The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1807-09-21 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER,
AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
No. 1082.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1807.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
TRIAL OF A. BURR.
ON THE INDICTMENT FOR A MISDEMEANOR.
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9.
MORRIS B. BELKNAP.
Mr. Hay. Were you not on the island on the night of Blannerhasset's departure? A. I was; on the night of the 10th of December. Mr. Hay. State the cause and consequences of your going.
Mr. Belknap. I had been employed by Mr. Blannerhasset to carry a letter to John Jouard, at Lexington, Kentucky. ( Mr. Hay. Jouard is here.) In that letter was one enclosed for Col. Burr. Some time previous to his asking me to go to Lexington, I had stated to him in conversation, that certain rumors were afloat, calculated to show the unlawfulness of his expedition. He declared to me that his expedition was not unlawful, and he read to me this letter, addressed to Col. Burr. I do not particularly recollect the contents of this letter, but this was the substance of it: He congratulates Col. B. on his acquittal in Kentucky, and that the grand jury did not find a bill against him; he mentioned the state of the boats building on the Muskingum, though I do not particularly recollect what he said about them. ( Q. At what time was this? A. About the middle of November, 1806.) He likewise mentioned the quantity of provisions, that he should probably have to take down the river with him; I particularly recollected corn meal, as one of the articles. He mentioned that he should probably take his family down with him. The letter was long; and occupied about 2 pages of common paper. I delivered to Mr. Jouard the letter addressed to him. He broke the seal, and requested me to carry the inclosed to Col. Burr at Frankfort. I did carry it to Frankfort, and delivered it to Col. Burr. I returned then to the island, and took back with me a letter from Col. Burr to Mr. Blannerhasset. Mr. Burr before he closed his letter, handed it to me. I read a part of it; but as I was somewhat puzzled to make out the writing, I asked him for an explanation of a word. He took the letter and read the whole, as I supposed, to me. The substance was, that he thanked Mr. Blannerhasset for the exertions which he had used to put the boats in a state of preparation. He stated, that he should probably leave that place in eight days for Nashville. He said that he should probably go down the river before Mr. Blannerhasset; that he was glad that his family was going down; and that he would prepare a place for them at Natchez or New Orleans, that they would be better accommodated on the Ohio. He told him to make all possible speed, as the probability was, that the river would close up.
Examined by the Prosecution.
Mr. Hay. Were there any other reasons mentioned besides its freezing? A. None that I recollect. Q. Did you carry no verbal instructions? A. Yes—that in descending the river, they should carry some signal object in the boats; as a white flag in the day time, and a lantern at night. Q. Believing that the object of this enterprise was lawful, did you not at first join in it? A. Yes; I did contemplate joining in it. Mr. Blannerhasset mentioned several persons to me who had joined in it. I do not know whether he mentioned the government, but he certainly said that the officers of the government had approved it. Mr. McRae. Did he mention the object of this enterprise? A. He stated, that he expected there would be a war with Spain; and in that event, the people who went down with him would join the regular army and advance to the frontiers. If there was no war, they would then effect a settlement on the Ouachita. He mentioned that general Eaton and Mr. Gallatin were engaged. He named general Wilkinson. Mr. Wirt. Did you go down with him? A. I did not. Q. What prevented you? A. When I had returned to Marietta, I received a letter from young Danielson, stating to me the substance of gen. Eaton's deposition. I repeated this important contradiction of one of Blannerhasset's statements to a number of my friends, and they all abandoned the enterprise. Mr. Hay. Had you any conversation with Mr. Burr? A. We had some about the boats and the party. Mr. McRae. How many persons desisted from the enterprise? A. Mr. Cushing, Mr. Mann, and two or three from Marietta. Mr. Hay. Did you not carry some message to Blannerhasset, about the necessity of his immediate departure? A. No. Col. Burr stated this; that he believed in consequence of newspaper reports, the public mind was much incensed; that he apprehended the party would meet with some opposition in going down the river; and that he hoped they would not oppose the constituted authorities. Q. Were there any men preparing to depart when you arrived on the island? A. When I returned from Lexington, I was surprised at the number of men whom I saw there; about 20. Mr. Wirt. When Burr spoke of these men and boats, did he speak of them as having any authority over them? A. He spoke of them as one concerned. Mr.
McRae. When he spoke of going down the river, did he speak of his people? A. He spoke of them under the general description of "they." He spoke of them as of persons in connection with himself, and with whom he had connection. Mr. Hay. Did you hear nothing of the legislative proceedings of Ohio before you carried the letter? A. Not till my return. ( Chief Justice. The legislature did not meet till afterwards. Mr. Burr. The legislature did not meet till the 4th of December, and Frankfort, where Mr. Belknap saw me, is about 200 miles from the island. Mr. Hay. I did not know the date of Mr. Burr's letter. Mr. Belknap. It was dated about the last of November, and I returned to the island about the 10th (December.) Mr. McRae. Did he not make some enquiries about Blannerhasset? A. He enquired about his health and the probability of his going away. Q. Did nothing of any moment occur in relation to Blannerhasset's departure? A. Nothing that I recollect. He departed a short time after I had arrived there. Q. Did he not state the reasons of this sudden departure? A. He said he apprehended some difficulty, if he did not immediately depart, from the people of Kentucky. Q. Did you carry no dispatches for Jouard? A. None. Mr. Wirt. Did you understand from both, that Blannerhasset was connected with Burr? A. I did. Mr. McRae. Was there no rumor and noise on this subject before you went to Kentucky? Was it not the opinion of the people that they intended to invade Mexico? A. There were various opinions concerning them. Messrs. Martin and Burr both objected to this question. Mr. McRae. My object is, next to ask the witness whether Col. Burr did not inquire about this state of the public mind? Did not Mr. Burr say something about it? A. He asked me what was going on abroad, such was his expression. I particularly recollect him to have asked this question; whether I had seen any thing in the papers from the government on this subject. I replied, that I had not. Q. What offers did they make to induce you to join them? A. None particularly, except that if when I descended the river, I did not find gens. Eaton and Wilkinson either there or coming there, and if there was no Spanish war; then Blannerhasset was to bear my expenses back. Mr. McRae. Then you considered yourself as engaged for a Spanish war? A. I did. Q. And Mr. Gallatin was to have joined? A. Yes: most particularly; so Mr. Blannerhasset said.
Cross examined by the accused.
Mr. Burr. Do you remember a particular portion of land, which I offered to Mr. Blannerhasset in my letter? A. No. I recollect you authorised him to offer a certain quantity to young men. Q. Do you not recollect, I offered him 40,000 acres? A. I do not. Q. Did I not show you a map of the land? A. You did. Q. Did I not show you some deeds for the land? A. I do not recollect. Q. Do you not recollect, that I stated in my letter the advantages and disadvantages on both sides; that if he did not live in peace with the neighbors, he had better come down? A. I do not recollect; but the impression on my mind is, that you expected him down. Q. Did I ever speak of the party in the island as my people? A. You did not; your expression generally was "they." Mr. Hay. As soon as you had made your communication to Mr. Blannerhasset, did you retire to bed and see nothing else? A. Yes. Mr. McRae. Did you say, that you stated to Mr. Blannerhasset the reasons of your declining? A. I did to his lady. Mr. Blannerhasset had then departed. Q. Who were the others whom Mr. Blannerhasset mentioned to you in conversation as concerned in the scheme? A. He mentioned Mr. Dayton, Ma. Devetix, ( Mr. Wirt. Does he live in Baltimore.) Mr. Smith of New York. Mr. Wirt. Did he represent Burr as the head of the expedition? A. In the first conversation he mentioned he did not know what Col. Burr intended to do; and as to his influence he observed "you know, he is not high in the confidence of his country." In all the other conversations he did name him as the head.
Mr. Hay then called RICHARD NEIL, who being sworn proceeded to state his testimony: Last year one of my sons went to the island on Blannerhasset's business, another lived a few miles in the neighborhood. About the 1st of September, Mr. Blannerhasset sent for me, he said he wanted to see me. I went down immediately. He appeared very busy at writing. He asked me if I could keep a secret. He said he had a piece of writing to copy; that he had sent the first number, "which the printer did not understand."
