The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1804-12-31 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER, AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. V. WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. NO. DCLXI.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, DECEMBER 31st, 1804.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 11.
Debate on the bill for authorising the erection of a Dam or Causeway from Mason's Island to the Western shore of the Potomac.
(Concluded.)
Mr. G. W. Campbell considering an important principle involved, would offer a few remarks on the point in question, namely whether Virginia did really intend to cede to the United States any right of jurisdiction which she possessed over the Potomac, and if she did mean to cede, whether the law passed by her is couched in such terms as to convey that right?
The principal objection relied upon is that the right which Virginia had was nothing more than a use springing out of the real property without any territorial right: yet he understood that both the states of Maryland and Virginia could send their civil officers to execute process upon the Potomac. This being admitted the inevitable conclusion is that the river was within the jurisdiction of Virginia for such purpose. Now look into the law, and see whether the terms are not broad enough to cover the jurisdiction claimed by Congress: the words are, that she cedes a tract of country not exceeding ten miles square, &c. and that Congress may exercise exclusive jurisdiction over the soil and the persons residing thereon; from these words, it is clear that Virginia meant to convey every thing she possessed in relation to the soil. He believed that a person might use expressions in a deed that conveyed more than he possessed. Although the object did not pass, yet it was pro tanto , good for as much as he did possess, which was the case with Virginia. He concluded by observing that it was singular, so much danger should be apprehended, and yet no person came before them to complain; there were no petitions either from Alexandria or the Eastern branch, nor did he apprehend there would be any, as he believed that deepening the channel would be a general good, and not produce even a partial injury.
Mr. Macon (Speaker.) Although it may be a good rule, yet it is not a general one, that people are well satisfied when they do not complain; yet gentlemen when they are sent here to legislate must exercise their own judgment on the probable consequences. If all the people of the district were to say this was a proper measure, he should still exercise his own opinion. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Lewis) had narrated the history of this river, and informed us there was no impediment prior to 1784. He did not doubt the correctness of the statement; but he should have gone further, and informed us what was the population on the waters of the Potomac at that time, and what it is at present, and likely hereafter to be; because if such a mud bank was raised in the river when its banks had little or no cultivation, what was it likely to be when thickly settled, for every new farm, every additional cultivation loosened the earth, which was swept away by every fresh, and the mud bank at the head of tide water would proportionably increase in magnitude. Such had been the case with the Rappahannock, and if it should turn out that these two rivers are in a similar situation, their trouble would be thrown away.
Mr. Holland admitted that the quantity of mud would increase by cultivation; but if the channel is deepened by narrowing the river, the mud would descend lower, and deposit itself in that part of the bed of the river where the channel was deeper: he had no doubt of the right of Congress to the exclusive legislation over the river, as well as over every other part of the district; he should therefore vote for the bill, believing they had the right, and that the measure would be greatly beneficial to the commerce of the country.
On the question being about to be put, Mr. Eppes requested the clerk to read the 8th article of the compact between Maryland and Virginia, which being done,
The question on striking out the first section was put and lost, 40 members voting in the affirmative, and 72 against it.
Mr. Lyon proposed a new section incorporating a company to build a bridge over the Potomac; he thought the two objects ought to go together, and unless they were connected he should not vote for the bill.
The Chairman determined the motion
not in order, the committee having had nothing relative to a bridge referred to them; the amendment however would be proper in the House.
The committee then rose and reported, and the House adjourned.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13.
On the third reading of the bill for the erection of a dam or causeway from Mason's Island, to the Western shore of the Potomac.
The Yeas and Nays were called for by General Varnum.
Mr. Dawson. My absence from this House for some days past, occasioned by my bad health, has prevented my hearing the arguments which have been urged in favour of this bill, as well as those in opposition to it; presuming however, that they had much affinity to those which were urged on its introduction, which in my judgment were conclusive in opposition, and feeble in support, I must be permitted to express my astonishment, that it has progressed so far, and that this House must now decide on its passage or rejection.
In this stage of the business and under existing circumstances I should not intrude a single observation, especially as I learn that the subject has been fully discussed, and various votes taken—did I not feel impelled by one consideration superior to all others—but, sir, whenever a proposition is made which goes to affect the interest and wantonly violates the rights of a state, one of whose representatives I am, I hold it to be my bounden duty to rise in the opposition.—Such is the bill in your hand, and under such influence do I now act—in my judgment, that bill usurps a power, and attempts the exercise of a right which the states of Maryland and Virginia never have, and I trust never will relinquish to any government—a right essential to them as sovereign states; and the relinquishment of which will render them dependencies not only on the general government, but upon any corporation within the district of Columbia.
In the course of this discussion, reference, no doubt, has been had to the deeds of cession from those two states to the general government, I mean not again to bring them to their view, and mention them only for one purpose—I presume that in the construction of those articles, the same rules will be observed, the same principles will be adhered to, which are observed in the construction of the original compact, the constitution—I well know that in the construction of that instrument, two opinions have gone abroad in the United States, and have their zealous advocates—the one is, that the general government possesses all powers, which it shall deem necessary, and which are not expressly reserved to the states—to this doctrine I have never been a friend, and am surprised to find that it has so many advocates on this day, who support that bill—the other is “that all rights, powers and jurisdictions are referred to the states, which are not expressly delegated to the general government.”—This is the doctrine which I have always advocated, and which I support on this day by opposing that bill.
Admitting, Sir, my first position to be true—that the same rules of construction must be used in the two cases which I have mentioned, I call upon gentlemen to shew any express surrender of this right of jurisdiction, either by the state of Maryland or that of Virginia—none such appears—and gentlemen must either, adopt the extensive doctrine of implication as one of their political tenets, or relinquish that bill.
I will go further Sir, and declare it as my opinion, that the legislatures of those two states never could have intended the surrender of that jurisdiction—I was a member of the legislature of Virginia at that time, and the idea was new unto me until the last year, when the bridge proposition was brought forward—I appeal to the candour of the gentlemen of this committee, and call on them to say, whether it is reasonable to suppose, that those two states, after taking uncommon pains to fix, and render secure, for ever, to themselves and their friends the navigation of this river, after uniting their efforts, to open and improve it to a considerable distance above tide water, would surrender the jurisdiction to any earthly power, thereby putting it in their power to impede it, whenever they please; for be it remembered, that if we have a right to throw up a dam in one place—we have a right to build a bridge in another, if to build a bridge, to draw an artificial line at any place, saying “thus far you shall go, and no further.”
For these reasons I am convinced that the right has never been surrendered—that it never was intended—and that it never ought to be relinquished—considering the objections which I have mentioned as sufficient to defeat the bill, I have forborne to examine into its expediency; whether it will prove advantageous to some of the district and injurious to others I will not pretend to say; one thing however appears probable to me, that if by the erection of this dam, the rapidity of the water opposite to Georgetown is increased, and thereby the sand and mud carried to a lower point and there deposited, that point may be at or near the Eastern Branch, which we have established as our Navy Yard, to which heavy vessels get with great difficulty, and from which they may be entirely excluded, should the effect which I apprehend take place; I submit this to the consideration of the friends of this establishment, which is not without its enemies already.
One more word and I am done; if we admit the right to erect a dam, we have the same to build a bridge, and if we grant the one for the accommodation of the people of one part of the district, I know not how we can refuse the other to the inhabitants of the other part—let the friends to the present bill look to this; the division of this House on the last year on that point was very equal, and the admission of the right will certainly give it new friends.
On the passage of the bill the Yeas and Nays were taken, and are as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. Alston, jun. Anderson, Baldwin, Bard, Betton, Bishop, Blackledge, Bryan, G. W. Campbell, Caley, Chamberlin, Gittenden, Claggett, Conrad, Davenport, Dwight, Earle, Elliot, Elmer, Findley, Goddard, Gregg, G. Griswold, R. Griswold, Hanna, Heister, Hoge, Holland, Hunt, Kennedy, Larned, Lewis, jun. Livingston, Lowndes, Lucas, M'Creery, Merriweather, Mitchell, T. Moore, Morrow, Mott, Patterson, Plater, T. M. Randolph, Rhea, (of Ten.) Root, Seaver, Sloan, J. C. Smith, Southard, Stedman, Stephenson, Stewart, Taggart, Tallmage, Tenney, Tibbitts, Van Cortlandt, Van Horne, Verplanck, Wadsworth, Whitehill, L. Williams, Winn, Winns-ton, and Wynns—66.
NAYS—Messrs. Alexander, Bedinger, Boyd, Boyle, Brown, Butler, Clark, Clay, Crowninshield, Dawson, Dickson, Early, Eppes, Eustis, Goodwyn, Griffin, Hasbrouck, Holmes, Jones, Knight, Leib, M'Gord, N. R. Moore, New, Newton, jun. Olin, Palmer, J. Randolph, Rea, (of Penn.) Riker, Rodney, Sammons, Sandford, Smilie, J. Smith, Stanford, Thompson, and Varnum—38.
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19. Debate on the report of the committee of Elections on the petition of sundry citizens of the county of Washington, in the state of Pennsylvania, complaining of an undue election and return of John Hoge, to serve in this House as one of the representatives for said state.
