pointed out a number of restrictions under which it would be proper to place vessels thus armed; but suppose the vessel to be in none of these situations, what was then to be done? Our vessels, he said, might be loaded with papers and regulations, the fact was, that we had no right to judge of the fact. We say no privateer has a right to take this vessel, because engaged in a legal trade; but, if a privateer, on inspecting the vessel's papers, suspects the contrary, he may take the vessel, and the cause must be tried in the admiralty court of the captor. To prove this, he referred to sundry documents. This being the case, he did not see a single advantage to be derived from arming, for a privateer might not only deny the cargo to be a legal one, but that the vessel was American, as had been the case in the capture of a vessel going out from this port last year (We understand he alluded to the Mount Vernon); and as no suit had been instituted, he supposed the ground was a good one. Indeed, he was informed that the vessel and cargo was consigned by power of attorney to the consignee, in England, to be delivered up on her arrival, and that a person on board was in possession of the consignment. If there were any other advantage to be derived from arming, he wished to hear it. It was not, Mr. G. said from a fear of offending this power or that, he was against this regulation, but because it was calculated to draw us into hostility, because if our vessels either resisted search or capture it would certainly lead to war; it would not only lead to war, but it was war! In addition to what had been said, it might be observed, that when the British exclusively committed depredations upon our commerce, nothing was said about arming our merchant vessels; and if they had done it, he believed it would have been considered as an infraction of the law of 1794. He therefore, submitted it to the Committee, whether a provision like the present, would not be considered as an act of partiality. From this opinion, and that the measure would be immediate hostility, he should oppose it. Mr. HARPER charged the gentleman last up with building his superstructure upon a sandy foundation. He insisted that the power of carrying vessels into port on suspicion was done away by treaty, and that if a vessel had a regular sea letter and passport on board, there could be no plea for carrying her in. Mr. H. complained that many American vessels were taken by small privateers without any authority whatever. The Mount Vernon, he said, was taken by one of these, and therefore there could be no ground for offence to any Government, to resist the attacks of such marauders. The spoliations of 1794, and the present, were wholly different, and therefore there could be no ground for a charge of partiality; at that time our vessels were taken by large authorized privateers; now they were principally attacked and taken by small, unauthorized vessels. Mr. GALLATIN maintained his ground, and denied that a shew of regular papers was sufficient to secure a vessel. Mr. W. SMITH said, if the construction given to our treaties by the gentleman last up was a good one, it would go to nullify
several articles in our treaties whose only tendency was to prevent vessels being carried into foreign ports as prizes, and therefore as they were certainly meant to have some meaning, his construction could not be a good one. The question was not whether we should authorize our vessels to arm to protect themselves; but whether, in the first place, our citizens have a natural right to arm and defend themselves, and if they have the right, whether the legislature ought to restrict it, and in what cases. Though some gentlemen had denied this right to exist, no proof had been adduced in support of that opinion. The question then was, whether the right should be restricted in voyages to the West Indies , as well as to the East Indies and Mediterranean. There could be no doubt, Mr. S. Said, that if a search was attempted in any way contrary to the mode directed by treaty, such search was illegal, and warranted resistance. That merchant vessels had a right to arm in their defence, in addition to other authorities, he had the opinion of the attorney general of the United States, which he trusted would have due weight with the Committee. (He read it; it was dated June 1.) It was said this power was not exercised in 1794; but he said they were now only about to restrict a right, which was then unrestrained. Indeed the privateers which then took our vessels, would have been more than an overmatch for any armed merchant vessel, whilst a merchant vessel would be equal to cope with any vessel which now annoyed our trade in the West Indies . If merchants' vessels armed at all, he thought there was as much necessity for it to the West Indies as to any other part. He contended that the construction he put upon Victor Hugues's proclamation was a good one. He said he had examined into the practice of the neutral nations, and he found that Sweden was in the habit of arming her merchantmen. He called the attention of gentlemen to the consequences of rejecting the present amendment. He believed if the restrictions were confined to the East Indies and Mediterranean, that the bill would not pass the Senate, if it passed that House. The right of arming would then be sanctioned, and they would have determined not to restrain it. The consequence would be, that merchants would arm their vessels incompetently, go and trade with what were called rebel ports, which would cause bloodshed, their vessels would be taken, and they would be hung; whereas if the restriction passed, the arming, might be confined to large vessels, which would be able to defend themselves. He hoped therefore the principle would be agreed to. Mr. MACON was surprised to hear the gentleman from S. Carolina introduce the opinion of the Attorney General in the way he had done. That gentleman was to give his opinion when called upon by the house; but it was extremely irregular to introduce it in the way he had produced it, as given to an individual. He was opposed to the resolutions, and said if large bonds were to be taken, none but men of property could find the security, and it would of course destroy all the small vessels trading to the West Indies . The call for the question was loud, and also for the Committee to rise, the question for the Committee to rise was put, and negatived. Mr. WILLIAMS said he was as desirous of taking the question as any one; but he wished to give his reasons for voting in favor of the amendment. He was far from thinking that the adoption of this resolution would amount to a declaration of war; if so, he should be the first to oppose it. The measure was recommended to them in the Speech of the President, and he wished to go into a consideration of it. He wished the principle to be agreed to, and referred to a special Committee, that they might have a plan reported before them; but in doing this, he should not consider himself as pledged to support the bill, except he approved of it. The questions were then taken upon the amendment, as stated in Saturday's paper; except that instead of the Chairman declaring the question on the first amendment, on which the division was 41 and 40, was negatived, he declared it carried.
SATURDAY, JUNE 10.
Mr. BLOUNT called up the resolution which he yesterday proposed to the committee of the whole, calling upon the President of the United States to lay before the House a return of all the arms and ammunition owned by the United States, and where deposited. It was carried. Mr. S. SMITH offered a resolution to the House to the following effect: "Resolved, that the President of the United States be requested to cause to be laid before the House, a report respecting depredations committed on the commerce of the United States since the 1st of October, 1796, specifying the names of the vessels taken, from whence and where bound, and wherein can be ascertained the species of lading, and the value of the vessel and cargo, and by what power taken, particularizing those which have been condemned, together with the proper documents relative thereto." Agreed to. Mr. BLOUNT said, as they were to be called upon to take the subject of fortifications under consideration, he wished to have some information on the subject, and proposed to the House therefore a resolution to the following effect: "Resolved that the Secretary of War be required to lay before the House, a list of the fortifications of the United States, together with the number of troops in each; an account of the expense which attended the erecting them, and what is yet necessary to their completion, and of the expended money appropriated for that purpose." Mr. LIVINGSTON suggested the propriety of suffering this resolution to lie until the committee appointed on this subject, made their report, as he believed some of the enquiries would be there answered, and that report would be made to day. Mr. BLOUNT concurred.