Mr. Burr interrupted the witness. He was willing for gentlemen to have proved the character of the military expedition which was charged in the indictment; and had therefore indulged them; but they now seemed to be departing from their own course. The witness was about to narrate his conver-
NOTE.—Presumed to be the numbers of the Queriets.
sations with his own son or with Blannerhasset. Mr. B. objected to any testimony of conversations with Blannerhasset when he was not present. He should object to the testimony of any acts, that were not done in his presence. If gentlemen were inclined to prove the nature of the military expedition, he invited them to do it. If they would not, he should object to the production of any other evidence.
Mr. Hay begged leave to go on with the evidence. He should prove Burr's connection with Blannerhasset and with the party on the island. He should prove the military character of the expedition at first; and its still more military character afterwards.
Mr. Burr. If this witness is not very prolix in his testimony, they may go on with it. But I hope gentlemen will have the liberty to say, whether they mean to go on in this manner, or to prove the military expedition at once. We shall certainly have a contest on law points, and it would be better for them before we commence it, to produce all their testimony that relates to the nature of the military expedition.
Some desultory conversation then ensued, when Mr. Randolph observed, that they were then to understand, that gentlemen were determined to persevere in this course— Mr. Wirt. We mean to pursue the proper course. If this is not the proper course, demonstrate it.
While Mr. Botts was preparing to open the argument, Mr. Burr enquired whether the counsel for the prosecution was in possession of the deposition of Timothy Kiffey. Mr. Hay replied he had never seen it.
Mr. Botts regretted that Mr. Hay's prediction for the island should be so great as to prevent his laying his indictment in any other place. He presumed that it would be productive of the same alteration as it had produced in the treason case. Would it not be better for the court to demand at once some evidence on the facts charged in the indictment, than to be amused for two months with an idle parade of the idle tales of idle people.
Mr. Botts laid down the following general positions, which he supported at considerable length.
1. That under the act of Congress there can be no accessory offender, re , none are within the pains of the statute but such as are acting at the fact.
2. If the first point be not sustainable, no act of Col. Burr out of the district can be given in evidence against him.
3. Again, if the first point be not sustainable, no act of an accessory agency can be given in evidence on this indictment, charging the offence of acting at the island, and not specially that the indictee did the accessory act.
4. That if the foregoing points be not sustainable, still no evidence of an accessory agency could be given till the record of the conviction of an actor in the expedition be produced.
5. That the acts on Blannerhasset's island cannot amount to a providing or preparing the means or beginning or setting on foot a military expedition there . This point resolves itself into two others. 1st. There was no military expedition in maturity. 2ndly. If there was a military expedition in progress there, it was not begun or set on foot there, nor were the means provided or prepared thereon. In enquiring into what constitutes the offence under the act of Congress, he contended that the act was so uncertain and ambiguous, that it could never be carried into execution. He instanced many cases which went to shew, that according to the rules of construing penal statutes, this act could not be enforced. He argued that providing the means spoken of in the act of Congress, required the entire means; that the means must be, not of an expedition merely, but a military expedition; that to make it a military expedition it must have a military character, the most essential means of a military expedition is a military organisation; that there must be a military posture; that the means must be adequate to the end; that no assembly of men was engaged in this expedition, nor was Burr ever present at it; that no intention could aid facts in furnishing the means of military expedition; that war might be without military form, but the means of a military expedition must have a military character; and that hostile means will not do, the means must be military.
THURSDAY, Sept. 10.
Mr. Botts continued his observations, and laid down a new proposition.
The 6th point was that no evidence of conversations said to have taken place between any other persons can be given in evidence against Col. Burr, unless he were present at the time the conversations passed.
Mr. Martin observed that he should merely offer a few additional authorities on the question before the court. He commented on the terms "setting on foot" used in the act of Congress. He contended that it was not to be found in the English laws or English dictionaries; and that it was an American word and in American use; that the law itself had passed the Senate of the
U. S. by no more than the casting vote of the Vice-President; and that when it passed through the other house it had received several modifications; and that its ambiguity was such as to forbid its being carried into effect. He contended, that the law was not intended to punish an accessory who advises another to begin and set on foot a military expedition; that upon the principles of the common law accessories were confined to treason, felonies and trespasses; and that this was not a case where there could be any accessory guilt under the common law; that col. B. was not to be considered as principal, because it was not pretended that he was on the island; and that he could not be considered as accessoryially present according to these principles of the common law. Mr. Martin entered into a short elucidation of the points stated by Mr. Botts .
Mr. Hay commenced his argument with some observations upon the light and ludicrous manner in which Mr. Botts had treated this subject. Why this solicitude of the accused to repress the evidence? Is it because its introduction would overwhelm him beyond the possibility of redemption? Why treat the subject with this extraordinary levity? Is it to impress the public mind, that it is not worthy of a serious consideration? With what is A. Burr charged? One of his counsel has asserted that the accomplishment of his scheme would have been honorable to him and to his country. And what were those schemes? They were contrary to every principle of an honest man and a virtuous citizen. They consisted in violating the laws of his country in a point the most materially interesting to her foreign relations. They were such as a man of ambition disposed to delude ignorant people might be disposed to conceive. They have alarmed and exasperated the whole country. And so difficult has it been to obtain a complete jury for the trial that 19 out of 20 men have been excluded; and yet in a case thus interesting to the public mind, have the opposite council had the hardihood to stand up here and declare that it was so farcical he could not treat it with serious consideration. If these gentlemen had but one moment reflected upon the consequences which must have resulted from the military expedition, they would have shrunk from this course. Perhaps the ambition of this party would have been gratified, and their hope of plunder would have been satisfied: perhaps the mines of Mexico would have been theirs, but little would it have been to them, that France and Spain should have exhausted their revenge in devastating the eastern coasts of our country. Had the gentlemen considered it in this light, they would have viewed it as every other man would, as a scheme formed by an ambitious man to effect his own aggrandizement, and they could not have treated the subject with such unwarrantable levity.
The object of this motion is to exclude the evidence.
The ground taken by Mr. Botts is, that no person can be found guilty under the act of Congress, who was not present, and concurring in the offence charged. But this point was already decided even in the treason case; it was there determined, that a man may be guilty of levying war, without being present at the scene where the war is levied, if he be properly indicted.
The true ground of objection to the evidence meant to be taken by Mr. Botts is this, that A. Burr not having been present at the time of the offence charged, the evidence offered must be irrelevant. This indeed is the only ground on which the evidence can be excluded; for mere variance will not justify its exclusion. If A be indicted for killing B with a hammer, would the evidence be considered as irrelevant which goes to prove that the instrument of death was a broad axe? Must not the whole of the evidence necessarily go before the jury; and is it not for them to decide under the instructions of the court? It is only in a case where the evidence does not bear upon the subject at all, that the court may exclude it.
Assuming this then as the basis of his remarks, Mr. Hay stated that the enquiry would be whether the evidence now offered be relevant to the indictment. The defendant is charged with beginning, setting on foot, providing and preparing the means of a military expedition at Blannerhasset's island against Mexico. These are the charges to which his plea relates and which we are bound to establish. The evidence offered goes to prove, that men were assembled and means were provided for an expedition against Mexico on the island; and that Burr was the projector of the plan and provider of the means. Is not this testimony relevant? and if it is, how can the court exclude it?
In the treason case, the indictment charged the prisoner with being present at the acts done on the island. There is a manifest difference between this and the indictment in the treason case. In the latter, the indictment
charged the prisoner with being present. But in this indictment, there is nothing which either expressly or by implication, proves him to be present. Burr might begin or set on foot, provide or prepare the means of a military expedition at Blannerhasset's island, without being present. Thus a merchant in Philadelphia might prepare the means of an expedition in New York; he might enlist men by bounty and even equip a vessel for carrying them to the West-Indies; without once stirring from his composing house.
Presence, therefore, not being expressly stated, nor even alleged by inference, there is not even a variance between the case and the evidence. If there was, it would be no good ground for exclusion. If it be said that the indictment is defective, in not stating expressly whether he was present or absent, it might be a good reason for a motion in arrest, but not for the exclusion of evidence. This objection as to the variance is entirely new. In the cases of indicting a man for keeping a gaming house; of retailing spirituous liquors without a licence; or for providing meat and drink for voters, it is not necessary to prove the presence of the accused; and such a defect is no ground of objection. But even if the defendant was charged expressly to have been present, in this case, still he might be convicted, though the evidence proved him to be absent; because in this case no proof of an overt act is required.
