The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1806-04-14 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER, AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VI.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
No. DCCCLIX.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, APRIL 14, 1806.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, MARCH 10.
DEBATE
On Mr. Gregg's resolution.
(CONTINUED.)
MR. CLARK. A sense of duty, prevailing over personal inclination, compels me, Mr. Chairman, to offer a few remarks on the subject under consideration. The measure now under discussion appears to me to involve the best interests of our country, the prosperity, the happiness and the liberties of America tremble before it. In the hands of the resolution are contained the issues of life and death, and it would be criminal in me not to throw in my mite to rescue our common country from the impending danger. The course which I shall take will differ in some degree from that pursued by those who have spoken in opposition to the resolution. I shall not attempt to draw any marked discrimination between the varying interests of the country, or intricate distinctions between the agricultural and commercial interests. I think they are so essentially united, that one cannot fall to the ground without tumbling the other head-long into ruins. I shall consider the subject relatively to its general policy, and whether, on the principles of that general policy or constitutional compact, as has been contended by gentlemen, we are bound to adopt the resolution. If I shall succeed in convincing a single gentleman now in favor of the resolution, that we are not bound by the constitution to adopt it, I shall consider this amongst the happiest events of my life.
The great objects of our federal engagement in forming the compact under which we now live, were to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and provide for the common defence and general welfare of society. Under this constitution gentlemen call upon us, under the pretext of promoting the general welfare, to adopt a resolution which manifestly goes to the promotion of a minor interest. This compact, in providing for the general welfare, must mean that of the whole, or at any rate, of the larger portion of the community; it was never designed to promote a subordinate interest at the sacrifice of the general prosperity. Are we then bound by the constitutional compact to adopt this resolution? I think not. Thus much as to the constitutionality of the question.
I must consider this resolution as a war measure, and viewing the policy and present situation of G. Britain, against which it is pointed, I have no hesitation to say, that in my opinion, it will produce instantaneous war. A maritime war, for such one she will wage, will not add one item to her present expenses; neither will it embarrass her measures in the continent; it can have no such effect. She has eight hundred ships on the ocean, flushed with victory and conquest, and a part of her navy is at this moment triumphantly sailing almost in sight of your shores, ready at any moment to size, should that course appear expedient to her, all our vessels navigating the ocean. It cannot affect her continental operations. The war she will wage will be altogether maritime—Her navy cannot be essential against her continental enemies in Europe. Already have their fleets been annihilated. The victories off Trafalgar and in the West Indies, have cleared the ocean of almost every sail, and there remains no employment for her navy but to depredates your commerce; and she will do it, you may rely upon it. Those are but indifferently acquainted with G. Britain and the genius of the first minister, who suppose all the power in their hands will not be made use of. Gentlemen tell you this is not contemplated as a permanent system of commercial arrangement, but a temporary expedient, which by its pressure is to bring our rival to a sense of duty, and make her do us justice. But this temporary measure will have on Britain all the effect of war. Declare war to-morrow, and it can only affect her trade. Can you believe that she will, with all her advantages, remain quiet? 'Tis not her character; she will not do it. I should think contemptuously of her if she should. Will she suffer you to take war measures and not retaliate? Will she be more afraid of you with your four thousand troops, dispersed over the whole western country, and your thirty armed vessels rotting in the Eastern Branch, than of that power whose enquiring arm has extended the limits of her sway beyond former comparison, and whose ambition is bounded only by the habitable world.
What was the conduct of that government about the year 1801, when an armed neutrality was formed by a coalition of the Northern powers? This measure was comparatively pacific; but did not the gallant Nelson enforce an abandonment of this measure with cannon at Copenhagen? Will she not do so to you? It is her interest, & will she not
be governed by it? She has no other rule of action. Are we not then correct in considering this a war measure? And ought not gentlemen to abandon the vain illusion they have conceived? It is however said, that she will not be willing to increase the number of her enemies. But is she not well apprised, from the genius of the American people, that nothing is more desired by them than peace; and that the moment she does you justice, you will be bound to seize it; and that she may therefore calculate on making peace when she pleases. Will she not, therefore, use all her power to bring us first to terms, and then if she fail, come to terms herself whenever she pleases.
So much with regard to this as a war measure. For the irresistible conclusion in my mind is, that it will produce war. But suppose it should not produce war; will it not produce consequences equally fatal? Will it not destroy your commerce? Our exports will not be purchased, as the merchants will not fit out their vessels unless they can get a market for them. For this what are we to gain? The carrying trade. I beg leave here to make some remarks on the position of the gentleman from Massachusetts and to examine the principle assumed by the British government; by which it will be seen the whole carrying trade is not affected by it. What is the ground which the prize courts of Britain take? That a neutral has no right to deliver a belligerent from the pressure of his enemies hostilities by trading with his colonies in time of war, in a way not authorized in time of peace. This principle, so far as it relates to our government, is not so unfair as gentlemen seem to imagine. Let us apply it to Britain and France. As to Great Britain she is contending for her liberties and her very existence, and, although I shall not contend that a nation at war has not the right to regulate her commerce with neutral neighbors in any way allowed by the law of nations; yet the enemy has certainly the right to prevent every means of relief, to produce, if possible, oppression and poverty in order to procure peace. Can you expect that Britain will permit you to supply France and Holland with commerce, and on such terms as enables them to go the cheapest into the market and convert all their merchant ships into armed vessels to privateer upon her trade, and while France is so relaxed in her system, have we a right to expect any indulgence from Britain? War we know always brings some evils to a neutral country. Can we therefore so materially blame Great Britain? Then as to the consequences of this trade. It certainly does not bring more than 170,000 dollars into our treasury, while it draws from the purchase of our domestic productions a large part of the capital that would be otherwise devoted to it. When I say 170,000 dollars, I mean to apply the remark particularly to that trade which has been the object of suppression by the prize courts; for I agree that the revenue arising from the whole carrying trade is stated to amount to 800,000 dollars, but no man will say that the duties arising from this species of trade is under-estimated. Is the whole value of this trade so important as to justify a sacrifice of all our interests? I will ask gentlemen, whether it is correct or proper that the great interests of the country should be given up to a trade only continued in time of war, and in which but a few men are interested? Let it not here be understood that I am the enemy of commerce. No, I am its friend. Without it, agriculture would be nothing, and there would be no market for the sale of our surplus produce. We must have trade—but let it be on principles of permanency, and not on such as emerge from a state of war. Britain has never affected our direct trade, and my vote shall be always ready to protect it. I agree that a circuitous trade is beneficial to the country, just as money brought into it is beneficial. But let us take the subject up on calculation. I think it a fair subject of calculation, a question of profit and loss, and see whether it ought on that ground to be protected. If it is found the play is not worth the candle, gentlemen will certainly not wish its preservation. Is it right to protect, at the hazard of every sacrifice, this trade of so precarious a profit, and which cannot continue longer than the period of war. Our exports to Great Britain and her dependencies amount upon an average of three years, to 20,653,000 dollars; of this amount the two articles of cotton and tobacco, the exclusive produce of the states south of the Potomac, constitute more than one half. This will be entirely lost, or at least the most considerable part, for I have no expectation of finding a market for any thing like this amount, in any other country. Cut up at one stroke under the pretence of temporary expediency the cultivation of these two articles, and you prostrate the expectation, independence, and industry of thousands—then will be applied to your own industrious and virtuous citizens, what the mover of the resolution supposed it would be to the manufacturers of England, a dagger to their vitals. Let us not for God's sake ruin our country under the delusive expectation of injur-
ing our adversaries. Another and very current view may be taken of this subject; it is acknowledged that there are comparatively but few persons immediately interested in this trade, and although to them a lucrative one, yet it must end upon the cessation of hostilities in Europe. It must be unjust, that the great interest of the agriculturalist should be sacrificed to this trade, or even pledged for its protection and security. I never will agree that one class or profession of people shall underwrite and ensure the success of another class, and this too without any premium. This is precisely the case in this instance—the trader gains all under the protecting arm of the farmer, and the loss falls on the farmer, if it should be attended with any.