Mr. LIVINGSTON then called up the resolution which he had laid upon the table for ap- pointing an agent to defend before the commission- ers now sitting, the citizens of the United States against the claims made upon them by Great Britain, in pursuance of the late treaty.
Mr. W. SMITH submitted to the consideration of the mover, House, whether it would not be best to place this business under the Attorney General. It might, in that case, be proper to afford him a sum of money to enable him to employ additional clerks for the purpose.
Mr. LIVINGSTON had no objection to modi- fy the resolution in this way, "to appoint an agent to assist the Attorney General in the defence of the business."
Mr. MACON said this might be a good propo- sition, but it did not strike him as necessary. He thought the commissioners would be competent to do the business.
Mr. GODDARD thought the business would be best referred to a select committee.
Mr. LIVINGSTON saw no use in referring the matter to a select committee, except it were to report a bill. When gentlemen reflected upon the nature of their duties, and the time at which they were contracted, they would see the op- portunity for collision. He did not mean that an agent should be appointed to reside at Phila- delphia, but a person who might be employed to investigate, in the best manner, the justice of the claims. The President might, perhaps, think it necessary to appoint a person near to the places where the debts were contracted.
Mr. NICHOLAS thought this a more serious business than was generally supposed, and that it would be found so, when the money came to pay. He knew not whether two or three agents would not be necessary.
The resolution was referred to a select com- mittee, to report by bill or otherwise.
Mr. LIVINGSTON, from the committee ap- pointed on the subject of fortifications, report- ed sundry documents; together with a bill to provide for the fortifications of the ports and harbors of the United States, in which it is provided that the money necessary for carrying it into effect, shall be borrowed of the bank of the United States, or in such other way as shall be found best. The bill was twice read and referred to a committee of the whole on Monday.
The House took up the resolution agreed to in the committee of the whole yesterday, au- thorizing the President to call on the Executive of the several States, to hold 80,000 militia in readiness, apportioned according to the number of white inhabitants in each State.
Mr. W. SMITH wished one part of the res- olution to be modified or omitted. He meant that part which directed the men to be ap- portioned according to the number of white inhabi- tants in each State. This, he said, might have an injurious effect. For, in case an invasion were to take place in a State where white popu- lation was the weakest, the proportion of men detached would be so small as to be, in a great degree useless; and in other States, the number would be greater than was any necessity for. For instance, if Georgia were to be the place of attack (and if an invasion did take place that was the most likely quarter for it) where the white population is small, there would not be a sufficient number of men to afford any protection, on the plan proposed. He thought if they fixed upon the proportion, the constitu- tional estimation would be best, viz. to add to the white population three-fifths of the number of negroes. He moved to strike out the ap- portionment, in order to have the regulation to be inserted in the bill.
Mr. MACON did not think there was any weight in the objection of the gentleman last up; as, in case of invasion, the Execu- tive of the State might call out more than the number he contemplated, or even the whole of the militia, until assistance could be got from the neighbouring states. The res- olution, being in the form of that agreed to on a former occasion, could not reason- ably be objected to.
Mr. THATCHER enquired whether it had been customary to train blacks to arms?
Mr. W. SMITH said he was not under- stood. He meant that the number of whites to be detached, should be in proportion to the number of whites, with three fifths of the blacks added to the number.
Mr. VENABLE did not think there would be justice in such a regulation, as the duty would lie heavier upon states thinly inhabi- ted than upon others. In case of invasion he said, the neighbouring states would be called upon.
Mr. McDOWELL said, that should the gentleman from South Carolina's proposition be agreed to, the duty would fall heavier upon him (Mr. S's) constituents than upon any other part of the Union; besides, when so many whites were taken from home on this business, the rest would be exposed to the blacks. He trusted therefore he would not persist it.
Mr. W. SMITH wished only for the sub- ject to be left open, that the apportionment might have been left to the President. [He read the form of an amendment which he would have proposed.] He did not at present contemplate an invasion, though it might be necessary to adopt this cautionary measure. He withdrew his amendment.
The question was about to be put on the resolution; when
Mr. VARNUM said he did not see any oc- casion for this resolution. He did not think they had any reason to suppose an invasion probable; but if it should take place, there was sufficient power in the Executive of the different governments to call out the militia. He did not know how the militia was regu- lated in other States, but in the Eastern states, he knew it was always in readiness, and that 20,000 men could be landed in a few days, at any point, from Portsmouth to Rhode Island. This being the case, he did not think it necessary to make any detach- ment from them. It was true, an invasion might take place from France, but he tho't it was as probable it might come from Eng- land; though he believed it was equally prob- able it might be from Nova Scotia.
It was said that this regulation would be no expense to the United States: It might be an expense to the government, but it will be a serious expense to the people. He thought the situation of the United States very different now from what it was in 1794. The British were at that time, not only taking our property at sea, but they had large provinces adjoining upon the United States; and could have brought large bodies of troops against us. It also appeared that they had hostile intentions against us; it ap- peared from the Proclamation of the Gover- nor of Canada, that Great Britain meant
to declare war; that the Indians were pre- pared to make attacks on our frontiers; and fortifications were erecting within our ter- ritory. In this case it became prudent to have a detachment of militia in perfect read- iness. But said Mr. V. the situation of the United States is now very different.—
The nation with whom we have now a misunderstanding, had no possessions adjoining upon us, and there was not much prob- ability of troops being sent against us from France. He did not wish, therefore, to go into the present measure. It might be well to call upon the Secretary at War to know the condition in which the militia was in the different parts of the Union; but he did not think more was necessary.
Mr. BLOUNT agreed with gentlemen in opinion, that they had no reason to expect any invasion. But it was well known the President of the United States, in his speech had spoken of raising a provisional army; but if he had not done this, he thought the measure now before them was at all times proper. The expense would depend upon the time at which the regulation was carried into effect. If the States did not call extraordinary sessions, no expense would be incurred. He believed we ought at all times to have a military force standing in readiness, which would at any time convince the world that we were not a divided people. The best defence, he said, was to be always prepared to meet the attacks of an enemy. When the measure was formerly gone into, he had as little apprehension of an invasion as at present; and if we had no misunderstanding with any nation, he should be in favour of it.
Mr. THATCHER believed it was true (as his colleague had stated) that the Massachu- setts militia could at any time be called out at a moment's warning; but if the Mi- litia in the Southern States were not in this readiness, he thought it would be well that they should be put into such a state.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS thought it would be proper to have a select corps of militia in readiness; but he denied that this could be done without expense. The expense of the corps which he commanded, when called out in 1794, was very considerable. If the gentleman from Massachusetts thought there was no immediate necessity for the measure, he might move to have the power of making the call whenever the President should see it necessary.