Mr. Elliot said, that the very comprehensive and argumentative examination of this question, which had been made by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Findley) would probably have been conclusive to his mind, had any doubt existed on the subject.—Without repeating, however, any of the arguments of that gentleman, a candid consideration of the provisions of the constitution relative to this subject, will evince the correctness of the position taken by the committee of elections. In the second section of the first article of the constitution it is declared, that “when vacancies happen in the representation from any state, the executive authority thereof shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies.” It is an established principle that a constitutional delegation of a general power includes a grant of all the subordinate and incidental powers requisite to give effect to the principal one, unless restrained, limited, or placed elsewhere by another part of the constitution. What is the power given to the state executives by this clause of the constitution? Not merely, as some gentlemen seem to believe, an authority to issue writs of election, but to give to those writs a certain operation and effect, that of filling a vacancy. They have authority to issue writs of election, to cause elections to be held in consequence, and the vacancies filled. Is the power here given to the executives of the states limited or taken away, by any other part of the constitution? If not, I shall not suffer myself to enquire into the discretion or indifference with which it has been exercised on the present occasion, as I be-
lieve the constitution has placed it beyond our powers of inquisition or censure? By the fourth section of the constitution, it is declared, that “the times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state, by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may, at any time, by law, make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing senators.” The words by law , in this section, are peculiarly emphatical. Congress can do nothing on the subject, but by law—the state legislatures may act by resolutions, and in that manner senators are commonly chosen. This section appears to have been intended to regulate the general election of the whole number of senators and representatives, to which a state is entitled, and to have no application to the case of vacancies. But if this construction be not the correct one, it will be necessary to adopt this construction of the two clauses taken together, that although the state legislatures have a right to regulate the elections in cases of vacancy, yet the executive possesses a complete discretion upon the subject until the legislature interferes. Such we are told has uniformly been the practical construction in Pennsylvania.—Two questions only are to be answered—Was the election in the present instance held in pursuance of the exercise of a power delegated by the constitution? Certainly it was—Was it regularly and legally conducted? It appears to have been conducted, except as to time, conformed to the laws of Pennsylvania, which govern other elections. Believing that under the peculiar circumstances of the case, no injustice has been done, and believing that the election was constitutionally conducted, I shall vote in favour of the report of the committee.
Mr. Lucas. Believing as I do that the report under consideration involves an important question I cannot forbear to add a few remarks. It appears that representatives in Congress may be elected under two different circumstances, periodically by general elections, accidentally by special elections. The election of the sitting member, which is the subject of the report, is a special election, an election held to fill the vacancy of Wm. Hoge resigned. It is not alleged, that any illegal votes have been given, or any fraud practised, in conducting that election. It is merely contended by those opposed to the report that the election ought to be set aside, because the time, place, and manner of holding the election have not been according to law, or because the power of prescribing the time, manner, and place, had been assumed by an improper authority.
Turning to the second section of the constitution of the United States we find this provision; “when vacancies happen in the representation from any state, the executive thereof shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies.” From this it appears that the governor is only vested in part with the powers to cause an election to be held, that is the power of issuing a writ of election, which gives him the initiative, but this initiative does not destroy the power placed by the fourth section of the same constitution in the state legislature, which is that “the times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof.” The words holding elections indubitably include all kinds of elections; a special election is not less an election than a general one, and unless the constitution express an exception to that general principle, it follows necessarily, that none but the state legislature or Congress have the power of prescribing the times, places, and manner of holding elections for representatives. Thus from the provision in the constitution, which vests the executive of each state with the power to issue writs to fill vacancies, and from the provision which vests the state legislature with the power to prescribe the times, places, and manner of holding elections, it appears that the powers necessary to cause elections to be held to fill vacancies are divided between the executive and legislative powers; the first is directed to issue writs of election; the second to prescribe the times, places, and manner for holding the same, both are bound by a constitutional injunction equally imperative; thus an election to fill a vacancy be legal, the executive and legislative must have co-operated to that election by the exercise of their respective constitutional powers. If the election under consideration has been held under the authority of but one of these powers, it is not according to the
constitution, in as much as the constitutional exercise of the power of the one without the concurrence of the other is but a lame power.
The report states that this election was held without the concurrence of the legislature; that is, that the state legislature hath omitted to prescribe by law the times, places, and manner of holding elections to fill vacancies. This being the case, the power of causing this election to be held was incomplete, and if its deficiency was supplied, it was by an authority other than that designated in the constitution.
But a gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Griswold) contends that by the constitution of the United States in the second section of the first article, respecting the executive authority of each state to issue writs of election to fill vacancies, the executive became vested with the absolute power of causing elections to be held, and that all other powers necessary to carry that act into effect are implied and can lawfully be exercised.
To this it may be answered, that the constitution of the United States hath been careful in distinguishing between the substance and forms of Elections; the substance of elections, which consists in the right of electors, and the result of the exercise of that right, hath been sufficiently expressed; the legislatures of each state have been expressly vested by the constitution with the power of regulating the forms, which consists in prescribing the times, places, and manner of holding elections. If the construction of the gentleman from Connecticut were correct, the consequence would be, that two provisions of the constitution would militate against each other; that is, that the executive would from the power he hath to issue writs of election to fill vacancies derive by implication the power of prescribing the times, places and manner, that is, would have by implication a power which the constitution expressly vests in the legislatures of each state, and which appears to be a subject of such importance, that Congress is empowered to control the state legislatures in that very case.
The gentleman from Connecticut hath gone further; he hath said that admitting for a moment that the power vested in each state legislature to prescribe the time, places, and manner of holding elections, which he believes extends only to general elections, should extend to elections to fill vacancies, yet that in as much as the legislature of Pennsylvania did omit to legislate on that subject, the governor had a right to supply the omission by assuming that power. To this argument I answer that as none of the constituted authorities can transfer by any act whatever the power lodged by the constitution in any of them, by a stronger reason no transfer of power can be made by their omission to act. The security of our political system rests principally upon the constitutional partition of the constitutional powers. The constitution does not only require that none but the powers which it grants should be exercised; it also requires that they should be exercised only by the authorities to which they are confided; and to contend that the omission of the legislature to legislate entitles the executive to perform acts of legislation is a position too preposterous to require refutation.
It hath been urged that it would be out of the power of the state legislature to prescribe the time of holding elections in pursuance of the writ of the executive to fill vacancies, because the governor issues his writ under the immediate authority of the federal constitution, and this power cannot be impaired or receive modifications by a legal state legislative act; it hath been added that this election to fill a vacancy being the result of a contingency, the time cannot be prescribed by law. I grant that the time cannot be absolutely prescribed, but I contend that it can be prescribed relatively, and so it is prescribed too by the law of Pennsylvania regulating the times, places, and manner of holding elections to fill vacancies in the state legislature? Upon the issuing of a writ by the speaker or either House, a time is fixed, which bears a relation to the time of issuing the writ, or proclaiming the election in pursuance of the writ, and as this relative prescription of time does not limit or abridge the power of a speaker, or a house legislative prescription of time with respect to the time of proclaiming an election under the writ of the governor would not abridge or impair the exercise of his right.
Independent of the radical deficiency of the election alluded to in the report on constitutional grounds, it cannot in my

opinion bear the test in point of dispo- sition or equity. The shortness of the notice refers to my mind an insuperable objection. From the report before us, it appears that the sheriff of Washington made a proclamation of the election on the 31st of October, and that the election was held on the 2d of November. It was not only morally impossible, but it was physically so, that one third of the electors could be informed; but this objection has been anticipated on this floor, and great endeavors have been used to justify the shortness. I might say the want of notice, by alledging it at the 2d day of November had been pre- ferred, it being a day already appro- priated for the election of electors, and that the notice given for that election would answer the purpose for the election of a representative in Congress, whilst it would save the electors the trouble of assembling again.
To be considered, more specious than solid, cannot prevent me from dis- cussing the whole extent of danger of holding elections with certain prin- ciples and rules with respect to a previ- ous notice. It was generally believed in Washington county, as in every other part of Pennsylvania, west of the moun- tain, that the election of electors would be at any rate carried on, according to the will of a large majority. Here many persons far distant from their re- spective election districts did rely upon those that were nearer to attend the election of electors; hence the result of the election for a member of Congress; had the electors of the district been in- formed, as they ought to have been, that a member of Congress was to be elected on that day, that although there was no danger of missing their object as to the election of electors, yet there might be some doubts as to the election of a repre- sentative, as we not every reason to believe from the repeated instances of public spirit prevailing in that district, that the election would have been at- tended by probably more than three times the number of persons that did actually meet; and as to myself I have a strong presumption that the result would have been quite different from what it was. Some of the gentlemen, who supported the report, have endeavored to justify this election on the ground of precedents. They have said, that all former elections in Pennsylvania to fill vacancies in Con- gress have been held under the same authority and circumstances. It is not improper to take notice, that this elec- tion is the first of the kind that hath been contested in Pennsylvania; that as no exceptions were taken to the former ones, it is an ordinary thing that the committee of elections report as legal elections, those that appear such from prima facie evidence; and they never enter into details, but when the elections are disputed. Ought precedents to go- vern where they militate against an ex- press constitutional provision, and will gentlemen say that elections to fill va- cancies held after thirty days notice, such as the first election of Wm. Hoge and others were, can be viewed as a pre- cedent in point with an election held after one day's notice?
It hath been the pleasure of some ho- norable members to bring into view the motives that have actuated the governor of Pennsylvania in directing the election to be held after so short a notice. The purity of these motives have been in- sisted upon, as if any member of this committee were questioning the good intentions of that magistrate; but the intentions of the governor, pure as I doubt not they were, cannot be the cri- terion to judge of the legality of this election. The governor may think one way, and this committee another, and yet we may all be influenced by good in- tentions. From the present view of the subject, I am induced to vote against the report. I lean still more to the rejection of the report, as by setting this election aside, the legislature of Pennsylvania, which is now in session, will feel more immediately the necessity of exerting its constitutional powers, and of prescribing by law the times, places and manner of holding elections to fill vacancies in fu- ture.