Let us view this subject in another light. It is contended, that if British manufactures are prohibited, that our commerce will fill up, that our merchants will find other markets, and that the security of the revenue will not be affected. But I beg gentlemen to consider the situation of Europe. I do believe that our demands cannot be supplied but from Britain, they cannot be supplied elsewhere? Because from 1786, the British manufactures introduced into this country have regularly increased; notwithstanding in France labor is cheaper than in Britain. Not because an English coat was better than a French one. The fact is, the French manufactures cannot be got on the same reasonable terms as the English. What has been the effect on the price of Liverpool cottons since France has menaced the invasion of England? They have increased in price, because her manufacturers have been taken from their looms and converted into soldiers. What is the situation of Europe? Convulsed to her centre, will Germany afford us the articles we want? Do we not know that her manufactures have always been limited and confined to particular articles. Where then is a supply to be had? Where is a return to be got for our domestic productions, without which our loss will be incalculable? What will its effect be on our treasury? We know that the British manufactures yield about five millions of revenue, which go to the regular reduction of the public debt, which to this degree must be suspended if they are prohibited. Will gentlemen say, because I hold this language that I am the apologist of British measures? No. Were I to give way to my feelings on this subject, instead of being governed by my judgment, there is no length to which I would not go. My colleague has told us that G. Britain is fighting our battles and those of the world. I believe so. But not from any good will to us or the world—in fighting their own battles, they fight ours. Let us then suffer them to go on, not out of affection to their government which is tyrannical, and which, if it had the power, would lord it over this country as it did when we were colonies, not from attachment to the English government or its measures, but from a regard to our own country to which this measure would be ruinous. If the articles we want can be got from any other country, let us obtain them from them; but do not let us carry our enmity so far to Britain as to ruin ourselves.
But we are told that this is only one cause of complaint against the British government; that another cause of complaint is the impressment of our seamen. It is a cause, a most serious cause of complaint. On this subject I have more feeling than on the other. I commiserate the deplorable situation of those men and their friends, and will most ardently it was in my power to relieve them from it. But there is some apology even here to be made for the British government. The inhabitants of the two nations are so like each other, and so nearly the same in their language and habits, that it is extremely difficult to distinguish one from the other. And I will ask you if we have not more subjects of Britain in our service, than they have American citizens in theirs? Let us also recollect their principle, once a subject, always a subject. When, therefore, we give their subjects the privileges of a citizen by naturalizing them, is it not a counter-action of British policy; and is it not some apology for their conduct in pressing this description of men? I recollect of no instance of their refusing persons allowed by them to be American citizens, whose claim was fully substantiated. Let me again repeat it, that in a state of war neutral powers must suffer some injury; when all nature is in conflict, we cannot expect to escape injury. I do not therefore think this
ground of complaint a cause of war, for where is the difference between forcibly taking away the citizens of our country, and enticing those of another by the allurements of superior advantage. Every society has the right, and exercises that right, to ordain municipal regulations for its government; and every member of the society is bound by them. By the immemorial usage of England, no subject is allowed the right of expatriation and they hold the privilege of impressing their sailors wherever found in time of war, and claim their allegiance, whatever may be their condition. We ought not to seduce them. I do not mean this as a justification, but it is undoubtedly a mitigation of the affront. But what is proposed? To go to war in order to obtain the release of a few captive citizens that have been taken on the water; let them get out of the way by turning cultivators of your waste land, in which they can acquire a virtuous and honorable competency. But sir, what will be the sympathy of the gentleman, who shed tears of grief over your impressed seamen, when they shall view the scenes of devastation produced by war; all your seaport towns in ashes, people of every age and condition mourning over their ruined mansions and fallen fortunes, countries ravaged by a merciless foe, or millions of your citizens slain in fighting your battles; will your carrying merchants then step forth, and fight for you? No, indeed, they will not, they are too precious to be made food for gun powder, they will not be shot at all day for seventeen cents, they will all disappear—their rule is wherever money can be made, there is my country. Guard, then, I beseech you, Mr. Chairman, against that fatal infatuation which hath destroyed the universe.
MR. EPPES. After the discussion which has already taken place on this subject, I shall not consider myself authorized to occupy much of the time of the House. As, however, I have on some occasions ventured to express my opinions on this floor, I cannot reconcile to my feelings a silent vote on a question interesting to the United States generally, and particularly so, to that portion of country which I in part represent.