The question was put on the resolution and carried.
The resolution reported by the committee of the whole, proposing to authorise the President to provide galleys or other vessels for the defence of our coast, was next taken up.
Mr. GILES wished to have it clearly ascer- tained what was to be the employment of these vessels; as Coos, he said was an indefinite phrase and li- able to be misunderstood. He was decidedly against their being employed as a convoy. In order to make the meaning clear, he should move to strike out the words "for defending our coast," to be employed within the jurisdiction of the United States.
Mr. RUTLEDGE supposed, if the resolution stood as it was reported, the vessels would be employed within the jurisdiction of the United States; but he thought it would be absurd to say, these vessels should on no account pass the limits of the jurisdic- tion.—The pirates would know this, and our ves- sels might have the mortification of seeing our merchant ships taken or plundered, without hav- ing the power of affording them relief. Or, if one of these pirates were to come within the line, and be pursued by one of these vessels, though he might be on the point of taking her, yet she must not venture across the line. He did not with these vessels to be employed as convoys; but he thought their destination might be safely left to the execu- tive; and had no notion of doing the business by law.
Mr. BROOKS said, it appeared to him, that this principle had been decided yesterday, and did not require farther discussion.
Mr. NICHOLAS supposed it was not from an apprehension that the executive would not do his duty, that it was wished this business should be put into a definitive form. No one, he believed, would put the same construction upon the amend- ment that the gentleman from S. Carolina had done. It could not be supposed to be the intention of the supporters of this amendment, that these vessels should be prevented from crossing the line in pursuit of a pickeroon which had come within the jurisdiction of the United States. Indeed the gentleman himself had concluded, that such an idea would be absurd. To do away all objection, he proposed to insert the words, "for the defence of the sea coast within the jurisdiction of the United States," instead of Mr. Giles's amendment.
Mr. GILES thought the phrase sea coast indefi- nite. It might be supposed, perhaps, to extend to Bermuda.
Mr. W. SMITH said the gentleman last up had supposed the sea coast might extend to Bermuda, yet our vessels were not to go beyond the jurisdic- tion of the United States, for the defence of the coast. This, he said, involved a contradiction. He wished the gentleman to define what he meant by jurisdiction of the United States; he believed it was not decided whether it extended three or nine miles. If it were even nine miles, he said, these vessels might sometimes be obliged to go be- yond the line merely for the purpose of avoiding shoals. Why, then, confine them so very tightly, when the purpose was expressly for the defence of the coast; it could not be expected they would be employed in any other way; to employ them as convoys would be unlawful.
Mr. SEWALL proposed the following: "To de- fend the sea coast of the United States, and to repel any hostility to their vessels and commerce within their jurisdic- tion."
Mr. R. WILLIAMS thought this amendment more objectionable than any other which had been proposed. The jurisdiction not being ascertained, disputes would of course be the consequence. He thought the resolution better without any of its amendments. He was disposed to defend our com- merce wherever attacked; but, if we had not the means to do this, he would not do any thing which would seem to infer that we had not the will to do it, by confining our defence of it without our own territory.
Mr. NICHOLAS was in favor of the amendment, Mr. ALLEN thought the whole of the business trifling, and wished to postpone the business, until the bill came down from the Senate; or, if they did pass the resolution, they ought not to confine it within such narrow bounds. After alluding to the various amendments which had been proposed and opposed, which he called "catchpenny proposals," he moved to postpone the subject till Monday.
Mr. S. SMITH agreed with the gentleman from Connecticut that the present was a trifling business, and he would agree to extend his motion till next session. It was a histrionic exercise . It was the British navy, he said, which kept possession of our coast, and what else, he asked, would these small vessels have upon them? Some of our delegates had lately gone on board one of the British ships of
war at Norfolk, and when they were demanded back, they were refused; and suppose, said he, one of these vessels had been there to have enforced the demand, could any one suppose, it would have produced any thing more than insult upon insult? They could not! He wished to leave these trifling subjects for the Senate, and to go on to substantial business; he meant the finance of the country .
Mr. BROOKS was in favor of coming to a de- cision at present, since the business had been fully discussed.
Mr. ALLEN wished it postponed till Monday; by that time, he thought, the House would have come to its senses.
Mr. GILES also thought the business trifling, and proposed to postpone it till the first Monday in November next.
Mr. HANSON said, if he was of opinion with the gentleman from Connecticut, that the House would have more understanding on Monday than at present, he would agree to postpone the question till that time; but he believed gentlemen must receive some lessons of experience before they could be convinced of their error. The arguments of the gentleman from Maryland went to this; if we cannot resist a British 74, we will not resist a French pirate. But Mr. H. trusted they should not be diverted by a jett from doing what he believed good sense and good policy require them to do.
Mr. S. SMITH said he did not mean to make a jett of the business; but merely to express his desire to go on to more important business.
Mr. THATCHER asked, if this business was postponed, whether when the bill came from the Senate, they could not proceed with it?
The SPEAKER answering in the affirmative, Mr. GILES recalled his motion.
Mr. SEWALL said the bill in the Senate had not the same object in view with this measure. It was their intention to provide vessels as a convoy .
Mr. GILES believed it was not very or- derly to refer to business doing in the Senate. He believed that bill was recommitted.
The question for postponing the business till Monday was put and negatived; Mr. Sewall's amendment was then put and carried without a division.
The question was then taken on the res- olution as amended, by yeas and nays, as follows:
YEAS. Messrs. Allen, Baer, Baldwin, Bayard, Bradbury, Brookes, Bullock, Cabell, Cham- plin, Clay, Clopton, Cochran, Craik, Dana, Davenport, Dennis, Dent, Ege, Elmen- dorff, Evans, Findley, A. Foster, D. Fos- ter, Fowler, J. Freeman, Gallatin, Gilles- pie, Glenn, Goodrich, Gordon, Hanna, Harper, Harrison, Hindman, Holmes, Hol- mer, Imlay, Livingston, S. Lyman, Ma- chir, Mathews, M'Clenachan, Milledge, Morgan, Nicholas, Parker, Potter, Reed, Rutledge, Sewall, Shepard, Skinner, Sin- nickson, Jer. Smith, N. Smith, S. Smith, W. Smith, (C.) W. Smith, (P.) Stanford, Swanwick, Thatcher, Thomas, Thompson, Van Allen, Van Cortlandt, Wadsworth, J. Williams, R. Williams.—68.
NATS. Messrs. Blount, Brent, Bryan, Chapman, Clairborn, Coit, Dawson, N. Freeman, Giles, Gregg, Griswold, Havens, Jones, Locke, Lyon, Macon, McDowell, New, Sprigg, Varnum, Venable.—21.