Mr. Jackson. Mr. Chairman—Two objections have been made by gentle- men to the report of the committee of elections: 1st, that the constitution of the United States requires that in all cases the times, places, and manner of holding elections shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; and as no law has been passed in Pennsyl- vania providing for the cases of supplying vacancies occasioned by death or resigna- tion, that the election of Mr. Hoge is invalid. 2d, If the constitution does not conclude the question, we have a right to examine all the circumstances inci- dent to the proclamation of governor B. K. and to determine whether the discretionary power vested in him by the constitution, as the executive of Penn- sylvania, for the time being, was duly exercised or not; and it is alleged that it was improperly exercised by him.
The fourth section of the first article of the constitution, upon which the superficiality of the arguments on the first point rests, is in these words, "the times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and repre- sentatives, shall be prescribed in each
state by the legislature thereof," &c. — The language of the section clearly proves it has reference to the general elections, and precludes the idea that it was intended to include the cases of vacancies, as no human or science could delimitate the proper time for holding elections to supply vacancies, that would thereafter occur. Who can determine when the incumbent will die? When the unrelenting hand of death shall cut the thread of life, or when some occur- rence in life shall induce him to resign into the hands of the people the trust reposed in him? And unless these things are foreseen, the state legislature cannot say at what time, at what place, and in what manner elections to supply vacancies shall be held. It the legislature were to pass a law regu- lating the time only, and leaving the place and manner to the direction of the executive officer conducting the election, on designating the place and leaving the time and manner to be fixed by him, it certainly would not be a compliance with the requisitions of the constitution; and a person thus elected would not be constitutionally entitled to a seat in this House. In the construction of a grant it is necessary that the person thereby claiming a privilege, shall show that he has complied with all its requisitions, and it being imperative that the states shall prescribe the time, place, and man- ner of holding elections, I doubt very much whether a compliance with either requisition alone would be correctly within the meaning and spirit of the con- stitution.
I am the more inclined to adopt this construction, when I refer to the para- graph contained in the second section of the first article, which declares that "when vacancies happen in the repre- sentation from any state, the executive authority thereof shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies." Either this sentence has some meaning, or it has not; if it has any, it clearly fol- lows that the cases of vacancies are provided for in a different way from that directed by the fourth section, which succeeds it. Mr. Chairman, when I contemplate the great talents and wis- dom which the framers of this instru- ment possessed in an eminent degree, and the perspicuous and emphatic language which characterises its provisions, that not only every paragraph, but every word of each paragraph conveys some meaning, I cannot reject the sentence just read as a dead letter, unmeaning and inoperative; and unless it is reject- ed, the executive authority of any state has the power, and is required to issue writs of election to fill such vacancies as may happen in its representation, in- dependent of any state law, or provi- sion; and in conformity with the su- preme law of the land.
Some gentlemen, however, contend for a limited construction of this clause, granting to the executive authority to issue writs of election; by denying the right of designating the time, place and manner of holding such elections; but it is not to be presumed that a power so merely nominal would be guarded by the insertion of an indepen- dent and express provision. If, how- ever, I err in the opinion I have ad- vanced, I deny the propriety of making a contrary decision at this late day. The states, the great parties to the compact, have, without a single exception that I know of, considered, that vacancies are to be supplied by writs of election un- der executive proclamations, and have not passed any law upon the subject. A respect for their decisions, for the uniform practice of this house, and a conscientiousness, that if we err, it is on the side of justice, will I hope incline us to sustain the report—if we do not, I call upon gentlemen to go through the House, to examine the rights of every individual to a seat; and to decide all cases similar to the one now before us in the same way. Sir, we have no law in Virginia providing for similar cases. I speak from present impressions; if I am mistaken, I will thank gentlemen to correct me. Two of my colleagues (Messrs. Clark and Wilson) now hold their seats in virtue of elections held to supply the vacancies occasioned by death, and resignation. If the gentleman from Pennsylvania is not entitled to his seat upon constitutional principles, my col- leagues are not; if they are, he is. One gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Conrad) however, varying the ground of objection, says that the laws of Penn- sylvania provide for the case, and require a notice of 20 days previous to holding elections, and as 20 days notice were not given, this election is void. The language of the law he read, proves he is mistaken; it provides for issuing writs of election by the Speaker of the Senate, or of the House of Representatives, as the case may be, to supply vacancies; and as neither branch of the state leg- islature, as such, has anything to do with the election of representatives to Congress, it must clearly apply to mem- bers of the state legislature only.
I will now consider the right of ex- amining the conduct of the executive of Pennsylvania, and of controlling the discretionary power vested in him, and first permit me to declare that I believe it is entitled to the highest approbation, and was well calculated to procure a fair
and honest expression of the public will. Congress was in session; the district of Washington was represented; and the ne- cessity of providing for the exigency as soon as possible most apparent—an im- portant election, the most important, Sir, which occurs under our constitution, about to take place, for the appointment of electors to choose a President and Vice-President of the United States, and upon that day by the Governor's proclamation was this election also to be held. True, Sir, a lengthy notice was not given, it could not be given; without suffering, this election to pass by, and requiring the people to assemble a second time after a short interval, which would have been highly inconve- nient. He had reason to believe that all the people would have attended; it was eminently their duty to do so; as the magnitude of that election was great beyond comparison, when considered with the other. A gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Conrad) has told us that he with the elections to be more frequent, as it is the interest and duty of the people to attend them. Where were they, I ask him, when the electors were chosen? Were they regardless of their interest and duty, asleep at their posts? Sir, the fact proves the unwil- lingness of the people to attend; and were the electors more frequent their neglect would increase with their num- bers. I will not dwell longer upon this subject, in supporting the conduct of the Governor of Pennsylvania. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Huger) has done ample justice to it. I now deny the right of this House to su- pervise or control the executive dis- cretion of a free and independent state; and I call upon gentlemen to shew me whence that power is derived. It can- not be too often repeated that our's is a limited grant of powers; no construc- tive or impliciative power is to be ex- ercised by us; this is the language of the constitution; it is the language of com- mon sense, if we have the power, I ask how is it to be exercised? Shall we erect ourselves into a high court of cri- minal judicature with general powers? Shall we say the governor of Penn- sylvania acted from corrupt motives? That he was influenced by a desire to control the district of Washington in opposition to the people? Unless we do, Sir, I see no ground for interposition. Mr. Chairman, there is no power vested in this house more dangerous in its in- judicious exercise, than the right of judging of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its members; by it a party may determine of what number the minority shall consist, and even whe- ther there shall be any minority at all; I will never consent to exercise this power, even legitimately, except in cases of urgent necessity.
THURSDAY, November 29.
The Bill to regulate the clearance of armed merchant vessels was taken up in committee of the whole, Gen. VANCE in the chair.
The bill was read as follows: Be it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assem- bled, That after due notice of this act at the several custom houses, no mer- chant vessel armed or provided with the means of being armed at sea, shall re- ceive a clearance, or be permitted to leave the port where she may be so ar- med or provided, without bond, with two sufficient sureties being given by the owner or owners, or by the master or commander, to the use of the United States in a sum equal to double the value of said vessel, conditioned that such vessel shall not make or commit any depredation, outrage, unlawful assault or violence against the vessels, citizens, subjects or territory of any nation in amity with the United States; provided, that the regulations herein contained shall not be construed to extend to ves- sels bound to any port or place in the Mediterranean, or beyond the Cape of Good Hope.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That if any armed merchant vessel clear- ing for any port or place within the Me- diterranean or beyond the Cape of Good Hope, shall make or commit any depre- dation, outrage, or unlawful assault, or violence as aforesaid, on her voyage to or from, or at any place to which she may be bound, such vessel with her arms and cargo, or the value thereof shall be forfeited to the use of the United States.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That on satisfactory evidence or infor- mation being given to the collector of any port, that any vessel within the same is armed or arming or provided with the means of being armed at sea, for the purpose of committing any unlawful act as herein before expressed, or of carrying on by force of arms, any unlawful commerce, it shall be the duty of such collector to detain such vessel until the case be submitted to the President of the United States, who is hereby authorised to cause such vessel to be disarmed, or to order a clearance to be granted, as he shall judge proper.
Mr. Crowninshield moved to amend the first section of the bill in such man- ner as to prevent armed merchant ves- sels from clearing out for one port and
failing to another; it would prevent a deviation from the true voyage.
Mr. J. Clay thought this alteration would extend beyond what was the true object of the bill; it might interrupt the European trade, while it was only intended to prevent the forced trade to St. Domingo. He suggested an amend- ment to the amendment, viz. to confine the forfeiture of armed vessels clearing for one port of the West Indies, and which shall proceed to any other port or place than that of her original destina- tion.
Mr. Crowninshield moved then to strike out the whole of the second section, he thought it unreasonable to forfeit the cargo as well as the vessel, her arms, tackle, and furniture.
Mr. Rodney asked whether the com- mittee would not be put to greater in- convenience by striking out the section than by amending it.
On the question to strike out, it was lost, only 32 voting for the motion.
Mr. J. Clay then moved to insert the amendment he had suggested, adding thereto, "unless compelled by stress of weather." The sole object being to con- fine the regulation of the clearance of armed vessels to those destined to the West Indies.
On a division, Mr. J. Clay's motion was agreed to—Ayes 62.
Mr. Crowninshield then offered ano- ther amendment, to extend the regula- tion of the clearance of armed merchant vessels to the Mediterranean, and beyond the Cape of Good Hope.
Mr. J. Clay did not see the necessity of this amendment, as vessels bound to those places never touched at the West Indies.
On the question, only 24 members were in favor of the motion; of conse- quence it was not carried.