Whatever difference of opinion may prevail within these walls as to the course which ought to be adopted towards a nation which under the pretence of right has commenced a system of warfare and pillage on our commerce; I hope for the honor and interest of our country we shall finally unite in something. If in a free country there is any principle which ought universally to be admitted, to enforce which neither reasoning or demonstration should be necessary, it is that every class of citizens is equally entitled to protection. To secure to man his personal rights, and the fruits of his honest industry, are the two most important objects of a free government. The government unwilling to use for that security the means of which it is possessed, does not deserve the support of freemen. Our constitution makes no discrimination between different classes of citizens, nor can we, in our legislative capacity. The citizen whose capital is vested in a ship, has an equal right to protection in using for his benefit and happiness that ship with the cultivator of the soil in using his plough. To arrest by violence his ship and confiscate his property, is to the merchant the same injury as it would be to the farmer to arrest his plough and destroy his crop. In each case the citizen must look to the community for the removal of every obstruction thrown by violence in the use of his property which constitutes its value. It is true, and no man will deny the correctness of the principle, that every nation has a right to abandon any particular commerce injurious to its interest or dangerous to its safety. This is the natural right of all nations, and particularly of free countries, where the general welfare of the community is the supreme law. While, however, a commerce remains lawful, the citizen embarks in it with the same right to expect protection as in any other lawful occupation. For a government to refuse it is a violation of that fundamental principle in free government, that protection on the part of the government is the basis of support on the part of the citizen. If we are unable or unwilling to interpose in behalf of our citizens, when their personal rights have been invaded, their property captured and condemned under principles unknown to the law of nations, let us give up the farce of pretending to self government, and go back to the degraded state of colonies.
The ground of difference between the United States and Great Britain, is too well known for me to dwell on this part of the subject. It has been stated on this floor by a gentleman from Massachusetts, in terms of credit, and
many. The impressment and detention of our seamen is an injury, which has justly excited the indignation of the people of America for the last ten years. Every attempt to arrest by negotiation this serious injury has failed, and each year adds new victims to the roll of impressed seamen. The recent captures of American property to the amount of six millions of dollars, under doctrines new and manifestly unjust, is a serious injury to the individuals and to the community. And although I have no doubt, as has been eloquently stated on this floor, that American merchants have in some instances disgraced that character by covering the property of the enemies of Great Britain, I am equally certain that the injuries done to bona fide American merchants, trading fairly on American capital, are sufficiently numerous to justify and demand the interposition of this government.
While, however, I have no doubt as to the right of the citizen on the one hand to demand protection, and of the duty of the government on the other to extend it to him, I am willing to acknowledge all the difficulties of our present situation. I consider it no disgrace to this infant nation to say we are not able to meet on the ocean a nation, a match on that element for the world combined. I hope the period will never arrive when the substance of the citizen here shall be squandered on a navy competent to meet on the ocean the navy of Great Britain—separated from the rest of the world, at too great a distance to fear invasion, possessing a country abounding with productions valuable to the different nations of Europe with whom we have commercial relations, it is our interest to cultivate peace with all—to adopt even for the protection of our rights peaceable remedies. On the value and importance of our commerce to the different nations of the earth, and not on offensive war, we must depend for enforcing a regard to the principles of justice on the part of those with whom we have commercial relations. If we are not able to meet on the ocean Great Britain or any other European power, we can say to them all, respect in your intercourse with us the principles of justice, or we hold no intercourse with you—if you will not traffic with us on principles that are fair, we will neither receive your manufactures, nor send to you our productions. We are now for the first time about to test this principle so important to a nation jealous of fleets and armies. Of the various measures of this kind which may be resorted to—high discriminating duties—a prohibition of certain enumerated articles, a general prohibition, and as a denier resort a suspension of all intercourse, are the remedies within our reach. It is a mere question of convenience and expediency, to which of these we shall resort. I should prefer for myself as a first step the mildest. It is not in my opinion the interest of this nation to dissolve at a single blow its commercial connection with Great Britain. The commerce, if carried on, on principles that are fair, is mutually advantageous to the two countries. In Great Britain we find the best market for our most valuable productions, and with us she finds the best market for her manufactures. To prohibit at a single blow imports to the amount of thirty-five millions of dollars, however injurious it might be to the manufacturers of Great Britain, would certainly be a serious injury to our own citizens. I cannot but hope that a milder measure will cause the British government to respect our rights and pursue a course manifestly dictated by a regard to its own interest. If, however, Great Britain is so lost to her own interest as to persevere in a system of injustice calculated to deprive her of the best market for her manufactures, a market daily increasing, with the increasing population of this infant country, let us on our part proceed with that caution and moderation, which shall evince that the course we are determined to pursue is founded on principle, and will never be abandoned until our wrongs are redressed. I am willing to adopt for the present a prohibition, of enumerated articles. If that shall fail, to pass hereafter a total prohibition and finally to put forth our whole strength, and say we hold no future intercourse with you; but dissolve for ever all commercial relations with a nation, which takes for its national law the base principle of necessity, and makes itself the exclusive judge of that necessity.
As, however, it will not be in order to argue propositions not immediately under consideration, I shall confine my observations to the resolution of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I am willing to consider this resolution, as its friends profess it to be, a commercial regulation, and not a war measure. Indeed I should not apprehend war with Great Britain, even if it was adopted—it is not her interest to add to the number of her enemies, and her vessels, numerous as they are, will find sufficient occupation in guarding her own channel and protecting her own capital. I object to this measure, because I believe that it will be so extremely injurious to the United States in its operations, that it ought not to be resorted to

unfathomable remedies have failed. In the remarks I shall make on it I shall confine myself to its probable operation on the revenue of the United States, and on that class of citizens for whose protection it is principally designed.
