The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1803-11-07 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER, AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
Vol. IV. WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. No. CCCLXXV.
FIVE DOLLS. PER ANN.
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7th, 1803.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, Oct. 25.
DEBATE ON THE LOUISIANA TREATY.
The House went into Committee of the whole.
Mr. Dawson in the chair—on the resolutions for carrying the Treaty into effect.
Mr. GAYLORD GRISWOLD said he had hoped that some gentleman in favor of the resolution under consideration would have risen to assign his reasons in favor of it. But no gentleman friendly to its adoption having risen, and feeling himself embarrassed, he would take the liberty of suggesting his doubts as to the propriety of the resolution. He hoped the committee would have the candor to believe, that in stating those doubts which hung upon his mind, his object was not to delay the progress of the measures contemplated, but to gain information.
In reflecting for the short time, during which the subject had been before him, he had not been able to pursue it in all its bearings, nor to solve all the difficulties it presented. He had first asked himself where was to be found the constitutional power of the government to incorporate the territory, with the inhabitants thereof, in the Union of the United States, with the privileges of citizens of the United States? Is there any such power? And if there is, where is it lodged? In giving his opinion on the constitutional right of making treaties, he would say that it was vested in the President and Senate, & that a treaty made by them on a subject constitutionally in their treaty making power was valid, without the assent of this House. This house had to be sure the physical power of refusing the necessary means to carry treaties into effect; but this power was essentially different from that conferred by the constitution. But if the treaty making power should be exercised, if it should be undertaken to make it operate upon subjects not constitutionally vested, he had a right to say that it was his duty not to carry it into effect. Even should its provisions be highly beneficial, it was not less their constitutional duty to resist it. He would not undertake to say that his mind was perfectly fixed, but he entertained doubts, serious doubts; and he hoped gentlemen would candidly give them answers.
He found in the 3d article of the treaty that "The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated in the Union of the United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of the federal constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of the United States; and in the mean time they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion which they profess." Here then is a compact between the French government and that of the United States to admit to citizenship persons out of the jurisdiction of the United States as it is now, and to admit territory out of the United States to be incorporated into the Union. He did not in the constitution find such a power vested in the President and Senate. If such a power be not expressly vested, it must be referred to the people. It was not consistent with the spirit of the constitution that territory other than that attached to the United States at the time of the adoption of the constitution should be admitted; because at that time the persons who formed the constitution of the United States had a particular respect to the then subsisting territory—They carried their ideas to the time when there might be an extended population; but they did not carry them forward to the time when an addition might be made to the Union of a territory equal to the whole United States, which additional territory might overbalance the existing territory, and thereby the rights of the now citizens of the United States, be swallowed up and lost. Such a measure could not be consistent either with the spirit or the genius of the government.
For these reasons, Mr. Griswold was of opinion that no such power was delegated to any department of the government; but if such power was delegated to any department, it must, in his opinion, be to the legislature, as he should afterwards notice. It was not consistent with the spirit of a republican government that its territory should be
exceedingly large; for as you extend your limits, you increase the difficulties arising from a want of that similarity of customs, habits and manners so essential for its support. It was certainly difficult to draw the precise line; but there was no such thing as one beyond which we should not go.
But if the right of extending our territory be given by the constitution, its exercise is vested in the legislative branches of the government. In the 3d section of the fourth article of the constitution it is said, "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this Union." Congress may admit new states. But, according to my construction of this article, are confined to the territory belonging to the United States at the formation of the constitution, to the territory then within the United States. Existing territory not within the limits of any particular states, may be incorporated in the Union. He contended, therefore, that the power to incorporate new territory did not exist; and that if it did exist, it belonged to the legislature and not the executive, to incorporate it in the Union. If this were the case, it was the duty of the House to resist the usurped power exercised by the executive.
There was another ground as to the constitutionality of the treaty; at least one which excited doubts in his mind, which he hoped gentlemen would take up and remove. In the 7th article of the treaty are these words:
"As it is reciprocally advantageous to the commerce of France and the United States to encourage the communication of both nations for a limited time in the country ceded by the present treaty, until general arrangements relative to the commerce of both nations may be agreed on; it has been agreed between the contracting parties, that the French ships coming directly from France or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce and manufactures of France or her said colonies; and the ships of Spain coming directly from Spain or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce or manufactures of Spain or her colonies, shall be admitted during the space of twelve years in the port of New Orleans, and in all other legal ports of entry within the ceded territory, in the same manner as the ships of the United States coming directly from France or Spain, or any of their colonies, without being subject to any other or greater duty on merchandise, or other or greater tonnage than that paid by the citizens of the United States."
This article gives to the ships of France and Spain the same right of entering the ports of the ceded territory with our own vessels; and it precludes the ships of all other nations from the same right. Now if, as gentlemen contend the new ceded territory with the inhabitants should become incorporated with the United States, there will be ports of entry in the United States into which French and Spanish vessels may enter on terms different from those on which they may enter other ports of the United States. The inference was that here was a favor granted to the ports of New Orleans over other ports. This was against an important principle of the constitution. For in the ninth section of the first article, we find, "no preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another." This treaty then becomes a law of the land—it has made a commercial regulation. It gives to the ports of the ceded territory a preference to any other ports. Because the produce of France and Spain can be carried cheaper to their ports than to any other. If the principle contended for by gentlemen in favor of the Treaty is admitted, I think I see a fatal blow proposed against the constitution of the United States, by destroying the reciprocity of interest that unites at present the different members of the Union. Perhaps I see wrong.
Mr. RANDOLPH rose for the purpose of satisfying, so far as was in his power, the doubts expressed by the gentleman from New-York, (Mr. G. Griswold). He had listened with great pleasure to the candid exposition which the gentleman had given of his objections, and from the temper which he had manifested, Mr. R. relied on being able to satisfy some of his scruples on this subject. The objections which have been urged to the motion before the committee, resolved themselves into arguments against the constitutionality, and arguments against the expediency of the treaty proposed to be carried into effect. As it would be needless to repeat objections of this last kind, unless those of the first
description could be satisfactorily answered, he should first reply to the observations which had been made on the constitutional doctrine.
He understood the gentleman from New-York as denying that there existed in the United States, as such, a capacity to acquire territory—that by the constitution they were restricted to the limits which existed at the time of its adoption. If this position be correct, it undeniably follows that those limits must have been accurately defined and generally known, at the time when the government took effect. Either they have been particularly described in the constitutional compact, or are referred to as settled beyond dispute, and universally acknowledged. But this was not the fact, in either case. The constitution not only did not describe any particular boundary, beyond which the United States could not extend—but our boundary was unsettled on our north eastern, southern and north western frontier, at the time of its adoption. But perhaps we shall be told, that, although our limits were in dispute with our English and Spanish neighbors, still there were certain boundaries, specified in the treaty of Paris, of 1763, which were the actual boundaries of the United States. It was, however, a well attested fact, one of which we possessed official information from the executive, that the limits assigned us, by that treaty, were incapable of being established. A line running west from the lake of the woods not touching the Mississippi at all—it followed that the United States were without limits, beyond the source of the Mississippi. It will not be denied that among the powers which the government possesses under the constitution, there exists that of settling disputes concerning our limits with the neighboring nations. This power was not only necessary in relation to the disputed boundaries on the side of Canada and Florida, but was indispensable to a government over a country of indefinite extent. The existence of this power will not be denied: it has been exercised in ascertaining our north eastern and southern frontier, and it involves in it the power of extending the limits of the confederacy. Let us suppose that the commissioners, under the treaty of London, had determined the river St. John, or St. Laurence, to be the true St. Croix. Would not that part of the provinces of New Brunswick, or Quebec, which lies on this side of those rivers, at this time have been a part of the United States? Suppose the northern boundary of Florida had been fixed, under the treaty of San Lorenzo, to extend from the Atlantic ocean to the Gulf, would not all the country north of this line and east of the Mississippi, (part of the very country conveyed by the treaty, lately negotiated, and which gentlemen conceived we could not constitutionally hold;) would not that country, at this time, compose a part of the United States? That the constitution should tie us down to particular limits, without expressing those limits—that we should be restrained to the then boundaries of the United States, when it is in proof to the committee that no such bounds existed, or do now exist, was altogether incomprehensible and inadmissible. For if the constitution meant the practical limits of the United States, the extent of country which we then possessed, our recent acquisitions on the side of Canada and the Natchez, could not be defended. But, Sir, said Mr. R. my position is not only maintainable by the reason of the constitution, but by the practice under it. Congress have expressed, in their own acts, a solemn recognition of the principle, that the United States, in their federative capacity, may acquire, and have acquired, territory. It will be recollected, that adverse claims once existed between the United States and the state of Georgia in relation to a certain tract of country, between the northern boundary of the Spanish possessions, and what we contended was the southern limit of Georgia: the United States asserting that the country in question was the property of the United States, in their federative capacity, and the state of Georgia claiming it as hers. Although I have always advocated the claim of that state, it never was on the principle of an incapacity in the United States to acquire territory, or any other which affects the question now before us. It is true, Sir, we appointed commissioners to settle the matters in dispute, amicably, with Georgia. But, in the mean time, we assumed the jurisdiction, erected a government over the country, and thereby established the principle, that the United States, as such, could
acquire territory:—the country in question, as we contended, never having been included within the limits of any particular state, and being ceded to the confederacy by the treaty of 1783. But perhaps it may be answered, that this acquisition being made anterior to the date of the present constitution, cannot affect any limitation or restriction, which it may have provided in relation to this subject—and that to prove that the old confederation could acquire territory, is not to prove the same capacity in the present system of government. To this I reply, that the constitution contains no such expressed limitation, nor can any be fairly inferred from it: and that if the old confederation—a mere government of states—a loosely connected league—all of whose powers, with many more, are possessed by the present federal government—if this mere alliance of states could rightfully acquire territory in their allied capacity, much more is the existing government competent to make such an acquisition. To me the inference is irresistible.