Mr. Crowninshield then moved to strike out that part which related to the forfeiture of the cargo in which he was supported by
Mr. Eustis who represented it as an enormous hardship upon the owner to put at risk 4 or 500,000 dollars, for which he was to give in indemnity; and which might be the value of the cargo.
On the question the word cargo was struck out, 71 being in the affirmative.
On motion of Mr. Eustis after the words in the first section that they "shall not commit any depredation, outrage, unlawful assault, or violence" these words were added "nor make any other unlawful use of her arms."
Mr. Eustis suggested the propriety of adding a new section to the bill, to ex- tend the security against the commander, making also an improper use of the arms entrusted to him, or selling them to others in the West Indies.
A question was however previously taken on a motion to strike out what re- flected the forfeiture of the cargo in the fourth section, which the mover observ- ed, he would not have made, but that the words had been stricken out of the second section; his own private judgment be- ing that the cargo as well as the vessel should be forfeited for an improper use of their arms; but he moved it for the sake of consistency.
On the question, there were 51 for striking out, and 40 in the negative.
Mr. Eppes thought the bill founded on erroneous principles; instead of per- mitting our merchantmen to arm and after- wards punishing them for the abuse of those arms, he conceived it would be infinitely more prudent and politic to restrain them altogether from arming.
Mr. J. Randolph, fully impressed with the importance of the ideas suggested by Mr. Eustis, in relation to selling their arms and vessels in the West Indies, or rather to the people of St. Domingo, thought it would be better for the com- mittee of the whole to rise, report the amendments, that the House might in- corporate them into the bill, and direct the whole to be printed.
This course was accordingly pursued, and the bill made the order for Wed- nesday.
THURSDAY, December 13.
The consideration of the bill to regu- late the clearance of armed merchant vessels, was resumed. The bill as amended was read as follows:
A bill to regulate the clearance of armed merchant vessels.
BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assem- bled, That after due notice of this act at the several custom houses, no merchant vessel armed or provided with the means of being armed at sea, shall receive a clearance, or be permitted to leave the port where she may be so armed or provided, without bond, with two suffi- cient sureties being given by the owner or owners, or by the master or comman- der, to the use of the United States, in a sum equal to double the value of said vessel, conditioned that such vessel shall not make or commit any depredation, outrage, unlawful assault, or violence, nor make any other unlawful use of her arms against the vessels, citizens, subjects, or territory of any nation in amity with the United States; Provided, That the regulations herein contained shall not be construed to extend to vessels bound to any port or place in the Mediterranean,
or beyond the Cape of Good Hope.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That if any armed merchant vessel clear- ing for any port or place within the Mediterranean or beyond the Cape of Good Hope, shall make or commit any depredation, outrage, unlawful assault, or violence as aforesaid, on her voyage to or from any place to which she may be bound or elsewhere, or shall wilfully proceed to any port or place in the West Indies, such vessel with her arms, tackle, and furniture, or the value thereof, shall be forfeited to the use of the United States.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted,
That on satisfactory evidence or infor- mation being given to the collector of any port, that any vessel within the same is armed or arming, or provided with the means of being armed at sea, for the purpose of committing any unlawful act as herein before expressed, or of car- rying on by force of arms, any unlaw- ful commerce, it shall be the duty of such collector to claim such vessel until the case be submitted to the President of the United States, who is hereby au- thorised to cause such vessel to be dis- armed, or to order a clearance to be granted, as he shall judge proper.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted,
That if any armed vessel as aforesaid, shall proceed to sea without a clearance, or shall leave the port, where her deten- tion or disarming shall be required, con- trary to the provision of this act, such vessel with her arms, furniture, and tackle, or the value thereof, shall be forfeited to the use of the United States.
Mr. Crowninshield moved to strike out the proviso to the 1st section, which declared that the regulations contained in the bill should not be construed to ex- tend to vessels bound to the Mediter- ranean, or beyond the Cape of Good Hope.
Mr. Eppes observed there were only two cases in which nations usually al- lowed their merchant vessels to arm; the one, when a nation is at war, when the willingly takes advantage of the aid furnished by her subjects in arming pri- vate vessels of war or letters of marque. The other, when the trade is so remote and the seas so dangerous to peaceable navigators, that each vessel must be qua- lified to defend itself, as the nation can neither furnish convoys nor establish a force for their protection. He confi- dered the latter case to be provided for by the proviso, and it was to him the most unexceptionable part of the bill. He did not approve of allowing mer- chant vessels to arm at all. He there- fore would move to strike out all that part of the section which went to allow a clearance upon giving bond not to com- mit depredations on the vessels or sub- jects of nations in amity with the United States, and so on to the end of the section. As this included the words in- tended by Mr. Crowninshield to be struck out, he presumed his motion would therefore supersede that made by that gentleman, and after the words were struck out, he meant to insert after the words, "shall receive" at any custom house of the United States any clear- ance, or be permitted to leave the port where she shall be so armed and provided, unless bound to the Mediterranean, or beyond the Cape of Good Hope.
In passing the first section of the bill in the way it now stood, he was con- vinced that we adopted a principle, al- most, if not entirely unknown to mari- time jurisprudence, and such as would without great caution involve the United States in a foreign war. He did not think that circumstances required the adoption of that principle at this time. The following passage in the President's message he suspected gave rise to the present measure:
"While noticing the irregularities committed on the ocean by others those on our part should not be omitted, nor left unprovided for. Complaints have been received that persons, residing within the United States, have taken on themselves to arm merchant vessels, and to force a commerce into certain ports and countries, in defiance of the laws of those countries. That individuals should undertake to wage private war, independent of the authority of their country, cannot be admitted in a well ordered society. Its tendency to pro- duce aggression on the laws and rights of other nations, and to endanger the peace of our own, is so obvious, that I doubt not you will adopt measures for restraining it effectually in future."
These are the evils we are called upon to correct; but let him ask whether the remedy was of a nature to cure the dis- ease. What! Shall it be permitted to every man, who can execute a bond, to wield the arms of the nation! Yet this is the only circumstance required to make a commander of an armed merchant vessel, and this too in a time of profound peace. The evil complained of by the President, is that our merchants have taken upon themselves to arm and force a commerce. The obvious remedy is to take away their arms, for then the evil can no longer exist. It is much more easy and more politic to prevent the in- jury being committed, than to punish the party for the offense.
We are informed that armed vessels failing to the West Indies, are sold with
the proceeds to the United States.
"While noticing the irregularities
committed on the ocean by others
those on our part should not be omitted,
nor left unprovided for. Complaints
have been received that persons, residing
within the United States, have taken on
themselves to arm merchant vessels, and
to force a commerce into certain ports
and countries, in defiance of the laws
of those countries. That individuals
should undertake to wage private war,
independent of the authority of their
country, cannot be admitted in a well
ordered society. Its tendency to pro-
duce aggression on the laws and rights
of other nations, and to endanger the
peace of our own, is so obvious, that I
doubt not you will adopt measures for
restraining it effectually in future."
These are the evils we are called upon
to correct; but let him ask whether the
remedy was of a nature to cure the dis-
ease. What! Shall it be permitted to
every man, who can execute a bond, to
wield the arms of the nation! Yet this
is the only circumstance required to make
a commander of an armed merchant
vessel, and this too in a time of profound

their arms and ammunition, to a class of people, it is the interest of the United States to depress and keep down, rather than put arms in their hands, to do such extensive mischief as is every day practised in that island, to say nothing of the feelings such conduct on the part of our citizens or people among us assuming that character, might have on the government of France.
Mr. Lowndes wished the gentlemen who made this report would give the committee some information of the ground upon which they had bottomed the bill. When the President's message was received, he had supposed that the French minister had remonstrated against this commerce, and that something was required to be done to restrain the trade to St. Domingo. If that is the design, it will not be answered by the bill in its present form. You here authorise your merchant vessels to arm, on giving bond and sureties; bond to do what? why, conditioned that such vessel shall not commit depredation, outrage, or violence against the vessels or persons of nations in amity with the United States. What is the fair inference from these words, but that you shall be competent to trade to St. Domingo in vessels armed or unarmed. If in an armed vessel, shall they refuse to be searched; suppose they resist the search, what then? Do gentlemen mean to extend this law to Spanish vessels claiming a right to search; for Spain is likely soon to become a Belligerent power; if they do, how can we preserve a neutral position? He was willing to do as much to preserve the peace of the nation as any man. And should think it the best and fairest mode of proceeding, either to declare the trade to St. Domingo to be a lawful trade, and in that case protect commerce by a public force, or suffer the private shipping to defend themselves. Or say, that the trade to that island is unlawful, and interdict it at once, and all together. Say then they shall not trade to any part of St. Domingo (and this appears to be what the message pointed at) and you will effectually restrain them.
Mr. Eustis said, that depriving merchant vessels of the power of arming would be to deprive them of the capacity of trading to St. Domingo, not of St. Domingo alone but of Cuba, and many other of the West India islands as well as the Spanish Main; for the number of small picaroons, employed for the express purpose of capturing our neutral and defenceless ships, would render the seas too dangerous for our navigation. He trusted, however, that Congress would not abandon so advantageous and profitable a trade, as that to the West Indies, but on a full conviction that it would ultimately do more injury than benefit to the United States. It is well known, and the circumstances are too recent not to be in the recollection of every member, that during the last European war many millions of dollars were taken from our citizens by almost every one of the belligerent powers having colonial possessions on this side of the Atlantic. A second time we are exposed to a similar injury, and he did not know how to avoid it without enabling our merchant vessels to arm and make effectual resistance to the small privateers, which swarmed in those seas. He hoped that Congress would express their opinion on this point; for if the idea of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Eppes) is to be acted upon, the business would have to be put into a different train, and would thereby render it unnecessary on the part of the select committee to give the information which had been requested.
