The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-08-01 00:00:00

National Intelligencer. WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1217.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM,
MONDAY, AUGUST 1, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
CASE OF JOHN SMITH.
Mr. Key's speech concluded.
Having now, sir, endeavored to shew the futility of the testimony adduced to support this charge; it might be sufficient here to rest our defence of the honorable member accused. But, sir, though more may be unnecessary, I rejoice that more is in our power; that we have been enabled not only to destroy the force of the proof offered to criminate him; but to exhibit the most complete and direct evidence of his innocence. I am sensible, sir, that I have trespassed greatly upon the indulgence of this honorable Senate. I shall not, therefore, take that view of this part of the case which its importance deserves: but will only beg leave to suggest a few considerations which appear to my mind unanswerable, which will render all doubt upon this subject (if indeed a doubt yet remains) utterly impossible.
In the first place, to what but his innocence can it be attributed, that such numbers of the conspirators knew nothing of his association with them? We have produced the depositions of several who appear to admit that they had been induced to participate in this enterprise, and they declare their ignorance and disbelief that Mr. Smith was in any way concerned in it. Nay, sir, let us look at the declarations of their chief, Colonel Burr himself. He has various communications with persons whom he was desirous to bring over to his views, many of which are detailed to us in the report of the evidence at Richmond. In these he makes the most flattering representations of his prospects, endeavors to shew the adequacy of his means, the number and consequence of his adherents. Among these he never mentions Mr. Smith, though there was no man in the whole western country, the importance of whose co-operation would have been more obvious. Here is one striking instance of this which I will beg leave to mention. Lieutenant Jackson deposes that when Colonel Burr gave him the draught on Mr. Smith, he directed him to call on General Tupper, to whom he referred him for information relative to the objects of the enterprise. Now, sir, if Colonel Burr had known Mr. Smith as one of his associates, why should he have been silent on this occasion; why should he not have allowed Mr. Jackson to get his information from Mr. Smith when he presented his draught, without proceeding to General Tupper?
All the other conspirators seem equally ignorant of Mr. Smith's participation. When Bollman and Swartwout communicated with General Wilkinson in the most unreserved manner, they seem to know nothing of it, they give him no intimation that the army contractor, the very man who was supplying his troops with provisions had any connection with their schemes.
Let us even descend to Glover and McFarland; that these men were engaged in this expedition after the proofs we have produced, cannot be questioned. And what are they able to say to criminate Mr. Smith?
If they were all living in the same place, associates in the same conspiracy, is it possible they would not have had frequent interviews? Would they not have had it in their power to produce some act, or at least some avowal to others by which his guilt could be proved, beyond the possibility of denial? Yet we hear McFarland frequently acknowledging and twice even swearing that he knew nothing of Mr. Smith's connection with it, and all that their malignant efforts have enabled them to collect, is one solitary conversation depending wholly upon the unsupported assertion of Elias Glover.
Thus, sir, it appears that if Mr. Smith was a party in this conspiracy, the persons from whom he most studiously concealed it were those who were associated in the same project. Neither are they more fortunate who were particularly engaged in watching the progress of this enterprise and ascertaining who were its partisans. General Gano states that he used various means to determine whether the reports relative to Mr. Smith were well founded, and he satisfied himself
of his innocence. He also directed Major Riddie to assist in this enquiry; that officer reported to him that he had frequent conversations with Mr. Smith, and had endeavored to ascertain whether he knew any thing of Burr's plans, and was convinced that he did not. Even Colonel Taylor, with whom these suspicions were strengthened by the conversation relative to a disunion which he thought he had heard from Mr. Smith, was yet so far from discovering any thing to confirm them in his enquiries, that he calls on Mr. Smith to aid him in procuring information, and frequently declares, (as General Carberry's deposition informs us) that he did not believe Mr. Smith was an accomplice.
In the next place, sir, how can Mr. Smith's guilt be in any manner reconciled with his conduct in opposing the progress of the expedition. Major Martin, Dr. Stall, General Gano, Mr. Totten, and numerous other witnesses prove that it was principally owing to Mr. Smith's exertions that any effectual support was rendered to the measures of government. When the President's proclamation was received at Cincinnati, it seems there was no means of arming the militia. The orders to the keeper of the arsenal to deliver out the public arms, had been neglected, and he persisted in refusing to deliver them without. At this juncture Mr. Smith, with that earnestness and decision which so strongly mark his character, crosses the river at midnight, offers his bond to Major Martin in the penalty of 10,000 dollars, to indemnify him; procures the arms and delivers them to the officers; prepares barracks and supplies for the militia; furnishes one of his own boats, and in short makes every arrangement to obstruct the passage of the expected armament.
It may perhaps, sir, be here objected, that these circumstances rather prove that Mr. Smith then abandoned the enterprise than that he never participated in it. That the vigilant measures taken by government alarmed him, and that therefore hopeless of its success, he sought by a zealous opposition to escape detection. However plausible this may seem, the least reflection will shew how unreasonable is this suspicion.
How does it appear that the situation of the conspirators was at this time more unpromising than at any former period? They had thus far proceeded without meeting any obstacles; their plans were arranged and ripe for execution; they were hourly expected to embark. And what was there so alarming in the measures taken to oppose them as to strike a panic into Mr. Smith and subvert his resolutions? The militia were called out it is true, but they were without arms. Their officers inform us that they could not even station a guard upon the river. I should rather suppose that this circumstance would have been considered as more auspicious than any thing he could have expected. Nor does it appear that this effect was produced in the minds of any of the party. For even at a subsequent period, and after the militia, by Mr. Smith's exertions, had procured arms, we find capt. Nicholls at Cincinnati still adhering to their views and far from despairing. Nay, even Elias Glover (whose courage appears from Dr. Lanier's deposition to be about equal to his veracity) and who doubtless was as ready as any one to renounce his associates when he saw them sinking, is seen at the same period persisting in his adherence to them. He tells Capt. Nicholls to hasten his departure lest the guard should stop his boats, declares that he will shortly follow and informs him that he had sent off an express to the party at the island. There is one other circumstance that totally overthrows this suspicion. If Mr. Smith had thus not only deserted but opposed his associates, would it not have excited their resentment? And would they not have revenged themselves for his treachery by disclosing his participation and shewing that he was equally guilty with themselves?
It cannot be necessary to contrast this conduct with that which we might expect to find in Mr. Smith, if, most unfortunately for his country and for himself, he had really been concerned in this enterprise. It is well known that the circumstances which first excited the suspicions of government, were the unusual prepa-
rations made by Col. Burr and his party on the Western waters. From these suspicions they would have been perfectly secure by obtaining the co-operation of Mr. Smith. His contracts for the supply of the army, and his engagements to prepare boats for the navy, would have enabled him to collect any quantity of provisions and materials, and place them in suitable situations without exciting the least attention: and whenever they were ready to act, he might in a moment have stopped the supplies of your army, and suddenly directed all his resources to aid in the most effectual and fatal manner the objects of the combination.
Thus, sir, in short it appears, that Mr. Smith has not merely forbore from the commission of those acts which if guilty it is almost certain we should have discovered in him, but has pursued a most decided and distinguished course of conduct utterly unaccountable upon any other presumption than that of his innocence.
I will now, sir, conclude by adding to these considerations those which naturally result from the view, which the testimony affords us, of Mr. Smith's character and situation in life, and the various honorable and lucrative employments committed to his trust. These alone, if properly considered, will be found more than sufficient to outweigh all the circumstances adduced against him. I will not undertake to point out the objects of Col. Burr and his partisans, but am very willing to admit the correctness of the information collected by the hon. committee on this subject, and so eloquently detailed in their report. They are there represented as having been only prevented by the "vigilance of government and of faithful citizens under its direction from a speedy termination not only in war, but in war of the most horrible description, in war at once foreign and domestic;" that "the debauchment of our army, the plunder and devastation of our own and foreign territories, the dissolution of our national union, and the root of interminable civil war, were but the means of individual aggrandizement, the steps to protected usurpation."
Now, sir, is Mr. Smith the sort of man to whom conspirators, who were in their senses, would have proposed such a scheme as this? Would he have been solicited to join in the dismemberment of the union, whose interest was so materially connected with its continuance, the profits of whose employment wholly depended upon it? Would he have been asked to join in "a war of the most horrible description" who is represented as enjoying every domestic comfort in the bosom of a happy and numerous family? Would he be called upon to unite in a scheme of plunder and devastation, who had every reason to be satisfied with his present possessions, who had so much to risk and so little to gain from civil commotion? Would he have been called upon to make all these sacrifices to the madness of ambition who was already distinguished even beyond his wishes?