I am the report of the secretary of the treasury at present on our table, it appears that the imports to this country from G. B. & its dependencies amount to thirty-five million nine hundred & seventy thousand dollars. We derive from imports on this commerce a net revenue of five million four hundred and thirty two thousand dollars. The whole net revenue of the U.S. derived from our commerce with all other parts of the world, amounts to six million one hundred eighteen thousand dollars. This resolution goes to prohibit a commerce from which we derive almost one half of our net revenue. The carrying trade which this measure is intended to protect, yields a revenue of eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars. So that for the protection of eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars, we put at hazard a net revenue of five million four hundred and thirty two thousand dollars. I well know that national honor cannot be estimated in dollars and cents. There is no man who feels more forcibly than I do, the correctness of this principle, or will be more ready on all occasions to acknowledge it. Gentlemen, however, ought to remember, that their remedy is a measure of dollars and cents. They profess it to be nothing more than a commercial regulation. In war millions must be sacrificed to protect thousands. In commercial regulations the risk ought to be in some degree proportioned to the object. A nation, deliberately forming a commercial regulation, by which it risks millions to protect thousands, manifests more zeal than wisdom; nothing short of absolute necessity, and a failure of every other remedy ought to induce us in our present situation to risk our revenue. We have repealed the whole system of internal taxes. We have set out with professions of economy and a determination honestly to meet our public debt. This resolution if adopted, may cause a deficiency in our revenue of five millions of dollars; the permanent revenue of the U.S. exclusive of the Mediterranean fund, which I hope soon to see abolished, amounts to eleven million five hundred thousand dollars; the permanent expense of the government amounts to eleven millions of dollars; eight millions of dollars appropriated to the payment of the debt, and three millions to the expenses of the government, including the naval and military establishment. No part of the eight millions can ever be divested from its object, without abandoning the principles which brought us into this government; and as there is no probability of our revenues being lessened, the three millions may be considered equally permanent, or the wheels of government must stop. From eleven millions five hundred thousand dollars, the amount of our present revenue, take five millions four hundred and thirty two thousand dollars derived from imports from G. Britain and its dependencies, and there remains six millions and sixty eight thousand dollars, which falls short of eleven millions of dollars, the permanent expense of the government, five millions nine hundred and thirty nine thousand two hundred dollars. Shall we incur this risk until other measures less injurious in their operation on ourselves, shall have failed. Gentlemen have told us of substitutes for British manufactures, and that no great loss will be sustained in our revenue. One gentleman has estimated the loss at a million of dollars; another at two millions; and the same gentleman has furnished us with abundant information as to the places from whence we may procure a substitute for British manufactures. On this subject every thing must be mere conjecture. It is impossible for any human being to say what will be the effect of this measure on our revenue. No man can say what will be the situation of Europe six months hence, and particularly of Germany, from whence we are to derive a part of our supplies. I wish not to risk the substance for the shadow. I cannot consent to trust the revenue of the U.S. to speculative opinions which may be true or false. The gentleman from Pennsylvania who introduced this resolution, talked of a substitute for British manufactures in home spun; he wished to see the people of this country clad in articles manufactured in their own families. There is no man who views with more pleasure than I do, that species of independence to which this kind of industry gives birth. I will not, however, to wear home-spun at the expense of a federal tax on my land. I know what a federal land tax is, because I have paid it, and I remember it, because it was the only oppressive tax ever did pay. If this measure shall not produce its effect on the British government and its operation on our revenue be as injurious as there is just cause to fear it will be; either we must repeal our own law, or adhere to a measure manifestly injurious to the United States and lay a direct tax; or we must divert from its object the annual appropriation for the payment of our debt. Never with my vote shall the fund appropriated to the payment of the debt be diverted from its object until the last dollar shall be discharged. Other gentlemen, I presume, would be as little disposed as myself, to resort to a direct tax.
The risk of revenue however is not the only objection I have to this resolution. A total prohibition of British manufactures will be extremely
injurious to our own citizens. It cuts down at once the occupation and employment of the merchant of small capital. In many parts of our country, and particularly to the south of this place, commerce is carried on principally on credit. That credit is generally in G. Britain. Take away the credit and the commerce is gone. It will seriously affect too the importing merchant of large capital, whose funds are in G. Britain. To withdraw his capital, establish new correspondents, and give an entire new direction to his commerce, would require time, trouble, and expense, and infuse at least one year's loss in the profits of his profession. It would operate least injuriously on the merchant whose funds were large, and in this country. With his money he might seek a substitute for British manufactures in other markets, if indeed a substitute can be found. Little or no injury would be done to merchants of this description, while ruin & bankruptcy would be the fate of those deprived, by a general prohibition, of a capital depending on credit. I have no data by which to calculate the number of our merchants embarked in the foreign carrying trade, and of those who are only importers. The whole foreign carrying trade of Virginia amounts to three hundred and fifty thousand dollars. But a small portion of the merchants there of course are interested in the foreign carrying trade. To all the importing merchants throughout the United States, the adoption of this measure would be a serious evil. Suppose one third of the whole number of the merchants of the U.S. interested in the foreign carrying trade, and this would be a large calculation, by the adoption of this measure we sacrifice the convenience and interest of two thirds even of this class of our citizens. Upon the whole, I have no doubt, but that the adoption of this resolution would be a serious injury to a large majority of the merchants of the United States, although designed for their protection.
What would be the effect on the planter? It would cause an immediate advance on all the articles of first necessity; particularly coarse woollens, which could not immediately be manufactured at home. It is true that during the revolutionary war, a substitute was made. We were driven to it by necessity, and abandoned it as soon as that necessity ceased. While for all the articles of first necessity, a great additional price must be paid by the farmer or planter, the value of every article of his labor must diminish; his produce be sold at a reduced price or left to rot on his hands from the inability of the merchant to purchase. This will be the effect on the planter, supposing G. Britain will take no countervailing measure. If however she is disposed to carry her principle to its full extent, she can dispense for a limited time with our exports, except the provision and lumber necessary for the West-Indies, with as little inconvenience as you can with her manufactures. Of tobacco she has always two crops on hand. Of cotton she has probably enough to carry her through the present war. A prohibition of these two articles only would be ruinous to the merchants and planters of the southern country. On occasions of great national necessity such sacrifices must be met with frugality. The citizen who shares the blessings of prosperity, must submit to sacrifices demanded by the interest and honor of his country. While however, this is the duty of the citizen, it is equally the duty of the government, not to require such sacrifices until milder measures have failed. Let us test the principle how far commercial regulations may be relied on. The resolution of the gentleman from Maryland is well calculated for this purpose. We know that it will affect our revenue to an extent we can permanently bear. It will be less injurious to our merchants as involving a smaller part of their capital, and allowing time to give a new direction to their commerce. It will enable us hereafter to decide with more certainty on the effect of measures of this kind on ourselves, and how far they may be relied on as an engine to operate on G. Britain. On this subject, however, my observations shall be suspended until that resolution shall be under consideration.
MR. NICHOLSON said, he had been desirous for some days, to offer to the committee his opinions on the subject now under consideration; but as other gentlemen had manifested a similar disposition, he had yielded the floor to them. It was now his intention to offer such remarks as appeared to him pertinent.