He would however state the object of the bill. It must be very well known that in carrying on the trade with St. Domingo a great number of irregularities have taken place; that our vessels have supplied the natives with considerable quantities of articles contraband of war; they have taken away people from that island, whether subjects of France or others, contrary to the established rules and legal regulations of the place. These are circumstances, it is desirable to avoid in future, and that can be best done by making a law for the regulation of this trade, and thereby secure to our country a very valuable commerce. Every gentleman knows there is great difficulty in restraining a trade, where the profits are high, though attended with more risk and danger than ordinary. And he saw but two ways in which the thing could be done on the present occasion; which were, either to interdict the trade altogether, or pass the bill now on table. The interdict of the trade would be followed by a loss to this country, which existing circumstances did not call upon us to make. He was persuaded that our merchant vessels must arm in order to get to St. Domingo, or many other of the West India islands; it is necessary for the safety of the vessel and the lives of the crew. Will a vessel under this bill being armed and cleared, having given proper security, proceed to sea. What is then required? They are to abstain from committing outrage, unlawful assault, or violence, upon our friends, nor make any other unlawful use of their arms. The clause is expressed generally, and not minutely; the committee did not deem it necessary to go into
a detail, showing the nature and defining the species of every act of violence, assault, or outrage; the difficulty of such a detail would have discouraged the attempt, had it even been required; the government will be equally secure against these armed merchantmen, committing offences, under the general definition, as they would have been in any other mode; the vessels are subject to the general restriction contained in the first section of the bill, and this, he thought, would restrain them sufficiently. As for the rest of the bill, the 2d, 3d, and 4th sections, he did not consider them of importance, and he should move to strike them out.
Mr. J. Clay expressed some surprise at Mr. Eppes's amendment, which went to restrain all merchant vessels from being armed, unless such as were bound to the Mediterranean, or beyond the Cape of Good Hope. This was laying nothing more than the laws already enacted declare. He supposes, too, that the peace of our country is to depend upon the honesty or villainy of the commander of an armed merchant vessel. If gentlemen would investigate this subject, they would find that the peace of the country never had been, nor was ever likely to be, hazarded by our armed merchantmen, except in the single instance of forcing a trade to St. Domingo; there is no danger to be apprehended from our armed merchant vessels in any other country. The object of the bill is to preserve the peace of the country by laying a penalty, to be incurred for every offence. The trade to the West Indies must either be suspended, or if carried on in unarmed vessels, it must be left to the plunder of a ferocious banditti, disguised under the French flag, nor are these the only ones to be apprehended; the brigands of small force are laying in wait in every quarter; indeed it is not safe for our merchantmen to sail unarmed from our ports on the Atlantic to New Orleans. The depredations already made on our commerce had amounted to an immense sum: the insurance companies in Baltimore alone have lost 100,000 dollars; yet the commerce is too valuable to the United States to be abandoned altogether; but were America to suspend her intercourse with St. Domingo, the evil of having the present inhabitants for our neighbours would not be lessened; for whilst the rich productions of that island are, in such universal demand, they will find their way to market, and their want of military stores or contraband of war will be equally supplied to them, not by Americans, but by British vessels, from the Danish or other neutral islands; the trade will continue, and either neutral or belligerent nations will reap the benefit. To make the thing still more secure, he thought it would be as well that the commander should give bond and sureties for his conduct on board an armed vessel, and if the cargo were made liable to forfeiture as well as the vessel, he should deem it a sufficient security to prevent the misapplication of the power intrusted to the commander. He hoped the committee would reject the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Eppes) and afterwards concur in the amendment suggested by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Eustis.)
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, DECEMBER 31. The following are the remarks of Mr. J. Lewis, in reply to those of Mr. J. Randolph, which should have been inserted in our last paper.
Mr. J. Lewis. When my colleague (Mr. J. Randolph) was laid up, he expressed a hope that no member from Virginia would be found to sanction a measure so hostile to the rights of that state. I lament extremely that I should upon any occasion differ in sentiment with that gentleman, and particularly upon this; but because I am so unfortunate as not to agree with my colleague upon this question, I hope I shall not on that account be charged with an abandonment of the interests of Virginia. I am as tenacious of her rights as my hon. colleague, or any other representative from that state; and I must at the same time be permitted to express my regret that any member from Virginia shall be found to oppose a measure so very interesting to a large portion of the citizens of that state.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 28.
Mr. Southard presented the petition of Charles Cresson of New Jersey, formerly of Col. Hartley's Regiment of the Pennsylvania line, stating that he had been taken prisoner at the battle of Brandywine in 1777, and for two years confined on Long Island, that during that interval the new arrangement of the Army had taken place, by which he had become supernumerary; that there were only seven officers in the same situation, five of whom are since dead; praying Congress to make him the allowances granted to other officers of the line who served to the close of the war. Referred to the committee of Claims.
Mr. Daws reported on the following petitions from the committee of claims. William McClelland, praying compensation for a company of Marylanders raised in 1760 against the hostile Indians. The report states the claim to be inadmissible, and concludes with a resolution that the petition be rejected; agreed to by the House.
On the petition of Peter Landais formerly Captain of the Alliance frigate for his share of three prizes sent into Bergen, and relinquished by the Danish government to the British, during our revolutionary war. The committee reported that the claim is barred by the statute of limitations, and therefore conclude with a resolution that the prayer thereof ought not to be granted, which was agreed to by the House.
On Catharine Haines, the Widow of an old soldier, praying a grant of land, &c. The report states that whatever might be her claims upon humanity or her title to support from state institutions, she does not appear to have any well-founded claim upon the Treasury of the United States. They recommend that she have leave to withdraw her petition, which was agreed to by the House.
Also a bill for the relief of John Steele, which was read twice and ordered to be engrossed for a third reading on Monday next.
Mr. McCreery presented a petition from certain sugar refiners, praying to be allowed a drawback upon sugars exported, equal to the duty on brown sugar, referred to the committee appointed to this subject on the petition of a similar nature from New York.
A message from the Senate was received informing that the Senate had agreed to the amendments proposed by the House on the bill providing for the distribution of the laws of the U. States.
Mr. Lewis called for the third reading of the bill to amend the charter of the town of Alexandria.
A lengthy discussion took place on the passage of the bill which was opposed by Mr. Lewis and its postponement contended for by Messrs. Dennis, Early, R. Galsford and Goddard. The bill was advocated by Messrs. Lyon, Elmer, Lyle, Gregg, Eppes, Smile and G. W. Campbell who likewise opposed the postponement.
On the question to postpone the bill till the first Monday in December next, it was lost, 44 being in favor of the postponement, and 60 against it.
On postponing till the first of February the question was also lost, 42 in favour and 58 against it.
A motion was then made to recommit the bill to a committee of the whole in order to withhold from aliens the right of holding real estate within the bounds of the corporation, and to make some other alterations, which though not very material would give satisfaction to the party in Alexandria who opposed the passage of the bill.
On the question to recommit, there were 36 in the affirmative, and 61 in the negative; so the motion was lost.
Mr. J. Randolph then spoke against the passage of the bill, and was replied to by Messrs. Dawson and G. W. Campbell.
The Yeas and Nays were called by Mr. Lewis, and were declared to be Yeas 54, Nays 51.
Mr. J. Randolph moved that the postmaster general be directed to lay before this House a list of the names of persons with whom contracts have been made for carrying the mail of the U. States from the 31st of December 1801, to the 31st of December, 1804 inclusive, specifying the terms on which such contracts were made, and the sums paid, or to be paid to the contractors respectively. On motion it was agreed to consider the resolution, and on the question will the House agree to same, it was carried nem. con.
Gen. Varnum suggests that his colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. Larned) had made a mistake in his vote on the Alexandria bill, which he wished to be permitted to rectify; whether it would alter the decision of the House he did not know; the gentleman voted for the bill, though he was against it altogether, under an impression that he was voting on the question of recommitment instead of its final passage. If he was permitted to record his vote according to his intention, it would make the result stand 53 to 52, and if the Speaker was to add his vote to the minority the bill would not pass.
This gave rise to a great deal of conversation relative to the rules of the House and its uniform practice, which appeared to have been against an alteration of the vote by yeas and nays, unless the alteration would produce no effect upon the vote by changing the majority into a minority. This idea was combated by the reason of the thing; it was deemed extremely improper to confine members to a lapsus linguae , without suffering them to explain. While the argument was going on, Mr. Berkeley had been induced to examine his list of yeas and nays with the most careful scrutiny, and had discovered that in the numerical list of votes he had marked the same number twice among the yeas, so that in fact there were 55
yeas, and but 51 nays. The alteration requested being now found not to alter the decision several members hoped the gentlemen might be indulged; but this being to be done by the unanimous consent of the House, and Mr. Conrad refusing his consent, the alteration was not made. Four motions were made to adjourn during the debate, and the last succeeded.
RETURNS of the election of President and Vice-President.
   President. Vice President. President. Vice President.     N. Hampshire, 7 7 — —   Massachusetts, 19 19 — —   Rhode-Island, 4 4 — —   Connecticut, — — 9 9   Vermont, 6 6 — —   New York, 19 19 — —   New Jersey, 18 8 — —   Pennsylvania, 20 20 — —   Delaware, — — 3 3   Maryland, 9 9 2 2   Virginia, 24 24 — —   North Carolina, 14 14 — —   South Carolina, 10 10 — —   Georgia, 6 6 — —   Tennessee, 5 5 — —   Kentucky, — — — —   Ohio, 3 3 — —   154 154 14 14  
FIRE AT ST. THOMAS'S.—Extract of a letter from that island, dated November 26th.