Surely, sir, this is the first time that robbers ever made offers of partnership to the man whom they were about to plunder—that incendiaries ever called upon him for assistance whose house was to be destroyed by their flames.
No man in the whole Western country would have been more certainly ruined by the success of this project than Mr. Smith. There is therefore no man from whom it would have been more studiously concealed. To a disposition of this sort I think it not at all improbable is to be in some degree attributed the circumstance of Col. Burr's stopping at his house. As Mr. Smith's guest he would have it in his power to say just as much as he pleased of his plans, and no more. In such a situation he would be less liable to the importunity of enquiries.
Let us, sir, for a moment fancy ourselves present at a consultation upon this subject between Col. Burr and his confederates at Cincinnati; and let us suppose that that gentleman had so far lost his usual discernment, had felt such confidence in his personal influence as to presume that he could seduce Mr. Smith from his interest as well as from his duty. After enquiring about major Kibby (whom it seems he was
anxious to see, and who is represented to be in distressed circumstances) let us suppose that he mentions Mr. Smith. What would his associates Glover and McFarland say to this? Would they not fear, that as Mr. Smith was their enemy, he would be tempted to inform against them? Would they not also know that if Mr. Smith assented to the proposal he would hold his rank in the expedition much above them and would have it in his power materially to affect their interests? Would they not at least have thought it highly dangerous to trust such a secret to a man so connected with the government they were about to oppose? These considerations would instantly have dictated a most decided reply. They would have said "you can have no hopes of Mr. Smith, his interests are too obviously opposed to our designs; he is too well satisfied with his present situation to consent to the change we contemplate; he is too, highly trusted and favored by the administration. He is, they would add, (repeating an expression used by Glover on a former occasion) "a damn'd army contractor and gun-boat builder," he makes too much by the present system of things to be trusted with a scheme for overturning it. No, sir, from him our plans must be concealed; he is easily deceived; tell him a plausible story about your settlement of lands, shew him your Washita grants; tell him his sons are fine promising young men, and offer to take them under your patronage." The force of these observations it would have been impossible to evade.
And sir, whatever Col. Burr's designs may have been, to whom does it appear that he actually did communicate them? To what kind of men does he apply to procure partisans? Why, sir, like a celebrated character of antiquity to whom he was long ago compared, it is always the discontented, the embarrassed, the turbulent, the idle, the ambitious and the enterprising. Nor does it appear that even to all these he fully explained himself. He had a variety of schemes suited to every taste, to every possible occasion. But among this mixed assemblage of characters collected by these means, there is not one to be found who had not some strong and ruling passion to which he could successfully apply himself. Thus, to the romantic enthusiasm of Dr. Bollman he would expatiate on the glorious and benevolent attempt to liberate, enlighten, and exalt a nation of slaves. To the youthful heroism of Swartwout he would paint in all their fascination,
"The plumed troops and the big war"
"That makes ambition virtue."
And turning from these he would address himself to such creatures as Glover and McFarland, and to them he would talk of plunder. But, sir, what motive could he expect to find in the breast of Mr. Smith that would prompt him to listen to a project that assumed any aspect of disunion, that discovered the least mark of treason, that bore even the most distant indications of "war and devastation?" What air-built castle could he picture to him to tempt him to overturn the fair and substantial fabric of his honors, the solid foundations of his happiness?
I feel, sir, that I have detained the honorable Senate upon this subject longer than I had designed. I have considered this as a question of the highest possible importance to Mr. S. as one on the issue of which more than his life depended. It is true, it has been differently represented, & I have heard it said with surprise, that the decision merely determines the right of the accused member to his seat and inflicts no punishment. I shall not attempt to describe (indeed no description could do justice to it) the horrors of that punishment threatened by the resolution now before us. I will only ask the honorable members of this House who are now anticipating an honorable discharge from their duties and a joyful return to their homes, to contrast the feelings excited by these anticipations, with those which they may presume are passing in the breast of Mr. Smith. I can fancy no tortures more dreadful, no execution more ignominious than that to which he must submit whose infamy is proclaimed to the nation, whose name is
blotted from your journals; who is driven slowly and reluctantly to a home where he may hope to hide himself, but which he yet trembles to approach; who is tormented by the reflection that every step brings him nearer to the malignant exultation of enemies, to the cold civility of friends, to the inconstable agony of a disgraced and distracted family. Surely the honorable members of this House will not inflict a punishment like this, without the most deliberate and unprejudiced consideration, without the most confirmed conviction of its justice.
From the painful necessity of such a decision, I trust that they are sufficiently preserved by the proofs which we have exhibited; that we may confidently hope for a far different result to this enquiry; one, which shall effectually wipe from the reputation of Mr. Smith, the only spot which slander has ever breathed upon it; which shall restore him to the undiminished confidence of his country and of these his honorable associates.
With this sense of its importance, and encouraged by these hopes, Mr. Smith has been enabled (by almost incredible efforts) to collect from the most distant points and within a very limited period, that mass of testimony which has so long occupied your attention. To the same motives, sir, is to be attributed, (and on that account I trust will be excused) the additional fatigue which I have occasioned.
FOR THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.
No. III.
The principle of retaliation, as a ground of belligerent pretension and deportment, is one, which it is our duty firmly to examine and deliberately to consider. Its great delicacy and vast importance may forbid a private well-intentioned individual to pronounce on the nature and extent of the rights, which an injured, endangered or provoked belligerent may practically enjoy or colorably claim, on this serious and inconvenient principle: but the same objections do not occur against argument or demonstration, calculated to quash all pretension to retaliate on the part of any government, from which we suffer. Hence it has been that fair and weighty considerations, applying negatively to the British claims on the ground of retaliation have been explicitly introduced into these papers.
After an honest and candid recollection of the rise and progress of neutral spoliations, we are unable to call to mind a single proclamation, order of council, or other act of the British government from 1791 to 1806, in which they for a moment set up, in substance or in words, the slightest pretension to retaliate on France or the neutral states any alleged original abuses or perversions of neutral trade, navigation or seamen, until the attempt of the court of London to procure an admission of that nature in their own addition to a treaty, otherwise mutual, in December 1806. This fact is the more strong, because general Hamilton, in his publications of " Americus ," while he was exercising the functions of a President over a federal administration in 1798, and colonel Pickering, then secretary of state, in a public official report, advanced the unfounded ideas, that England had followed France in all her violations of neutral commerce, whereby those eminent citizens put into the mouth of Britain all the pretensions of a power entitled to retaliate, which she had never theretofore claimed. And here, Britain, we will ingeniously confess, in your favor, that these and other children of America, adopted and native, while honored by our high trusts and fed by our treasures, have done much indeed, (and often have done so much) to mislead you into unwarrantable, irregular, and pernicious acts, and to confirm you in a course towards neutral trade and persons, which has threatened ruin to us and now suspends fearful dangers over your beautiful and noble country. But we return to our point: England, sharp and ingenious, and thus goaded by Americans as she has been, never once mentioned the doctrine of retaliation, till the last of December 1806, in the proposed rider to the treaty of Monroe, and Pinkney, Auckland and Holland.

Let us now examine the opposite side. What has been the conduct of France? She always, even in 1792, took the ground of a power-aggressor on, offended much, and much endangered by those aggressions. She avowed, before the war with England, her right and duty to retaliate on the Hanse towns the perversions of their resources, which neutral Britain committed in January, 1793. She took measures of regular indemnity from England on the 1st of February, 1793, by an open declaration of war. In May, 1793, France issued her first general order touching neutral trade, and though it was to save her bread, and she avowed the right, duty and necessity of retaliation, or of using the resources of neutrals to save her country, to prevent England from using those neutral resources to ruin her country, yet France did not add the penalty of confiscation of neutral property, as England does; but, agreed to pay for the neutral property taken in retaliation of English abuses. In the same spirit, grounded upon the same defensive grounds, avowing the same principles, it will be found that the legislative proceedings, executive acts, official communications and soundest publications of France from 1792, inclusively, to the memorable decrees of Berlin, Milan, and Bayonne, all avow the right, duty and necessity of retaliation. The government of France, incommoded, injured, justly provoked and deeply endangered by illegitimate British perversions of the vast supplies, purchases, ships and men of neutrals to her own gain or power, and to the destruction of the French—France, we say, under these circumstances, contends for the right, duty and necessity to retaliate; and unhappily for the neutrals, she at length adds that ruinous confiscation, in these neutral cases, which Britain had long before adopted and enforced in her first aggressions. Thus does a fair and calm review of the history of neutral spoliations prove to us, that England from 1792 till the last week of 1806, never even pretended, that France had so abused and perverted neutral trade, as to give her a color of pretension "to retaliate;" while France, from 1792, to that day, always maintained the charge of aggression against England in her acts, and in the most ateady, explicit, and open manner. The principle of retaliation has never carried France to the lengths of England. She is not like England in the invariable and odious practice of taking either American, or French, or other foreign seamen by impressment, or rather capture, out of our vessels. She has never extended her claims on persons sailing in our vessels, to passengers. Her Milan decree, with the exception of the wrecked vessel, is not executed by final and effectual confiscation, as are all the orders of council of G. Britain. Various other differences in the conduct of England and France exist. It is true, we believe, that as Britain assured our ministers in December, 1806, that she would act towards us as we should permit France, so France in 1808 has said she will follow that example of England, and confiscate under the Milan decree, if we do not resist similar English anterior aggressions, affording, by a new and solemn fact, another serious evidence, that original aggression of pernicious example is the real characteristic of the English conduct, and an imitative retaliation the characteristic of the conduct of France. England, by claiming and insisting on a right of retaliation against reason, justice, and public law, gives the most unfortunate sanction to the conduct of France, so far as she has that law on her side.