The resolution of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Gregg) in his opinion was objectionable in all its parts. There was no point of light in which he could view it, in which objections did not present themselves. He read and commented on the preamble; the style of which he said he did not like, because instead of a spirit of amity and conciliation, it breathed little less than defiance. While we profess to speak the language of peace, we declare to G. Britain, that unless she will meet us at that precise point, which we think proper to mark, we will, in the words of
the gentleman from Pennsylvania, stab her in the vitals. While we declare that we approach her as friends, yet our style is that of an enemy. The olive branch that is held out, conceals a dagger in its boughs. This threatening manner he said was not calculated to preserve peace in private life, and how could it be expected to succeed between nations? Did gentlemen imagine that G. Britain, even surrounded as she was by her enemies, was yet so tame as to submit to threats? Was the character of her first minister so little known, as to induce a belief that he would tremble at the rod held over him? No, sir, they are not sunk so low; and if we really wish for an amicable adjustment of our differences, we ought to proceed as friends and not as enemies. A mere commercial regulation he said might not, perhaps, produce war; it was the threat held out in the preamble, and the hostility manifested on the floor of the House of Representatives, that were calculated to wound the national pride of Britain, and, therefore, to excite enmity between the two countries. What does the preamble say? We have marked a point from which we will not recede, and to which we demand that you shall come; if you do not, we strike at your most essential interests; in the language of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, we will stab you in your vitals. Is this the way to conciliate? Is this your method of opening a negotiation? Believe me, sir, instead of presenting the olive branch, we carry a fire brand, that will kindle a flame, which we may find it difficult to extinguish. G. Britain will feel all this—she will at once ask, is it fair, is it manly, is it honorable to threaten me now, when I am contending for all that is dear to me? Will you insult me in my distress, and while you sustain my enemy on one hand, with the other endeavour to unnerve the arm which you acknowledge is raised in defence of its own existence?
If the subsequent parts of the resolution were unobjectionable, the preamble itself would determine me against the whole. To preserve peace let us proceed to our object in a peaceable manner. If, indeed, gentlemen are for war, then they are right in advocating this measure.
From the course of the debate, Mr. N. said, one who had not attended to the points in dispute, (which he feared was too much the case with the great body of the people,) would really imagine that all the commerce of the country was at stake—that G. Britain had assumed a principle by which the whole of our trade would be involved in ruin—commerce and agriculture had been called the hand maids of each other, and high eulogies had been pronounced upon the intimate connection subsisting between them. No one was so blind or so stupid as to deny that under the peculiar circumstances of this country, commerce and agriculture were the mutual assistants of each other; but did gentlemen imagine that the people were so blind or so stupid as to believe that the commerce which was connected with agriculture, was the subject of dispute with G. Britain? Did they suppose that they could cast such a veil over the real points of difference, as to produce an impression of this kind? If such was the hope, he trusted it would be defeated. No man would pretend to assert that G. Britain had denied our right to carry the products of our own soil to foreign markets, and to bring home in return such articles as were adapted to the necessity, the convenience or the taste of our own people. She did not interfere with the carriage of our corn, wheat, flour, tobacco, cotton, provisions or lumber to those places where we could meet the readiest sale for them; and had never raised an objection to our returning with the products or manufactures of Europe, or of the East or West Indies. It was the carrying trade alone which was the subject of difference. A trade so slightly, if at all, connected with agriculture, that the connection, such as it was, did not merit notice in discussing the present question. It was that trade which carried the products of one foreign country to another—which relieved France, Spain and Holland from the pressure of war, by carrying on a trade for them which they could no longer carry on for themselves—which carried the coffee and sugar of Batavia and the West India islands, to the respective mother countries in Europe, thereby relieving them from the necessity of convoy, and the expense of maintaining large fleets. This was the trade, he said, upon which G. Britain had committed depredations. It was not the home trade in articles of our own produce or for our own consumption; but a foreign trade, in foreign articles, for foreign markets and for foreign use. It was the colonial trade which France, Spain and Holland monopolised to themselves in times of peace, but which they could not command in time of war, and had, therefore, permitted us to carry it on for their benefit. It was a trade, therefore, totally unconnected with agriculture and enjoyed by a few merchants only; and it remained with the American people to determine whether, for its protection, they would involve the agricultural interest, and the revenues of the country, in those embarrassments which would necessarily ensue, upon the adoption of the measure proposed by the gentleman from Pennsylvania. He flattered himself that the people would enquire, and that they would not suffer themselves to be deceived by the misrepresentations which had gone abroad. The question was deeply interesting to them, and he wished them to examine it in all its bearings.
The resolution, he said, embraced two points; the one related to the carrying trade; the other to the impressment of American seamen. The latter had always been a source of great anxiety to
him. No man in America had deplored the evil more than he did, and none should be more ready to apply the remedy, when an effectual remedy could be devised. To him, however, it was a matter of no little surprise, that gentlemen had so long slept upon a subject, on which they now appeared to manifest so much zeal. He had himself twice proposed measures with a view to obtain redress, but he had not been able to carry them through the House. Gentlemen, who now so zealously volunteered their services, rendered him no assistance then. At the last session he had introduced a bill on the subject, and such were the variety of objections to it, that it was committed and recommitted several times. Difficulties presented themselves from all quarters; alterations and amendments innumerable were adopted, until finally it was shuffled through the House in so imperfect a state, that it was not worth the time that which had been spent on it. Strong measures were not then the order of the day, nor would they be now, if the impressment of American seamen was the only ground of complaint. G. Britain has pursued this practice for ten or twelve years past, but these patriotic merchants, who are now so clamorous, presented you with no memorials on the subject. No, sir. It is the carrying trade alone, which has covered your tables with the memorials of the merchants, because their interests are affected; and it is out of this that the resolution of the gentleman from Pennsylvania has grown. Although I do not admit the correctness of the principle assumed by G. Britain, in relation to the carrying trade, yet I am willing to acknowledge that with me it is an object of secondary importance only, when compared with the other violations of our flag, in the impressment of our seamen.