But the gentleman does not rest himself on this ground alone—He does not embark his whole treasure in a single bottom. Granting that the United States are not destitute of capacity to acquire territory, he denies that this acquisition has been made in a regular way—Congress, says he, alone is competent to such an act. In this transaction he sees at a distance executive encroachment, and we are called upon to assert our rights, and to repel it. If any usurpation of the privileges of Congress, or of this House, be made to appear, I pledge myself to that gentleman to join him in resisting it. But let us enquire into the facts. No gentleman will deny the right of the President to initiate business here; by message, recommending particular subjects to our attention. If the government of the United States possess the constitutional power to acquire territory, from foreign states, the Executive, as the organ by which we communicate with such states, must be the prime agent, in negotiating such an acquisition. Granting, then, that the power of confirming his act, and annexing to the United States, the territory thus acquired, ultimately rests with Congress, where has been the invasion of the privileges of that body? Does not the President of the United States submit this subject to Congress for their action? Does he not recognise the principle, which I trust we will never give up, that no treaty is binding until we pass the laws for executing it—that the powers conferred by the constitution on Congress cannot be modified, or abridged, by any treaty whatever—that the subjects of which they have cognizance cannot be taken, in any way, out of their jurisdiction? In this procedure nothing is to be seen but a respect, on the part of the executive, for our rights; a recognition of a discretion on our part to accord, or refuse our sanction—Where then is the violation of our rights? As to the initiative, in a matter like this, it necessarily devolved on the Executive.
The unconstitutionality of this treaty is attempted to be shown by the following quotation from that instrument. "No preference shall be given to the ports of one state over those of another state, &c." But by the 7th article of the treaty, French and Spanish vessels, laden with the produce of their respective countries, are, for 12 years, to be admitted into the ports of the ceded territory on the same terms with our own vessels. In our other ports a discrimination is made between American and foreign bottoms. New Orleans, therefore, will enjoy an exemption, which will enable her to trade to the French and Spanish colonies on terms more advantageous than other ports: She is, therefore, a favored port, in contradistinction to the express letter of the constitution. To me it appears that this argument has much more of ingenuity than of force in it—more of subtlety than of substance. Let us suppose that the treaty, instead of admitting French and Spanish vessels on the terms proposed, merely covenanted to admit American vessels on equal terms with those of France and Spain—if we had acquired this right (divested of the country) it would have been considered, and justly, as an important privilege. Annex the territory to it and you cannot accept it. You may indeed acquire either the commercial privilege, or the territory, without violating the constitution—but take them both, and that instrument is infringed. But the gentleman will recollect that the discrimination between foreign bottoms and our own is a creature of the law, and not a provision of the constitution. It
his construction be found it does not involve a necessary violation of the constitution, it only involves the necessity of repealing these discriminating duties on French and Spanish products, brought in their own bottoms, into other ports than those of the ceded territory. It would therefore become gentlemen to adduce this as a proof of the inexpediency, rather than of the unconstitutionality of the treaty. For however inexpedient it may be to repeal this discrimination, no one will contend that it is unconstitutional, and if the constitution or the law were to give way, no one would hesitate between them. But I regard this stipulation only as a part of the price of the territory. It was a condition which the party ceding had a right to require, and to which we had a right to assent. The right to acquire involved the right to give the equivalent demanded. Mr. Randolph said, that he expected to hear it laid in the course of the debate, that the treaty in question might clash with the treaty of London, in this particular. He would therefore take the opportunity of remarking, that the privilege granted to French and Spanish bottoms, being a part of the consideration for which we had obtained the country, and the court of London being officially apprized of the transaction, and acquiescing in the arrangement, it would ill become any member of that House to bring forward such an objection.
Another case may be adduced to illustrate this question of constitutionality. During the last session of Congress, they had received information of the manifestation of a disposition, on the part of the possessors of this country, to violate our right to the navigation of the Mississippi, as secured to us by existing treaties. There was no difference of opinion but as to the mode of asserting this right. On all hands it was agreed that we would never relinquish this great object. A certain portion of the legislature were disposed to resort immediately to violent measures. Another portion was of opinion that it was best to wave such measures, until amicable means of settling this difference had proved ineffectual. Let us suppose this to have been the case,—that our negotiation, instead of its present happy issue, had terminated in a refusal of justice. I believe there would, in that event, have been but one sentiment in this House and in this nation. We should have appealed to arms, and if fortune had only been as impartial as our cause was just, we should have possessed ourselves, at least, of a part of the territory in question. Did any one dream of denying our right to the forcible possession of New Orleans, if necessary to secure the navigation of the Mississippi? Can a nation acquire by force that which she cannot acquire by treaty? Must not the eventual right to the country, possessed by conquest, be confirmed by treaty? And is it not idle to contend that so long as we employ force we may occupy the country, but no longer,—that we cannot retain it by convention? Is not this to convert the question, from a question of political right, to a question of physical power? Mr. Randolph said he was now done with the constitutional objections, and he would finish by saying something of the expediency of the measure.
The gentleman from New-York seems to dread this treaty as a death-blow to our commerce and carrying trade.—What is the state of that trade now, in relation to the ceded country? But a short time ago, who would have asked more than to be put on an equal footing with the possessors of that country? We now have the sovereignty of it, and only stipulate that (for 12 years) France and Spain should be admitted (not on an equal footing with us) but that their vessels, laden with their own produce (not otherwise) should pay no higher duties than our own. At the expiration of that period we can give a decided preponderance to our own trade by discriminating duties. Will the hardy and enterprising New-Englanders shrink from a competition with France and Spain on these terms? Cannot the discriminating duties be still enforced by the existing regulations in respect to imports from New Orleans to other parts of the United States? So far from a clog on our commerce, does not this treaty unetter the Mississippi trade and give us a preference over all other nations, except in the case of French and Spanish vessels laden with the produce of their respective countries, and there we are on a footing with them?
Mr. R. said that he would not dilate upon the importance of the navigation of the Mississippi which had been the theme of every tongue—which we now

possessed unfettered by the equal claim of the nation holding the west bank,—a fruitful source of quarrel;—but he would call the attention of the committee to a report which had been made at the last session and to which publicity had lately been given.
I am not surprised, Mr. Chairman, that in a performance so replete with information a single error should be discovered, especially as it does not affect the soundness of its conclusion. As long ago as the year 1673, the inhabitants of the French province of Canada explored the country on the Mississippi. A few years afterwards (1685) La Sale, with emigrants from old France, made a settlement on the bay of St. Bernard, and at the close of the 17th century, previous to the existence of the Spanish colony of Pensacola, another French settlement was made by the governor D'Iberville at Mobile & on the Isle Dauphin, or Massacre, at the mouth of that bay. In 1713, a short time previous to the peace of Utrecht, Louis XIV described the extent of the colony of Louisiana (by the settlements) in his grant of its exclusive commerce to Crozat. Three years subsequent to this, the Spanish establishment at Pensacola was formed, as well as the settlement of the Adais on the river Mexicana. After various conflicting efforts, on both sides, the bay and river Perdido was established, (from the peace of 1719) as the boundary between the French province of Louisiana on the one side and the Spanish province of Florida on the other:—this river being nearly equidistant between Mobile and Pensacola. Near the close of the war between England and France, rendered memorable for the unexampled success with which it was conducted by that unrivalled statesman the great lord Chatham, Spain became a party on the side of France. The loss of the Havannah, and other important dependencies, was the immediate consequence. In 1762 France, by a secret treaty of contemporaneous date with the preliminary treaty of peace, relinquished Louisiana to Spain as an indemnity for her losses, sustained by advocating the cause of France. By the definitive treaty of 1763, France ceded to England all that part of Louisiana which lies east of the Mississippi except the Island of New Orleans:—The rest of the province to Spain. It is to be observed that although France ostensibly ceded this country to England, virtually the cession was on the part of Spain: because France was no longer interested in the business, but as the friend of Spain, (having previously relinquished the whole to her) and because in 1783 restitution was made by England, not to France, but to Spain. England having acquired this portion of Louisiana, together with the Spanish province of Florida, annexed to the former that part of Florida which lies west of the Apalachicola and east of the Perdido; thereby forming the province of West-Florida. It is only in English geography, and during this period, from 1763 to 1783, that such a country as West-Florida is known. For Spain having acquired both the Floridas in 1783, reannexed to Louisiana the country west of the Perdido subject to the governor of New Orleans, and established the ancient boundaries of Florida; the country between the Perdido and Apalachicola being subject to the governor of St. Augustine. By the treaty of St. Ildefonso, Spain cedes to France "the province of Louisiana with the same extent that it now has in the hands of Spain": viz. to the Perdido—"and that it had when France possessed it"—to the Perdido—and such as it should be after the treaties subsequently entered into between Spain and other powers: that is saving to the United States the country given up by the treaty of San Lorenzo. We have succeeded to all the rights of France. If the navigation of the Mississippi alone were of sufficient importance to justify war,—surely the possession of every drop of water which runs into it;—the exclusion of European nations from its banks, who would have with us the same causes of quarrel, did we possess New Orleans only, which we have had with the former possessors of that key of the river;—the entire command of the Mobile and its widely extended branches, scarcely inferior in consequence to the Mississippi itself;—watering the finest country and affording the best navigation in the United States; surely these would be acknowledged to be inestimably valuable.