As to Mr. Botts's second proposition, that no evidence of facts done out of the district was admissible, this had even been settled in the treason case; for if after giving evidence of an overt act of treason, on Blannerhasset's island, you can give explanatory and confirmatory evidence from another district, a fortiori can it be done on the present occasion.
As to Mr. Botts's 3d proposition, that no evidence of accessory agency can be given, until the guilt of the principal be proved by a record; it may be answered, that the accused himself is charged as the offender; that the persons supposed to be the principals are merely means, the providing of which constitutes his guilt; that in treason every member of an assembly performing an overt act is a traitor, but that in this case, the persons called principals, are not supposed to have any legal guilt under this act, because they have not begun and set on foot, or provided the means of a military expedition; and that those only who have had agency in the scheme, have begun and set it on foot.
The Chief Justice here interrupted Mr. Hay , and said that he seemed to have misunderstood the argument of the opposite counsel. The principals to whom they alluded were not the men who were enlisted, but the agents who had enlisted these men, and purchased arms and provisions. Mr. Hay replied, that he should regret to see such a doctrine ever established in this country; a doctrine which was calculated to save able, intriguing and artful men, from the penalties of their ambition, and to expose their humble agents to destruction. The persons who enlisted men and purchased arms, might be completely ignorant of the uses to which they were to be applied, and yet by this doctrine, they were to be treated as the principals.
Mr. Hay continued and observed, that this 3d objection of Mr. Botts's had not been taken by the able and zealous counsel in the cases of Ogden and Smith, and that at all events this was a question of law and of fact and proper for the consideration of the jury.
Mr. Hay contended that the 4th proposition, that the acts on the island do not come within the law, there being no military expedition, was a question of fact and law, and was therefore proper for the consideration of the jury; that whether under this act a man can be said to provide the means of a military expedition, unless he provides adequate means, as Mr. Botts had asserted, was not therefore essential to be discussed. Mr. Hay contended, however, that there were insuperable objections to this construction; that it was impossible to ascertain what were adequate means; that this point would depend upon the object to be attained, whether conquest, revenge and plunder; that this construction was also inconsistent with the law itself, for it would be absurd to require full means for punishment, and yet punish for beginning or setting on foot an expedition. Mr. Hay contended that the word "military" was only intended to mark the character of the enterprise; to shew that it was an expedition of war and not a mere commercial or trading voyage; and that no military organisation was necessary, as 1000 men enlisted, 1000 guns provided, and boats, provisions, and ammunition prepared, would certainly come within the purview of the law.
Mr. Hay contended that Mr. Botts's 5th proposition was no reason for excluding the evidence; that this was a question of law and fact, fit for the consideration of the jury.
He admitted that the 6th proposition standing naked was true in itself, but he

contended that if there was a connexion between the parties, that the acts and confessions of one were evidence against the other; that this principle was settled in Hardy's, Thelwell's, and Tooke's cases; and that in the present case, the evidence of the connection of Blannerhasset was already before the jury; and that he was prepared to adduce additional testimony. See Trial of Smith and Ogden , page 162. On Friday Mr. Martin offered a few additional authorities. He was followed by Mr. McRae; and afterwards by Mr. Wirt, who spoke two hours. Mr. Randolph continued the argument for one hour.
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15. Mr. Hay said that the counsel for the prosecution would attempt to go on as well as they could; and that they would attempt to introduce no evidence which interfered with the court. He should state what he conceived to be a summary of that opinion. Mr. Hay stated one or two propositions, when the opposite counsel objected to this course.
Mr. Martin suggested whether it would not be better to introduce particular points of testimony, for the court then to determine upon their admissibility. After some conversation, Mr. Hay called up Mr. Neale. Q. Were you on the island, on the night of Blannerhasset's departure? A. I was not; I left it about the 26th of August.
JAMES McDOWELL was then called; when Mr. Hay observed that this witness was introduced for the purpose of proving an interview between him and the accused at the mouth of Cumberland river, when the accused stated to him the object of his expedition. Mr. Burr observed, that he understood this was offered as corroborative or auxiliary testimony. Auxiliary to what? They ought first to demonstrate that he did commit the acts on the island, that were laid in the indictment. Why do they thus attempt to prove acts done in Kentucky out of the district?
Some argument ensued on this point; when Mr. Hay observed, that he considered the terms "providing, and providing means" as the direct and operative terms of the law; he would prove that means for a military expedition had been provided at the island; and the question was, who did provide them? he would undertake to do so, from circumstances, to the compleat satisfaction of the jury, that Mr. Burr was the provider. These circumstances were satisfactory to his mind, and he thought they would be equally so to them.
Chief Justice. If you have any testimony about providing the means at the island, let it be produced.
Mr. Dudley Woodbridge was then called up, whose testimony we have already retailed in the Enquirer. He now gave a particular history of his contract with Mr. Burr, the building of the boats and the preparing of provisions. The prosecution interrogated him particularly about the corn, which Mr. Blannerhasset had purchased on his island, and attempted to show that, in this transaction he acted under the powers of the firm. The opposite counsel asked him, whether this purchase of corn had ever been carried into the company's books. A. No. Whether were the partnership accounts settled? A. Yes.
Peter Taylor was then interrogated about the corn purchased by Blannerhasset on the island. He said that this corn was kiln-dried on the island; then carried to the mills on the Muskingum and the Kanawha; that the meal was brought back to the island; but he was not certain whether any had been carried away by Burr's party.
Mr. Hay at length arose. He said, he perceived very distinctly that he could not proceed in his evidence without meeting the opinion of the court. That opinion had removed the great and most effective part of his testimony; that under such circumstances, he could not support the prosecution; he was willing therefore to enter a Nolle Prosequi and he quoted Foster, p. 327 B, to show, that after a jury was impanelled, it was within the discretion of the court to admit that practice; that he was led to this mode of proceeding by the consideration that the low under which the indictment was laid, was vague in its terms, and as yet undecided, and that this court might permit him to resume the prosecution at some future day, should any substantive testimony occur. The opposite counsel objected to this proceeding; that it was contrary to the uniform practice of the courts; that it was the right of the jury to give a verdict; that the consequences of this proceeding would be the delay of justice to the accused, to whom the constitution had awarded the benefit of a speedy trial. They attempted to show that the principle from Foster did not apply. Mr. Hay was perfectly willing to submit it to the court. The Chief Justice decided that the attorney could not enter a nolle prosequi .
The jury then retired with the indictment, and after an absence of about 20 minutes, Mr. Orris Payne, their foreman, returned a verdict of "Not Guilty". Mr. Hay then announced the course which he was now to pursue; Mr. Burr was not yet discharged from his recognizance for the misdemeanor; that it was his intention to move for his commitment to that place for trial where the military expedition is said to have been completed; that he should combine in the same motion Messrs. Smith and Blannerhasset, and that he should have no difficulty in entering a nolle prosequi to their trials for a misdemeanor. Mr. Burr requested the attorney to allege the place where the act is said to have been committed. Mr.
Hay replied, that the evidence he should introduce would cover a vast extent of territory; that he would name, if he could, the very spot. Mr. Burr. The district then. Mr. Hay. I do not distinctly recollect the opinion of the court—but I believe it will be proved that troops were assembled at the mouth of Cumberland river and down the Mississippi to Bayou Pierre, in a warlike posture. It is not my business to locate the scene. It will be the province of the court, after they have heard the evidence, to fix the place where he is to be tried.
Mr. Martin mentioned the case of John Smith of Ohio; but no arrangement was made.
Mr. Wickham mentioned the case of Jonathan Dayton. Mr. Hay observed, that he did not think himself justified in entering a nolle prosequi , as that would discharge him from his recognizance, and he was not certain but some evidence would occur in the course of the examination which would induce him to combine Mr. Dayton in his motion for commitment; that he had no doubt that Mr. D. was leagued in the general conspiracy, and if he had the similarity of the hand writing of the letter he had in his hand (Gen. Dayton's) with some he had previously seen, would have satisfied his mind.
Mr. Wickham then proposed, that Mr. Hay should enter a Nol. Pros. and that Gen. D. should continue his recognizance to which Mr. Hay acquiesced.