There is a fact in our own conduct, which is conclusive upon the subject of first aggression and retaliation. In 1794, President Washington, to avoid our retaliating on England by a sequestration of property to pay for her illegitimate seizures, sent a special mission to England to obtain redress, and even General Hamilton did not then suggest, nor did General Washington propose to send such a minister for such a purpose to France. It would have appeared very extraordinary indeed thus formally to demand redress of England, if she were correctly retaliating the anterior aggressions of the French, and to be totally inattentive to prevention and redress in the case of the French. In Mr. Jay's negotiations and treaty, no trace is to be found of a single idea relative to retaliations by the English for any suggested French original aggressions. Mr. Pickering was then and afterwards as enthusiastic a friend of France as any person in America. He did not then pretend she had given cause for retaliations in 1793. It is also true and is well known to Mr. Monroe, Mr. Jay and others of both parties, at this time alive, that General Hamilton was extremely anxious to go to England, in order to
be the instrument of our demand of a discontinuance of original British aggressions, reparation for the past and security for the future. His baggage was notoriously begun to be packed, but his appointment was prevented, and the duty was assigned to Mr. Jay. So extreme was the anti-American spirit at that moment in the British public circle, here, so bent were they on neutral spoliation, that it was asserted among them, in the most emphatic manner, that "Mr. Jay, (our special minister to England for redress) would not be allowed to set his foot on shore." It is a curious fact, that after such sentiments and conduct in 1794, Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Pickering should hazard the idea, in 1798, that France was the first aggressor on neutral commerce, and England, consequently, a mere justifiable retaliator. It is submitted to our countrymen to consider the facts and observations in these papers in their due and very serious relation to the recent letter of Mr. Senator Pickering to the governor of Massachusetts. It will appear to that great commercial state and to our whole country, that the strong and decided encouragement openly given to the misconduct of Great Britain by Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Pickering and other persons in the same pernicious habits, are among the real and most efficient causes of her refusing to us redress and indemnity for the past and security against future violations of our neutral commercial rights. Nay—the present jeopardy of G. Britain is chargeable in a very considerable degree, to these and similar characters, who have taught her by their pamphlets, reports, speeches and conversations to believe, that as the neutrals would bear any ill treatment, she might go on, till she has at length excited the utmost indignation of the neutrals and the most awful spirit of revenge and retaliation in the rest of the civilized world. It is best, even now for England to be persuaded of these truths. What Hamilton could not effect, Pickering cannot accomplish. Nor Jefferson or Madison, Clinton or Monroe would be persuaded that England has ever had one particle of ground to retaliate, tho' Hamilton rose from the dead. The only part for England now to act towards the United States is to be regular and just. We require not favor, nor even liberality, though such temper and conduct would certainly go further to promote her American interests than any other. No Senate, no House of Representatives can possibly exist, which will concede to England, against their own knowledge and memories, a right to retaliate on us for the retaliations of the European continental powers. Even in 1798, when the impressions of President Adams against France, the labored publications and incessant exertions of Mr. Hamilton and the official advantages & statements of Mr. Pickering, favored England; the legislature of the United States would not sanction the idea, that France was the originator of neutral spoliations, and England, as she first pretended in her treaty rider of 1806, the mere and justifiable retaliator.
The conduct of Great Britain in 1794, in advancing ideas of countervailing duties was an abuse of the idea of commercial retaliation. She excluded us from her colonies, shut out all our manufactures, prohibited many articles of our produce, highly dutied others, and refused all foreign goods in our vessels; and because we gave a small encouragement to our own vessels, by a duty on cargoes in foreign vessels, of one per cent. more than in our own, and small tonnage duty, she determined to retaliate or "countervail" those two duties, and to maintain all her other burdens on our vessels, produce and manufactures. There has been a craft in that country towards us like that of Ulysses. It is a kind of wisdom, which has never worn well, since the days of that Greek. Hence it has been, that no writer has ever assumed the signature of the cunning Ulysses. No nation has ever followed the commercial devices of the British government, whose sordid merchants clamor, in their rival meetings, that we, their best and then indeed their only customers, "grow too rich," though their own commerce had trebled in the time and though they enjoyed all the trade of the world which we did not possess. Americans! think not I am harsh. It was in this unhappy spirit that the king and council of Great Britain, introduced for the first time in their Parliamentary history the 35th section of their act of the 17th June, 1793, whereby all impediments from ministerial responsibility, and from the rights of their legislature, to a complete prostration of neutral commerce with their enemies in innocent articles were unobstructedly removed. With that law in their hands, a British ministry could
safely riot—could insolently wanton in the rich spoils of neutral trade. Were this base act of June, 1793, and its base repetition in 1803, retaliations of the Berlin, the Milan or the Bayonne decrees of 1806, 1807 and 1808? Ye little pirates of the states of Barbary! hide your diminished heads. Ye children in the game of plunder, go to London to learn infractions of the christian decalogue. Britain will teach you that for every hundred of our free bodies, which ye infidels have taken, in thirty years of American trade, she, a christian power, has taken ten-fold the number in a quarter of the time. Britain will teach you, that all your much noised plunder of the Christian world, in centuries past, is less by far, than what her "corsairs" have torn from us alone in fifteen years. Britain will teach you that the pious heads of an established christian church can openly vote for these pirate laws, and humbly solicit, for their brothers and their sons, formal commissions, civil, military, and judicial, to perpetrate their execution!
Americans! look at this statement; and tell me plainly, if it be not true. Tell me then on what strange grounds, ye ever hoped that France, a witness of our former non-resistance, would cease to plunder too. By your peace measures of strong coercion—your interdiction of the manufactures of Britain, the exclusion of her dangerous navy from your waters, and the withholding of all our supplies to their people and their artists, ye have proved to the European world, that wholesome measures of redress at length engage our counsels.
JURISCOLA.
REPORT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Of the U. States, in the case of the Mandamus lately issued by the Judges of the Circuit Court of the U. S. for the district of South Carolina.
SIR,
I have read and considered the papers and documents referred to me relative to the case of a mandamus, issued by the circuit court of the United States for the district of South Carolina to compel the collector of the port of Charleston to grant clearances to certain vessels.
The first question that naturally presents itself, is, whether the court possessed the power of issuing a mandamus in such a case?
A mandamus in England is styled a prerogative writ, and in that country is awarded solely and exclusively by the court of King's Bench.
The constitution and laws of the United States establish our judicial system. To these we must refer in order to ascertain the jurisdiction of the respective courts, the extent of their powers, and the limits of their authority.
The "Act to establish the judicial courts of the United States," passed on the 24th September, 1789, declares and defines the jurisdiction of the several courts thereby created, and among these the jurisdiction of the circuit courts. Upon a careful and attentive perusal, it will be found to delegate to the circuit courts no power to issue writs of mandamus. In the thirteenth section of that act this authority is expressly given to the supreme court of the United States. In like manner it is specially provided by the act of the 3d of February, 1801, that the supreme court shall have power to issue writs of mandamus. This last act having been repealed and the former revived, the question must rest on the true construction to be given to the original act.