But it is dreaded that so widely extended a country cannot subsist under a republican government. If this dogma be indisputable, I fear we have already far exceeded the limits which visionary speculativists have supposed capable of free government. This argument, so far as it goes, would prove that instead of acquiring, we ought to divest ourselves of territory. If the extent of the republics of Greece, or of Switzerland, of antiquity or modern times is to be our standard, we shall dwindle indeed. They have formed the basis of most theories on this subject. The acquisition of the country west of the Mississippi does not reduce us to the necessity of settling it now or for a long time to come. It will tend to destroy the cause of Indian wars, whilst it may constitute the as-
ylum of that brave and injured race of men.
Mr. R. concluded by apologizing for detaining the committee so long. He was sorry that he had been unable to compress his remarks into a smaller compass.
Mr. JOSEPH LEWIS said that on a question so important it was proper that his vote should be accompanied by his reasons. With the gentleman from New-York, (Mr. G. Griswold) he entertained doubts as to the constitutionality of the treaty, and if those doubts should be removed, he should vote for carrying it into effect. The part of the treaty to which he referred was in the 7th article, in the following words:
"As it is reciprocally advantageous to the commerce of France and the United States to encourage the communication of both nations for a limited time in the country ceded by the present treaty, until general arrangements relative to the commerce of both nations may be agreed on: it has been agreed between the contracting parties, that the French ships coming directly from France or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce and manufactures of France or her said colonies; and the ships of Spain coming directly from Spain or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce or manufactures of Spain or her colonies, shall be admitted during the space of twelve years in the port of New Orleans, and in all other legal ports of entry within the ceded territory, in the same manner as the ships of the United States coming directly from France or Spain, or any of their colonies, without being subject to any other or greater duty on merchandise, or other or greater tonnage than that paid by the citizens of the United States."
In opposition to this part of the treaty, he found in the constitution of the United States this declaration: "No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another."
It was on this point that he entertained doubts, which he wished might be removed. His honorable colleague (Mr. Randolph) had not removed them; so far from removing, he had confirmed them.
Mr. Lewis was free to declare that his only objections were as to the unconstitutionality of the treaty: and should any gentleman remove them, he would not object to voting for carrying the treaty into operation; but unless they were removed, he must vote against it.
Mr. Randolph, in explanation said that he thought he had suggested that the preference referred to was a legal and not a constitutional difficulty.
Mr. Lewis. Still the gentleman has not removed my difficulty. Congress possesses no power to give a commercial preference to one state over another; and if the ships of France and Spain are permitted to enter New Orleans on terms more advantageous than they are permitted to enter other ports of the United States, it is a palpable violation of the constitution.
The gentleman from Virginia has also told us that this preference is to be considered as the price paid for the ceded territory. I am astonished at this observation. As I understand the treaty, we are to take possession of Louisiana within three months from the ratification of the treaty; and as soon as taken into our possession, a specific sum is to be paid for it, on which being done it becomes our sole property. If then we give a great advantage to the port of New Orleans, not enjoyed by other ports, I say such preference will be a palpable violation of the constitution. For it must be evident to every mind that such a preference will operate against every state in the union. For if the ships of France and Spain are permitted to enter New Orleans upon better terms than any other ports, they can afford to bring the productions of those countries into New Orleans much cheaper than into any other ports of the United States. These are my only objections; if removed I shall have no difficulties; but until they are removed, I must be opposed to the resolution before the committee.
Mr. Griffin said that upon a subject so important, and so deeply interesting to his country, it would be un pardonable in him, and evince a dereliction of duty, to give a vote without assigning his reasons. On referring to the treaty and the constitution, and comparing their provisions, considerable apprehension had arisen in his mind; and he seriously feared the consequences of a collision between them. As he was only in search of truth, and as it was his sincere wish that all his apprehensions and doubts should be removed, he would take the liberty of stating his doubts on the constitutionality of the treaty.
In the 7th article of the treaty were these words, (quoting the words recited by the last Speaker, as above stated.) This was evidently a commercial regulation. If a commercial regulation—and such he deemed it—the President and Senate have undertaken to form commercial regulations for the ceded territory.
In the 8th section of the 1st article of the constitution power is given to Congress "to regulate commerce with foreign nations." Is not then this treaty stipulation, made by the President and the Senate, in direct contravention of this constitutional investiture of power in Congress? The constitution says, "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations." Who are Congress? The Senate and House of Representatives.—If then the President and Senate make a treaty for the regulation of commerce, they infringe the constitution, by doing that which Congress alone can do. Thus then have the President and Senate, in their executive capacity, legislated, and thereby infringed the rights of this House as a branch of the legislature.
In the same 7th article of the treaty we find that "French ships coming directly from France or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce and manufactures of France or her said colonies; and the ships of Spain coming directly from Spain or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce or manufactures of Spain or her colonies, shall be admitted during the space of twelve years in the port of New Orleans, and in all other legal ports of entry within the ceded territory, in the same manner as the ships of the United States coming directly from France or Spain, or any of their colonies, without being subject to any other or greater duty on merchandise, or other or greater tonnage than that paid by the citizens of the United States."
In the 9th section of the 1st article of the constitution we find, "No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another." He was correct, he believed, in stating that, under the present regulations of trade, Spanish vessels pay 50 cents per ton, while American vessels paid only 6 cents. Here then the President and Senate undertake to destroy this provision made by law. For, according to the treaty, Spanish and French vessels entering the ports of New Orleans will hereafter pay only 6 cents a ton; while similar vessels coming to all the other ports of the United States will be obliged to pay 50 cents a ton. The difference between six and fifty constitutes the preference given to New Orleans.
Feeling these doubts most forcibly, he could not consent to give his approbation to the resolution until they were completely removed. He did not feel a disposition to discuss the merits of the treaty, or to go at large into the consequences which it might produce. He did, however, fear those consequences; he feared the effects of the vast extent of our empire; he feared the effects of the increased value of labor, the decrease in the value of lands, and the influence of climate upon our citizens who should migrate thither. He did fear, tho' this land was represented as flowing with milk and honey, that this Eden of the new world would prove a cemetery for the bodies of our citizens.
Mr. PURVIANCE. I am clearly and decidedly in favor of the resolution on your table, premising the appropriations, for carrying the treaty between France and this country into effect; and I sincerely regret that in doing so, I shall act adversely to the general sentiment of the gentlemen with whom it is my pleasure and my pride to confess I have hitherto politically associated.
It is true I am, and always have been opposed to the general tenor of the present Administration. It has not appeared to me to possess that bold commanding aspect, that erect and resolute front which ought to be assumed by the Executive of a free people when claiming satisfaction for a wrong sustained. It has not shewn that strong muscular, athletic shape, which is calculated to intimidate aggression, or which is enabled to resist it; nor do I think that it has manifested that firm, dignified, manly tone of virtue and of spirit, which, resting on the love of a free people, and conscious of their strength, can ask for the prompt, direct and unequivocal satisfaction to which it is entitled, and, being denied, can take it. It has not appeared like the veteran chief ready to gird his loins in defence of his country's rights; but if I may be allowed to use the magna componere parvis , it has to my mind, somewhat resembled a militia subaltern, who in time of war, directed his men not to fire on the enemy, lest the enemy might fire again.
Under such an administration I have thought that it would be better to have the ceded territory on any terms than not to have it at all. If we have not the spirit or the means of doing ourselves justice, would it not be better that we bribe those who might be in a situation to molest us, and thus put it out of their power to do us any injury which we cannot or which we will not avenge? There are but two ways of maintaining our national independence—men and money—since we did not use the first, we must have recourse to the last. One of these two we should be compelled to resort to if France gained possession of Louisiana, and we had better resort to it now. I deny that they have as yet gained possession—they have not received any livery of the four redoubts which
garrison and command the country, nor have they a single armed soldier there except those which are particularly attached to the equipage of the Colonial Prefect. If, Sir, we were obliged to resort to the necessity of purchasing their friendship after they had procured an establishment, it would not be confined to one instance of humiliation and acknowledgement on our part, or one instance of insult only on theirs. If we purchase their friendship once, we should be compelled to make annual contributions to their avarice, and be annually subjected to their insolence. Repeated concessions would only produce a repetition of injury, and at last, when we had completely compromised our national dignity, and offered up our last cent as an oblation to Gallic rapacity, we would then be farther from conciliation than ever. The spirit of universal domination, instead of being allayed by those measures which had been intended for its abatement would rage with redoubled fury; elated by those sacrifices which had been intended to appease it, it would soon stride across the Mississippi, and every encroachment which conquest or cunning could effect might be expected; the tomahawk of the savage, and the knife of the negro would confederate in the league, and there would be no interval of peace, until we should either be able to drive them from their location altogether, or else offer up our sovereignty as an homage of our respect, and permit the name of our country to be blotted out of the list of nations forever.