Adjourned till tomorrow 11 o'clock.
From Bell's Weekly Messenger, a London paper.
CONSEQUENCES AND IMPOLICY OF A WAR WITH AMERICA.
The intelligence of the week has produced one event upon which it is impossible to reflect without a sentiment of indignation. The intemperance of one of our Admirals has nearly involved us in a war with America. The intemperance of the party writers at home, has hurried them not only to approve of the conduct of our officers, but to make the unqualified assertion, that a war with America would be an undoubted good—an absolute advantage to us.
A war with America an undoubted good! We really wish that these advocates for war would consult the merchants of London, Liverpool and Bristol. They would soon be compelled into other conclusions.
America, say these advocates, monopolizes the whole of our Colonial Carrying Trade. This is a manifest injury to British Commerce. Indeed! Why is it, good friends, that our merchants prefer the Americans as carriers to carriers of their own nation? For no other reason, but because as a neutral, America can afford to take their commodities at a lower freightage. And is not this an indispensable advantage both to the individual merchant, and to the general commerce of the country? Are not our commodities thus enabled to come cheaper to market, and thereby ensure a more certain and more speedy sale.
It appears, therefore, in this point of view, the Carrying Trade of America is of real benefit to the general commerce of England.
But the Shipping Trade, say the party-writers, must proportionately suffer—certainly. But it will not, we hope, be contended, that the interests of the general commerce are to be sacrificed to one particular branch—the Shipping or country Trade.
There are, indeed, certain advantages, which are essential to neutrals, and which no belligerent power should grudge to its neutral neighbor, inasmuch as they themselves fully participate in the benefit. Commerce would not only diminish, but in many respects would be totally extinguished, if these neutral mediums were to be prohibited.
In what manner for example, is it, that our colonial produce obtains admission into France and Germany, in despite of all the oppressive regulations of the French Emperor? It is only through these neutral mediums. In a word, what America takes with one hand, she gives us tenfold with another. She is above a carrier or an agent. Her flag covers the English as well as the French manufactures. She has no partiality but that of gain, and this may be procured equally on both sides, so will America, we found equally advantageous to both.
If America were to be cut off from the Carrying Trade, say the party-writers, the British merchant would be compelled to employ his own countrymen.
We have already answered this argument. The employment of the neutral medium is of benefit to the general commerce, and the interest of one branch not be consulted at the expence of the whole. The merchants must not send their commodities into foreign markets, at a price amounting to a prohibition of all purchases, for no other purpose but that they would employ their own countrymen. They must not pay convoy and insurance on commodities (sugars, for example) which will scarcely pay the simple freightage.
A very shallow objection is here made. These commodities, say they, are articles of necessity; the buyers must have them, and will therefore pay the price at whatever they may.
In the first place, other commodities will enter into competition with them, and though not so good, the difference being more than compensated by the inferior price, will assuredly find a preference.
In the second place, in the circum-
stance of any advanced price, even the necessary buyers take a less quantity than usual. But this diminished consumption is so much dead loss to the merchant and manufacturer. It will not, we hope, be contended, that there is a new thing in the advance of price which can indemnify him for his diminished sale. The advanced price is but the detrayment of his advanced expence. If he add anything beyond it is a forced argumentation of his profits beyond their natural level, and of course subjects him to be undersold by those who will sell at a fair profit. He gains nothing, therefore, as we have above said, by his advanced price and therefore must necessarily lose by his diminished sale.
Such, then, would be the necessary effects of forcing trade into an unnatural channel—of compelling our merchants, in the event, and under every circumstance, to employ only British shipping, and dismiss the neutral medium.
Our commerce would suffer, and ultimately our shipping. We should shortly have more ships, but fewer commodities. The shipbuilders would then have just cause of complaint, that had employed their capitals in building vessels, which have only to rot in the docks.
The result is, that nothing is to be gained by a war with America. In her carrying trade, she carries for us, and she carries for our enemy. It would be a manifest injury to our general commerce to deprive her of the former, and with respect to the latter, we should not gain that of which we should deprive America. We could not supply her place by becoming carriers to our enemy; neither should we much distress the enemy by cutting off the means of conveyance—we should only throw his carrying trade into another channel—whilst the Danes are neutral, it would be to no purpose to cut off the neutral medium of America.
We might add, that we perhaps gain as much on one hand as we lose on the other by this neutral communication. America carries English manufactures as often at least as she carries French. We might almost say, that in her character as a neutral trader, she carries scarcely any thing else but English goods.
We have entered into some detail upon this subject, as there seems to be a strange misconception upon the very first principles of political economy. It is confessed, for the first time, that the merchant will lose nothing by being compelled to sell dear; and that is a matter of perfect indifference in commerce, whether the commodity reaches its market by a direct road, and therefore at a natural price, or through all the obstacles of possible interruption, and therefore at a very disproportionate and a very unnatural price.
"The only difference would be," say they, quoting the words of Mr. Randolph, an American Senator, "that the Americans will have to give a joe for a commodity, where they formerly gave a dollar."
This might be the difference to such a man as Mr. Randolph, who could equally afford to have the commodity whether it cost a joe or a dollar. But it would be very difficult with respect to the Americans in general. Every one could not purchase at a joe who purchased at a dollar. Some would endeavor, therefore, to do without, others would begin to think of substitutes. Necessity is the mother of invention. Let us not drive the Americans to resources from which it may be afterwards very difficult to recall them.
From the Liverpool Chronicle, August 5.
WAR WITH AMERICA.
From the Continent of Europe the attention of this country has been directed to that of America, by an event which cannot be too much regretted—an action between an American and a British frigate, as we noticed in our last, in which several men were killed. This act of hostility originated in an attempt to search the American frigate, which was resisted. It is hardly possible to describe the consternation the consternation the first intelligence of this event occasioned amongst mercantile men, who contemplate the bare possibility of an American war with horror, yet the ministerial papers, with diabolical phrenzy, have not scrupled to congratulate the public on the probability of such a ruinous event taking place. If at any period it was the interest of a commercial country to enlarge its system of warfare, which has generally, if not always, ruined the cause it professed to serve, we think the present time, of all others, the most inauspicious. We sincerely hope that we shall not be plunged into a course of unmeaning hostilities with a nation which, for seventeen years, has been a profiting but silent spectator of the convulsions which have occupied the attention of Europe—and in whose prosperity we are greatly interested. Seven millions of our annual exports have their market in America; and though nine tenths of the revenue of America may depend on her external commerce, and its consequent diminution would become certain from a rupture with England, yet the disadvantages of a contest would predominate against us. While we have been augmenting our public burdens, America has been changing her internal economy, and widening the sources of her commercial prosperity. Our West India colonies would become materially injured by a war, the Atlantic would teem with innumerable cruizers, to the great annoyance of our trade, and to the ruin of our manufacturers. Our government ought not to forget that several of the powers, which we assume
upon the ocean, such as those of searching neutral ships, or allowing or disallowing various branches of neutral trade, are such as to occasion no slight interruption, mortification and loss to the Americans; and undoubtedly these acts, if necessary for our interests, ought to be attended with as conciliatory a language and manner as possible. There is good evidence, however, to believe that the contrary is the case, and that they are very frequently attended with circumstances of studied insult and oppression. For this, the temper of our officers and sailors, in many respects so admirable, is chiefly to blame; but it has not hitherto been sufficiently the care of government, by express and peremptory injunctions, to guard against this inordinate conduct.
At a late hour last night we received Charleston papers to the 6th ult. inclusive. Their columns are filled with details of the unhappy rencontre between the Leopard and Chesapeake, and the resolutions of meetings held in various parts of the United States, in consequence of that unfortunate affair. Our limits will not allow their insertion, but the substance of them is, to express the horror and indignation excited by the occasion—a determination to support with life and property the government, in obtaining satisfaction—to prevent all intercourse with British ships of war—to refuse all supplies—to invite the pilots to refuse their assistance towards conducting any such ships of war into their harbors—and to hold as infamous all who violate these resolutions, or refuse co-operation. At Norfolk the conduct of the citizens of Hampton, who destroyed the water casks belonging to the British frigate Melampus, was voted highly laudable and praiseworthy. The meetings, it is said, have been conducted with great temper and moderation, considering the circumstances under which they met. The men taken from on board the Chesapeake, are said to be native Americans, and 17 others, are reported to be detained on board the Bellona, a ship belonging to the same squadron. The volunteer companies throughout the union are tendering their services to government. The Norfolk paper states that the irritation of the public mind, far from moderating, appears daily to increase—an officer from the Leopard had the temerity to venture on shore; the people, incensed, broke into the house where he had taken refuge, and were about to proceed to acts of violence, when captain Decatur of the Chesapeake arrived, and with great difficulty rescued him—he was afterwards put on board a boat, with a guard of soldiers, and conveyed to the ship. It was reported that threats had been thrown out, that the British squadron would obtain a supply of water by force—Preparations were made by the people to resist the attempt. Business in Norfolk was entirely at a stand. All party distinctions were set aside, and every man stood prepared to resist further aggression.