Committees were appointed to report bills in pursuance to the two resolutions which had been agreed to.
Mr. VARNUM said there was a subject of importance referred to in the President's speech, which had not yet been touched upon, he meant the revision of the militia laws. In order to bring the business before the House, he moved a resolution for the appointment of a committee to report whe- ther any and what alterations in them were necessary. Agreed to, and a committee appointed.
Mr. W. SMITH called for the order of the day, on the bill from the Senate for raising an additional corps of artillerists and engineers.
Mr. BLOUNT asked whether it was not necessary, when they were going into these expenses, to go into an enquiry on the sub- ject of ways and means. He moved that a Committee of Ways and Means be ap- pointed.
Mr. W. SMITH thought it better to pro- ceed with the business in the way he propo- sed. Before they went into the subject of ways and means, he thought it was necessary they should know what money would be wanted, that they might provide according- ly; and they could not know this, until they had gone through the several measures which lay before them.
Mr. NICHOLAS said if it was necessary to have additional revenue, it would be well to appoint a Committee to be calling about as to the proper way of raising it. If the money were to be borrowed, they might be en- quiring upon what terms it could be got.— If they did not do this, when all the other business was done, they would have to wait until these enquiries were made.
Mr. GILES thought the bill for raising additional troops might be very well put off till next session. He did not believe there was any necessity at present for an increase of the military establishment. He thought this was the proper time for taking up the subject of the revenue, since they must ei- ther borrow, or raise money by taxes, and he trusted a Committee would now be ap- pointed.
Mr. W. SMITH withdrew his motion, to give way to the appointment of a Commit- tee of Ways and Means.
Mr. BLOUNT said money would certain- ly be wanted. It was presumed it might be borrowed; but no enquiry had been made on the subject. He was of opinion that the difficulties which would present them- selves on this subject, would throw out of view a number of measures which he thought might very well be dispensed with.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS thought if they ap- pointed a Committee of Ways and Means, and were to go into the Militia Laws, they
might fit all summer. He hoped they should have gone on with the bill for raising money, and if they had rejected that, and declined furnishing convoys, and the measure of pur- chasing vessels for the defence of the coast, was left to the discretion of the President, that a Committee of Ways and Means would not have been necessary.
A Committee of Ways and Means, consi- sting of seven members (after 15 and 13 had been proposed and negatived) was ap- pointed. Adjourned.
By this day's Mail.
BOSTON, June 8
Late Important Intelligence!
Yesterday afternoon, arrived here the ship TELEMACHUS, Capt. PRENTIS, in thirty days from Liverpool, by whom we have re- ceived London papers to May 4th—which contain Paris news to April 28th—much later than before received.—These papers a- bound with events of the greatest magni- tude.
The articles most interesting to Americans contain well corroborated accounts, that pre- liminaries of peace had been signed between the Emperor and French Republic; having been concluded by the Archduke Charles, and Gen. Buonaparte. The events which led to these measures were an unexampled se- ries of victories by the French army of Italy over the Austrians, in which the latter lost between 15 and 20,000 men in killed and wounded, and prisoners; great quantities of ammunition, military stores, provisions, &c. and two millions worth of Quicksilver from the mines of Idria. Our corroborating intelligence are:—First, Mr. Fox, in the British House of Commons the 3d of May, announced the event, and Mr. Pitt did not contradict it.—Second, the French Executive Directory, on the 26th April, in a message to the Council of Five Hundred, says a dispatch from General Moreau is ter- minated by the following postscript: "A Courier which I received this moment from Gen. Buonaparte, announces me the signing of the Preliminaries of Peace with the Em- peror." This message created the liveliest emotions of joy as the harbinger of a speedy peace. Third, The Directory in another message on the same day, to the Council of Five Hundred, respecting the French Colo- nies, say, "The Constitution ought not to be put in activity until after the Peace; but every thing announces that this peace will be concluded in less than a month."
[It may be necessary here to state, that that the reason why the Directory did not receive a Courier from Buonaparte, announc- ing the above event, as early as General Mo- reau, was that General Buonaparte in or- der to stop the useless effusion of blood, dis- respected the Courier he sent with the intelli- gence to proceed to Moreau's and Hoche's armies on the Rhine before he went to Paris.]
—Fourth, Gen. Vernier, Governor of Strasbourg, announced by the sound of trum- pet, on the 24th April, a letter from Gen- eral Regnio, to Gen. Vandamme, as follows: "I have the pleasure to inform you, General, that the preliminaries of a peace have just been signed by the army of Italy; and an armistice has just been proclaimed between the Austrian army and that of the Rhine and Moselle; and in consequence you will cease all hostilities, and the advanced posts will remain in the same position."
This event caused unusual demonstra- tions of joy at Strasbourg, which was brilli- antly illuminated. At Paris numerous dis- charges of artillery announced the peace— the business was suspended—and the streets and gardens resounded with the shouts of vive la Paix! vive la Republique! Fifth, General Leclerc, arrived at Paris, from the army, left the two generals settling the preliminary terms of peace. Gen. B. required, that the formal acknowledgment of the French Republic, by the Emperor, should be ex- punged from the treaty, as the Republic stood not in need of it, for its existence.—
A number of less prominent occurrences, convince us, that Peace now exists between the French Republic and the Emperor of Ger- many.
It will be asked, does the peace include Great-Britain? We can give no decisive answer on that head.—A Paris paper of April 26, says, "The Directory also reck- ons on a peace with England:—And on the 2d of May, the British Parliament voted 1,880,000l. loan to the emperor; likewise provision for guaranteeing 3,500,000l. to be raised on account of the emperor. This was on the day the news arrived of the em- peror's having made peace; the officiality of which Mr. P. seemed unsatisfied with; but told the house, if it was necessary to stop the loan, it could be done in any stage of the bill."
The conditions of the peace are variously stated.—Some say that "Austria consents to the boundaries of the Rhine and the Alps, and the liberty of Lombardy and Mantua." Others state, the conditions to be, "1st, the independence of Italy. 2d, the cession of part of Upper Austria to the prince of Orange. 3d, the expenses of the war to be paid by the emperor." The terms are only editorial conjectures.
The French armies of the Upper and Lower Rhine, both passed that river about the 19th April. General Moreau attacked and carried at noon day the strong post of Kehl, and before 7 o'clock planted the tri-coloured flag on the battlements of that very Kehl which they had defended for 52 days, against prince Charles and all the vi- gour of his veteran army. General Hoche established his position on the right side of the Rhine, after a pitched battle, and three ac- tions, in which he took 7,000 prisoners, 27 cannon, 7 standards, and 60 waggons.