The eleventh section defines and limits the jurisdiction of the circuit courts. It is specially appropriated to this single object. There are no expressions in this section which can fairly be interpreted to confer the authority of issuing writs of mandamus. Nor can the power be either implied or inferred from any language it contains. It is true, the proceeding by mandamus in England is on the crown side, as it is termed, of the court of King's Bench. But it is a prosecution relative to a civil right to enforce it, and to obtain prompt redress; and not to punish criminally as in the case of an offence. The provision therefore that the circuit courts "shall have exclusive cognizance of all crimes and offences cognizable under the authority of the United States, except when the act otherwise provides, &c." cannot warrant such a proceeding. Besides the same act does provide that the supreme court shall issue writs of mandamus—An authority given perhaps because its jurisdiction extended all over the United States.
The fourteenth section, immediately succeeding that which gives this authority in plain and positive terms to the supreme court, solely, if not ex-
clusively, (and the affirmative frequently, and in this case justly, I think implies a negative) contains the following provision: "All the before mentioned courts of the U. States (including the supreme, as well as the circuit and district courts) shall have power to issue writs of scire facias, habeas corpus, and all other writs not specially provided for by statute, which may be necessary for the exercise of their respective jurisdictions." This clause cannot affect the case, I conceive. The mandamus is a writ, which we have seen is specially provided for by law. This section was evidently not designed to give any additional jurisdiction to either of the courts, but merely the means of executing that jurisdiction already granted to them respectively. The issuing of a mandamus in the case under consideration was an act of original jurisdiction. Precisely as much so, as it would have been in the supreme court, to have exercised the power in the case of Marbury vs. Madison. In that case the supreme court declared, that to issue a mandamus to the Secretary of State, would be, to exercise an original jurisdiction, not given by the constitution, and which could not be granted by Congress. The constitution having enumerated or declared the particular cases in which the supreme court should exercise original jurisdiction, though there were no negative expressions, the affirmative they considered implied them. It was on this principle alone they refused to exert their authority.
The practice, I believe, has uniformly been, so far as I can trace it from the books of reports, that it have been published, or from recollection and experience on the subject, to apply to the supreme court for a mandamus. This court it is true have determined not to issue the writ, when it would be an act of original jurisdiction. But this I apprehend, can afford no ground for the circuit court's assuming an authority, which the supreme court have declined, unless by a legislative act the power be delegated to them. This power is not inherent nor necessarily incidental to a court of justice, even of general jurisdiction. For in England but a single one of several courts having general jurisdiction, possesses the authority. Neither the chancery, the common pleas, nor the exchequer, though classed among the kings superior courts, and having general jurisdiction over the realm, can exercise this power. It is the peculiar privilege of the king's bench alone. Our circuit courts have merely a local and subordinate jurisdiction. Their analogies therefore with the four courts of England, having general and superior jurisdiction, must be very weak, and still weaker their claim to the pre-eminent distinction of the king's bench, which possesses solely the exclusive authority of issuing the mandamus.
For these reasons I am induced to believe from the best consideration I have been enabled to give the subject, that the circuit court of South Carolina had not authority to issue a mandamus to the collector of the port of Charleston.
It is scarcely necessary to remark, that when a court has no jurisdiction, even consent will not give it, and much less will the mere tacit acquiescence of a party, in not denying their authority.
Independent of this serious and conclusive objection to the proceeding adopted by the court, there are others entitled to consideration. For supposing the court did not err in the exercise of jurisdiction, and admitting the British doctrines on the subject without restriction or limitation could be extended to this country, there are legal exceptions to the course they have pursued, supported by English authority.
In the first place, the law gave the collector complete discretion over the subject. According to the opinion he might form, he possessed competent authority to grant or refuse a clearance. And I apprehend where the law has left this discretion in an officer, the court, agreeably to the British practice and precedents, ought not to interpose, by way of mandamus.
Secondly. In this case there was a controlling power in the chief magistrate of the United States. There was in fact, an express appeal given to the President by the very words of the act of Congress, which authorises the collectors to detain vessels, "until the decision of the President of the United States be had thereupon." By the mandamus the reference to the President is taken away, and the collector is commanded to clear the vessel without delay. Agreeably to the English authorities under such circumstances, it is not the course I believe to issue a mandamus.
Thirdly. The parties it seems had
their legal remedy against the collector, and it is not usual, if not unprecedented, to grant a mandamus in such a case.
Fourthly. A mandamus is not issued to a mere ministerial officer to compel him to do his duty. The court will leave the parties to their remedy by action, or even by indictment. In England, in a very late case, they decided that they would not grant a mandamus to a ministerial officer, such as the treasurer of a county, for the proper remedy was by indictment.
I am aware of a precedent in which it seems to be admitted that a mandamus may issue to the commissioners of excise, to compel them in a proper case to grant a permit. This case is more analogous to the one now before us than any other, I have been able to discover, after a diligent research. But in this instance the point was not made, nor the question argued. Besides, the commissioners of excise in England form a board for superintending the collection of that branch of the revenue. They constitute in many respects a court of inferior jurisdiction, which in particular cases takes cognizance in a summary way, of offences against the excise laws. A mandamus might be granted to such a tribunal when it would not be issued to a mere ministerial officer, acting under them in the collection of the revenue.
It results from this view of the subject that the mandamus issued by the circuit court for the district of South Carolina, was not warranted by any power vested in the circuit courts by statute; nor by any power necessarily incident to courts, nor countenanced by any analogy between the circuit courts and the court of king's bench, the only court in that country possessing the power of issuing such writs. And it further appears that even the court of king's bench, for the reasons assigned, would not, agreeable to their practice and principles have interfered in the present case by mandamus.
It might perhaps with propriety be added that there does not appear in the constitution of the United States any thing which favors an indefinite extension of the jurisdiction of courts, over the ministerial officer within the executive department. On the contrary, the careful discrimination which is marked between the several departments, should dictate great circumspection to each, in the exercise of powers having any relation to the other.
The courts are indubitably the source of regal redress for wrongs committed by ministerial officers, none of whom are above the law. This redress is to be administered by due and legal process in the ordinary way. For there appears to be a material and an obvious distinction, between a course of proceeding, which redresses a wrong committed by an executive officer, and an interposition by a mandatory writ, taking the executive authority out of the hands of the President, and prescribing the course, which he and the agents of any department must pursue. In one case the executive is left free to act in his proper sphere, but is held to strict responsibility; in the other all responsibility is taken away, and he acts agreeably to judicial mandate. Writs of this kind if made applicable to officers indiscriminately, and acts purely ministerial, and executive in their nature, would necessarily have the effect of transferring the powers vested in one department to another department. If in a case like the present, where the law vests a duty and a discretion in an executive officer, a court can not only administer redress against the misuse of the authority, but can previously direct the use to be made of it, it would seem that under the name of a judicial power, an executive function is necessarily assumed, and that part of the constitution perhaps defeated, which makes it the duty of the President to take care, that the laws be faithfully executed. I do not see any clear limitation to this doctrine, which would prevent the courts from compelling by mandamus, all the executive officers, all subordinate to the President at least, whether charged with legal duties in the treasury or other department, to execute the same according to the opinion of the judiciary and contrary to that of the executive. And it is evident that the confusion arising will be greatly increased by the exercise of such a power, by a number of separate courts of local jurisdiction, whose proceedings would have complete and final effect, without an opportunity of control by the supreme court. So many branches of the judiciary, acting within their respective districts, their courses might be different, and different rules of action might be prescribed for the citizens of the different states, instead of that unity of

administration which the constitution meant to secure by placing the executive power for them all, in the same hand.
What then becomes of the responsibility of the Executive to the court of impeachment, and to the nation? Is he to remain responsible for acts done by command of another department? Or is the nation to lose the security of that responsibility altogether? From these and other considerations, were this branch of the subject to be pursued, it might be inferred, that the constitution of the U. States, by the distribution of the powers of our government to different departments, ascribing the executive duties to one, and the judiciary to another, controls any principles of the English law, which would authorise either to enter into the department of the other, to annul the powers of that other, and to assume the direction of its operations to itself.
These remarks are respectfully submitted to your consideration. They are made with due deference to the opinion of the court, with one of the judges constituting which I am personally acquainted, and for whose character I feel the sincerest regard.
Yours very respectfully, (Signed) C. A. RODNEY. July 15, 1808.
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, AUGUST 1.
SECOND VIEW Of the Imports and Exports of Great Britain, founded on official documents.
The following is the real value of the articles imported into Great Britain from the United States during the year ending on the 5th of January, 1808, in pounds sterling.
 Anatto 64,402  * Ashes Pot and Pearl 144,326  Cochineal 9,104  Coffee 66,636  * Corn, Grain and Meal 922,308  Hides 18,530  Indigo 69,909  * Pitch and Tar 40,266  * Seeds, viz. Flax & Linseed 7,050  Skins and Furs 26,116  Sugar 13,030  Tobacco 447,383  * Turpentine 77,638  Woods, viz.  * Deals and Fir Timber 131,741  Mahogany 81,482  * Masts 5,355  * Staves 146,734  Cotton 4,115,136  Other Articles 143,704  6,531,410 
Of those articles marked thus* there appears to be no exportation whatever from Great Britain.