On the 22d inst. about half past 7 o'clock a fire broke out in the house of Waswo and Mulenburgh, in this island, and raged with such unexampled fury that notwithstanding every exertion, it proceeded almost to the house of Capt. Kerr at the lower end of the town, before it could be got under, leaving nothing but bare walls from the Custom House all the way to Mr. Kerr's. I suppose that at least five thousand white inhabitants are without shelter, although every public and private building that escaped, are appropriated to their use. The part of the town from the bridge to the eastward, excepting the Company's Stores, are all saved. This letter is written in haste, expect more particulars in my next.
London papers as late as Oct. 26th are received by arrivals to the Eastward; from which it appears that a change has taken place in the Batavian government, at the head of which Schimmelpennick is to be placed, and that the emperor of Russia had ordered the French Charge des Affaires to leave Petersburg within twenty-four hours.
The Nantes Journal of the 19th of Oct. mentions the arrival of Gen. Armstrong, our minister to France, in that city, whence he was to proceed, within a few days, for Paris.
Captain Wells, of the ship Portland from L'Orient, which place he left on the 24th October—reports the capture of two valuable Spanish ships laden with linen, bound from St. Maloes to Spain, (cargoes estimated at four millions of livres) by a British frigate. Thirty gun brigs, boats, &c. had been captured and destroyed on their passage from L'Orient, to Brest, by two British frigates.
Friday, December 28.
At a meeting of a number of residents and proprietors of the territory of Columbia, convened at the hotel of W. Rhodes, in the city of Washington, the following resolutions were entered into.
Resolved, That it is incumbent upon those residents and proprietors of the territory of Columbia, who are opposed to a reception, by the United States, of the whole, or of any part, of the territory of Columbia, to the respective states of Maryland and Virginia, and are in favor of a subordinate government for the said territory, to associate themselves together for the purpose of more clearly ascertaining their strength, and of pursuing more efficacious measures for the promotion of their objects.
Resolved, That this meeting do now organize itself into an association for the above purposes, and that the name of this association be "The Association for the promotion of a subordinate Government for the Territory of Columbia."
Resolved, That the persons now present at this meeting, together with Abraham Raw, of Alexandria, and William Prouty, William Tunnicliff, and Peter Miller, of the city of Washington, who have authorized their names to be inserted as members of this association, and such other persons, actual inhabitants or proprietors in the Territory of Columbia, whether residing in Washington, Alexandria, George Town, or the country parts of the territory, as shall request the Secretary to enrol their names as members, shall compose the said association.
Resolved, That as soon as a sufficient number of members shall have enrolled, this association will divide itself into
sections, to hold separate meetings, in the several parts composing the territory, as shall be found most convenient.
Resolved, That in the mean time this association will hold three meetings on every Monday, Wednesday and Friday evenings, at such places as may from time to time be adjourned to, for the purpose of discussing the principles upon which a subordinate government ought to be constituted, and such other special meetings as may be found necessary.
Resolved, That Henry Harsford, and William M. Duncanson, be a committee to wait upon the citizens to explain the nature and objects of this association.
Resolved, That the association to now elect a Secretary.
Thomas Herty was then unanimously elected Secretary.
Resolved, That the Secretary do immediately transmit a copy of these proceedings to the Editors of the National Intelligencer, Washington Federalist, Alexandria Exposition, and Alexandria advertiser, with a request to them to give publicity to the said proceedings, and the future proceedings of this association.
Resolved, That this association, when they do adjourn, will adjourn to Saturday evening, the twenty-ninth day of the present month, then to meet at the hotel of William Woodward, at six o'clock.
Resolved, That at the next meeting this association will proceed to the election of a President, and of two Vice-Presidents.
And then the association adjourned pursuant to order.
By order, THOMAS HERTY, Secretary.
Louisville, December 7.
On Wednesday, the 6th inst. the electors of Pelican and Vice-President met at the Statehouse and gave an unanimous vote for THOMAS JEFFERSON as President and GEORGE CLINTON as Vice-President of the United States for the next term. When the vote was announced a salute of 17 cannon was fired by the artillery corps under the command of capt. B. H. Wick. The electors and general officers of militia dined with the governor.
In the evening, the town was brilliantly illuminated and a ball given. Joy sat on every countenance and pleasure was the ruling sentiment. When we viewed the scene through which we had passed; the doubts, anxieties and fears of the last election and contrasted them with the different circumstances of the present; not a soul is expanded with the sweet emotions it excited. We now behold, not the dangers of stamp, sedition and excise laws, but light taxes, liberty and plenty secured on a basis too firm to be shaken. Every patriot felt proud of his country when he uttered the name of J. Herson; every Georgian felt proud of his state when he reflected that he was not a federalist in the legislature.
Five Dollars Reward
To any person giving information where a GREY HORSE is to be found, if within the District (Nick'd and crop'd) formerly the property of William Dyer—now the property of Charles Johnston. Said horse is detained and kept out of the way in order to avoid a writ of replevin being levied on the horse by Mr. Henry Queen to whom he was lent. Apply to CHARLES JOHNSTON on the Capitol Hill, at Mr. Debin's, or to WILLIAM DYER, at the Navy Yard City Washington, Dec. 27th 1804.—2t
NOTICE
Is hereby given that the sale of all those lands and lots heretofore advertised in the Washington Federalist, the National Intelligencer and the Baltimore Federal Gazette on the 20th day of August last for a tax due the county of Washington in the territory of Columbia for the year 1802 (which sale was to have taken place on Monday the 10th day of December next at Rhodes Hotel in the City of Washington) is postponed until the first Monday in February next, when, at the same place at 11 o'clock A. M. the sale will commence and continue from day to day until all are sold or so much thereof as will satisfy the tax and other charges due thereon unless the said tax and charges be paid previous to the day of sale.
By order of the commissioners of the Levy Court, WASHINGTON BOYD, Collector of Washington County Sept. December 8th, 1804.
For Sale or Rent
THE TWO STORY BRICK HOUSE on Gay Street north of the methodist meeting, containing two rooms on each floor and two in the garret. The whole completely furnished—has an extensive back garden with an excellent pump of water in front with other conveniences suitable for a genteel family.—For terms apply to Mr. John Suter, or to CHARLES BOTETER. December 24, 1804.
Doctor Benson,
(Lately from Great Britain) RABO C. FULLY informs the inhabitants of Washington and its vicinity, that he has taken up his residence in E. Street, (three doors from the Secretary of State) where he intends practising as Physician, Surgeon and accoucheur. Washington, Dec. 28. 1804.

PROPOSALS
For carrying Mails of the United States on the following Post-Roads, will be received at the General Post Office, in Washington, until the 14th day of Jan. next, inclusive.
IN DELAWARE.
1. From Wilmington, by New Castle, St. Georges, Cantwell's Bridge, Duck Creek, Dover and Frederica to Milford, three times a week. April 15 to November 15.
Leave Wilmington every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 11 a m.—Arrive at Dover by 9 p m. Leave Dover every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Milford by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Milford every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 2 p m. Arrive at Dover by 8 p m. Leave Dover on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Wilmington by 2 p m.
November 15 to April 15.
Leave Wilmington every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 6 a m. Arrive at Dover by 6 p m and at Milford on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Milford every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 2 p m. Arrive at Dover by 8 p m and at Wilmington on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday by 6 p m.
2. From Milford by Georgetown, Dagsborough, Trap, Snowhill, Horntown and Drummondtown to Northampton once a week. Leave Milford every Tuesday at noon and arrive at Georgetown by 6 p m. Leave Georgetown on Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Northampton on the next Saturday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Northampton every Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Georgetown the next Tuesday by 6 p m. Leave Georgetown on Wednesday by 6 a m and arrive at Milford by noon.
3. From Georgetown by Bridge Branch, New Fork Bridge and New Market to Camden once a week. Leave Georgetown every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Cambridge on Thursday by 11 a m. Leave Cambridge at 1 p m and arrive at Georgetown on Friday by 6 p m.
4. From Georgetown by Concord and Laurel to Salisbury once a week. Leave Georgetown every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Salisbury by 6 p m. Leave Salisbury every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Georgetown by 6 p m.
5. From Georgetown by Broadkill Landing to Lewistown once a week. Leave Lewistown every Tuesday noon and arrive at Georgetown by 6 p m. Leave Georgetown every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Lewistown by noon.
6. From Wilmington by Christiana, Middletown, Warwick, Sassafras and Georgetown Cross Roads to Chestertown twice a week. Leave Wilmington every Tuesday and Friday at 5 a m and arrive at Chestertown by 8 p m. Leave Chestertown every Wednesday and Saturday at 5 a m and arrive at Wilmington by 8 p m.
IN MARYLAND.
7. From Easton by Hillsborough, Denton, Greensborough and White's Ferry to Frederica once a week. Leave Easton every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Frederica on Wednesday by 10 a m. Leave Frederica every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Easton on Thursday by 6 p m.
8. From Chestertown by Church-hill, Centerville, Queenstown, Sharktown and Kent Island to Annapolis twice a week. Leave Chestertown every Wednesday and Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Centerville by 10 a m and at Annapolis by 8 p m. Returning. Leave Annapolis every Tuesday and Friday at 4 a m and arrive at Centerville by 2 p m. Leave Centerville at 3 p m and arrive at Chestertown by 8 p m.
9. From Centerville to Easton twice a week. Leave Centerville every Wednesday and Saturday at noon and arrive at Easton by 6 p m. Leave Easton every Tuesday and Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Centerville by 6 p m.