I confess there are many gentlemen of that nation for whom I entertain the sincerest esteem; but although I love some of them as friends, they will pardon me when I say that I do not like all of them as neighbours. Blood, havoc and devaluation have for some years past encircled their proximity and circumstances equally disastrous and equally improbable have already taken place. Do we want any evidences of this? We can find them in Switzerland, in Italy, in Egypt, in Hanover, in France itself. We have seen the ancient throne of the Capets tumbled from its base; we have seen the tide of succession which had flowed on uninterruptedly for ages dammed up for ever; we have seen the sources of the life-blood royal drained dry. And by whom? By the pet younglings of the day.
"An Eagle towering in his pride of flight, Was, by a mousing owl, hawkt at and kill'd."
We have afterwards seen these puny upstarts, when their hands had been reddened in the slaughter-pens of Paris, kicked from their seats, and a Corsican soldier embellished with the majesty of the Bourbons. We have seen one half of the old world subjected to his dominion, and the other half alarmed at his power. And is it thought, Sir, that America alone, with an army scarcely sufficient to defend our garrisons, with a navy scarcely sufficient to punish a Bashaw, with a treasury incommensurate to our engagements, and an executive unwilling to strain our energies—Is it, I say Sir, for America alone, under these circumstances, singly to withstand that gigantic nation, which fighting on her own ground, fed from her own granaries, and furnished from her own arsenals? The time once was, indeed, when we could have redressed our own wrongs, and had an opportunity of doing so; but that necessity and that opportunity, I take it Sir, have now both passed away.
Yes, thank God!—We have now a treaty, signed by themselves, in which they have voluntarily passed away, the only means of annoyance which they possessed. But I do not thank the honorable gentleman who is at the head of our executive. At the time this negotiation was commenced there could not be the smallest hope of its being carried into effect. The French consul had obtained it perhaps for the express purpose of carrying into effect his favorite scheme of universal domination—it might give him the chance of injuring the British, controlling the Spaniards, and dismembering America. Compared with these objects a handful of bank stock was of no more consequence to him than a handful of sand. His fleet and army were ready to sail, and his colonial prefect had already arrived.—But, mark! The king of Great Britain, who at this crisis I take to have been by far the most able negotiator we had, declares war. The scene is now changed. That which France had refused to our intercessions, she was now compelled to grant from mere necessity. A state of warfare took place about the last of March, and the treaty was signed soon afterwards. As long as I retain the small stock of understanding which it has pleased God to give me, I shall never be induced to believe, that it was owing in the smallest degree to the efficacy of diplomatic representation. The mind of that great man is not made of such flit materials as to receive an impress from the collision of every gentle hand. Stern, collected and inflexible, he laughs to scorn the toying arts of persuasion—his foot is a stupendous rock, which the rushing of mighty waters cannot
shake from its place. No, Sir; had it not been for this happy coincidence of circumstances, the personal solicitations of our ministers would have been regarded with as little an ear as if they had been whispered across the ocean.
But, Sir, whatever may have been the causes which produced this treaty; whether it was owing to diplomatic agency, or to fortuitous incidents, its effects will certainly prevent an evil, if it does not produce a good. I do not think that there will be any positive advantage resulting from the sale of unlocated lands, as has to day been hinted; on this score we need not expect a reimbursement; there is no doubt but that all the valuable lands contained within the subscriptions of the territory have already been granted by the courts of Spain and France to their own subjects; nor do I see any restrictive provision in the treaty which would prevent the latter from continuing to issue patents up to the very date of the ratification.
There may however be other advantages, or there may indeed be disadvantages, which, shrouded as I am in the gloom of uncertainty, and not possessing the intelligence which has been asked for and withheld, I am unable to discern. To gentlemen who have been pleased to prevent our procuring it these circumstances may be obvious, as they are more eminently situated, they perhaps command a larger and a clearer prospect. If then the claim which has been transferred should be invested with any latent embarrassment; if the court of Madrid has already signified an hostility to this treaty in consequence of the non-performance of the stipulations contained in that of Saint Ildefonso, respecting the recognition of the late king of Etruria; if our possession should be opposed, or our right of property hereafter contested, let the president look to it. He only will become responsible for every drop of American blood which may be drawn in such a contest, as he ought to have communicated any information to this effect which he possessed, in order that our deliberation might be regulated accordingly.
As no such obstacles have been made known to us by the president, I will suppose that none such do exist, and I will therefore vote for the treaty; and if even a larger sum was necessary for its effectuation I would not withhold my assent; for the same reason that a man would give an exorbitant price for a piece of land adjoining his own, in order to prevent the settlement of a disorderly neighbour, who he thought would plunder his property or burn his enclosures; and, if this was the last public act of my life, I would sink into the grave under the pleasing impression that it was perhaps the best.
Mr. ELLIOT. Mr. Chairman—Altho', in the short time since I have had the honor of a seat on this floor, I have several times risen in debate, that circumstance scarcely diminishes my diffidence at the present moment; uneducated in the schools, and unpractised in the arts of Parliamentary eloquence, it is with no inconsiderable degree of diffidence that I rise upon the present occasion. There are occasions, however, where even the eye of timidity should sparkle with confidence; and there are questions in the discussion of which the finger should be removed from the lip of silence herself. And such is every occasion and every question involving the existence, the infraction, or even the correct and just construction of that constitution, which is the palladium of our privileges, and the temple of our glory. If I might be permitted to borrow a metaphorical expression from one of the most celebrated commanders of antiquity, who declared that he intended to spread all his sails, on the ocean of war, I would say that it is with fear and trembling I presume to launch my little feeble bark, on the vast ocean of eloquence and literature (pointing to the federal members) by which I am surrounded. If however the remark be just, that it is even sweet and glorious to die for one's country, surely the humbler sacrifice of native diffidence may with propriety be expected and exacted from a juvenile American representative.
Whatever minutiae shades or minor differences of opinion may exist among the American people, there is one point in which we shall all meet with cordial unanimity. We all unite in an ardent devotion to the constitution. He who is not devoted to it is unworthy of the honorable name of an American. I lament that it is necessary to speak particularly of myself, but duty, not only to myself, but to my constituents, a numerous and respectable section of the American people, demands it. It may be objected to me, and with truth, that there has been a time when I professed sentiments hostile to some of the most important provisions in the constitution. It was not, however, at the time when the constitution was submitted to the people. I was then in infancy and obscurity, deprived of the means and even of the hopes of education. I had yet read much and reflected more. My ardent and excursive eye had wandered rapidly over the wide field of antient history—I thought I beheld my country, like the Roman

republic in the age of Cato, the sport of every wind and of every wave. As far as I understood the constitution I admired it, and wished for its adoption. But when an elegant anonymous writer predicted, as the consequence of its adoption, that "liberty would be but a name, to adorn the short historic page of the halcyon days of America," I trembled and shuddered for the possible consequences. If in the plenitude of juvenile full sufficiency, (and who has not been young?) I have since fancied that I could form a more perfect constitution, that dream of the imagination has long been past. Long have I been sincerely and ardently attached to the constitution. I foresee that I shall be led into a wide field, and that I shall long, too long, occupy the attention of the committee. Will the committee bear me? I imagine that I read a favorable answer in the countenances of all its members. I shall be interrupted by no unpleasant indications of impatience, by no loud calls for the question.
The treaty before us is of immense consequence, and my attention was early turned to the subject. From the moment of my election, I have devoted many studious and laborious hours to the subjects connected with it, and I have anticipated all the objections against it; none of those presented this day by the gentleman from New York, who opened the debate, or by the gentlemen who followed him on the same side, have struck my mind as novel. The question of the constitutionality of the treaty first presents itself. It is said to be unconstitutional, because it enlarges the territory of the United States. To reduce the arguments of gentlemen on this head to a syllogistic form, they would run like this: The mind with great force. The constitution is silent on the subject of the acquisition of territory; by the treaty we acquire territory; therefore the treaty is unconstitutional. It has been well remarked by an eminent civilian, that those are not the most correct and conclusive reasoners, who are very expert at their quicquids , their atquis and their ergos ; but those, who, from correct premises, by just reasoning, deduce correct conclusions. This question is not to be determined from a mere view of the constitution itself, although it may be considered as admitted that it does not prohibit, in express terms, the acquisition of territory. It is a rule of law, that in order to ascertain the import of a contract, the evident intention of the parties, at the time of forming it, is principally to be regarded. This rule will apply, as it respects the present question, to our constitution, of which it may be said, as the great Dr. Johnson said of the science of the law, that it is the last result of human wisdom acting upon human experience. The constitution is a compact between the American people for certain great objects expressed in the preamble ( Mr. E. here read the preamble ) in language to which eloquence and learning can add no force or weight. Previous to the formation of this constitution there existed certain principles of the law of nature and nations, consecrated by time and experience, in conformity to which this constitution was formed. The question before us, I have always believed, must be decided upon the law of nations alone; and under this impression I have examined the works of the most celebrated authors on that subject.
I recollect a time, Sir, when a foreign minister in this country, at a moment when genius, fancy, and ardent patriotism, were lords of the ascendant over learning, wisdom, and experience, spoke of the law of nations and its principles as mere worn out authorities, and aphorisms of Vattel and others. I also recollect that the illustrious man, who is now President of the United States, was then Secretary of State, and that he delivered the unanimous sentiments of the American people when, in his reply to that minister, he observed that something more than mere farcisms of that kind was necessary to disprove those authorities and principles; and that, until they were disproved, the American nation would hold itself bound by them. This is the man, Sir, who has been so injuriously calumniated within these walls this morning, and upon whom such a torrent of bitter eloquence has been poured by the gentleman from North-Carolina ( Mr. Purviance ) a gentleman who is himself a model of eloquence, uniting all the excellencies of Cicero and Demosthenes, and all other orators, ancient and modern.