From this statement it follows that the official value of Pot and Pearl Ashes imported into Great Britain in one year from the United States, and actually consumed in Great Britain, amounts to 144,326 pounds sterling. We have not the materials for computing the real value: but considering the one as bearing the usual proportion to the other, the real value may be computed at 216,000 pounds, or 864,000 dollars.
It further appears that the official value of corn, grain and meal imported, in one year, into Great Britain, from the United States, amounts to 922,308 pounds sterling, which, at the same computation, amounts to 5,532,000 dollars.
It appears that the official value of pitch and tar imported into Great Britain from the United States is 40,266 pounds sterling, which on the like computation amounts to 265,000 dollars.
It appears that the official value of turpentine imported into Great Britain from the United States amounts to 77,638 on the like computation amounting to 465,828 dollars.
It appears that the official value of the various descriptions of wood imported into Great Britain from the U. States amounts to 283,830L on the like computation amounting to 1,302,980 dollars.
 The aggregate of these articles is—  Dollars.  Pot and Pearl Ashes 864,000  Corn, Grain and Meal 5,532,000  Pitch and Tar 265,000  Flax and Linseed 43,300  Turpentine 465,828  Wood 1,302,980  8,473,108 
Of the exports of the United States to Great Britain, such is the large amount of articles actually consumed in that country, every one of which is essential to her manufactures or subsistence; and many of which cannot be obtained in sufficient quantities from any other country.
This will be shown by the following statement of the official value of the entire importations of the same articles into Great Britain from Europe, Africa and America—viz.
 Pot and Pearl Ashes L. 189,975  Corn Grain and Meal 920,435  Pitch and Tar 155,046  Flax and Linseed 145,515  Turpentine 51,188  Woods, of above descriptions 669,162  2,131,321 
From which it follows, that of the entire amount of the consumption of these articles in Great Britain at least two thirds are drawn from the United States.
Great Britain, we have been often told, is independent of this country for grain. This statement proves the contrary, and her dependance to a great extent. Let it not be imagined that this is either occasional or accidental; the official statements before us show that her importations in the year 1805 were to nearly double the amount, and those of 1806 to about two thirds of it; and on an average equal to the full supply of half a million of souls.
The following is the real value of the total exportations from Great Britain of those articles, which she imports from the United States—
 Anatto L. 4,858  Cochineal 71,820  Coffee 2,987,057  Hides 36,403  Indigo 2,223,085  Skins and Furs 44,117  Sugar 2,099,508  Tobacco 361,812  Mahogany 19,653  Cotton 203,390  8,062,698 
By comparing this table with that first given, it will be seen that Britain herself consumes within a fraction all the cotton exported to her from this country, which exceeds one half the full amount of the foregoing articles. By an official statement before us it likewise appears that the whole importation of cotton into England from all parts of the world amounts only in value to about six millions and a half of pounds sterling. It follows that nearly two thirds of her supply is received from us.
It further appears that the quantity of tobacco exported by the United States to Great Britain about five-sixths are again re-exported by her, and that consequently her own proper demand for this important article does not exceed 80,000 pounds sterling in value.
INSANITY.
QUEM DEUS VULT PERDERE, PRIUS DEMENTAT.
"Mad, madder than the maddest of March hares!"
The New-York Commercial Advertiser thus exemplifies our motto: "They (the people) are quitting with precipitation the whitened sepulchre of all-unhinging democracy, that slaughter-house of true liberty, inhabited only by the blood-stained ghosts of Robespierre, Marat, &c. to enter once again into the temple of truth, candor and federalism, where the paternal shade of Washington, with anxious solicitude, beckons their approach, and with characteristic benignity welcomes their return to their father's mansion, from which in an evil hour they had strayed!!"
Mr. Irvine, editor of the Whig, printed at Baltimore, has lately been brought in guilty of a libel on Edward J. Coale, Register of the city; and sentenced to a fine of 200 dollars, and sixty days imprisonment.
The United States frigate Chesapeake, capt. Decatur, anchored in Hudson Bay on the 20th inst.
The United States schr. Revenge returned to N. York on the same day from a cruise.
We have good authority for stating that our government have given orders for the immediate construction of two brigs of 18 guns and a number of gun-boats, on the lakes. Post. paper.
New Orleans, June 16.
We learn from Baton Rouge, that serious apprehensions have been entertained by gov. Grand Pre of a rebellion against the government of his Catholic Majesty, and that maj. Ellis, formerly of this city, has been arrested, and is in close custody.
June 17. A report has been in circulation since yesterday morning, founded it is
said, on the authority of a letter from Havana, that a new viceroy for Mexico has reached that place. He is said to be a Frenchman by birth, but emigrated early, and bears a Spanish title of nobility. We presume he comes out under the new king.
Predictions verified.
A distinguished member of the British Parliament remarked, in the year 1793, that—"should the allies continue the war against France, it was not unnatural to apprehend that she might become the scourge of every nation. Driven to make exertions which could not fail ensure victory—her sons, born as it were on the field of battle—trained to arms from their youth—the toils of war their delight—A nation of soldiers inflamed with military ardor, and thirsting for glory—They might be easily led from a just defence to unjust conquest; and, like ancient Rome, swallowing up the nations around her, become the mistress of the world."
This prediction has been partially verified, and it is to the blind policy of the British ministry that we must ascribe the present political preponderance of France on the continent of Europe. British gold has converted Europe into a slaughter-house, and British alliances have been to the impolitic cabinets of Europe the precursors of ruin.
Farmer's Reg.
The present administration have been repeatedly censured by the federal writers for disposing of a part of the navy of the United States; it is true several of the ships were sold in the summer of 1801, but it will be seen by the annexed extract from an act of Congress passed and approved of by John Adams, on the 3d of March 1801, that this sale was authorised by the former administration.
"Be it enacted by the Senate, &c. &c. That the President of the U. States be, and he hereby is authorised, whenever the situation of public affairs shall in his opinion render it expedient, to cause to be sold, they being first divested of their guns and military stores, which are to be carefully preserved, all or any of the ships & vessels belonged to the navy, except the frigates United States, Constitution, President, Chesapeake, Philadelphia, Constellation, Congress, New-York, Boston, Essex, Adams, John Adams, and General Green; and also to lay up all the frigates thus to be retained, except such as are directed by this act to be kept in constant service in time of peace."
Though the preceding act has been a thousand times published, & it is well known that many of the ships purchased by the administration, while Mr. Adams was President, were intended only to answer a temporary purpose, yet the federalists unblushingly charge Mr. Jefferson with having reduced our navy, though in obedience to a law over the passage of which he had no sort of control!
Bal. Ev. Post.
"THE TWO MILLIONS"
Owing to the foul misrepresentation of a British morning print, we are obliged to call the attention of our readers to an extract from the speech of Mr. Quincy, a federalist, on the discussion of the bill authorising the President to suspend the embargo laws.
"Congress," said Mr. Quincy, "can vest a general discretion to borrow or not to borrow, according to the view which the Executive may possess of the state of the treasury and of the general exigencies of the country, particularly in cases where the loan is contemplated at some future day, when perhaps Congress is not in session, and when the state of the treasury, or of the country, cannot be foreseen. In the case of the two millions appropriated for the purchase of the Floridas, such a discretion was invested in the Executive. He was authorised, 'if necessary, to borrow the sum, or any part thereof.' This authority, he never exercised, and thus (according to the argument of gentlemen on the other side) he has made null a legislative act. For so far as it depended on his discretion, this not being exercised, it is a nullity."
So much for the two millions; but an early day shall be devoted to this subject. Pub. Ad.
From the Mercantile Advertiser.
SIR, As it may be interesting to the public to know the particulars of captain Ichabod Sheffield's throwing over the Turks in the Mediterranean, from on board the schooner Mary Ann, after having been captured by an Algerine frigate of 44 guns, and being in their possession four days, I have procured them as correctly as I could, and now lay the same before the public thro' the medium of your paper, hoping he
and his brave companions, who so justly merit the bounty of their countrymen, may not be unrewarded for risking their lives in so desperate an undertaking.
Yours, &c. A SUBSCRIBER.