LONDON, AUG. 4.
The letters from Holland state that the new code of restrictive laws against the English commerce, was immediately to be distributed, and enforced with all possible rigor.
Man of the letters received yesterday from St. Petersburg, indicate a strong probability of the departure of many of the English merchants residing there from G. Britain; they add, that the commercial treaty has been enlarged for three days only; this was done on the 28th of June, to continue to the 1st. of July.
AUGUST 6.
Sir James Craig, is to go as chief governor of British America.
AUGUST 7.
A strong sensation of dread relative to our future communication with Portugal pervades the public mind. We think it very probable, that the French Emperor intends to take measures to cramp that lucrative branch of commerce which we carry on to the Tagus. Nay, it is not unlikely that the Portuguese government has received an intimation to that effect, which although not publicly known, they have transmitted to our ministers; and occasioned those vague reports on the subject that are now so general.
PARIS, JULY 4.
37TH BULLETIN OF THE FRENCH GRAND ARMY.
The Emperors of France and Russia, after 29 days residence at Tilsit, where the Imperial Palaces were in the same street, and at no great distance, took leave of each other with the greatest cordiality, and at 3 o'clock in the afternoon of the 9th. The Journal which contains an account of what happened between them, will be very interesting to both nations.
At half past four the Emperor Napoleon having received a visit from the King of Prussia, who came to take his leave, set out for Koningsberg, where he arrived at 10 o'clock at night. The King of Prussia went to Memel.
Yesterday the Emperor Napoleon inspected the port of Koningsberg, in a boat manned by the Imperial Guards. To-day his Majesty will review marshal Soult's corps, and at 2 o'clock tomorrow he will set out for Dresden.
The number of Russians killed in the battle of Friedland amounts to 17,500, the prisoners to 40,000; 18,000 of whom have passed through Koningsberg, 7,000 remain sick in the hospitals, and the rest have been conducted to Thorn and Warsaw. Orders have been given to send them to Russia without delay; 7,090 have returned again to Koningsberg. Those in France are to
be formed into provisional regiments. The Emperor has ordered them to be clothed and armed.
[After mentioning the ratification of the treaties with Russia and Prussia, it is added—]
After such events as these, one cannot but smile, when the great English expedition is mentioned, and at the new frenzy which animates the King of Sweden. Besides, we may remark, that the army of observation between the Elbe and the Oder, is 70,000 strong, exclusive of the Grand Army, without including the Spanish division, which are now upon the Oder also. It was, therefore, necessary for England to bring her whole force together, her soldiers, her volunteers, fencibles, &c. in order to have made a diversion of any interest. But when we take into our account, that England, under the present circumstances, has sent 8,000 men to Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Arabs, and 7,000 men to the Spanish W. Indies, we can also feel sentiments of pity for the extravagant avarice with which that Cabinet is tormented.
The peace of Tilsit puts an end to the operations of the army; notwithstanding this, all the Prussian coasts and ports will be shut against the English, and it is probable that the continental blockade will not prove a mere sound.
The Porte is included in the treaty. The revolution which lately occurred at Constantinople, was the antichristian revolution, which has nothing in common with the policy of Europe.
The adjutant commandant Guilleminot is gone to Bessarabia, where he will communicate to the Grand Vizir the intelligence of the peace, and the liberty given to the Porte to take part in it, as well as of the conditions of the treaty in which the Porte is interested.
WASHINGTON CITY,
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21.
Extract of a letter from Amsterdam, dated in the beginning of Aug.
"The present emperor of Austria is in future to be king of Bohemia, and the archduke Charles is to be king of Austria, the arch duke Constantine, Brother to Alexander, comprehending Moldavia, Wallachia, and part of Poland—the present king of Prussia to have part of his dominions restored to him; Murat, duke of Berg, to be king of Poland; Jerome Bonaparte to be king of Westphalia, and to marry the daughter and only child of the king of Saxony; Jean Beauharnois, son of the present empress Josephine, to be king of Holland, (Louis Napoleon retiring) Joseph Bonaparte present king of Naples to be king of Italy; and Ferdinand the former King of Naples to be restored, the present confederation of the Rhine to remain, and a confederation of the North to be formed under the patronage of Alexander, whose sister the empress Napoleon is to marry after repudiating his present wife."
We have received the Layden Gazette of the 28th July, which, however, contains no news of consequence.
We are obliged to defer the publication of "Respondent," from the superior claims of other articles.
COMMUNICATION.
On the tenth instant the First Regiment of the Militia of Maryland commanded by Col. R. Hawkins assembled for the purpose of confiding what steps were necessary to be adopted in obedience to the requisition of the commander in Chief, calling for the quota of the militia of Maryland.—
The regiment being formed and having with great alacrity performed the accustomed military evolutions, the Proclamation of the President of the United States was read to them by brigadier general Caleb Hawkins, after which he addressed them in the following patriotic and eloquent terms.
Fellow Citizens—It is with the utmost satisfaction that I have read this manifesto of the President, addressed to the citizens of the United States—because I believe it contains not a sentence the truth of which can be denied—It is a mirror which presents without distortion or aggravation, the genuine features of the British character, as exhibited in its transactions with this country—it gives a striking view of American moderation and love of peace, contrasted with British violence and injustice. It is a solemn call upon the people of the United States either to relinquish the honorable stand which they have hitherto maintained among the powers of the Earth, or to rally round the standard of their government, a government of their own choice—and by a dignified attitude, and manly resistance, convince our enemies, that our forbearance has not proceeded from cowardice, nor our attachment to peace flowed from a love of gain—Let us convince them that, in our estimation, loss of honor is the greatest evil that can befall a nation, and that we prize it, much too lightly to surrender its keeping to any power whatever—that to preserve it, we are ready to encounter all the hazards and submit to all the privations of war, that in the maintenance of our just rights, we will meet them hand to hand, and foot to foot, nor ever relinquish the prize but with our lives.
Let it be proudly recollected by every American, that at a period of national infancy, unsupported by foreign aid

—unprepared with arms, without military discipline—destitute of money or credit—and what was worse, a considerable division existing among ourselves, under these accumulated disadvantages, we dared to resist oppression, and determined to be free—Our efforts were crowned with success—and shall we now when our numbers are nearly treble, when our finances are known to be ample—our credit established and Union complete, shall we render the smiles of Providence nugatory, by meanly crouching at the foot of that nation, whose attempts to enslave us were so gallantly resisted by our fathers—forbid it Heaven—forbid it glory, & every thing that is honorable to man.
Americans arose, to long have we borne the insults and aggressions of a nation, who having failed in her efforts to crush our republican happiness, now endeavors to thwart our commercial prosperity by every act of injudicious policy and continued malice—longer to remain passive, would justify the conclusion, that we want either sensibility to feel, or courage to resent the injuries she inflicts—The present occasion affords an opportunity, to manifest to the world that we are deficient in neither, and I trust, our conduct this day will evince to the world, that the spirit of '76 still exists among us in all its energy—that patriotism is the natural growth of our country, and foreign violence only tends to cherish it.