The American people, in forming their constitution, had an eye to that law of nations, which is deducible by natural reason, and established by common consent, to regulate the intercourse and concerns of nations. With a view to this law the treaty making power was constituted, and by virtue of this law, the government and people of the United States, in common with all other nations, possess the power and right of making acquisitions of territory by conquest, cession, or purchase. Indeed the gentlemen who deny us the right of acquiring by purchase, would probably allow us to keep the territory, were it obtained by conquest.
Colonies, or provinces, are a part of the eminent domain of the nation pos-
sessing them, and of course are national property; colonial territory may be transferred from one nation to another by purchase; this purchase can be effected by treaty alone, as nations do not, like individuals, execute deeds, and cause them to be recorded in public offices; that department of the government of the nation purchasing, which possesses the treaty making power generally, is competent to make treaties for that purpose. These positions are established by the laws of nations, and are applicable to the case before us. [ Here Mr. E. read a variety of extracts from Vattel to establish these positions, and observed that they were corroborated by Grotius, Puffendorf, and other eminent writers on the law of nature and nations, whose works he had consulted. ]
A mere recapitulation, and that not a tedious one, of these principles and authorities, will now answer the present purpose. Colonies have always been considered as national property, although the law or practice of nations, in this instance, may not conform to the law of nature. Greece treated her colonies with peculiar indulgence: Rome considered any privileges which her's were suffered to possess, as mere matters of grace, not of right. The one was a natural and tender parent, the other a cruel stepmother. Yet I have no recollection that the Grecian colonies in Asia Minor, Italy, or even in Ionia, were represented in the Amphictyonic Council, the general assembly of the states of Greece. The claim of the British colonies, which now constitute the United States, to be represented in that body by which they were taxed, though just in itself, was novel and unwarranted by the practice of nations. Thank God the claim was successful, and in consequence of it, we are now here as the representatives of the American people, deliberating upon their most important interests. It is unnecessary to reiterate the other positions; they are undeniable in themselves, and their applicability to the present case will hardly be disputed. If the treaty be extremely pernicious, or has not been made by sufficient authority, or has been made for unjust purposes, it is void by the laws of nations.
Another ground of objection to the constitutionality of the treaty is taken. It is said that a clause of the constitution which forbids any preference, as to duties and privileges, being given to the ports of one state over those of another, is irreconcilable with the seventh article of the treaty, by which "it is agreed between the contracting parties, that the French ships coming directly from France or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce or manufactures of France or her said colonies; and the ships of Spain coming directly from Spain or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce or manufactures of Spain or her colonies, shall be admitted during the space of twelve years in the ports of New Orleans, and in all other legal ports of entry within the ceded territory, in the same manner as the ships of the United States coming directly from France or Spain, or any of their colonies, without being subject to any other or greater duty on the merchandise, or other or greater tonnage than that paid by the citizens of the United States." Let us again enquire with what views, and for what objects, the constitution was formed. The articles of confederation were but a feeble band of union, the "shadow of a shade," to borrow a poetical expression, of a federal system. Several states, sovereign and independent with respect to many objects, united under a national government as it respected the most important national objects, and formed a federal system, novel in its nature, and unequal in the annals of all ages and nations. The states as such were equal, and intended to preserve that equality; and the provision of the constitution alluded to, was calculated to prevent Congress from making any odious discriminations or distinctions between particular states. No preference shall be given to the ports of one state over those of another state. It was not contemplated that this provision would have any application to colonial or territorial acquisitions. But it is said that the treaty obliges us to receive the inhabitants of the ceded territory into the union, and of course to form them into new states. By the treaty—"The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated in the union of the United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of the federal constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of the United States." This stipulation of the treaty is of a novel, singular, and curious nature, but does not diminish my zeal to have it carried into effect. A complete discretion is left to the United States as to the time and manner of admission; and I have no idea that it will be necessary to admit them within the twelve years during which France and Spain are to enjoy those privileges. The eloquent and honorable member from Virginia ( Mr. R. ) took a very different view of this subject, which of itself was perfectly satisfactory to my mind, and I could take still other views equally satisfactory. There can be no
possible violation of the constitution. The expediency of the treaty is another question, and an important one. I once hoped that the interests of our country would never require an extension of its limits, and I regret even that that necessity now exists. Evils and dangers may be apprehended from this source, and great evils and dangers may possibly result. But the regions of possibility are illimitable; those of probability are marked by certain well defined boundaries, obvious to all men of reason and reflection, and in the language of the poet,
As broad and obvious to the passing Clow,
As to the letter'd sage's curious eye.
If we cannot find, in the peculiar principles of our form of our government, and in the virtue and intelligence of our citizens, a sufficient security against the dangers from a widely extended territory, in vain shall we seek it elsewhere. There is no magical quality in a degree of latitude or longitude, a river or a mountain. And it has been well remarked that every danger from this quarter might have been apprehended before the acquisition of this territory. The Roman Empire, or that of Alexander in the zenith of its glory, was scarcely capable of containing a greater population than the territory of the United States; and men conversant with history do not wonder at the transient existence and rapid ruin of those empires. I repeat it, Mr. Chairman, we must look for our security in principles and circumstances inapplicable to the ancient nations. With the present question of expediency, I confess, Sir, are naturally intermingled many considerations, infinitely interesting to the future peace, prosperity, felicity, and glory of our beloved country. The physical strength of a nation depends upon an aggregation of circumstances, amongst which, compactness of population, as well as territory, may be reckoned, our population may become too scattered; but this too is only a possible event. These possible evils ought not to be put in competition with the certain advantage, which we derive from the acquisition.
But a gentleman tells us that the administration hold out to us an Eden of the western world, a land flowing with milk and honey, while they have obtained nothing but a dreary and barren wilderness. Perhaps, if the gentleman be correct, the acquisition is scarcely the less important. To demonstrate the advantages of this purchase, it is not necessary to describe Louisiana as an Elysian region, to describe it, as Homer does the Fortunate Islands, a region, on whose auspicious climate even winter smiles, where no bleak wind blows from its mountains, and no gale is felt but the zephyr, diffusing health and pleasure. But from geographical information, defective as it is, and from reasonable analogies, we may conclude that, with the exception of some considerable tracts, it is a country, fertile and salubrious. Geography points us to China, Persia, India, Arabia Felix and Japan, countries situated in corresponding latitudes, which, though always overshadowed by the horrid gloom of despotism, are always productive, and teaches us by analogy that Louisiana, in natural fertility, is probably equal to those beautiful oriental regions.
( Mr. Elliot's speech to be concluded in our next. )
NOTICE.
ORDERED that Orlando Cook administrator of Nathaniel Goodall deceased, give notice to the creditors of the deceased to exhibit their claims against him by advertisement in the usual form, inserted in a newspaper in the city of Washington twice a week for three successive weeks.
Ordered also that the said administrator sell the personal property of the said deceased at public auction—on a credit of sixty days where any purchaser shall buy to the amount of more than twenty dollars; taking bond with security for payment with interest from the day of sale—all sales under the above sum to be for cash. But he shall give fifteen days previous notice of the time, place and terms of sale by advertisement in the National Intelligencer, and also at the most public places in the city of Washington.
JOHN HEWITT, Reg.
November 4—taw3w
NOTICE.
WILL be sold at public auction, on Wednesday the 23d inst. at the Twenty buildings in the city of Washington, the personal property of Redmond Barry deceased, consisting of some plate, household kitchen furniture, together with a horse and chair with harness, and one cow and calf. Terms six months credit for all sums over 20 dollars, the purchasers giving bonds with approved security for the payment with interest from the day of sale until paid.
JOHANNA BARRY, admx.
November 7—3t
TWO DOLLARS REWARD.
STRAYED away from the subscriber on the 25th ult.
Two fat Steers,
white with some red spots on the fore shoulders and head, with some tar on the middle of the back; the above reward will be paid for both, or one dollar, for either, and all reasonable charges paid by
MEAHLOM ATKINSON, near the Center Market.
November 7—3t
WASHINGTON CITY
MONDAY, November 7.
POUGHKEEPSIE, State of N. Y.
On Tuesday of last week there was a sailing match run to windward, for a stake of 400 dollars, from Newburgh to the Union store 15 miles; between the sloops Anna Maria of this place, (long noted as the fastest sailing vessel on the Hudson) and the Edward , built by Mr. J. Winans, on a new projected plan of G. Livingston, Esq. of this Village, which was won by the latter by about three quarters of a mile. Next day a match of 8 miles to windward, for a stake of 200 dollars, was sailed for between the fast sailing sloop Montgomery , lately built by Mr. Buckingham on the Union wharf, with the laid sloop Edward , which was won by the latter by more than a mile's distance.
Correspondent.
N. B. A gentleman with a sloop watch found that the Edward came in stays in ten seconds; when a sloop of ordinary mould will take 25 or 30 seconds. The Edward is a vessel of 75 tons, burthen; and can be brought to stays in six seconds. We understand that a patent has lately been obtained by G. Livingston, Esq. for constituting keels of vessels on the model of the Edward .
Correspondent.
October 25th, 1803.
House of Representatives.
FRIDAY, Nov. 4, 1803.
Mr. Early, in order to attract the attention of the House to a subject of some importance, that it might obtain an early decision, moved the following resolution.