On the 26th of October last, within the Straits of Gibraltar, saw a sail to the northward. On her bearing down she proved to be a frigate with English colours. After firing three shots, which fell near us, the schooner hove to. When alongside they hauled down the English colors and hoisted the bloody flag. They sent on board their boat, and took out the captain and three men. After two hours detention, the boat returned with the captain on board the schooner, accompanied by 9 Algerines, all armed, who steered direct for Algiers. Being in their possession upwards of 90 hours, the captain held a consultation with the mate and cook; when fearing they should never again see the United States, they chose rather to die than submit as slaves for life to Turkish tyranny. The vessel at this time was within three miles of the land, and in sight of the shipping in the harbor of Algiers. Accordingly the Cook was stationed at the pump and Mate at the cabin door, when the captain threw the grains over the quarter into the sea. Four of the Turks went to the side to see if he had caught a fish. The Captain then seized the prize-master, and threw him overboard; the Mate at the same time seized the one next to him, and did the like; the Cook then came to their assistance, and they threw over the third. The remaining six attacked them very furiously with handspikes. The Captain then clenched the second prize-master and threw him into the sea, while the Mate and Cook killed two. Of the remaining three, two who refused to submit were killed; one they preserved and carried safely into Naples, where the vessel fortunately arrived after six days.
During the contest the captain and mate received several desperate blows from the Turks; and while they were on board they compelled the captain and mate to go aloft and assist in navigating the vessel.
To the Editor of the National Intelligencer.
SIR, Having observed in your paper of the 22d inst. an anonymous publication libelling the characters and impugning the motives of those citizens who lately concurred in expressing their satisfaction at the honorable acquittal of General Wilkinson, it is presumed that you cannot object to the admission of a few observations in reply from one who does not seek to shelter himself from the responsibility attached to his remarks, under an anonymous mask.
Amongst other erroneous & malicious assertions in the publication alluded to, calculated to impose on those at a distance, it is represented that an officer under the immediate control of the General so far infringed upon decorum and the rights of citizens, as to be counted one of those who supported the measure. It is well understood, sir, throughout the city, and no doubt will be eagerly repeated elsewhere, that I am the person to whom, in this particular, allusion is made by the persons understood to be the authors of the publication. So far from their statement speaking, as it professes, the sentiments of the inhabitants of Washington, the mass of our citizens totally disapprove of it, and have considered it as emanating from a junto of Federalists and Burrists, to whom General Wilkinson and that Chief Magistrate whom they profess to revere, are equally obnoxious. Some of these men were industriously engaged, on the day of the meeting, in endeavoring to collect as many men as they could find, as a band to frustrate the object for which the citizens were called together.
As to myself, sir, I have been a resident of Washington city for seven years last May, engaged in business nearly the whole time; have acquired real property in the city and feel a lively interest in its prosperity. I regard the place as my home. When, therefore, a meeting of the citizens was requested, I considered myself as called upon, in common with the rest of the inhabitants, and accordingly attended. It is true, sir, I had a few days before received an appointment in the army of the U. States; but I by no means considered myself disfranchised by the commission. Two of the anonymous association, are men who have acquired no permanent interest here, notwithstanding they have officiously volunteered their services as the champions of "the citizens of Washington," and proscribed one of the oldest inhabitants for appearing at a public meeting.
By the publication in question it is implied that I acted under the control of General Wilkinson—an insinuation which I do not hesitate to pronounce to be totally at variance with truth: and here, in justice to myself I must state, that, having waited on the reputed penman of the communication, and an explanation being refused, I am compelled in self-defence to make this statement of facts.
I conclude by assuring you, sir, that as no man shall ever influence me, if I can prevent it; so neither shall any officious party-man insult me with impunity, if he be worthy of notice.
ROBERT CHERRY. Washington City, July 23, 1808.
* * The Editor of the Intelligencer, considering the above letter, as sent for publication, as too pointed, has been under the necessity of omitting a part of it.
POSTSCRIPT.
New-York, July 29.
LATEST FROM EUROPE.
The ship Thalia, captain Silliman, arrived at this port yesterday from Falmouth, from whence she sailed on the 8th of June.
Capt. S. informs that a few days before he sailed about 10,000 of the inhabitants of Yorkshire, principally weavers, had assembled in a tumultuous manner on account of the high price of provisions, and to demand an increase of wages. The troops in the barracks and in the town were employed to quell the riot, and the people at length dispersed, but not until several of them had been killed by the military. It was said, also, that 60,000 looms in Manchester and its neighborhood were without employment.
A small vessel arrived at Falmouth about the 6th of June from Bilbao, having on board three Spanish deputies who had come to solicit assistance in arms and clothing from the British government, in consequence of the revolution. They reported that every Frenchman found in the province of Biscay had been massacred.
No detained property had been condemned in any part of France.
Capt. S. is the bearer of dispatches from Mr. Pinckney to the Secretary of State.
COMMERCIAL COMPANY OF WASHINGTON.
THE Stockholders are notified, that the Fourth Instalment, on their Stock, will fall due on Saturday the 6th of August next. All shares not paid upon that day will be forfeited.
JOSEPH FORREST, Pres. August 1—
Circuit court, District of Columbia, for the county of Washington.
IN CHANCERY, JUNE TERM 1808. John Hoye, and Leonard M. Deakins, executors and devisees of Francis Deakins, deceased, which John Hoye is the acting executor and devisee, and the President, Directors, and company of the Bank of Columbia, complainants,
against Charles F. Brodhead, William Stewart and Aquilla Beall, Philip B. Key and Benjamin Stoddert—Defendants. This bill states, that Francis Deakins in his life time sold to the said Charles F. Brodhead certain real property in George Town, which has never been paid for or conveyed—that the said property is under rent to the said Stewart & Beall as tenants of the said Brodhead—that the said Brodhead has assigned the same together with other property in trust to Philip B. Key, and that the said Benjamin Stoddert as the complainants have been informed, sets up some claim to the same.
The object of the bill is, to obtain a decree for the sale of the said property and to compel the said Stewart & Beall to pay the rents which are already due or which may hereafter become due thereon, towards the payment of the sum due on the said property by the said Brodhead to the said complainants.
The bill further states that Charles F. Brodhead and Aquilla Beall, two of the defendants, do not reside within the district of Columbia, and are beyond the reach of the process of this court.
It is therefore ordered that the said Charles F. Brodhead and Aquilla Beall be warned to appear in this court on the fourth Monday of December 1808, to answer the bill of the said complainants, and for that purpose that a copy of this order be published once a week for three successive weeks in the National Intelligencer and the Frederick Town Herald, prior to the said fourth Monday of December next.
WM. BRENT, Ck. August 1—
RUN AWAY from the subscriber an Apprentice boy by the name of Thomas A. Austin, a Taylor by trade. All persons are forewarned against harboring or employing said apprentice. The above reward will be given to any person who will deliver him to me. JOSEPH S. CLARKE. July 8—St

MILITARY LIBRARY. No. 10 of this valuable Work is just received, and for sale at R. C. WEIGHTMAN'S Book-store.
R. C. W. receives subscriptions for major Z. M. PIKE'S EXPEDITIONS to the sources of the Mississippi, and through the western parts of Louisiana, to the sources of the Osage, Arkansas, Kans, La Platte, and rivers, performed by order of the government of the United States, in the years 1805, 6, and 7.
This work will be divided into three parts, but comprised in one volume, large octavo—Price to subscribers, three Dollars in Boards, payable on delivery.
Subscriptions are also received for an interesting Novel of Mrs. Opie, entitled "Adeline Mowray, or the Mother & Daughter," in 2 vols. Price to subscribers 75 cents per vol. in boards; to non-subscribers 87 1/2 cents.
July 27—3t
IMPROVED BREED OF SHEEP. FOR SALE. From 40 to 50 half blooded English EWES, (part of the flock of the subscriber) got by imported Rams of the celebrated Teeswater, Dishley and South Down breeds—price EIGHT dollars each; likewise half and three quarter blooded Ram LAMBS, TEN dollars each; to be viewed at Ross Hall, near Brunswick, New Jersey. MILES SMITH.
July 27—3t
MILITARY NOTICE.
MARY A. PIC has the honor to inform military gentlemen that she has just received an elegant assortment of articles in the Military Line , consisting of 100 pair Gold & Silver Epaulets , among which some are truly elegant. Plumes of all colors and sizes; Gold and silver tassels, Ditto cord, Tinsel do. Sword knots, Cockades, Stocks, &c. &c. She has also a parcel of fine VIRGINIA CLOTH , different patterns—umbrellas, a large assortment of split straw hats and bonnets—ribbons, and as usual every other article in the military line. July 27—3t.