Young men of Charles! this day you hear the voice of your country—she tells you, her lawful commerce has been obstructed—her ships of war have been attacked—her citizens have been murdered—others forcibly arrested from her protection perhaps to undergo in a foreign country a sham trial, and real execution—And for what offence? For endeavoring to escape from unlawful bondage. From worse than Algerine slavery—For this the laborious peaceful citizen of America may be suspended at the yard-arm of a British Man of War—Shall we stand idle, unconcerned spectators, whilst such atrocious scenes are passing before our eyes—I trust we shall not—Our country calls for an hundred thousand men, to repel such gothic violence—and I hope we shall not wait the slow operation of law, to draw from us our proportion of this force—she wants not the tardy, reluctant draughts—but the intrepid, cheerful volunteer—with an 100,000 at these ready armed and equipped, she will assume an attitude of dignity, and firmness—Our enemies who have hitherto counted upon our divisions, when they shall see such an host of warriors voluntarily rallying round the standard of their government—who they cannot love, will learn to respect us—And tho' their ears have long been shut to the voice of reason, their eyes will be open to a prospect of danger—and what has been refused to justice, will be yielded from necessity.—
Young men of Charles, let me again exhort you—your Country calls on you—let her not call in vain.
General Hawkins was followed by the Honorable John Campbell, the representative for this district in Congress, who in patriotic and energetic language reminded the people of the purpose for which they had assembled—He entered them to bury all party distinctions, to rally round the constituted authorities of their country, and unite for the purpose of avenging the violated rights of their nation—He dwelt particularly upon the outrage lately inflicted upon our national dignity, and honor, and enforced the importance and necessity of unanimity in the alarming crisis.
All present seemed to feel the full force of these addresses—but one sentiment prevailed, and seventy volunteers rallied at the beat of the drum, determined to vindicate the rights of their country—support the constitution of their choice, or be buried under its ruins—we are happy to state that among the volunteers were young men of the first fortune and respectability—we feel assured that the whole quota required from Gen. Hawkins's brigade will be effected without a draught and we are proud to announce that the people of Charles County still feel the spirit of '76, and will when their country demands their aid, and services, be among the foremost to protect & enforce her rights.
Charles County. Sept. 15th, 1807.
FOR THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
Observations on the conduct of Great Britain—Continued.
No. IV. It has been unfortunate for neutral commerce, that the merchants could not know, in time to avoid confiscations, the etched sections of foreign laws, executive orders, &c. &c. by which their property was unwarrantably condemned. It is of consequence that they should now see and understand these great sources of danger. Nothing can protect our merchants, but our maintaining inviolate the law of nations. We have contended, that our property was often captured and condemned without any real and sound lawful authority, and, of course, against existing law. It is proposed now to offer to the American merchants a decided opinion on this subject, which a very great majority of them will receive as the most respectable and indisputable. It comes from Mr. King, who as a man of natural abilities, as a lawyer, an experienced dip-
lomatist, and perfectly informed by the English ministers themselves in recent negotiations of all their pretensions, writes thus in the 40th page of his pamphlet in "Reply to war in Disguise," published by Riley & Co. of N. York, and S. F. Bradford, of Philadelphia, in February 1806. He expressly states as follows, in regard to British Captures.
"The prize courts therefore spoke "to neutrals (by their decrees) this "clear and distinct language. We ac- "knowledge, that by the law of nations "you are entitled to the prohibited "commerce, and should not hesitate to "restore your captured property, but "we are bound by the text of the king's "instructions. Where they do not ap- "ply we shall restore; as we did during "the American war; and as soon as "as far as the instructions may be with- "drawn, so soon and so far we will "confirm our decrees to the law of na- "tions."
Again in page 41, Mr. King writes more concisely, tho' indeed not more explicitly thus. "It has in the strong and pointed terms of Sir William Scott," (the present Judge of the high court of admiralty of Great Britain,) "been adjudged, that the text of the "king's instructions is the true rule of "a prize court."
The conduct of the British naval commanders, upon the foundation of the order of council of January, 1794, and on the plea of blockading islands, was very dreadful to America. It is certain that blockading a fort, a castle, a town or a port, is a precedent and common measure. But the blockading a whole group or chain of islands, at one time, and the blockading of an entire great island, like St. Domingo, is a new stretch of English naval refinement. The island of St. Domingo is considerably longer than the kingdom of England, and it is therefore a preposterous affectation of blockades, to put all the ports of it under an arbitrary proclamation, because port or two are properly and really blockaded. A ruinous list of captures, however, took place under these orders and proclamations of blockade, by the English, during the year 1794, and examples as wild, as loose, and as injudicious, as possible to the French, and to the neutrals, were set by the Bermudas, Halifax, Providence, and British frigates, to the French cruisers.
In the close of that year, the treaty was hesitatingly made by Mr. Jay and Lord Grenville, between the U. States and G. Britain. It was thought only better than war by her sons of both parties. By this treaty the British, by mutual contract, gave to the Americans, and we accepted several new rights to trade, in the war, with the English colonies in the East and West Indies; which rights were of the same nature, as certain other rights to trade, in the war, which the French had allowed by their own separate acts to the Americans. Those rights to trade, granted by the French, were constantly made the avowed ground to confiscate neutral American ships and cargoes by the British orders of council, and courts of admiralty, because the neutral Americans, as it was alleged, thereby and so to aid the French colonial agriculture. Yet great complaints have been made, that the French have condemned American vessels for giving the same aid to islands taken from themselves by the British, tho' we had guaranteed those islands by the treaty of 1778 then in force. If the French have acted much more favorably to the neutrals than the English; for their courts do not hold the general English principle, viz. to condemn vessels from the East and West India British colonies, because the privilege of trading with those colonies was given to us in the war, and was not previously allowed by law, in peace. Thus the English afford an example extremely injudicious to the neutrals which the French have refrained from following. This is an important truth.
It is an essential point of difference in the conduct of France and G. Britain, that France has hitherto admitted the doctrine, that her citizens may change her allegiance and become American sailors, merchants, and ship-holders. The opposite doctrine is held by England—and many a fine ship has been endangered or expensively detained by the impressment of native Englishmen, married in America, and become, legally, citizens of the U. States. Numerous captures have taken place, because the cargoes were the property of Englishmen thus become Americans, who had bought goods in places belonging to the enemies of England. The English courts deny the American citizenship, of such former English subjects, and condemn their property, because they are persons claimed as British subjects, and have done business in countries belonging to their enemies. To a country like ours, incessantly receiving foreign merchants and capital, this is an immense disadvantage, arising from the conduct of England alone, and not followed by France. England may fairly be considered as having forced America into an entirely new act, for a neutral power, in making the provision article of Mr. Jay's treaty; an article expensive, dangerous, and even capable of being rendered fatal to France. It may be justly asserted that this provision article is without precedent in the annals of the civilized world. No neutral nation ever before made such a contract with a power at war. It is said to be advantageous to us, and advantageous to France, and yet England accepted the measure of her own accord, before the treaty, and insisted upon it in making the treaty. It cannot be doubted that England did consider the provision article, as, on the whole, very injurious to France and very advantageous to herself.
When the treaty was signed in London, on the 19th of November, 1794, the orders of the British council, which had injured and disgraced the neutrals, and
brought on avowed defensive retaliations from France, were either revoked or considered as superceded. In this state of things, the treaty and Mr. Jay came forward to America. The President received the treaty early in March, 1795. No objection to it being promulgated, and the senate being called to receive it for ratification, there was every reason generally to presume, that it was so far agreeable to the President that he would offer it without objection to that body, as indeed he afterwards did. Such being the appearance of things in the beginning of March, it may be fairly presumed, that the British government relied in May (two months after the call of the senate) with firm confidence, that the treaty would be ratified before anything England might then do, could be known in America.
In this state of things the new orders of the British council of May, 1795, for carrying in our provision vessels were issued. To judge of the shock to France, let us remember how the bare rumour paralyzed the late President Washington. He made an immediate and solemn stand, and caused it to be made known to the British minister that he would not ratify the treaty while those orders were continued in force. The British minister here, suggested the advice of revoking them for a time, to give a fictitious moment of their non-existence, for the ratification of the treaty! He explicitly proposed, however, that they should be then renewed! How dangerous to the neutral! were these examples of British conduct, set before the government of France. The English minister acting thus, is known to have solicited the executive of this country, for the favour of being made the bearer of the treaty to England. Instead of continuing to be informed, that the provision orders must be revoked before the treaty would be signed; the President's signature was subscribed to the instrument, and the benefit and honor of carrying it to England were conferred upon the British minister, agreeably to his request.