Resolved, That the petition of John F. Randolph and Randolph M'Gillis in behalf of themselves and others, presented to this House at the last session, together with the report of the Secretary of War, accompanied with sundry documents respecting claims against the United States, for services of the militia of Georgia, made the 6th of February 1803, and also the report of the select committee thereon, made on the 10th of the same month, be referred to the committee of claims.
Agreed to.
Mr. Randolph invited the attention of the House to a subject of some importance to the revenue. Under an existing law a drawback of duties on goods exported to New Orleans was allowed. Should this act remain in force, goods sufficient to supply the Mississippi territory and the other western country for several years might be stored in the warehouses of New Orleans, which on possession being taken by the United States, may be carried into the United States, thereby evading the payment of duties. He therefore moved a resolution for the repeal of that act.
Resolution agreed to, and referred to the committee of ways and means.
A message was received from the Senate, stating that they had passed the act for the creation of a stock, as prescribed by the Louisiana treaty, with an amendment.
Referred to the committee of ways and means.
A message was received from the President as follows:
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States.
"By the copy now communicated, of a letter from Captain Bainbridge of the Philadelphia frigate to our Consul at Gibraltar, you will learn that an act of hostility has been committed on a merchant vessel of the United States, by an armed ship of the Emperor of Morocco. This conduct, on the part of that power, is without cause and without explanation. It is fortunate that Captain Bainbridge fell in with, and took the capturing vessel and her prize; and I have the satisfaction to inform you that, about the date of this transaction, such a force would be arriving in the neighborhood of Gibraltar, both from the East and from the West, as leaves less to be feared for our commerce from the suddenness of the aggression."
"On the fourth of September, the Constitution frigate, captain Preble, with Mr. Lear on board, was within two days sail of Gibraltar, where the Philadelphia would then be arrived with her prize; and such explanations would probably be instituted as the state of things required, and as might perhaps arrest the progress of hostilities."
"In the mean while, it is for Congress to consider the provisional authorities which may be necessary to restrain the depredations of this power, should they be continued."
"TH: JEFFERSON."
Referred to Messrs Eustis, J. Clay, Sands, M'Creery, and Dana.
Mr. Newton laid he held in his hand a resolution, which it was not his will should be immediately acted upon, but at a future day. It would be recollected
that during the last session the propriety of repealing the bankrupt law had come under the consideration of the House; but that, owing to the lateness of the day, its consideration had been postponed. As he was desirous that the subject should be investigated this session, he made the following motion:
Resolved, That the act entitled an act to establish an uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States ought to be repealed.
Referred to a committee of the whole, and made the order for the 21st inst.
Mr. Early laid he held in his hand a manuscript copy of the original report of the commissioners who had settled the accounts between the United States and the several states; as a document, throwing much light on this subject, he moved that it might be printed.
Agreed to.
Mr. Lyon called up his resolution for suspending the payment of duties on goods imported into the United States from Louisiana.
Referred to the committee of ways and means.
On motion of Mr. Dawson, a resolution laid by him on the table for continuing for years an act augmenting certain salaries, was referred to a committee of the whole, and made the order for Monday next.
Mr. Elliot offered a resolution for the appointment of a committee to inquire whether any, and if any, what provision was necessary to be made, to produce a more general circulation of copper coin through the United States.
Agreed to, and a committee of 5 appointed.
STOUGHTON'S
GENUINE BITTERS.
Faithfully prepared at the original warehouse London.
TO make any observations here, upon the superior quality of these bitters to any ever offered for sale, is needless; suffice it to say, that they have stood the test of approbation a great number of years.
Gentlemen, who prefer bitters, will find them an elegant and wholesome preparation; and far preferable to the trash generally offered under that name. It is now for the first time, imported in quart bottles, as well as vials, which will reduce the price near one half.
Sold by Rapine, Conrad and Co. Capitol Hill, Washington, John March, George Town, Robert and J. Grey, Alexandria, and A. Buckt. Frederickburgh, Virginia.
November 7—taw3w
FOR SALE.
By the subscriber, in order to bring his friends closer together, the following property, viz.
A complete assortment of dry goods, hardware, groceries, in Cumberland Allegany county, Maryland, at present attended to by Aquila A. Browne, Esq.
Also the house in which the store is kept with other necessary houses, and two lots in gardens—for the above property a credit of 6, 12 or 18 months will be given for approved paper.
Also 800 acres of land in Allegany county, on the Little Crossings, and the road leading to Union town and Pittsburgh, some improvements and an excellent sugar camp are on this land.
1116 acres called Recourse, in Allegany county.
210 do. part of Bear Creek meadow.
64 do. of Mount Hope.
100 do. called Matthews Lot; a coal mine is on this land.
9 do. called Coal Mine; a coal mine also there.
150 do. three fifty acre lots, no. 82, 1413, 1963.
3rd part of a tract called White Oak Point, in Harden county, Kentucky.
2000 acres in three surveys, two of 500 and one of 1000 acres.
VIRGINIA.
1000 acres surveyed at an early period and adjoining col. Francis Deakens's lands in Monongahela county.
1800 do. in Randolph county.
The tit es to the above property are clear—property in this place will be taken in part pay, and a credit for approved paper given on all.
I have also for sale at my ware house in Water street between gen. Mason's and Messrs. Jeremiah Williams and Co.
Martineque sugar in hogsheads and barrels.
Do coffee in bags.
Sherry and Claret wine.
Cette Brandy in hds 4th proof.
New England Rum and Whiskey.
Coarse Salt.
Pfaister Paris, and
Flour for family use.
CHARLES F. BRODHAG.
George Town, November 7—6w1aw
4,000 weight of first quality
FIRKIN BUTTER
Just received and for Sale by ALEXANDER M'GORMICK. Capitol Hill, Washington, Nov 7—tf
General Washington.
JOHN MARCH,
Respectfully informs the public that he is appointed to receive subscriptions for the Life of General Washington, by Mrs. C. T. Wayne, the Proprietor of the Copy-right.
Proposals may be seen at John March's Store, George Town.
Nov. 2—3t

MILLENERY.
MADAME PIC, returns her thanks to the ladies and gentlemen who have honored her with their custom, and informs them that she has just received an elegant assortment of Millinery goods which will be opened and ready for sale on Friday next, consisting of Dressed and half dressed caps—lace do. Plush Hats—velvet bonnets a la Bonaparte, New fashioned wigs and frizzets, Flat ostrich feathers, white and colored, do. black, New Chemille and bead bandet, gold and silver do. Gold and silver lace, Embroidered gold and silver trimmings, Silk and Chemille. Satin and crapes for dresses, white and colored, Ladies and gentlemen's silk stockings, white, colored and black, Velvet Spanish mantoes, Velvet stowls, muffs and tippets, Silk great coats, Leghorn, white, and white chip hats and bonnets, Artificial flowers and shoes, &c. November 2—3t
LOST,
A few days ago between George Town and the Capitol, an officer's PLUME of RED FEATHERS. Whoever has found the same shall be rewarded, on delivering it at the Marine Barracks, or at Mrs. Scott's house near the seven buildings. October 2—3t
Twenty Dollars Reward.
RAN AWAY from the subscriber, on Friday the 21st inst. a likely mulatto lad called BILL. He is about eighteen or nineteen years of age, and five feet seven or eight inches high. His face is covered with a number of large black freckles. He had on when he went away a new black fur hat, a fustian round jacket, and a pair of dark gray cassimere or cloth pantaloons. But he will in all probability change his apparel, as he has carried off money with him. Whoever will apprehend said lad and secure him in any jail shall receive the above reward from JOHN I. MASON. George-Town, Oct. 25 1803. N.B. All masters and owners of vessels are hereby forewarned from employing or secreting said Bill at their peril. 6t
FOR SALE.
THE Plantation on which I live, containing about 600 acres of valuable and good. The improvements are, an exceeding good dwelling house two stories high, 42 feet long, by 36 feet wide, with a passage through the middle, three rooms below, and four above stairs, with five places in all but one, and a dry sweet cellar, the size of the house, in which is a capital vault with two rooms, and above is a fine airy pantry. A kitchen 36 by 18, two stores high, with a larder and laundry below, and lodging rooms for servants above. A washing house, meat house and dairy and in short every necessary improvement for the accommodation of a family, and a very fine collection of grafted and budded peach trees of the most approved kinds, chiefly from Princes nursery on Long Island, which are just beginning to bear. This property is situated in a healthy genteel neighborhood, about four miles from the city of Washington, five from Alexandria. Nearly one half is in wood at a time ere, and the residue arable and meadow land, of the latter, there are about 50 or 60 acres under the plough and more may be easily laid down. Perhaps no tract of the same size, abounds more in fine springs, there being a never failing stream in every field, besides an abundant one which runs through the meadow and from which the greatest part of it may be watered. For terms apply to the subscriber on the premises. OVERTON CARR. September 19. eptf
A Valuable Purchase.
To be sold by private contract, on an unusual long credit, a part of the valuable estate belonging to ANTHONY ADDISON , esq. called Chichester with addition, lying on the Waters of the Eastern Branch, immediately opposite the city of Washington. It extends from below the Navy Yard up to within a few yards of the foot of the bridge, and has on it the ferry over the Branch, commonly called Naylor's or Dyer's Ferry. The estate is divided into lots for the accommodation of purchasers, a correct plan of which is in the hands of capt. Marbury of the Navy Yard opposite Alexandria. Capt. Marbury may be spoken with at the bank of Columbia on every Thursday. October 19. ep4w
Fifteen Dollars Reward.