WANTED
AT the Woodyard for the ensuing year a Manager, to take charge of the whole estate. He must be a sober, diligent and discreet man—well acquainted with the culture of wheat, corn and tobacco, and the management of negroes. To such a man who can produce unquestionable testimonials of his capacity, sobriety and fidelity, high wages will be given. A person not connected in the neighborhood will be preferred. Apply to R. W. WEST, Woodyard. N. B. Application must be made before the 1st. Sept. next. May 13—ep13
PROPOSALS for carrying the Mails of the United States, on the following Post Roads, will be received at the General Post Office, until the 6th day of September next.
 1. From Athens in Georgia, by Apalachicola, Flint River, and Coweta to Tuckabatchy on the Mississippi territory estimated at 220 miles, once a week. Leave Athens every Saturday at 1 p. m. and arrive at Tuckabatchy the next Tuesday by 8 o'clock p. m. Leave Tuckabatchy every Wednesday at 4 a. m. and arrive at Athens the next Saturday by 10 o'clock a. m.  2. From Tuckabatchy by Majors Creek on Alabama, or Tensaw to Fort Stoddert, estimated at one hundred and seventy three miles, once a week. Leave Tuckabatchy every Wednesday at 4 o'clock a. m. and arrive at Fort Stoddert the next Saturday by 10 o'clock a. m. Leave Fort Stoddert every Saturday at 2 p. m. and arrive at Tuckabatchy the next Tuesday by 8 p. m.  3. From Fort Stoddert to Farre's on Pearl River, estimated at 160 miles, once a week. Leave Fort Stoddert every Saturday at 2 p. m. and arrive at Farre's the next Tuesday by 8 o'clock p. m. Leave Farre's at Pearl River every Wednesday at 4 o'clock a. m. & arrive at Fort Stoddert the next Saturday by 10 o'clock a. m.  4. From Farre's on Pearl River to New Orleans, once a week. Leave New Orleans every Monday noon, and arrive at Farre's on Tuesday by 8 p. m. Leave Farre's every Wednesday at 4 a. m. and arrive at New Orleans on Thursday by noon. 
NOTE 1. If the depending mail shall not have arrived at the time fixed for departure, the contractor shall be bound to wait for it, provided it arrives within six hours after such fixed time. NOTE 2. For every failure, and for every delay which shall continue so that the depending mail loses a trip, the contractor shall forfeit double the pay he would have received for such a trip, unless the failure shall have been occasioned by unavoidable accident; and in that case, the amount of the pay for such trip shall be forfeited, so that no pay shall be made unless the service is performed.
NOTE 3. For every hours delay, the Contractor shall forfeit one dollar; but no forfeiture for the delay of any one trip can exceed double the value of such trip. The contracts are to commence on the 1st day of October next, and continue in force until the 31st March, 1810. General Post Office, July 20th, 1808.
PUBLIC SALE.
By virtue of a decree of the honorable the Circuit Court of the district of Columbia, sitting as a court of Chancery for the county of Washington in the suit of
Gideon Snow—complainant, against Abigail Perkins, widow and administratrix, and Hannah Perkins, sister and heir of Joseph Perkins deceased, and Nathan Bond—Defendants.
WILL be sold at public auction to the highest bidder on Monday the twenty-ninth day of August next at Rhodes's hotel in the city of Washington, at the hour of 10 A. M. all the Estate, right, title, claim and demand both in law and equity of the said Joseph and of the said defendant Hannah, as heir at law of the said Joseph, of, in, and to Lots Nos. 5 and 6 in square No. 533, and Lot No. 2 in square No. 403, with their improvements, all lying and being in the city of Washington, and which said lots are laid out and designated in the general plan of said city as above described.
The terms of sale are, a credit of six months, the purchaser or purchasers giving bonds with approved security for the amount of the purchase money, bearing interest from the day of sale.
This sale is not to affect any claim of dower which the said Abigail Perkins may have in said lots.
JOHN G. McDONALD, Trustee. July 13—3wep
20 DOLLARS REWARD.
ESCAPED from the subscriber on the road leading from George Town towards Leesburg, about 15 miles from the former place, a negro man named LUKE, about 35 years of age, 6 feet high, dark skin, two of his upper fore teeth are out; he has a down cast look, and generally speaks in a low voice; his clothes and name he will probably change, I purchased him of Mr. Theophilus Hughs to take to my residence in Kentucky, he has had several masters about Bladensburg, and he will certainly be lurking about that place as he has a wife, the property of Mr. Isaac Barrett near Bladensburg. I have appointed Mr. Everard Gary of George Town my agent, and the above reward will be paid by him to any person who will deliver the said fellow to Mr. C. Tippet in the city jail. SAML. M'LEAN. July 25—6w
BURNS AND BULL.
WOOLLEN drapers, men's mercers, and tailors, New Jersey Avenue, opposite the Secretary of the Navy's, respectfully inform the public that they have commenced business in the above line, where they will endeavor to give satisfaction—they have on hand a fresh supply of the most fashionable goods, suitable for the approaching season, all fresh and of the very best quality. N. B. Regimentals and naval uniforms made in the most elegant and fashionable stile with neatness and dispatch. October 23—tf.
FOR SALE.
By virtue of a decree of the high court of Chancery of the state of Maryland, will be exposed to public sale, in the town of Port Tobacco, Charles county, at the court house at 3 o'clock in the afternoon of the second day of the next August term of Charles county court (which commences on the fourth Monday of August next) a parcel of land late the property of John D. Scott deceased, being part of a tract of land called Pymton Manor, lying upon a branch of Nanjemoy creek from the port road leading to Nanjemoy from Port Tobacco near the "Hill Top" & about seven miles from Port Tobacco. This land consists of about 300 acres, of which between 50 and 100 acres are well timbered, about twenty acres are in marsh, and the remainder arable and very productive.
The terms of sale are that the purchaser shall give bond with sufficient security to pay the purchase money in twelve months from the sale. It will be sold entire or in parcels as may best suit the persons inclined to purchase. F. S. KEY, Trustee. July 4—tdos
50 DOLLARS REWARD.
RAN AWAY from the subscriber living near Bryan Town, Charles county, Maryland, negroes STEPHEN and RALPH . Stephen absconded on the 5th inst. is a short black man about 20 or 21 years of age; he took with him a white country cloth jacket, double wove, a blue cloth under jacket, an Irish linen shirt, a cotton country shirt and trousers, and a black wool hat.
Ralph ran off on the 14th inst. is about 22 years old, nearly 5 feet 7 or 8 inches high, a bright black complexion, a large scar under his left eye, and another on one of his feet—he took with him a dark bay horse, about 16 hands high, about 9 or 10 years old, a small star on his forehead, with a few white spots on his nose, and is rubbed a little on his shoulders with the gears, trots and gallops. He had on and took with him a black broad cloth coat, striped swansdown under jacket, an old Irish linen shirt, a country cotton shirt and trousers, black wool hat. Stephen and Ralph are brothers, and probably will be found together. A reward of 50 dollars will be given for the delivering of them with the horse, bridle and saddle, if brought home, or 15 for either of them, if secured in any jail, so that I get them again, or 10 dollars for the horse, saddle and bridle, if brought home, by
BENEDICT BOARMAN. July 18—w3t
PURSUANT to an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed at November session, 1806, entitled "An act authorizing the collection of certain ground rents due on lots in the Town of Cumberland, in Allegany county," and a supplement thereto, passed at November session, 1807, Public Notice is hereby given to all persons holding unimproved lots in said town, on which ground rents are now due, that unless the said rents are paid on or before the first day of December next, the said lots will on that day be offered at public sale to the highest bidder, on a credit of 60 days. The sale to be held at Mr. J. Rine's tavern in said town, to commence at ten o'clock, A. M. and continue from day to day, until the whole are sold. THOMAS BEALL, of Saml. March 21—ep13
TUNIS CRAVEN
HAS removed his entire stock of DRY GOODS from Alexandria to Washington, and is now opening, at his new Store, between the Marine Garrison and Navy Yard Gate, an assortment equal to any in the District; among which are,
 Wood's best London cloths,  Do. double milled & plain cassimeres,  Bennett's cords and velvets,  Constitution Gerrow, hunting, Trafalgar, and silver cords,  Velvets,  Imperial, Brunswick waistcoating,  Silk moleskins do.  Tollinets, swansdown do.  Plain and figured Marseilles do.  Bears skin coatings,  Plains, kerseys, halfthicks,  Rose and duffel blankets, flannels,  Superfine green cloth table covers,  Calicoes, colored cambrics,  Ginghams, silk and cotton chambrays  Furniture Chintz,  Cambric and jaconet muslins,  India and British book do.  India mullmull figured and plain,  Plain and figured lenoes,  Laced cambrics,  Elegant tambooured mulls,  Grecian robes and Pelisse dresses,  8-4 damask and raw silk shawls,  Damask scarfs,  Camel's hair and swansdown do.  Down scarfs,  Long and short lace sleeves, spider & nett sleeves,  Extra long and habit kid gloves,  Do. do. silk do.  Do. do. raw silk do.  Cross-barred and plain Mantuas and lute strings,  Persians and Medes,  Thread and cotton laces,  Lace caps and handkerchiefs,  Book muslin and leno cap patterns,  4-4-7-8 Irish lenes,  Long lawns, linen cambrics,  Irish diapers, table-cloths, napkins,  Cotton counterpanes,  Cambric Dimities,  Common do.  Furniture do.  Ladies and gentlemen's silk, thread, cotton, worsted, lamb's wool & Angola hose,  Gentlemen's pantaloons do.  Silk cords and buttons,  Ribbons, floss threads,  Scarlet and other colored bombazets,  Hearth rugs, Russia sheeting, ticklingburg,  Osnaburgs, baftas, gurrahs, &c. &c. 