The British orders of May, 1795, may be deemed fathomless to us, and peculiarly offensive and injudicious to France, who would as n for by consider them as explanatory of the British sense of the treaty, as our own President is known to have done. It is years since the publication of that fact was made in America; with what degree of good intention or prudence will not be discussed. The captures under those orders were so many, that at the end of 22 months, about 120 cases were carried into the British high court of admiralty appeals. These were chiefly our European adventures, wherein the cargoes and vessels are large and valuable. Not a dollar of these is saved by Jay's treaty which does not affect them.
JURISCOLA.
*Prohibited merely by British orders of King and council, contrary to the law of nations.
From the Norfolk Public Ledger.
In our paper of Monday last, we republished a letter said to be an extract of one from Boston, noticing some particular facts which we were then persuaded were not correctly stated, and which in used us to make a note to that effect.
From the commencement of the present dispute, which may lead to the most serious consequences to our country, it has been our constant aim to collect the truth upon every subject, and submit it without regarding whether it was for or against our country. We have not only done so, but in the same disposition we have corrected, as far as it was in our power the mis-statements which we have seen in other papers. As we happen to be at the place where many circumstances have occurred, interesting to the public, our distant friends have a right to expect industry in collecting, and candor in narrating facts.
The letter to which we refer, and to which we must beg leave to refer our readers, will be found in the third column of our paper of Monday last, amongst other matter contains the following:
"But in order to establish the fair pretensions of the British to a restoration of their deserters, upon principles of reciprocity, it is said at Halifax, to be an incontrovertible fact, that last winter, while the Chichester British frigate lay at Norfolk, a guard from the fort, came along side and demanded three American deserters of Captain Stopford, who ordered his crew to be mustered, and not finding the deserters, the Chichester was thoroughly searched by captain Stopford himself, the three men were all found below, and then taken on shore by the guard, to the fort; after this happened, several of the Chichester's men as many I think as five, deserted from her, and were received at our rendezvous at Norfolk, dressed in the British uniform."
How far this relation ought to be credited, let the following statement of facts (for the accuracy of which, we have authority that we cannot doubt) shew.
About the 8th of February last, the commandant at Fort Nelson, received such information as did not permit him to doubt, that three soldiers of his garrison which had been advertised in the papers of this place, were on board his Britannic majesty's ship Chichester, captain Stopford, then repairing at a wharf, in that part of Portsmouth called Gosport. Upon which the commandant of the fort dispatched an officer of his garrison (a lieutenant) with his compliments to captain Stopford, requesting him to deliver the three men in question to the lieutenant if they were within his command. The lieutenant related, that he was met in the pas-
sage of the house where captain Stopford then quartered to whom he delivered his orders from the commandant of the fort. At first captain S. said he would give the lieutenant permission to search for them, but presently stepping into an adjoining room, he called a boy, and in the hearing of the lieutenant, directed him to go down to the ship, and tell the officer commanding on board, to have some men stored away, which the lieutenant concluded were the men he was in search of. The door was then shut, and a person who the lieutenant took to be an officer, remained some time with captain S. after which he came out, and informed the lieutenant that three or four volunteers had entered on board his ship, and that he should keep them. Having nothing more to say the lieutenant returned to the fort, & made the report now stated to the commandant.
The next morning the commandant called on the British captain, to whom he related the preceding circumstances, and who was great politeness took up the subject; upon which, he addressed a letter to captain Stopford, requesting him to deliver up the men on board. The commandant then went to Gosport, taking with him a sergeant and six armed men to prevent the deserters from escaping by land; having placed them at the different avenues leading from the ship, he went to captain Stopford, and delivered him the captain's letter. Having perused it, he said that three or four volunteers had entered with him and that if they belonged to the service of the U. S. he would deliver them up, and that orders should be given that they should be sought for, and brought to his quarters. Nearly half an hour having elapsed, and no orders being issued, the commandant proposed to go to the ship, which was agreed to; accordingly they proceeded to the ship, and a search was ordered; after some time the officer who made it, reported that the men could not be found in the ship. Upon this the commandant told captain S. with some earnestness, that he was so well satisfied that the men were concealed either in the ship, or in some of the warehouses, which were occupied for the ship's use, that he would not depart without them. Another search was then made, and in about two hours the three men were brought up from the ship's hold, dressed in the uniform of the artillery of the U. S. in which they had been received on board.
The commandant denies that he ever enlisted a man in British uniform, or that he ever enlisted any man knowing him to be a deserter—He denies that Captain Stopford ever made a demand of any deserters from him, and he has the best reasons to believe that captain S. took away three other men who deserted from his garrison, and in uniform.
Boston, Sept. 12.
Further from the Baltic.—The brig Sally and Mary, captain Cobb, arrived here yesterday from Copenhagen, which place she left the 29th July. Unfortunately captain C. brought no papers; and we lament it the more, as had he brought any we should have been in possession of very late news from the Continent of Europe. Captain C. informs, that a report had just been received of an attack upon Stralsund, and its capture, by the French; that previous to the attack, the English had joined the Swedes; that the battle was very severe, and that the loss of the French was very great. Off the Naze, captain C. saw 47 sail of British vessels, 27 of them ships of the line.
New York, Sept. 16.
The ship Diana, Bunker, was below last night, in 34 days from Liverpool. She was left there on the 12th of August, (to sail on the 14th) by the ship Huron, and will probably bring 2 or 3 days later London news than before received.
The ship Huron, captain Clarke, sailed from Liverpool on the 12th of August, but brings no papers later than have been before received at this office; nor any verbal news.
The United States schooner Revenge, bound to England, with dispatches from government, was spoken by captain Walker of the ship Liberty, on the 18th ult. in lat. 48, 31, long. 23, 30, then out 17 days.
LONDON, May 30.
The Gazette contains an Order in Council, for prohibiting the exportation of gun powder or salt petre, or any sort of arms or ammunition, for six months, from the 6th day of June next.
District of Columbia, Washington county, to wit.
In the case of JOHN LONG an insolvent debtor confined in the prison of Washington aforesaid for debt notices is hereby given to the creditors of the said John Long, that on the 24th day of September instant at the hour of 9 o'clock at the Hotel in the city of Washington in the Court room the oath preferred by the said John Long entitled "An act for the relief of insolvent debtors within the District of Columbia" will be administered to the said John Long and a trustee appointed, unless sufficient cause be then and there shown to the contrary. It is ordered that this notice be published in the National Intelligencer and Washington Federalist, three times in each paper prior to that day.
By order of the Hon. Wm. Cranch Esq. Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia. Sept. 22—26. WM. BRENT, Clk.
At a General Meeting of the Shareholders of the ANNAPOLIS LIBRARY COMPANY, the following persons were chosen Officers for the ensuing year. Alexander McWilliams, } Bulley Cooke, } Gustavus Higdon, } Robert Bowie, } Benjamin Moore, } Directors. James Boulding, } John Davis, } John Dempsey, } Edward Fitzgerald, } James S. Stevenson, Librarian. JOSEPH CASSIN, Treasurer. September 21, 1807.
PROSPECTUS.
THE Subscriber has long been impressed with an opinion, that a newspaper which should concentrate important facts, and do its national improvements, particularly those arising from canals and turnpikes, and the advantages of inland water carriage, and careful agriculture, in short that a paper which should regularly have a specific portion of its columns devoted to political economy, would be useful to his country, as tending to convince his fellow citizens of truths, in which all may not be sufficiently aware are essential to insure the United States independent, respectable and happy.
Such an idea has frequently been canvassed among the friends of the interest, and as they agreed with him as to the advantages which might be diffused thereby, they have often urged him to commence such an establishment. Many difficulties originating in his ignorance of the mechanical parts of the business and other causes, long rendered such an attempt however desirable impossible, yet he never ceased anxiously to hope, the day would come when he might be enabled to undertake it—this anxiety has been tenfold increased by the late daring and profane attack on the Chesapeake whilst the necessity of disseminating by means of a newspaper (the most popular of all modes) such information, as might tend to free us from the shackles of foreign nations and promote within our own territory, the consumption of our own wheat, barley, hops, cotton, flax, hemp, iron, pitch, tar, turpentine, beef, pork, as well as a number of other raw and manufactured articles, thereby securing to our own agriculturalists (the best support of our country) a sure stimulus and efficient reward for their labor, has been felt and acknowledged by every true friend to the United States. Under these impressions, the subscriber proposes to commence such an establishment, and should a confident view of the importance of agriculture and the arts, induce one individual in addition to our Franklin, Rittenhouse and Fulton's, to emulate the perseverance and talents of a Brindley—a Bolton a Bakewell, an Arkwright or a Parker, or lead one of our wealthier countrymen to extend to the most important objects of political economy, the useful literacy of a Ruskin, a Coke or a Burdett, it will be attended with infinite advantages to the United States and richly repay the labors of the Editor.