RAN away from the subscriber, on Saturday the 8th of this instant, a NEGRO FELLOW by the name of DICK ; he is a likely well made fellow, about twenty or twenty-one years of age, five feet eight or nine inches high, rather of a light colour, has a good head of hair with a fine set of teeth and when spoken to has a smiling look; had on when he went away a green negro cotton great coat, German oznaburg shirt, hempen rolls vestalls, and a felt hat about half worn. Took with him a short jacket of olive coloured sussen with yellow buttons, a pair of olive coloured fancy cord pantaloons, an old black broad cloth coat with metal buttons, with other articles of clothing not recollected. He was seen at Frederickburg on the first day of the war, and it is probable he is still lurking about that place. He is the property of Doctor Robert H. Rose of this county, and was hired from him by the subscriber. I forward all masters of vessels and others from harbouring or carrying the said fellow out of this State at their peril. I will give the above reward to any person who will deliver him to me residing in Orange county, or secure him in any jail and give such information that I get him again. LEONARD H. MAURY. Halifax, (Orange) October 24th. 3w
MILITARY LANDS FOR SALE.
By virtue of a power delegated to his executors, by the last will and testament of John Rose, esq. deceased, late of the county of Westmoreland we the subscribers, having taken upon ourselves the execution of his said will, and qualified thereto according to law, now offer for sale, the following tracts of land, viz. One tract of fifteen hundred acres, by patent, bearing date 7th of day of January, 1796, lying on Cumberland river, in the State of Kentucky. One of 1500 acres by patent, bearing date the 30th day of August, 1797, on the waters of Paint Creek, between the Miami and Sciota rivers. One of 1500 acres by patent, bearing date the 25th of April, 1800, also on the waters of Paint Creek. One of 1200 acres by patent, bearing date the 23th day of April, 1800, lying on the banks of the Sciota river. Two other small lots of one and two hundred acres, on the waters of Lees creek a branch of the Rattle Snake Fork of Paint creek. One other small tract, of 360 acres, in the same neighborhood—and lastly, One other tract of 1500 acres, surveyed and patented for Burgess Bell, lying on a branch of Gaspere river, adjoining the upper corner of George Washington's survey, and the same having been sold and conveyed by the said Bell to the said Rose. Proposals for a purchase of the whole or any part of the said lands will be received verbally or by letter, addressed to any of the subscribers. The taxes on these lands have been regularly paid, and a clear and indisputable title will be made the purchaser, by HENRY ROSE, Alexandria, Wm. ROBINSON, Leeds, J. BERRY, Port Royal, September 26. 2m
Valuable Lands and Lots
FOR SALE. I Will sell, on liberal terms of payment, to accommodate purchasers, the following Property, bequeathed to me, in trust with power to sell, by the late Mr. Thomas Dick, of Bladensburg, viz. 1. HE valuable FARM which he had in his own possession, and lands adjoining thereto, containing in the whole upwards of 1300 acres. These lands are situated to the northward of Bladensburg, on the Eastern Branch of Potomac river, about three miles distant from that town, on a fine level road. From Bladensburg to the City of Washington, by land, the distance is about four miles, and by water five; and the Eastern Branch is navigable for large craft to said town. There is a great abundance of wood on the lands, and they are well watered in every respect; have a considerable quantity of rich bottom, some of which is already in grass. The improvements on the farm are good, and the whole under good fences. These lands can conveniently be laid off into three parcels, with improvements to each, and will be sold together or separately. Part of a tract of Land, called Hills and Dales, lying in Montgomery county, on the north-west branch of the Eastern Branch of Potomac, about six miles from Bladensburg, and about the same distance from Washington, containing 70-124 acres. Part of another tract, called Crawford's Adventure, lying to the south east of Bladensburg, nearly adjoining the town, and adjoining the lands of the late Richard Henderson, esq. containing 160 acres all in wood. And 83 1-2 acres of valuable Marsh and low land, on the said Eastern Branch, about half a mile below that town, and adjoining the said lands of the late Mr. Henderson. The House and Lot in Bladensburg, on which the late Mr. Dick resided, containing about six acres; this is one of the best situations in the town, is generally admired, and commands a very extensive view. There is a good garden, ice-house, stable, and all other offices necessary for the accommodation of a private family, and the lot and garden properly inclosed, and all in good order. Should this house, &c. not be sold previous to the 1st of December, it will then be to rent. One other lot or parcel of ground, adjoining the town lots, near the above mentioned house, and contiguous to the residence of Richard F. Lowndes, esq. containing 9 3/8 acres. Also, Lot No. 7, in square No. 704, in the City of Washington, being the north-east corner of that square, containing 9388 square feet. A further description of the property is considered unnecessary, as persons inclined to purchase will doubtless satisfy themselves by viewing the same. Mr. John Hugh, at present residing in Bladensburg, will show the property, and the terms may be particularly known on application to him, or to JOHN LAIRD, Trustee. N.B. I hold 245 1-2 acres of Land, adjoining the above mentioned tract of Hills and Dales, which may be advantageous and desirable for the purchaser of the latter to have—and I will sell the same on similar terms. JOHN LAIRD. George-Town, Oct. 24, 1803. ep2wratf.
BISCUIT BAKE HOUSE,
Near the Sugar House New-Jersey Avenue. THE subscriber has commenced the above business in its various branches; where merchants or owners of vessels may be supplied on reasonable terms; also private families with the best of Crackers. PETER MILLER. Washington August 19. tf
COLUMBIAN INN.
GEORGE TOWN. THE Subscriber begs leave to solicit the patronage of his former friends and customers, and informs them he will continue at the Columbian Inn—where he will be happy to have it in his power to accommodate them as usual. JOHN H. BARNEY. September 21. eptf
All persons having claims or
demands of any nature against the subscriber are requested to exhibit their accounts, without delay, to JOHN HEWIT or RICHARD FORREST , Esqrs. of the city of Washington, who are authorized, in my name, to adjust and settle the same and all persons indebted to me are requested to make payment to either of the gentlemen above named. SAMUEL BLODGET. March 30. tf
By His Excellency JOHN FRANCIS MERCER, Governor of the State of Maryland.
A PROCLAMATION. WHEREAS the General Assembly of Maryland did, by an act passed at the November Session, seven hundred and ninety, entitled "An act directing the time, places and manner of holding elections for representatives of this state, in the Congress of the United States, and for the regulation of the said elections, and also to repeal the act of assembly therein mentioned," direct that the Governor and Council, after having received the returns, papers, and instruments containing the number of votes for representatives of this state, in the Congress of the United States, should enumerate and ascertain the number of votes for every candidate and person chosen as a representative, and by proclamation, signed by the Governor, and dispersed through the state, should declare the names of the persons duly elected as representatives:—We, in pursuance of the directions of the said act, do, by this our proclamation, declare, that by the returns made to us as appears, that John Campbell, Esquire, was elected for the first district; Walter Bowie, Esquire, was elected for the second district; Thomas Flater, Esquire, was elected for the third district; Daniel Hoister, Esquire, was elected for the fourth district; Nicholas Buxton Moore, and William Mac Crery, Esquires, were elected for the fifth district; John Archer, Esquire, was elected for the sixth district; Joseph Hopper Nicholson, Esquire, was elected for the seventh district, and John Dennis, Esquire, was elected for the eighth district. Given in Council, at the city of Annapolis, under the seal of the state of Maryland, this seventeenth day of October, eighteen hundred and three. JOHN F. MERCER. By the governor, Ninian Pinkney, Clerk of the governor and council.
In Council
October 17, 1803. ORDERED, That the foregoing Proclamation be published three times in each week, for the space of two weeks successively, in the American, Telegraph, and Federal Gazette at Baltimore; the Maryland Gazette at Annapolis; the National Intelligencer at Washington; Republican Advocate and Bartee's paper at Frederick Town; Graves' paper at Hager's Town, and the Star at Easton. By Order, NINIAN PINKNEY, CLK. October 24. ep2w. THOMAS CARPENTER, TAYLOR.
NOTICE.
APPLICATION is intended to be made at the Treasury for the renewal of the following described certificates of Registered debt which have been lost, viz. No. 2203 and 2204, given to James Moore and Andrew Henderson for 165 69-100ths cents each—one to Charles Aurner, No. 2199 for 165 69-100ths cents—another to Mr. Reddick Wolf, No. 2193, for 264 62-100ths cents, and one granted to Charles Miller, No. for 165 69-100ths cents, all bearing interest from 1st July 1781. WILLIAM CALHOUN. October 26.—6w
WASHINGTON
Jockey Club Races, WILL commence on the second Tuesday in November next, over an excellent course, well prepared and inclosed with a post and rail fence. First day—A sweepstake of 1,600 dolls. Second day—A purse of 400 dolls.—4 mile heats. Third day—A purse of 200 dolls.—3 mile heats. Fourth day—A 50 guinea silver cup—10 horse heats. Fifth day—A handsome City or Town Purse—Two mile heats. All horses, mares and geldings, to be entered and run agreeably to the rules of the club, and to carry the following weight: An aged horse, 126—6 years old 120—a five years old 112—a four years old 109, and a three years old 90 pounds. Three pounds being allowed to fillies, mares and geldings. The following tolls to be paid at the gate to the clerk of the course, M. C. Bailey, or any person authorized by him to receive the same. Four wheel carriages, 1 Doll. each, Two wheel do. 50 Cents. do. Every man and horse, 25 Cents. Booths will be let on application to the subscriber. It is probable that the 2d & 3d days purses will be increased—as the surplus of the tolls after defraying the expenses, &c. will be added to them. CH. McLAUGHLIN, Sec. & Tr. The club will meet at the Union Tavern on the evening preceding the first day's race. September 14. eptf
MECHANICS HALL.