A SERIOUS MUTINY Broke out in the whole British channel fleet the 15th April. On that day, Adm. Brid- port ordered the fleet to prepare for sea, in- stead of weighing anchor, the crew of the
Queen Charlotte, gave 3 cheers, as the signal of disaffection—as the plan had been preme- ditated, the rest of the crews followed: the officers thunderstruck, could do nothing. They were soon confined, and ropes hung from the fore-yard arm to foremast to the un- popular of the fleet—Deputies from each ship repaired on board the Queen Charlotte, a first rate; and the mutiny, in consequence of an intemperate proceeding of Admiral GARD- NER, assumed the most alarming aspect.— The demands of the seamen were an advance of pay to 30s. per month; a due allowance of provisions; a more equal distribution of prize-money; and the displacement of se- veral obnoxious officers. These demands created the most alarming apprehension in the British ministry; but they were complied with in their fullest extent. Admiral Brid- port communicated to the crews the con- cession of the government, and a pardon from the king; on which they all returned to their duty. The contagion spread thro' every port in England; but at the sailing of the Telemachus order had been restored.
A new loan for 18,000,000l. was carried in the House of Commons, May 2, 193 against 50.
No intelligence had been received from Mr. HAMMOND, who had been sent to Vi- enna on a pacific embassy.
Twenty-one counties, cities, and towns have petitioned for peace and the dismissal of PITT. Other counties, &c. were af- sembling.
Three per cent. consol. May 4, 48 1-2. The official detail of the above spreads over many columns; which had we time or room, we should copy.
The Gazette.
PHILADELPHIA, MONDAY EVENING, JUNE 12, 1797.
An error, in the omission of several sentences, inadvertently took place in Mr. HARPER's speech, published on Saturday.—A correction will be in- terested to morrow.
For the remainder of Mr. Dennis's speech, &c. see fourth page.
GAZETTE MARINE LIST.
PORT OF PHILADELPHIA.
ARRIVED. DAYS. Brig Nancy, Buck, Bordeaux 63 Schr. Hopewell, Clark, Cape Francois 29 Dove, May, Charleston 7 John, Wals, Boston 3 Crisis, Brown, N. Carolina 8 Virg. and Phil. Packet, Portsmouth 3 CLEARED. Brig Newton, Dacolia, St. Croix Harmony, Morris, Wilmington, D
NEW-YORK, June 10.
Capt. Pratt, from Carthagena, informs that a Spanish frigate, with the vice-king on board, and about 9 millions of dollars, sailed from Carthagena while he lay there, and ar- rived safe at the Havana the 12th of Febru- ary, and sailed from thence for Cadiz the 20th April.
He further informs, that while there, 8 vessels, 1 ship, 6 brigs, and a sloop, sailed from Carthagena for the Havana, under con- voy of a schooner of 14 guns—that about the 27th of April, 3 had arrived at the Havana, and 2 missing. They were laden with sugar, coffee, cocoa, and indigo, valued at 3 millions.
Left at Carthagena schooner Lucy, Best- wick, of Norfolk, to sail for New-York.
June 6, in lat. 37, 23, long. 73, 49, spoke the schooner Triton, of 14 guns, How- ard, 24 hours from Philadelphia, to St. Tho- mas, all well.
LAILSON'S CIRCUS,

CONGRESS. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. FRIDAY, MAY 26.
In committee of the whole, Mr. Dent in the chair, on the amendment of the answer to the President.
[Mr. DENNIS'S Speech cont'd.]
But it is observed by some gentlemen that the article including contraband goods—that free ships shall make free goods—is just cause of offence. I hope gentlemen will not be alarmed at my mentioning this alleged infringement, because I do not mean to enter into it. I think the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Smith) has fully and most masterly answered all the arguments of the other gentlemen (Mr. Nicholas) on this subject, and even anticipated all the ideas advanced by the other gentlemen on the same point to fulfil. That it would be entirely unnecessary for me to enter into the discussion, as I believe it has been fully displayed to the satisfaction of the committee. I shall just observe, Sir, on that part of the article referred to, which relates to supplying belligerent powers with provisions, on what has fallen from the gentleman from New York (Mr. Livingston) as he has put this in a very extraordinary position, says the gentleman, we should have said to Great Britain, there are cases in which by the law of nations provisions are to become contraband. Now every one knows this! The only doubt which can arise on this occasion, will arise, not out of the law, but out of the fact: we always denied that provisions were liable to become contraband unless where one belligerent power had a well grounded hope to compel another to peace—or to make a garrison capitulate, where there exists an appearance of this provision, and I may say every thing in existence may become contraband. It depends then on facts or existing circumstances. Nations sometimes declare a port in a state of blockade when it is not; neutral nations have then a right to exercise their judgment on that point: so it was when Britain declared the whole French Republic in a state of blockade—we denied the fact, and did not consider ourselves bound by that declaration. But the gentleman says if this be the law of nations why did we recognize it? I answer, he may recollect nations recognizing more simple facts than this, when against the law of nations too. It was recognized to make it more plain, for it is important—if not, not only is the vessel taken, but a confiscation of the property. It might become necessary and mischievous if not mentioned. It will appear then, that we have granted no new right. We have stipulated that though these nations may take our provisions it shall not be without an ample consideration. This was altogether an article of our own, and if any nation found fault it would be more reasonable to expect it to be Great Britain. This position goes to show that it was our interest, and not the particular injury of any nation, that this stipulation was made. But it has been said that we suffer our enemies to be impressed on board English ships to the great injury of the French. I ask, in what manner have we suffered it? I will grant that if by partiality or connivance we had suffered it, there would be just ground of alarm from the French. How have we suffered it? Because a foreign nation took advantage of our weakness.
Another gentleman, who went copiously into the subject, says that we have surrendered the right of requisition. I do not conceive this right when I am under a moral obligation to do it. It is not a surrender to say merely, that we will not requisition.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania says, could we expect that, while we were granting stipulations, that free ships should not make free goods, France would not act upon similar principles. I could not suppose that France would violate her treaty to us, merely because it was her interest to do it. But here we complain of depredations committed upon a right predicated upon this supposition. I should not agree with any gentleman on the right of France to act upon the same principle with us, as we by treaty granted Great Britain the liberty of doing.