On these accounts the subscriber has determined to move his establishment to Washington city, emphatically denominated the Heart of the Union, as likely soon to become the seat of science and the nursery of the arts.
Some time then in September next will be published the 1st number of a weekly newspaper, entitled,
The Washington Expositor, or WEEKLY REGISTER.
Having it is believed, surmounted the difficulties hitherto experienced by the subscriber he has completed such arrangements, as will enable him, to present to his patrons a correct sheet in a handsome dress, which will contain 1st. Statistical facts, particularly such as relate to national improvements, navigable canals, and turnpike roads.
2d. Facts respecting the practice of husbandry including reviews of, and extracts from the best books, which can be procured on that important subject.
3d. Views of the various mechanic improvements by which labor has been economized.
4th A constant tendency to support the great distinguishing principles of federal America, viz. The right of every man who pays a tax or carries a gun in defence of his country, to the enjoyment of an equal suffrage, the right of every man to the free exercise of his own religious opinion, as well as, that his house should be his castle, free from obtrusion of search.
5th Such views the Expositor will be printed on a good white paper, of a quarto size, with handsome type.
The price to subscribers will be 3 dollars per annum.
A considerable labor and expense will be connected with this establishment no paper will be forwarded to any subscriber without an advance of the subscription money.
In order to afford room for as much information and amusement as possible, after the first insertion, every advertisement will be published in a supplemental sheet.
All subscribers to the Alexandria Expositor who have hitherto paid with regularity, will be supplied with the contemplated paper, except special orders are received to the contrary.
Articles of intelligence, essays on general policy and the various circumstances connected with political economy, advertisements, &c. will be thankfully received at the office.
Letters relative to the business of the paper must be addressed Post Paid to the Expositor Office Washington city, otherwise they will not be taken up.
Subscriptions will be received at the Office in Washington city, and Mr. Milligan's Georgetown.
The scheme of the paper, being detailed, it is only necessary to add, that when it receives adequate patronage, it will be rendered a semi weekly paper, and to request of such Editors, as approve the plan, to give this Prospectus a few insertions and thereby oblige their fellow-citizen.
RICHARD ANN MOORE. August 27, 1807.

EDITORIAL ADDRESS.
In the early part of June the Editor intimated his purpose to retire from the establishment of the National Intelligence...
But a short time elapsed, from the time of his making known his purpose, before a totally unlooked for aggression on the national rights occurred...
A considerable time has since passed without any offer being made, which has been considered satisfactory on this ground.
Looking forward to the ensuing session of Congress as probably one of the most interesting since the era of the present government...
More regard will likewise be paid to the mechanical management of the paper. For some time past, the Editor has had to regret the necessary use of an inferior paper...
This is to give notice, That the subscriber of Georgetown in the district of Columbia, has obtained from the Orphan's Court of Washington county...
JOA. CARLETON. Georgetown, September 18-taw4w
PUBLIC NOTICE.
PURSUANT to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the United States, of the 3d day of March last directing the clerk of the said House to advertise for and receive separate proposals for supplying the said House during the next Congress...
FOR THE STATIONERY.
Table with 2 columns: Item, Price. Items include: Very best superfine English letter paper, Best plain letter paper, Best wove do. do., etc.
FOR THE PRINTING.
Table with 2 columns: Item, Price. Items include: For plain work, octavo per sheet of 300 impressions, figure work, do. do. do., etc.
FOR THE FUEL.
Good found Hickory Wood, delivered in the cellar at the Capitol at Nine Dollars and Seventy-five Cents per Cord.
CHARLES H. VARDEN, Merchant Taylor
New Jersey Avenue, near the Capitol. RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia, he has imported by ship Eliza ANN lately arrived at Philad.
PROPOSALS
For carrying mails of the United States on the following routes will be received at the General Post Office until the 15th of October next.
1st. From Petersburg by Marlinton, Goldensville, Drummondsburg, Warrenton, Lewisburg, Raleigh, and Averilboro, to Fayetteville, three times a week.
NOTES.
1. The Post master general may expedite the mails, & alter the times of arrival and departure at any time during the continuance of the contracts...
GIDEON GRANGER, Post master-general.
This is to give notice, that the subscriber has obtained from the Orphan's court of Montgomery County, in Maryland, letters testamentary on the personal estate of Absalom Beddo, late of said county deceased...
Fifty Dollars Reward
RANAWAY from the subscriber residing in the District of Columbia, on the first of August, 1807, a black man named MOSES, about five feet 8 or 9 inches high, 25 years of age...
LITERARY NOTICE.
WM. DUANE, of Philadelphia, will thank such Book sellers, Printers, and others, as may have had the goodness to collect subscribers, for the LIFE & WORKS OF DR. FRANKLIN...
New & Valuable BOOKS.
JUST received, and now opening, at D. RAPINE'S Book-store on Capitol Hill, a Choice and Valuable Collection of BOOKS and STATIONERY, which he will be happy to dispose of to his friends and customers...
FOR SALE.
A valuable tract of land called Westbury, containing 1464 acres, situated in Anne Arundel County, state of Maryland at the head of West river 12 miles from Annapolis...
For terms apply to William Cooke, Esq. Baltimore or John Galloway, Esq. West river, or to Henry W. Waddell, Philadelphia.
Charlotte Hall School.
The Trustees of said School will receive applications for an appointment of an Assistant Master in the Latin language, on Thursday the 1st of October next.
CAPITOL OF THE UNITED STATES.
NO Person whatever can be admitted into the South Wing of the Capitol, excepting those actually engaged in the work.
PUBLIC SALE.
BY order of the Orphan's Court of Montgomery county on the 13th day of October next-the Sale to begin at the Plantation of Volinda Beatty's to continue from day to day until all is sold.
WILL be sold all the PERSONAL ESTATES of Volinda Beatty, and Dr. Ozias Offutt both of Montgomery county, deceased...
20 DOLLARS REWARD.
RANAWAY from the subscriber in August last, a Negro CHARLES-he is a straight well made black man, about 26 years of age...
BANK OF COLUMBIA. Sept. 17th, 1807. The President and Directors having this day declared a Dividend on the Capital Stock of the Bank for the half year ending the 30th inst. at the rate of Eight per cent. per annum.
District of Columbia, to wit: BE it remembered that on the 15th day of August in the thirty-second year of the Independence of the United States of America, WILLIAM CRANCH of the said district hath deposited in this office the title of a book the right whereof he claims as author...
Treasury Department, United States, April 28, 1807. WHEREAS the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund at a meeting held on the 23d day of March 1807, did among other things resolve, that the Eight per cent. Stock, created in pursuance of the several acts of Congress passed on the 16th day of July 1798, and 7th day of May 1800 should be reimbursed on the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and nine.
And whereas the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund at their meeting held on the 23d day of March as aforesaid, did also resolve, that the sum which after making the current payments for the years 1807 and 1808, and after reimbursing the Four and a half per cent. Stock might remain to complete the annual appropriation of Eight Millions of dollars, for those two years should, among other purposes, be applied to the purchase of the Eight per Cent Stock at private sale...
FOR SALE OR RENT.
THE Subscriber will SELL or RENT the HOTEL, situated on the Capitol Hill and near to the Capitol, at present occupied by Mr. P. D. SERLE. As this house is well known, it is useless to say more than that it is calculated for a large establishment...
By the Orphans Court of Saint Mary's county-June Term, 1807. ORDERED that Joseph Edwards, administrator of Stourton Edwards, late of St. Mary's county, deceased, give the notice required by law for creditors to exhibit their claims against the estate of the said deceased...
This is to give notice, that the subscriber of St. Mary's county, hath obtained from the Orphan's court of St. Mary's County in Maryland, letters of administration for the personal estate of Stourton Edwards, late of the county aforesaid, deceased...