ALSO,
Imperial and young hyson tea of a superior quality in small boxes, to suit families, or by the pound—Also genuine Havana segars. T. C. is determined to sell on the lowest terms. February 3—tf
FORTY DOLLARS REWARD.
RAN AWAY from the subscriber, living in St. Mary's county, on Patuxent river, in Halfpence neck, two negroes, Baptist and Lydia . Baptist is a black man about 35 years of age, nearly 6 feet high; he is an artful insinuating fellow, in conversation talks much of his travels; he has been in the bay trade, and once in the West Indies; he has a scar on his breast, short, but the flesh much raised; he has had a bone-breaker on his right thumb, that has been recently cured; he plays well on the violin, and probably may have one with him as he carried one off; he had on, when he went away, a new shirt and trousers of tow, a blue striped short coat, but I think it needlessly to describe clothing as they both had pretty good, and they probably may change them, as also their names. Lydia is a low woman of a yellowish complexion, about 18 years of age, pretty far advanced in pregnancy, & it is highly probable they may endeavor to pass for man and wife, and also free people, as they well know that there are many now that pass and repass in every town and city in the United States without examination.
Whoever takes up and secures the said runaways in any jail so that I get them again, shall be entitled to a reward of five dollars, if taken in this country, if in Montgomery or nearer home ten dollars, if farther twenty dollars; and if out of the state the above reward, together with all reasonable charges, paid by
JOHN TIPPETT. N. B. All masters of vessels are forewarned from carrying the above runaways off at their peril. J. T. July 18—w3t
LANDING THIS DAY,
From on board the schooner MARIA , capt. Fitzhugh, from New York—A quantity of prime St. Croix sugar, Coffee, Molasses, Port Wine, Nutmegs, and Chocolate. Also, Gun-Powder, Imperials, and Hyson Teas, in chests, half and quarter chests and canisters of this spring's importation, For sale by ROSS & GETTY. George Town, June 20—tf
NOTICE
Is hereby given that application is intended to be made to the Treasury of the United States for the renewal of the undermentioned Certificates of Six per Cent Stock issued by Joseph Nourse, Register of the Treasury, in the name of Christine Alexander , of London or of Bath in Great Britain, which certificates were sent in the ship Bristol Packet , capt. Burns, captured and burnt by the French, and lost in the same, viz.
N. B. The name is sometimes written Christine but it is the same person.
   Denomination of the stock. Dates of the Certificates. Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock 1792 December 5. 8. 68 11,000   1795 May 11. 13168 800   1795 July 16. 13450 250 03   1796 June 11. 14537 2,000   1796 — 14. 14531 247 81   1797 February 7. 3615 1,557 55   1797 February 7. 14942 277 30   1798 February 1. 15605 2,975 25   1799 December 17. 16918 882  
Standing to her credit on the 1st. April 1808. 19,999 99
Also for the following Certificates of six per Cent Stock issued as above, in the name of Jane Alexander of Bath aforesaid, which were also lost in the said ship Bristol Packet , viz.
   Denomination of the Stock. Dates of the Certificates. Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock. 1796 June 14. 14344 2,000   1796 — 14. 14345 2,000   1796 — 14. 14346 2,000   1796 — 14. 14347 2,000   1796 — 14. 14348 753 42   1796 — 14. 3616 2,000   1796 — 14. 3617 2,000   1796 — 14. 3618 2,000   1796 — 14. 3619 2,000   1796 — 14. 3620 2,000   1796 — 14. 3621 453 15   1797 February 7. 14944 225 05   1797 March 3. 15005 1,500   1797 June 3. 15204 766 78   1797 — 16. 15257 1,700   1798 February 1. 15604 1,505 65   1799 December 17. 16917 980  
Standing to her credit on the 1st April 1808. 25,891 05
June 20—ep6w
St. Mary's county court, March term 1808.
ON application of Benjamin Tabbs of St. Mary's county to the judges of the said county court, by petition in writing, praying the benefit of the act for the relief of sundry insolvent debtors, on the terms mentioned in said act, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his said petition, and the said county court being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said Benjamin Tabbs has resided the two preceding years prior to the passage of the said act, within the state of Maryland. It is thereupon adjudged and ordered by the said court that the said Benjamin Tabbs give notice to his creditors of his intention to apply to the next county court to be held at Leonard Town in said county on the first Monday of August next, for a discharge from his debts, and to warn his said creditors to appear before the said judges on the day and at the place aforesaid to show cause if any they have why the said Benjamin Tabbs should not be discharged agreeably to his said petition, by causing a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer , weekly for three months successively.
By order, JOSEPH HARRIS, Ck. May 2—w3m
Prince George's county court, April term, 1808.
HENRY T. COMPTON of Prince George's county having applied to this court, by petition in writing, praying the benefit of the act, entitled "An act for the relief of sundry insolvent debtors," passed at the session of 1805, and the supplement thereto in 1806; and a schedule of his property and list of his creditors as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his petition; and the court being satisfied by competent testimony that the said Henry T. Compton resided the two last years preceding this application within the state of Maryland. And the said Henry T. Compton being in the custody of the sheriff of Prince George's county; and having entered into bond in such penalty as directed by this court, and with approved security, conditioned for his personal appearance before this court, on the second day of the next term, to answer the allegations of his creditors or creditors. It is by this court directed that the said Henry T. Compton be discharged from imprisonment, and the said second day of the next term, which will be the sixth day of September next, is by the court appointed for the said Henry T. Compton to appear before this court, to answer interrogatories, which his creditors may propose to him. And it is ordered, that the said Henry T. Compton, give notice to his creditors, of his application, by causing a copy of the foregoing, to be published three months in the National Intelligencer , previous to the next term. True copy from the proceedings, Test JOHN READ MAGRUDER, Jr. Ck. June 1—w3m
WASHINGTON & ALEXANDRIA TURNPIKE COMPANY.
THE Stockholders of the "Washington and Alexandria Turnpike Company" are hereby notified that the second installment of TEN dollars on such share is called for by the President and Directors of the said company, and is required to be paid to Charles Page, treasurer in Alexandria, on or before the 26th day of August next, agreeable to the act of Congress, entitled "An act for the establishment of a Turnpike Company in the county of Alexandria in the district of Columbia." By order of the Directors, G. DENEALE, President. July 25—tA26
BALTIMORE TRINITY CHURCH LOTTERY,
Positively commences drawing on the first day of November next.
The Managers give notice that they have contracted with a Company of Gentlemen for nearly all the unsold TICKETS and have given them bonds that the drawing shall positively take place as above stated, and to draw 2000 tickets per week till the whole is completed.
SCHEME.
   Subject to no Deduction.   Dollars. Dollars.     1 prize of 5000 is 5000   1 3000   2 2000   2 1500   3 1000   6 500   20 200   35 100   70 50   175 20   500 10   5250 6   6065 Prizes, 72,000   11935 Blanks.   18000 tickets less than two blanks to a prize: sum raised 15000   Expenses including commission to the corporation, 3000   90,000  
Part of the Capitals will be determined as follows:
   1 prize of 200 dollars to the first drawn blank. 1 do. 200 do. after 2000 tickets.   1 do. 200 4000   1 do. 200 6000   1 do. 200 8000   1 do. 1000 10000   1 do. 500 12000   1 do. 500 14000   1 do. 500 16000   1 do. 1500 17000   1 do. 2000 last drawn blank.  
July 20—ep1m.
CHARLES H. VARDEN
MERCHANT TAILOR, RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia and public in general, that he has