The amendment now before us strikes me, to present itself in three points of view, and to each of which I object; First, it ascribes all the misfortunes, depredations, and calamities to the British treaty, and exculpates it in that view to the world. It has been sufficiently demonstrated by the gentleman from South Carolina, that if the British treaty had never had existence, the ground of complaint would have been the same, and that they have never been abandoned to the present time. The French government inform us, that those three complaints form but a small part of the long catalogue of crimes they can allege to our charge, and that by the amendment we seem inclined to acknowledge. But they also say that our judicial and legislative acts, and infinite variety of others which they say America has practiced to her injury and, that until these are removed, they will not come to terms of accommodation, and gentlemen here say, they will grant it, without even attempting to contradict the assertions; they certainly ought to wait the issue of negotiation, which the President has promised to pursue. But gentlemen seem to take it for granted, that the President prevaricates—that he will not negotiate although he has engaged to do it. They say the British treaty is the sole cause of the grievance. But the French represent it, as only one cause, and without the whole is removed, they will not admit our minister, we must then not only nullify the British treaty, but we must instruct our judicial officers to remove their part of the grievance; we must permit the French to arm in our ports, to fight against nations with whom we are in amity:—We are to bring war into our cities, while our hands are tied; admit them to sell their prizes in our country, and by these means make enemies of those with whom we are now at peace, under their imperious command:—They will take out of our harbours their enemies' ships, because their jurisdiction is paramount—we must give orders to all the American printers in the United States, to place their minister's name first among the list of foreign ministers. But I object to the amendment also on another ground, it seems to me to create unnecessary apologies for the French, and because it expresses contradiction in itself, it goes further, it seems audaciously to lay the whole blame upon our government; it has followed up the blame cast upon us by the French, that we have not sent a minister extraordinary with proper functions, &c. and having omitted to do this, our government is chargeable: many apologies have been brought forward by gentlemen to endeavour to clothe this conduct to appear fair; but notwithstanding their display of oratorical ability on this point, I am not convinced. I only appeal to the feelings of this house, on the rejection of our minister. Gentlemen in general say that we ought not to go to war, that we ought rather to suffer indignity. If they had stopped here, if indignity had been all, and our dearest right had not been involved, I should have found no difficulty in agreeing with them. With them, I will say that I am not for war.
The gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Freeman) has read a passage from Vattel to prove that they have only exercised their right: and he has said that republics in particular have a right to send away foreign ministers, when they have nothing for them to do. But can the gentleman put his finger upon the place in the law of nations or good manners, where any nation has rejected a foreign minister without giving him an evidence—refused a passport out of the state, and even thereafter put him under the jurisdiction of the civil laws? I ask the gentleman on this occasion, for I am at a loss to know, What could be the reason? Has Mr. Pinckney departed from his instructions? Gentlemen seem to talk about sending an extraordinary minister to France: I am for it too, but what have we to do with that; it is better be sending us to leave that to the President. He may send Mr. Pinckney with extraordinary powers, or any other minister, but this will not satisfy the
exigencies of the French. Their demands seem of such a monstrous kind that it is difficult to conceive them. I know no other way from the least idea I have of their demands, than to call Mr. Pinckney on this side of the Atlantic, giving him the same power as before, but call him a minister extraordinary. This word EXTRAORDINARY is a very extraordinary one indeed. This is an extraordinary enacting of Congress, on an extraordinary occasion, to send a minister extraordinary, and we all this while are in a most extraordinary manner exercising the executive power in our intended directions the President.
It is an opinion, Sir, that by offering to the French the same footing on which Great Britain is put by the treaty, they will abandon all their ground of complaint: now can this be supposed when they say they have a "community of privileges." That they claim—if we have granted privileges to Great Britain they have a right to the same, therefore what they can and will take as a matter of right can be no grievance in our not granting it freely. But the gentleman from Pennsylvania thinks they recede from some ground of complaint, but what particular ground? Should we go to them and give up all into their hands with submission and not say they have done wrong, and ask redress? Surely we ought to do it, else where is our neutrality?
But the third which I mentioned is still more objectionable, because it is interfering with the executive powers. I will not contend though I do not doubt that it is a violation of the constitution but confine it merely to the ground of prudence. What are we attempting to do? Why to prove that there is not unanimity in the government which they have been thought to have; it is to prove to the world that this body cannot trust the executive with the power of negotiation, although he has declared he means to prosecute negotiation, yet Gentlemen seem inclined not to believe him; they will say that he is about to involve the country in a war, and not prosecute any amicable adjustment with the French. If this is not evident from the amendment, I am at a loss to know what is: and if not from it, the observations of Gentlemen prove the assertion.
According to an observation made, the government is like a clock, that if one part does not do its duty, the other part will compel it. What does this evince? That if the President means hostility, the House will prevent it;—That the House of Representatives take it for granted that the President has done wrong—that contrary to his own inclination to do us justice they will compel him—that the Representatives of the People being in favor of the French, and take their part, they will not regard their plunder and their violations of right—while they say we are right, say the French, we will not regard the other parts—we will increase in our demands while they are on our side.
Another gentleman from Pennsylvania, says, that he thinks the President waits for instructions from the House.—So then the President and Senate have not wisdom enough. Although I have heard of the House of Representatives monopolizing all the power; I never heard that they ever possessed all the wisdom of the three branches.
But it is asked, may we not express our opinion upon this occasion? I think we may as individuals, but not as a body, and if as a body not in this obligatory kind of manner.
There is another amendment, which is not taken to much notice of as others. I have said that the arguments of gentlemen seem to be predicated upon a supposition that the question is a declaration of war.—It is easy to conceive that the greater part of the observations has been distant from the subject, and while going on thus, they might have talked forever, and not been nearer to a decision, like a writer, I have been, seen, who says, "where the tongue is let loose in the plenitude of passion, it is the man and not the subject that is exhausted." I have heard but one opinion on this subject—I have heard war deprecated from every part of the house; no man is willing to go to war. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has asked, if we liked to be taxed? Whether the people would like to be plunged into an unnecessary war? I do not think the people would like taxes, and as much disapprove of war and would abominate an unnecessary one. We all want peace, but we differ about the means to preserve it. I believe the best way to preserve it is to let the Executive go on their own way in the act of negotiation, while we prepare means of defending our country. That while we are not willing to accede to any act of offence we will prepare the most effectual means of defence. I ask, is there any reason to expect war? I believe not. But gentlemen say, it is probable; it may be. I do not confide in any extraordinary negotiation, but though I do not think it will be effectual, I am still willing to try it. My principal hopes centre in a change in the spirit and legislature of the French Government. When they come to reflect on the indignities committed towards our Minister, and those of 13 other nations whom they have expelled, they will recall what they have done, and not from negotiation, nor our determination to defend our rights and honor.
I have been sorry to witness so much passion and partiality shown on both sides of the question.—We did not come here to advocate the part of France, or of Great Britain; it will be time enough to talk of that if a more ripe part of the subject should be presented. If gentlemen had not introduced the extensive arguments they have, and to no purpose, we should have been through the question before now.
I shall again mention, that I am for providing a suitable defence, although I should not be willing to leave this city until the house had paid proper attention to the military, and put us on ground of defence. But in my measures with the French Republic I would be moderate, not only in words, but in actions, which speak louder, and which must naturally be attended with unpleasant effects. On the whole, I must express my disapprobation of the amendments.