Why, Mr. Chairman, is the carrying trade a secondary consideration only? Because the depredations committed on it, do not affect the personal rights of our citizens, nor our trade in our own products, or in the products of foreign nations for our own use; but all these are affected, deeply affected by the impressment of our seamen. It has been said, indeed, that this interruption of the carrying trade was peculiarly hostile; because it struck at bona fide American property. In many cases this is true, but in many I believe it is not true; for I have no doubt that much foreign property is covered by our flag. Admitting, however, that it is always American property, yet all seizures of this are not considered acts of hostility. It is conceded by all that the direct trade between the colony and the mother country, cannot be carried on in neutral bottoms. If, therefore, a cargo of sugar or coffee were purchased at a French island, it would thereby become bona fide American property; but by our own acknowledgments it could not be carried directly to France; nor if it was French property, could it be carried in our vessels, as in 1794 we surrendered the principle that "free ships make free goods." Seeing then, that we could not carry on the direct trade between the colony and the mother country, even when the property had become American by purchase, and that we could not cover French property under our flag, a new method was invented by our merchants to evade these regulations. They went to the West Indies, purchased their cargoes there, returned with them to this country, and then reshipped them & carried them to France, and Spain, and Holland, thereby yielding them very important assistance in their warfare against Great Britain. This Mr. N. said was the new principle against which Great Britain contended, and although he was not willing to acknowledge the correctness of her proceedings, yet he was more unwilling to sustain our right at the exception of so much injury as we should incur by adopting the proposed resolution. Negotiation, he said, ought to be resorted to—if that failed, then indeed, commercial restrictions might be imposed, but not such restrictions as the gentleman from Pennsylvania and his friends advocated. These, although they might wound Britain, would inflict a still deeper wound on ourselves. It was known that our minister at the court of London, had the subject under his immediate attention, and we had reason to expect that he would succeed in an amicable settlement of our differences. Mr. King had formerly remonstrated against similar practices by British cruisers, and the report of the attorney general of England, transmitted by Lord Hawkesbury, fully recognized the justice of our pretensions. No treaty however was made, and until a treaty is entered into, regulating all our commercial relations, we cannot expect that our trade will be free from embarrassments. The points in difference now between the two governments, are fair objects of negotiation. The admissions of Lord Hawkesbury in his correspondence with Mr. King give us a fair claim on the British government, and I have no doubt they will yield, provided the intemperance of our language and our conduct does not furnish them with a pretext still to resist.
What, I ask, will be the effect of this resolution on Great Britain? She will either disregard it, under the conviction that it will operate much more injuriously upon ourselves than upon her, and that therefore we cannot persist in it; or, inflamed by the threats contained in it, and by those used by its advocates on this floor, she will consider it as a cause of war. Will it not be good cause of war, when professing peace, you use the language of intimidation, and the mover of the measure tells you, he brandishes a dagger in his hand with which he means to stab her to the
vitals (Mr. Gregg said he did not say so) Mr. N. continued, it may not be found in the Gentleman's printed speech, but I find it in my notes, and I believe they are as correct as those of the stenographer. (Mr. Gregg explained, and said he did not use the word dagger.) Mr. Nicholson said it was of no importance, what the instrument was, whether a sword, a dagger, or a knife, if he was to touch the vitals. It was a figurative expression, and the gentleman might select either of the figures which he preferred. He himself had used the word dagger, supposing it the most appropriate, and the most congenial to the gentleman's own mind. (Mr. Gregg said he would take some other opportunity of explaining.) Mr. N. The gentleman declared the measure was calculated to stab Great Britain in her vitals. I appeal to the committee if such is not their recollection. The gentleman himself does not deny it; he only says he did not use the word dagger. But if Great Britain believes that we can persist in it, and if we are determined to sustain her enemy against her, and to stab her in her vitals, she will consider it as a cause of war and will make war.
Are gentlemen prepared then to hazard these consequences? are they ready to go to war for the protection of this carrying trade, in which the great bulk of the nation have no interest? I venture to assert that nineteen twentieths of the people of this country have no interest whatever in the trade, for which we are now about to contend. One consolation however yet remains—let this House receive the measure as favorably as they may, the people will condemn it, when they feel its consequences. We may run headlong into war, but we shall not have the trouble of carrying it on. The people will supply our places with other representatives—they will not so readily forgive us, I trust in God they will not.
A gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Crownshield) thinks the measure will not lead to war, but if he believed it would, this would be no objection with him to the resolution—he would still vote for it. We can convert our vessels he says, into privateers, and can capture two or three British vessels for one of our own that will be lost. How, I ask, is this to benefit the farmer or the planter? What proportion of these profits are to go into their pockets? The gentleman may vest his capital in privateers, and may make a fortune. Here, sir, he plays the merchant again. Whatever the effect may be on the great body of the people, he is Shylock still—the nation may bleed at every pore, but he will have his pound of flesh. This privateering business, however, won't do—Great Britain has eight hundred ships of war, and it ought to be remembered that she can fit out as many privateers as we can. But, Sir, the idea of our meeting Great Britain on the ocean is too ludicrous to be repelled by serious argument. My friend from Virginia, has given the best answer to it, in his prescription of a strait waistcoat, a dark room, depletion and water gruel. It is just as absurd as to talk of fitting out a privateer to fight a seventy four.
The gentleman from Massachusetts has another measure in reserve to wound Britain. He tells us we must confiscate the public debt. This is a strange doctrine for men who talk so much of national honor. I have always believed it most honorable to pay our debts, instead of swindling our creditors. My determination, however, has long since been taken on this point. I will never consent to lay my hands upon the public debt, but for the purpose of fairly extinguishing it. Let our conflict with Great Britain proceed to what lengths it may, I will never lend my aid to defraud her subjects of that debt, for the payment of which the national faith is solemnly pledged. The nation may do it; but if it be once done, the violations of the national honor, which are now so loudly complained of, will weigh but an atom in the scale, when compared with the blow, which you yourselves will level at your own honor. You will set yourselves up as a rare and modern example of the Punica fides , for you will so effectually blast your credit, that I venture to affirm you will make no more loans. Had I millions to lend, I would not trust you with a dollar.