10. From Baltimore by Ellicott's Lower Mills and New Market to Fredericktown twice a week. Leave Fredericktown every Saturday at 9 p m and arrive at Baltimore on Sunday & Wednesday by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Baltimore every Monday and Friday at 3 p m and arrive at Fredericktown on Tuesday and Saturday by 4 p m.
11. From Fredericktown by Woodborough, Taneytown, Peter's Ferry and Hanover to York once a week. Leave Fredericktown every Monday at 4 a m and arrive at York by 5 p m. Leave York every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Fredericktown by 6 p m.
12. From Fredericktown by Middletown, Boonsborough, Hagerstown and Greencastle to Chambersburg twice a week. Leave Fredericktown every Tuesday and Saturday at 6 p m and arrive at Chambersburg on Wednesday and Sunday by 11 1-2 a m. Returning. Leave Chambersburg every Wednesday and Sunday at 1 p m and arrive at Fredericktown on Thursday and Tuesday by 1 p m.
13. From Hagerstown by Hancock, Berkeley Springs, Oldtown, Cumber-
land, Crisfield, Frankfort & Springfield to Romney once a week. Leave Hagerstown every Wednesday at 8 a m and arrive at Romney on Saturday by 10 a m. Leave Romney every Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Hagerstown on Tuesday by 6 p m.
14. From Baltimore by Ellicott's Lower Mills, Brookville, Montgomery and Crisfield to Leesburg once a week. Leave Baltimore every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Leesburg on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Leesburg every Wednesday at 9 a m and arrive at Baltimore on Friday by 10 a m.
15. From Fredericktown to Leesburg once a week. Leave Leesburg every Tuesday at 3 a m and arrive at Fredericktown by 11 a m. Returning. Leave Fredericktown every Tuesday at 1 p m and arrive at Leesburg by 8 p m.
16. From Fred. town by Newtown, Harper's Ferry, Charlestown & Shepherdstown to Martinsburg once a week. Leave Fredericktown every Wednesday at 8 a m and arrive at Martinsburg by 5 p m. Leave Martinsburg at 6 p m and arrive at Fredericktown on Thursday by 9 a m. Returning. Leave Martinsburg every Thursday at noon and arrive at Harper's Ferry by 8 p m. Leave Harper's Ferry on Tuesday at 9 a m and arrive at Fredericktown by 6 p m.
17. From Hartford to Bell Air once a week. Leave Bell Air every Tuesday by 7 a m and arrive at Hartford by 9 a m. Leave Hartford at 11 a m and arrive at Bell Air by 1 p m.
18. From Baltimore to Annapolis three times a week. Leave Baltimore every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 8 a m and arrive at Annapolis same days by 5 p m. Returning. Leave Annapolis every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday at 8 a m and arrive at Baltimore by 5 p m.
19. From Annapolis by Tracey's Landing, Lower Marlborough, Huntingdon and Calvert to St. Leonard's once a week. Leave Annapolis every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at St. Leonard's on Wednesday by 10 a m. Leave St. Leonard's every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Annapolis on Thursday by 6 p m.
20. From Annapolis by Haddaway's, St. Michael's, Easton, Cambridge, Vienna, Salisbury, Princess Ann and Snowhill to Salisbury once a week. Leave Annapolis every Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Easton on Monday by 10 a m. Leave Easton at 2 p m and arrive at Snowhill on Wednesday by 1 p m. Returning. Leave Snowhill every Wednesday at 3 p m and arrive at Easton on Friday by 10 a m. Leave Easton at 2 p m and arrive at Annapolis on Saturday by 5 p m.
21. From Washington by Unitytown to Brookville once a week. Leave Washington every Wednesday at 5 a m and arrive at Brookville by 11 a m. Leave Brookville every Wednesday at 1 p m and arrive at Washington by 8 p m.
22. From Washington city by Gaithersburg, Montgomery and Clark's Cross Roads to Fredericktown three times a week. Leave Washington city every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Fredericktown same days by 4 p m. Leave Fredericktown every Monday, Wednesday & Friday at 4 a m and arrive at Washington same days by 4 p m.
23. From Washington city by Piscataway, Port Tobacco, Allen's Ferry, Newport, Chaptico, Leonardtown, Great Mill and St. Inigoes to the Ridge. Leave Washington every Monday and Friday at 7 a m and arrive at Port Tobacco by 5 p m. Leave Port Tobacco every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Leonardtown by 4 p m. Leave Leonardtown at 1-2 past 4 p m and arrive at the Ridge on Wednesday at 4 p m. Returning. Leave the Ridge at 6 a m on Thursday and arrive at Port Tobacco on Friday by 6 p m. Leave Port Tobacco on Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Washington by 4 p m.
24. From Washington city by Upper Marlborough and Queen Ann's to Annapolis twice a week. Leave Washington every Wednesday and Saturday at 5 a m and arrive at Annapolis by 6 p m. Leave Annapolis every Monday and Thursday at 5 a m and arrive at Washington by 4 p m.
25. From Upper Marlborough by Nottingham, Aquasco, Benedict and Charlotte Hall to Chaptico once a week. Leave Upper Marlborough every Wednesday noon and arrive at Chaptico on Thursday by 11 a m. Leave Chaptico every Thursday at 1 p m and arrive at Upper Marlborough on Friday by noon.
IN VIRGINIA.
26. From Hagerstown Md by Williamsport, Martinsburg, Winchester, Stevensburg or Newtown, Strasburg, Woodstock, New Market and Harrisonburg to Staunton once a week. Leave Hagerstown every Tuesday at 2 p m and arrive at Winchester on Wednesday by 10 a m. Leave Winchester at 11 a m and arrive at Staunton on Friday by 11 a m. Returning. Leave Staunton every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Hagerstown the next Monday by 10 a m.
27. From Washington city by Georgetown, Prospect Hill, Hillsborough, Leesburg, Waterford, Charlestown and Battletown to Winchester. Leave Washington city every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Winchester on Wednesday by 5 p m. Leave Winchester on Thursday by noon and arrive at Washington on Sunday by 4 p m.
28. From Washington city by Fairfax, Centerville, Middleburg, Gaithersburg, Millwood, Paris and Winchester to Romney once a week. Leave Washington every Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Winchester on Sunday by 3 p m and at Romney on Monday by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Romney every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Winchester on Wednesday by 9 a m and at Washington on Thursday by 5 p m.
29. From Romney by Westernport, Green Glades, Gandy's and Clark's Cross Roads to Marsh's once a week. Leave Romney every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Gandy's on Wednesday by 3 p m and at Marsh's on Friday by 11 a m. Returning. Leave Marsh's every Friday at 1 p m and arrive at Gandy's on Sunday by 8 a m and at Romney on Monday by 8 p m.
30. From Marsh's by Marietta, Middleburg and the Salt works to Chillicothe once a week. Leave Marsh's every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at the Salt works on Monday by 10 a m. Leave there at 10 1-2 a m and arrive at Chillicothe by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Chillicothe every Tuesday at 8 a m and arrive at Marsh's the next Friday by 10 a m.
31. From Romney by Moorfields to Pendleton once a week. Leave Romney every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Pendleton on Wednesday by 4 p m. Returning. Leave Pendleton on Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Romney on Friday by 6 p m.
32. From Marietta to Wood once a week. Leave Marietta every Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Wood on Sunday by 5 p m. Leave Wood on Saturday at 7 p m and arrive at Marietta by 10 p m.
33. From Clark's Cross Roads by Buchanan, to Randolph once in two weeks. Leave Clark's Cross Roads every other Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Randolph on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Randolph on Saturday by 6 p m and arrive at Clark's Cross Roads on Friday by 10 a m.
34. From Fredericksburg, by Falmouth, Elk Run church, Fauquier and Salem to Paris once a week. Leave Paris every Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Fredericksburg on Friday by 10 a m. Leave Fredericksburg every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Paris on Saturday by 6 p m.
35. From Leesburg by Centerville, Hay market, Buckland, Warrenton, Jefferson and Culpepper to Madison once a week. Leave Leesburg every Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Madison on Tuesday by 10 a m. Leave Madison every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Leesburg on Friday by 6 p m.
36. From Fredericksburg by Germania, Stevensburg, Culpepper and Gaines Cross Roads and Front Royal to Winchester once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Winchester on Monday at 6 a m. Returning. Leave Winchester every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Fredericksburg on Friday by 10 a m.
37. From Culpepper by Woodville, Washington, Thornton's Gap and Mundell's store to Newmarket once a week. Leave Culpepper every Monday at 6 a m and arrive at Newmarket on Tuesday by 10 a m. Leave Newmarket at 2 p m and arrive at Culpepper on Wednesday by 6 p m.
38. From Fredericksburg by Thornsburg, Chilesburg, Chesterfield and Newfound Mills, Oxford, Crew's store, Goochland and Mitchell's, Yanceyville, Louisa and Pottiesville and Spottsylvania and Bibb's store to Fredericksburg once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Tuesday at noon and arrive at Goochland on Thursday by 11 a m and at Fredericksburg the next Tuesday by 8 a m.
39. From Fredericksburg by Port Royal to Layton's once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Wednesday and arrive at Layton's every Wednesday. Leave Layton's every Wednesday and arrive at Fredericksburg every Wednesday.
40. From Fredericksburg by King George and Brookfield, Mattox Bridge, Leesburg, Templeman's Cross Roads, Richmond and Farnham, Kinfaile, Northumberland and Lancaster to Kilmarnock once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Kilmarnock the next Saturday by 5 p m. Returning. Leave Kilmarnock every Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Fredericksburg the next Wednesday by 10 a m.
41. From Tappahannock to Richmond once a week. Leave Richmond every Thursday noon and arrive at Tappahannock by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Tappahannock on Thursday at 6 1-2 p m and arrive at Richmond on Monday by 9 a m.