Mr. Sewall claimed the indulgence of the committee for some observation in which he should be as brief as possible, on this interesting occasion; he had said interesting without having in his mind the estimate of it, which some gentleman had expressed. He did not consider that the fate of the United States, as to peace or war with the French Republic, depended in any de-
gree upon the present deliberation.—He thought the present question, however, sufficiently interesting, when he considered that the determination of it would go far to shew the disposition of the House of Representatives as to a provision for the defence of their country, when in actual danger from a foreign power. He observed this extraordinary session of Congress to be occasioned by the dangers which threaten the United States on the side of France. The President had informed them that in consequence of the complaints of that republic, and their outrageous depredations on the property of our citizens, a respectable ambassador had been sent to them, that the object of his mission as expressed in his letter of credence had been "to maintain that good understanding, which from the commencement of the alliance had subsisted between the two nations; to efface unfavorable impressions; banish suspicions, and restore that cordiality which was at once the evidence and pledge of a friendly union," and his instructions were to the same effect, "faithfully to represent the disposition of the government, and the people of the United States, their disposition being one, to remove jealousies and obviate complaints, by shewing that they were groundless, to restore that mutual confidence, which has been so unfortunately and injuriously impaired, and to explain the relative interests of both countries, and the real sentiments of his own."
Yet this peaceful messenger has been rejected without a hearing, has been threatened and insulted, and has taken refuge in another country. The complaints of France have been long heard and understood; they have been answered by the departments of state of the United States, and the answer remains without reply: but she goes on with her depredations, and at length she has recalled her minister, and driven away ours. Her open violation of the right of a neutral nation, not only secured to us by the common principles of the law of nations, but also by a solemn treaty, which France claims to hold in force against us, and her contemptuous dismissal of our minister, evince a hostile disposition on her part, and that our danger is imminent. At a moment like this, to find in this committee, among the immediate representatives of the people, the advocates of the French, condemning the government of the United States, and acquitting the French government, or palliating and excusing those violences and insults, of which the circumstances are too prominent to be dignified, this will be proving to them and to the world, that we deserve the character of us which is said to be prevailing in France, and which too probably has encouraged their attack upon us; that we are indeed torn with faction, and that there is a division between the government and the people of the United States. To him it appeared, that a former transaction, rather than the business before the committee, had produced this debate. Those who were once opposed to the carrying into effect the British treaty, arm themselves as renewing that subject, and lighten up the yet unextinguished fires of that transaction.
If any thing can prevent the open hostility, which is now feared to be approaching, or can assure the United States of a complete defence, it must be the unanimity of their councils, and the mutual and unabating confidence between the government and the people.
Three of the gentlemen who have advocated the amendment, have gone into very labored arguments to prove, that the complaints made by France against the United States, ought first to be remedied; and they urge upon this House immediately to condemn the government of the United States, and to acquit France.
This proneness to condemn on the one side, and this anxiety to excuse on the other, mark the conduct of an enemy and not of a friend, not even of an impartial judge. Indeed if they had made good the charges upon which the condemnation is to be brought, they might be excused for their sincerity, whatever might be concluded of their patriotism; but when the charges are inconsistent, unfounded, and unjust, we are at a loss to say what are the motives of their conduct. It is far from being clear, upon what grounds the government of the United States is to stand convicted and self-condemned before the Directory of France, that the gentlemen who advocate their proceedings, differ from each other as to the principles upon which they so readily condemn the government of their own country. The gentleman from New-York selects from among the French complaints, three charges which he conceives to be entirely supported upon certain principles of the law of nations, and to admit of no excuse. The gentleman joins him in condemning the government, but denies the principles upon which the gentleman from New-York had proceeded, and has never conceived them to be a part of the law of nations. Another gentleman from Pennsylvania, with that caution and argument which distinguishes him, relies upon one only of the three charges, and upon this he thinks the government would have been excusable, if there had been any necessity for a commercial treaty with Great Britain.
He would proceed to a more particular examination of the three charges; but would first observe, that when the gentleman from New-York could select only three of the many complaints of the French republic as deserving attention, and had rejected all the others, tho' urged by them with equal seriousness and determination, it might naturally have occurred to him, that these charges did not exhibit the real designs of the French—that the real question between them and us was not whether we had forfeited our neutrality by the articles of the British treaty, of which she complains, any more than whether we had done her an injury by our law of 1794, or respecting the consular convention, or any other instance of her numerous complaints; but the question is, whether the United States shall be involved and made
a party with her in the European war, or whether our rights as a neutral nation shall be submitted to her, and we should violate in conformity to her wishes, our treaty with Great Britain. In his opinion it was that treaty which had excited the complaints of the French, but not as applied to any particular article of it; no, it was the treaty itself, and because the United States had there by forfeited their neutral ground, and become more able to baffle the insidious designs of France, for involving us in the European war. He would submit it to the committee and to their own recollection, whether from the coming of Mr. Genet, the French have not been incessantly endeavoring to drive us from our neutrality, and to engage us in the projects of war: even the gentleman from Virginia, who so warmly advocates the French complaints, acknowledges this; but if it were not acknowledged, it would be impossible to resist the evidence which exists at this moment.
He conceived the charges to be examined were immaterial to the present question, he had thought that an address to the President in answer to his patriotic and animating speech, might have rested upon the love of our country, which must exist in the House of Representatives; that it would have been given spontaneously and with one voice, shewing that we were aware of the dangers which threaten us, and we thought only of the necessary defence.
Notwithstanding his opinion that the charges were irrelevant to the present question, as they had been brought into view, they ought not now to be dismissed without an answer.