THE subscriber respectfully informs his friends and the public, that he has opened a House of Entertainment, on the causeway in George-Town, at the sign of the Golden Square and Compass, for the accommodation of travellers and others, entitled the Mechanics Hall. All those who do not think themselves above a mechanic, will find it their interest to call on him, as he pledges himself to the public to be moderate in his charges, and to keep a supply of the best of every article in his line of business. Having several genteel rooms with five places in each, parties on business can have private rooms. Oyster suppers while in season will be prepared on the shortest notice. Beer and porter. Also, newspapers of different politics, regularly filed in the bar room. He also keeps a small assortment of Groceries, of the best quality, which he sells low. Any favor in either line will be gratefully acknowledged, by the public's humble, servant, ANDREW M'DONALD. A few genteel persons may be accommodated on moderate terms with loading by the week, month or year. A woman, well acquainted with cooking, and of good character, is wanted, to whom liberal wages will be given. August 3. rzwtf
JUST RECEIVED,
By the UNITED STATES, Capt. Finley from Liverpool, Fall Goods, viz. Brass Plate and wire fences and irons, stove and tongs, pokers, bellows, coal hods, bell metal kettles, brass footmen, knives and forks, plated bridle bits and stirrups, with a variety of saddlery, brass ware, kitchen furniture, tools and building materials, &c. HENRY INGLE. Washington Oct. 28.—epam.
TO RENT
AND immediate possession given, a two story frame HOUSE, in the city of Washington, on sq 224, opposite to Robert Peacock's estate occupied by Doctor T. L. B. Containing 3 rooms and a large pantry on the 1st floor, two on the 2d floor with gasier rooms—Piazza and balcony to the south front, cellar and dry well, with an excellent garden—kitchen, stable and carriage house, with every other convenience fit for the reception of a genteel family—For further particulars, enquire at the store of Mr. Xampi a few doors east of Rhodes's tavern, north F Street. October 19. tf
LECTURES.
IN a science so various and complicated as the present system of the LAW, nothing which tends to facilitate the progress of the student can be deemed useless. It is with this view that the subscriber proposes to deliver during the winter, (and if suitable encouragement offers, annually) A COURSE OF LECTURES, On Education, Ballei Letters, Composition, History and Law. The subscriber means to divide the same into two distinct courses. The object of the division is, that young gentlemen who are destined to fill stations in active life, distinct from those of the learned professions, may resort to that course of lectures which will be delivered without a relation to the Law, which will be the sole foundation of the other. If the plan should meet with success, the subscriber contemplates furnishing, next winter, a handsome Library, for the use of such gentlemen as feel desirous of patronising the undertaking. The municipal laws of each state will then be provided—That students at law from any part of the United States will find in their interest to repair to the Metropolis, to pursue their studies; where they will have the advantage of attending the Congressional debates. The facility of access which the houses of Congress offer, is a circumstance peculiarly advantageous to the student, and the youthful pleader, not only from the light which is thrown in the course of debate on controverted questions of law; not only to be derived from witnessing the eager contests, the vigorous attacks, the wary methods of defence, exhibited by men of the most conspicuous talents, rivals alike in abilities and interest, but especially from this consideration, that the speakers are, in general, exempted by the nature of their functions, from those defects to which pleaders are peculiarly exposed. The Lectures will commence the first week in December next, and continue until twelve distinct Lectures in each course shall have been delivered. The terms may be known by application personally, or by letters post paid to ROBERT WARE PEACOCK, Attorney at law. City of Washington, October 17, NI&UGDr
Wants a Place.
WITH a gentleman or in a family, a young Man who has been accustomed to the care of horses and driving a carriage, a line left at the Office of this paper will be duly attended to. October 3—7t
Lots for sale.
IN eligible situations and upon very advantageous terms—A plan of the several squares in which they are contained may be seen and terms thereon by applying to, ROBERT W. PEACOCK, Attorney at law and Conveyancer.
NOTICE.
WAS committed to the goal of Baltimore county, on the twenty third ultimo, as a runaway, a negro man by the name of TOM —he is about nineteen or twenty years of age, 5 feet 5 inches high, of a light brown complexion; had an olive colored jean jacket with sleeves, velvet trowfers, red cross barred, Marcellus vest, and a white linen shirt—He says he belongs to Mr. Usher Williams, of Charleston, South Carolina. If his owner does not release him, he will be sold for his goal fees according to law. James Wilson, Sheriff. September 12. rzwtf
Phygnognorace
LIKESSES ENGRAVED. THE subscriber begs leave to inform the public, that he intends to take up residence in this place for a short time, and respectfully solicits of the lovers and protectors of the fine arts, the same favors and patronage he has met with in different cities of the United States, where he has taken a great number of likenesses, among which are those of the most distinguished characters, copies of which may be seen at his lodgings (at David Shoemaker's F Street near the Bank). Oct. 28—6t
NOTICE.
WAS committed to the goal of Baltimore county as a runaway, on the 6th inst. a negro man by the name of WILLIAM GROCE —He is about 50 years of age, 5 feet 7 inches high, a deep black complexion, his village, large thick lips, and has lost one lower and upper fore tooth, and has a scar on the back part of his left shoulder, occasioned by the cut of an axe; he has on a round about blue cloth jacket with sleeves, light colored calico gown and striped gingham petticoats. He says he was raised by col. Ezekiel Ekes of Dorset county, on the Eastern Shore. If he is not released, she will be sold for her jail fees, according to law. James Wilson, Sheriff. September 12. rzwtf
NOTICE.
WAS committed to the jail of Baltimore county as a runaway, on the 21th inst. a negro woman who calls herself RACHEL MAY ; she is about twenty four years of age, five feet two inches high, dark complexion, much pock fretted—she has on a blue spotted calico gown and striped gingham petticoats. She says she was raised by col. Ezekiel Ekes of Dorset county, on the Eastern Shore. If she is not released, she will be sold for her jail fees, according to law. James Wilson, Sheriff. September 28. rzwtf
NOTICE.
FOR Sale One hundred and fifty acres of land, One hundred acres of which is in wood—it is situated within six miles of the Eastern Branch ferry. For terms apply to MICHAEL LOYD. Prince George county, July 22. rzwtf
BURNETT & RIGDEN,
JEWELLERS AND WATCH-MAKERS Have just received by the ships Ann and United States from Liverpool, a handsome assortment of PLATED WARE, JEWELLERY & FANCY ARTICLES. They have on hand and constantly keeps a variety of GOLD and SILVER WATCHES, the most fashionable Silver Plate, &c. &c. All of which they are enabled to sell at the most reduced prices. George-Town, Oct. 22, 1803.
Dancing School.
THE subscriber respectfully informs the Ladies and Gentlemen of Washington, that he has opened his Dancing School the 20th of this month, at his own residence 2 or 3 doors below Rhodes's Hotel, in a very spacious and convenient room: any person desirous of being instructed in the different branches of that art, will (in making application, at the subscriber's Dancing School) be informed of all the necessary particulars, his school is always open at 11 o'clock in the morning for young ladies and at 7 in the evening for gentlemen on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. XAUPI. Washington, Oct. 22.—2am2w
In the case of JAMES M'DONALD,
(A Bankrupt.)
WHEREAS a Commission of Bankruptcy founded upon the act of Congress of the United States, passed on the fourth day of April, 1800, entitled "an act to establish an uniform system of Bankruptcy throughout the United States" has been awarded and issued against James M'Donald of Washington County, in the District of Columbia, dealer and chapman, and he has been declared a bankrupt. He is hereby required to surrender himself to the Commissioners in the said commission named, or the majority of them on the eleventh, and twenty-fifth days of November, and on the ninth day December next, at five o'clock in the afternoon on each day at the house of William Rhodes, Innkeeper in the City of Washington, and make a full discovery and disclosure of his estate and effects when and where his creditors are to come prepared to prove their debts, and at the last sitting the said bankrupt is required to finish his examination all persons indebted to the said bankrupt, or who have any effects, are not to pay or deliver the same, but to whom the commissioners shall appoint. RICHARD FORREST,
RAPINE, CONRAD & Co.
NEW JERSEY AVENUE. Have just received the following
NEW BOOKS.
THE life of Lorenzo De' Medici, 3 vol. Denon's travels in Upper and Lower Egypt during the campaigns of gen. Bonaparte in that country, 2 vol. Willich's Domestic Encyclopedia; or Dictionary of facts and useful knowledge, vol. I, & II, for which the subscription is still open—the price will be enhanced to nonsubscribers. The Marriage Promise, a new comedy. Public characters, or contemporary biography, containing the memoirs of the most celebrated personages of this country and Europe. John Bull, or an Englishman's fire side, a new comedy. Tale of Mystery—ditto, Friend of Women, translated from the French. Bollue's Select Sermons, &c. &c. N. E. R. C. & Co. Have always on hand, at moderate prices, writing paper and wrapping paper, quills, waters, feathings, ink, powder, ink and sand stands, pocket knives, playing cards, parchment, blank and account books, copper plate copies, &c. &c.