42. From Bowling Green by Bakersville, Broadus's Mill, Harrisonville, Newtown, Dunkirk, Walkerton, King William and Lilly Point and Cumberland to New Kent once a week. Leave New Kent every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at New Kent on Tuesday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave New Kent every Tuesday at 2 p m and
arrive at Bowling Green on Wednesday by 6 p m.
43. From Richmond by Hanover and Dunkirk to Tappahannock once a week. Leave Richmond every Wednesday at 1 p m and arrive at Dunkirk on Thursday by 7 a m. Leave Dunkirk at 8 a m and arrive at Tappahannock by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Tappahannock every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Richmond on Wednesday by 9 a m.
44. From Dunkirk by King and Queen and North End to Matthews once a week. Leave Dunkirk every Thursday at 8 a m and arrive at Matthews on Friday by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Matthews on Saturday at 6 a m and arrive at Dunkirk on Monday by 6 p m.
45. From Richmond by Granville to Charles City once a week. Leave Charles City every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Richmond by 4 p m. Leave Richmond every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Charles City on Friday by 6 p m.
46. From Richmond by Hopkins' Powhatan, Cartersville, New Canton, Buckingham, Bent Creek, Lynchburg, New London and Liberty to Fincastle once a week. Leave Richmond every Wednesday at 1 p m and arrive at Powhatan on Friday by 9 p m, and at Fincastle on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Fincastle every Sunday at 4 a m and arrive at Powhatan on Tuesday by 3 p m. Leave Powhatan on Tuesday at 4 p m and arrive at Richmond on Wednesday by 10 a m.
47. From Richmond by Colesville, Genito Bridge, Pridesville, Perkinsonville, Painsville, Ligontown & James-town to Farmville once a week. Leave Farmville every Monday at 6 a m and arrive at Richmond on Tuesday by 4 p m. Leave Richmond every Wednesday at 8 a m and arrive at Farmville on Thursday by 8 p m.
48. From Powhatan by Cumberland, Ca Ira, Farmville, Prince Edward and Charlotte to Halifax once a week. Leave Powhatan every Thursday at 10 a m, arrive at Prince Edward on Friday by 4 p m and arrive at Halifax on Saturday by 4 p m. Leave Halifax on Sunday at 4 a m and arrive at Prince Edward on Monday at 6 a m. Leave it at 6 1-2 a m and arrive at Powhatan on Tuesday by 1 p m.
49. From Prince Edward's by Leicesters, Wheeler's Springs, Reed's & Campbell's to New London once a week. Leave Prince Edward every Friday at 4 1-2 p m and arrive at New London on Saturday by 8 p m. Returning. Leave New London on Sunday by 4 a m and arrive at Prince Edward on Monday by 6 a m.
50. From Halifax by Danville & Dixonville to Lenox Castle N. C. once a week. Leave Lenox Castle every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Halifax on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Halifax every Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Lenox Castle on Monday by 6 p m.
51. From Halifax by Oldtown, Pittsylvania, Pittsylvania old town, Peytonburg, Henry and Rocky Mount to Liberty once a week. Leave Halifax every Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Henry on Monday by 3 p m and at Liberty on Wednesday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Liberty every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Henry on Friday by 8 a m. Leave Henry on Saturday at 9 a m and arrive at Halifax on Saturday by 6 p m.
52. From Henry by Patrick to Germanton in N. C. once in two weeks. Leave Henry every other Monday at 4 p m and arrive at Germanton on Wednesday by 10 a m. Leave Germanton the same day at 2 p m and arrive at Henry on Friday by 8 a m.
53. From Petersburg by Brookington, Namazee Bridge, Notoway, Hungarytown, Double Bridge, Halesburg, Willisville, Bibb's Ferry and Scottsburg to Halifax once a week. Leave Petersburg every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Willisville on Saturday by 9 a m. Leave Willisville at 10 a m and arrive at Halifax on Saturday by 4 p m. Returning. Leave Halifax on Sunday by 6 a m and arrive at Willisville by 2 p m. Leave Willisville at 3 p m and arrive at Petersburg on Wednesday by 10 a m.
54. From Willisville by Speed and Wilson's Store, Walden's Store, Sterlingtonville and Normans to Mount Tirzah once a week. Leave Willisville every Saturday at 10 a m and arrive at Mount Tirzah on Sunday by 4 p m. Leave Mount Tirzah every Friday at 5 a m and arrive at Willisville on Saturday by 8 a m.
55. From Harrisville by Fielders Mill, Quarlesville, McFarlands, Lunenburg, Christiansville, Marshallville, Mecklenburg, Davis's, St. Tammany's, Gads Bridge, Edmundson and Fielder's Mill to Harrisville once a week. Leave Harrisville every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Marshallville by 5 p m. Leave there on Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Harrisville by 6 p m.
56. From Harrisville by Hick's Ford & Alexandria to Halifax twice a week. Leave Harrisville every Wednesday and Friday at 5 a m and arrive at Halifax
by 8 p m. Leave Halifax every Thursday and Saturday at 5 a m and arrive at Harrisville by 8 p m. The mail is to pass by Putney's Store and Dancy's on Wednesday and Saturday.
57. From Petersburg by Suffolk, Jerusalem and South Quay to Murfreesborough, N. C. once a week. Leave Petersburg every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Murfreesborough on Wednesday by 4 p m. Returning. Leave Murfreesborough every Sunday at 8 a m and arrive at Petersburg on Monday by 6 p m.
58. From Smithfield by Urquhart's store, Jerusalem, Bethlehem Cross Roads and the Cross Keys, to Hick's Ford once a week. Leave Hick's Ford every Thursday at 5 a m and arrive at Smithfield on Friday by 11 a m. Returning. Leave Smithfield every Friday at 1 p m and arrive at Hick's Ford on Saturday by 7 p m.
59. From Norfolk by Kempeville, N. W. R. Bridge, Tulls Creek, N. C. Indian town, Jonesboro', Elizabeth City, Nixonton and Hertford to Edenton once a week. Leave Norfolk every Tuesday noon and arrive at Edenton the next Friday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Edenton every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Norfolk the next Tuesday by 8 a m.
60. From Charlottesville by Warren, Warmroster, New Market, New Glasgow, Amherst and Madison to Lynchburg once a week. Leave Charlottesville every Thursday at 2 p m and arrive at Lynchburg on Saturday by 10 a m. Leave Lynchburg every Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Charlottesville on Monday by 10 a m.
61. From Staunton by Kinkaid's, the Warm Springs or Bath, Morris's, Callaghan's and the Sulphur Springs to Lewisburg and from thence by Union Town, the Sweet Springs, Callaghan's, &c. to Staunton once a week. Leave Staunton every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Lewisburg on Monday by 10 a m. Leave Lewisburg by noon and arrive at Staunton the next Friday by 10 a m.
62. From Lewisburg by Boyers, Huff's, Morris's, Kenhaway, Point Pleasant and Gallipolis, to Scioto Salt-works, once in two weeks. Leave Lewisburg every other Tuesday at 6 a m, arrive at Scioto Salt-works on Sunday by 4 p m. Leave Scioto Salt-works every other Monday at 6 a m, and arrive at Lewisburg on Saturday by 6 p m.
63. From Staunton by Middlebrook, Brownsville, Lexington, Natural Bridge, Fincastle, Airmount, Montgomery and New Dublin to Wythe once a week. Leave Staunton every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Wythe on Monday by 6 p m. Leave Wythe every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Staunton the next Friday by 10 a m.
64. From New Dublin by Tazewell to Jeffersonville, Russell and Lee to Cumberland Gap once in two weeks. Leave New Dublin every other Monday at 9 a m and arrive at Cumberland Gap the next Saturday by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Cumberland Gap every other Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at New Dublin the next Friday by 6 p m.
65. From Wythe by Austinville, Grayson and Scull Camp, Mount Airy and Bethania to Salem N. C. once a week. Leave Wythe every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Salem the next Friday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Salem every Saturday at 6 a m and arrive at Wythe on Monday by 6 p m.
IN NORTH-CAROLINA.
66. From Suffolk, Vir. by Everitt's bridge and Gates to Edenton twice a week. Leave Suffolk every Monday and Friday at 1 p m and arrive at Edenton on Tuesday and Saturday by 1 p m. Returning. Leave Edenton every Sunday and Thursday at 9 1-2 a m and arrive at Suffolk on Monday and Friday by 9 a m.
67. From Edenton by Lee's mills, Plymouth and Washington to Newbern twice a week. Leave Edenton every Tuesday and Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Plymouth by 6 a m on Wednesday and Sunday. Leave Plymouth at 6 1-2 a m and arrive at Washington by 6 p m. Leave Washington at 7 p m and arrive at Newbern on Thursday and Monday by 4 p m. Returning. Leave Newbern every Tuesday and Friday at 5 a m and arrive at Washington by 5 p m. Leave Washington at 6 p m and arrive at Plymouth on Wednesday and Saturday by 4 p m. Leave Plymouth at 4 1-2 p m and arrive at Edenton on Thursday and Sunday by 9 a m.
68. From Washington by Bath to Woodstock once a week. Leave Woodstock every Wednesday at 7 a m and arrive at Washington by 4 p m. Leave Washington at 7 p m and arrive at Woodstock on Thursday by 2 p m.
69. From Newbern by Trenton, North West Landing and Richmond to Wilmington once a week. Leave Newbern every Tuesday at 5 a m and arrive at Wilmington on Thursday by 10 a m. Leave Wilmington every Thursday at 2 p m and arrive at Newbern on Saturday by 7 p m.
(Continued)