The first charge is that by the article of the British treaty, the principle is admitted, that free ships do not make free goods, and the gentleman from New-York says, that there is no amelioration of the effect of this principle, and that it is a surrender of our neutral rights; and he will have it that by the law of nations free ships make free goods, and defies the contrary to be shewn. If there should be an examination of books of acknowledged authority in the purview of the law of nations, their decision would undoubtedly be against him. The law of nations may be considered in its origin as the law of nature determined by the reason and common consent of mankind, and applied to the conduct of nations, who are to each other as individuals in a state of nature. If such a state may be supposed, the individuals in it are governed by their own natural reason and sympathy, and being without any common arbiter or judge, if an injury happens, it is revenged by force, and so among nations, injuries produce a state of war. Then each party in the war aims at conquest, for the purposes of securing dominion, by lessening the means and power, or by the destruction of its adversary. Hence is argued the right of every nation at war to possess itself of the goods and persons of the nation which has become an enemy. If we can suppose that one nation prosecuting hostilities against another has a right to destroy the persons of their enemy; we may readily allow the right of seizing their property, thereby to deprive them of the means of defence, and to reduce their power. If this may be considered as the general principle, it is for the gentleman to shew the limitation and exception which he contends for, and to shew some custom, convention, or rule, by which a neutral nation is allowed to protect the property of a nation at war, from the rights of hostility, and the power of its enemy. The armed neutrality is produced as a convention having that effect; and it is granted that with regard to the nations who were parties to that convention, a different principle was thereby established and became obligatory upon them; but it could not become the law to those nations, who refused their consent & would not submit to it. This is also an answer to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, who relied altogether upon the armed neutrality as constituting the law of nations, and he mentioned Great Britain as acquiescing in that convention, but in this he was mistaken.—as between the United States and Great Britain, then the law of nations in this particular must be understood to have been that free ships do not make free goods; and as a belligerent power has a right to seize the goods of its enemy wherever found, a neutral vessel cannot protect them, unless by force of some treaty to that effect. Indeed the law was formerly carried to a much greater extent; for a neutral vessel found in the possession of an enemy's goods, was formerly considered as infected, and was condemned as well as the enemy's property on board; but the principle has been modified in this respect, and now it is agreed, that the enemy's property shall be prize, and that the neutral vessel shall go free.
Taking it then to be the law of nations, as far as it is generally established, that free ships do not make free goods, this article of the British treaty affords to France no just cause of complaint. The value of the contrary principle to the commerce of the United States, leaves no room to doubt the intents of their desire and endeavours, to obtain it as an article of their commercial treaty with Great Britain. If their attempts were ineffectual, it would not be contended, that the treaty ought to have been refused, or the hazard of war incurred, for the sake of this principle. He observed, that the gentleman from Virginia had admitted the law of nations to be as stated by Vattel, and as now argued; but, says the gentleman, though the principle is well established yet the application of it is wrong; for although an enemy's goods may be liable, yet it is a violation of a neutral right, to enter a neutral vessel for the purposes of search or seizure: But the gentleman having admitted the principle, must yield also what is necessarily connected with it. The gentleman from New York argued, that admitting it to be the law of nations, the U. States should not have agreed to the list, establishing it, because unnecessary, and it is made without any amelioration of the sub-
jects; to this he answered, that there is something favorable to the United States in that stipulation: If a vessel is taken or captured on just suspicion of having on board enemy's property, or of carrying to the enemy, any of the articles which are contraband of war, the vessel is to be carried to the nearest port, and after the case is decided, the vessel shall be liberated to proceed on her voyage. Besides it has been long usual to introduce a stipulation to this effect, in commercial treaties, probably with some reference to what has been mentioned as having been the most ancient rule in the case, and thereby to provide for the restoration of the neutral vessels and goods, which are not to be esteemed to be infected or rendered liable to confiscation by the enemy's property found with them. There remains another charge brought against the United States, and which is represented to be of a very heinous nature indeed. The gentleman from Virginia had spoken of it as a stain in the annals of American history, which nothing can obliterate. It is said to be not only a stipulation unfavorable to France, but that we had contrived a mean pecuniary advantage to ourselves, from a sacrifice of our interests.
To this he observed, that if it is the existing law of nations, that an hostile nation has the right of reducing its enemy, by preventing neutrals from carrying provisions into a blockaded port, then this article has given an advantage to the commerce of the United States, and is therefore favourable to the French Nation. The risk of a voyage in which supplies of that kind are undertaken to be carried, are materially lessened by this article. There can be no doubt that in the case of a blockaded or invested place provisions are liable to seizure: but when our vessels are taken going to such place, the full value of the provisions, with a reasonable profit, freight and demurrage is to be paid.—This then is an heinous offence, the disgrace of our country, which the gentleman endeavours to establish. He has argued that this article necessarily admits the practice of the English, which they claimed to maintain by the law of nations, and had pursued against the United States; but which they had never ceased to complain against; that is, the assumed right of forbidding the carriage of provisions to a large extent of territory, under pretence of some general invasion, or of the particular nature of the war, in which it was their design to reduce their enemy by famine—and this the gentleman from Virginia included, from a supposition that the case of blockade or investment is provided for by another article in a distinct manner from this; but there is no distinct provision of this kind, and what is said of vessels which happen to fail for a port belonging to an enemy, without knowing that the same is besieged, blockaded, or invested, connects itself with the former part of the same article, and may be rather understood to limit the intention of the wholesale article, than to give a larger extent to the former part. It is plain, however, that the whole article supposes no other case than what arises under the existing law of nations, which in the cases provided for by this article, was not precisely agreed, and it is not denied, that under the practice of the English, of which not only the United States, but Denmark and other neutral nations had complained. And even in this view it is justifiable as tending to lessen the evil, to encourage the commerce of provisions, and to avoid a war with Great Britain, which the severer exercise of her claim might excite. What in the existing law of nations, must in any case of capture be determined by the courts of law having a maritime jurisdiction, and as the English practice of seizing provisions in the extensive manner contended for by them, had never before been allowed, as it is not allowed by this act. The letter of Mr. Pinckney, on this subject, and which has been so triumphantly quoted, as determining the law, does not deny the right of stopping provisions, from going to a blockaded port, but denies the construction by which the English had endeavoured to maintain their novel and unjustifiable practices, and it is of this Mr. Pinckney complains.
These complaints may be also fairly answered together by observing, that if there had never been a treaty with Great Britain, and she had maintained the same conduct towards us as the treaty authorizes respecting nations with whom she is at war, the deprivation to France would have been the same, and the only alternative to the United States must have been war, or a submission to the contraction by Great Britain of the law of nations, and from which her superior force prevents an appeal. As to the increase of the list of articles deemed contraband of war, it was no violation of neutrality, even determining by the convention of the armed neutrality; here the evidence from that convention concludes against those who would establish this complaint. It ought to be understood that the declaration of the King of Denmark, making a part of that convention, relies upon his treaty with Great Britain, and which expresses and makes contraband the same list which are enumerated in her treaty with the United States.
(To be continued.)
For Sale, That well known place, called VANDERGRIFT'S FERRY, ON Neshannoy creek, 18 miles from Philadelphia, on the New-York post road, containing 74 acres and 34 perches. Upon the premises are a large two story stone house occupied as a tavern, and a good one flour stone mill, a large frame stable with a good threshing floor, and some out buildings—also a well of good water, and an excellent ice House. On this place is a most elegant situation for a gentleman's seat, commanding a view of the Neshannoy to its junction with the Delaware, and thence across to the Jersey shore. It has the privilege of one half the toll received from the bridge. For terms apply to the Sableriber, MORDECAI LEWIS. May 24. 32wtf.