To justify the measure now proposed, we are referred to the years 1793, and 1794, and because a resolution somewhat similar to the present, was then adopted, and had well nigh passed into a law, we are called upon to sanction that which is now before us. But will gentlemen undertake to say that our situation at this time will justify such measures as were adopted then? Will they pretend that we have now the same grounds for hostility against Britain, or that the two periods can be compared with each other? What was our situation in 1793, and 1794? We had made a treaty in the year 1783 with Great Britain—ten years after, some of its most important stipulations on her part were unfulfilled. She had pledged herself to restore to our citizens an immense amount of property, which had been taken from them. She had engaged to put us in possession of the Western posts. With neither of these engagements had she then complied. Year after year, she was active in kindling a destructive war upon our frontier, and had let loose the savage of the wilderness upon our peaceable citizens. The Algerines too were at the instigation of Britain committing depredations on our commerce, and in addition to all this she directed a blow at our trade, more injurious than that which is now complained of. For she ordered her cruisers to capture all vessels laden with provisions going to the

French colonies, or returning from them with the products of those colonies on board. Then it was that the measure alluded to was adopted by one branch of the legislature, and it is most certain that we had cause enough to go to war. But is our situation at all similar now? Have we any of those outrages to complain of at this time? Not one. A part of our trade it is true is affected, but it is that part which is the least interesting to the nation. When I say this, I trust it will not be believed that I am willing to abandon it, or that I mean to palliate the conduct of Great Britain. My only object is to show that for this carrying trade, we ought not to bring upon ourselves the calamities of war, nor to pursue a line of conduct which though it may affect Great Britain, will operate much more injuriously upon our own country.  It is said however that the measure will not lead to war. This I am willing to grant for argument's sake. Let us then take it in the most favorable point of view in which it can be presented, and enquire into its consequences.  Suppose Britain does not consider it a cause of war, but that nevertheless, instead of relaxing in her system, she should obstinately persist in it. Gentlemen seem to have looked at only one side of the question, and appear to have forgotten that every question has two sides to it. In their anxiety to injure Britain, they have not attended to the effects which their proposition is calculated to produce at home—should she persist, in what manner are we to be affected by the proposed measure? Let us see how it is to operate on the revenue. As here it would be well to remind gentlemen that almost the whole of our revenue is derived from the duty paid on the importation of foreign merchandise, and that this duty annually amounts to    Dolls  11,850,000    Our imports from Great Britain amount annually, to  27,400,000    From the British East Indies, to  3,500,000    British West Indies, to  4,570,000    New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Canada, to  540,000    Making in the whole,  36,010,000    It is uncertain how much is exported, but say,  6,010,000     30,000,000    The revenue on which as appears by the report of the Secretary of the Treasury amounts to, 5,432,000 or very little less than one half of our whole revenue derived from imports.  The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gregg) thought he had gained an immense triumph in showing that I had been guilty of an error in stating the average duty on importations from Britain at 20 per cent. which he says is not more than 14 per cent. It ought to be remembered, that I did not pretend to speak with accuracy; for when I made a few observations prefacing a resolution which I submitted some time since, I had no documents from which a calculation could be made. I supposed that the importations from Britain might amount to 25,000,000 of dollars, and taking the average duty at 20 per cent. said five millions of revenue would be affected. Does, however, the detection of the error, change the result? It does not; for it appears by the report of the secretary of the treasury, that the revenue derived from this source is 5,432,000 dollars, which is more than I stated it at. Is all this then to be put to hazard? Are we to cast it upon the ocean of uncertainty without helm or chart? And for what? To protect that trade from which the revenue is derived? No, sir—to protect that trade which carries our own products to market, and brings home in return the articles of our consumption? No, sir—but to protect a trade, interesting only to a few merchants, and I repeat it again, totally uninteresting to more than nineteen-twentieths of the people of this country. Gentlemen ask, will you not assist the merchant, in recovering his property? I answer, yes, most willingly; but not at this expense—I will not commit to chance nearly one half of the revenue of the nation, which we have already pledged for the fair and honorable discharge of the public debt. Sir, when I said some days ago, that five millions of the revenue would be affected by this measure, I was understood by some to have stated that it would be diminished to the amount of five millions. This, however, was not my statement; for I well knew that it was not in the power of human ingenuity to calculate the extent to which it would be affected. But by prohibiting the importation of goods from the only country that could furnish all of them, you would thereby hazard the whole revenue derived from them, and a part of it would certainly be lost. What amount would be lost, I did not pretend to say—I do not now pretend to say—it is beyond my reach—but that a considerable amount would be lost, seemed to be admitted by every body, except the gentleman from Massachusetts, who said we should not lose a dollar.  [Mr. Crowngshield explained, by observing that he had said the measure would not, in his opinion, affect the revenue beyond a million of dollars, and the gentleman had now reduced it to one dollar.]  Sir, said Mr. Nicholson, the gentleman declared when he was addressing you on this resolution, that he had before stated, he did not believe the revenue would be diminished one million
of dollars, but that he had since thought it would not be diminished a single dollar—he now goes back, however, to his million, and this is the difficulty which constantly presents itself. We can none of us tell how much the revenue will be diminished, though every one acknowledges to a very great extent—my fear is that the loss will be equal at least, to two or three millions. How strange are the arguments offered to us! One gentleman tells you, you ought to protect commerce, because we derive our revenue from it; and yet in the same moment, he advocates a measure which he admits is to destroy a large amount of that very revenue he is so desirous of protecting. Another calls on you to protect the revenue, and warns you against direct taxes; whilst his favorite measure, by destroying a considerable amount of revenue, renders direct taxes necessary. I warn those gentlemen, in my turn, against direct taxes. Let them take care that they do not by agreeing to this resolution, compel the nation to resort to those taxes, which they say was the rock upon which the former administration split. Let them remember that the direct tax for two millions of dollars only, which was laid eight years ago, is not yet received into the treasury. Will they, by adopting this measure, and thereby reducing the revenue, drive us into excise duties as a substitute? They ought to recollect that this, too, was once a favorite scheme of raising revenue, though not a very fortunate or a very popular one, among gentlemen on the other side of the House can testify. I believe, sir, that they, at least, will not be very willing to burn their fingers with it a second time. They have their experience on this point. But, when gentlemen call upon us to agree with them in a measure, which they admit will considerably diminish the revenue, though they cannot calculate the extent, why don't they tell us what they intend to propose as a substitute—I want to see their ways and means for supplying the deficiency—until they show us these, I, for one, will not consent to cut off our present resources—are we to borrow? It won't do, Mr. Chairman, to talk of borrowing, and of confiscation in the same breath—we shall find no body to trust us; and if we could, we must still find the ways and means of paying.  (Mr. Nicholson's speech to be continued.)
WASHINGTON CITY. MONDAY, APRIL 14. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.  FRIDAY, APRIL 11.  A bill from the Senate to regulate and fix the compensation of clerks, and for other purposes, was read and referred to a committee of the whole to-morrow.  The amendments of the Senate to the bill making appropriation for the support of government were read and referred to the committee of ways and means.  Mr. J. C. Smith, from the committee of claims, made a report on the memorial of Amelia Eugene Beaumarchais, which was ordered to lie on the table.  The bill to authorise the state of Tennessee to issue grants, and perfect titles to certain lands therein described; and to settle the claims to the unappropriated land within the same, was read the third time.  Mr. Alston moved to recommit the bill to a committee of the whole, for the purpose of introducing an amendment, declaring that nothing contained in this act should be so construed as to impair the cession act of North Carolina.  This motion was supported by Messrs. Alston and Alexander; and opposed by Messrs. Gregg, J. C. Smith, and G. W. Campbell—and disagreed to—Ayes 28.  When the bill was passed—Yeas 63 Nays 28.  A message was received from the President of the United States, transmitting the returns of the militia of the several states.  The bill to prohibit officers of the army and navy of the United States from holding or exercising any civil office, was read a third time.  We omitted in our last paper to state that the blank in this bill was so filled as to give it effect from the 3d of July next.  Messrs. Stanford, Quincey and Eppes supported, and Messrs. Gregg, Smith, Finley and Sloan, opposed the passage of the bill. The debate turned principally on the constitutionality of adopting a principle which, it was contended, would have a retrospective effect, by compelling those persons, already appointed to both a civil and military office, to vacate one of them.  The question being taken, the bill passed—Yeas 64—Nays 34.  Mr. J. Randolph, from the committee of conference, appointed on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses to the act to repeal so much of any act or acts, as authorise the receipt of evidences of the public debt, in payment for lands of the United States; and for other purposes relative to the public debt—made a report.  The House took up this report, which recommended to the House the receding from their amendment, to strike out that part of the original bill which authorised the appointment of an agent, with power to make purchases of the public debt by open purchase and allowing him one quarter of one per cent. on all purchases made by him.  A short debate took place on receding—Messrs. J. C. Smith and Quincey supported; and Mr. J. C. Smith opposed receding—which was disagreed to—Ayes 35—Nays 38.  When on motion of Mr. J. Randolph the House resolved to insist on their amendment.  Mr. J. Randolph, from the committee of ways and means, reported a bill, making appropriations for carrying into effect the treaty between the United States and the Chickasaw tribe of Indians—which was referred to a committee of the whole on Saturday.  The House took up the bill prescribing the effect in each state of the records of judgments, and decrees of the courts of record of every other state.  A debate of considerable length arose on this bill.  A motion made by Mr. G. W. Campbell to postpone the bill indefinitely was lost—when it was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading on Monday—Ayes 63.  Mr. J. Randolph, from the committee of ways and means, reported a bill to carry into effect certain Indian treaties which was referred to a committee of the whole to-morrow.  The Speaker laid before the House a letter from the secretary of the navy, transmitting, in obedience to the resolution of yesterday, an estimate of the monies necessary for repairs of vessels, store rent, pay of armorer, freight, and contingent expenses.
SATURDAY, APRIL 12.  A bill making appropriations for the support of the navy of the U. States, during the year 1806, was read a third time—which on motion of Mr. J. C. Smith, was re-committed to a committee of the whole House.  On motion of Mr. J. C. Smith, an item, previously struck out, for compleating the marine barracks at the city of Washington, was inserted, and the blank filled with 3,500 dollars.  Mr. D. R. Williams offered an amendment, so to modify the provision, which appropriates 411,950 dollars for repairs of vessels, store-rent, pay of armorer, freight, and other contingent expenses, as to separate these items, connecting with each item the sum estimated by the secretary of the navy.  Messrs. D. R. Williams, Leib and Bidwell supported, and Messrs. Conrad, Dana and R. Nelson opposed this motion—which was disagreed to—Ayes 32—Nays 51.  The committee then rose and reported the bill; which was afterwards passed without a division.  A bill prescribing the effect in each state, of the records of judgment, and decrees of the courts of record of every other state, was read the third time.  Messrs. Kelly and Rhea, of Ten. opposed its passage; when the question was taken, and the bill passed—Yeas 67—Nays 18.  Mr. J. C. Smith, from the committee of ways and means, reported a recommendation to the House to agree to the first amendment, and to disagree to all the other amendments, proposed by the Senate, to the bill making civil appropriations—in which report the House concurred, and appointed conferees.  A message was received from the Senate advising that they had considered the bill to authorise the erection of a bridge over the Potomac, and the bill to prohibit officers of the army and navy from holding or exercising any civil office; and had postponed the same to the first Monday of December next.  A bill making a further appropriation towards completing the south wing of the capitol, in the city of Washington, having passed through the committee of the whole, was read a third time and passed.  The sum appropriated is 40,000 dollars.  A bill for the relief of Gilbert C. Russel, having passed through the committee of the whole, was read a third time and passed.  The House went into a committee of the whole—Mr. Gregg in the chair—on the bill concerning the further safeguard of merchant vessels in the vicinity of the United States.  The first section of the bill was read as follows:  SEC. 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it shall be lawful for the President of the U. S. whenever he shall deem it expedient, to prohibit the exercise of hostilities against merchant vessels in any of the roads, or places of anchorage, near the ports and harbors of the U. S. and also in any of the tracts of sea within the principal head lands on the coasts of the U. S. and to require all foreign armed ships, or vessels of whatever description, to abstain from seizing, annoying, or molesting, any merchant vessels, within any of the spaces and precincts aforesaid.  Mr. Crowngshield moved to amend the section by extending the contemplated protection to "American citizens or other persons."  Mr. Dana considered the amendment superfluous, as the section provided against molesting merchant vessels; he was of opinion that the impressment of seamen would be a molestation.  Mr. Crowngshield held a different opinion as to the construction of the section—which only provided against molesting a merchant vessel.  Mr. Ely expressed himself of the same opinion with Mr. Dana.  After some further conversation Mr. Crowngshield withdrew his amendment, and submitted it under a new modification, in which shape it was disagreed to, under the idea that it was superfluous.  On motion of Mr. Jackson the section was so amended, as to apply the provision to all vessels whatever.  After some other amendments, the committee rose, and the bill as amend-
ed in committee of the whole was ordered to a third reading on Monday.  Mr. Newton gave notice that he should on Monday call up his resolution, proposing an amendment to the constitution of the U. S.  The House resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Mr. Dawson in the chair—on the bill to suspend the sale of certain lands in the state of Ohio and Indiana territory.  The bill suspends the sale of lands, on which instalments are due, until the first of October next.  A motion of Mr. Lyon to extend the time till February 1, was lost.  The committee rose, and reported the bill without amendment, which was read a third time and passed.  Ayes 66.  The bill has passed both Houses.  A bill making appropriations for carrying into effect certain Indian treaties, having passed through committee of the whole, was ordered, without amendment, to a third reading on Monday.  As was a bill making appropriations for carrying into effect a treaty between the United States and Chickasaw tribe of Indians, after undergoing a small verbal amendment.  The bill respecting the claims to lands in the Indiana territory and the state of Ohio, having passed through committee of the whole, was, without any material amendment, ordered to a third reading on Monday.  Baltimore, April 10.  Died, on Saturday evening, the 5th instant, at his residence in the country, the Hon. JAMES WINCHESTER, Esq. late judge of the district court of Maryland.  Will be sold at PUBLIC SALE  the property where I now live, on FRIDAY the 2d day of May next, at 12 o'clock. TWO LOTS in square 38 fronting on Water street, 78 feet 3 inches, and running back 131 1/2 feet which are included in a handsome plot in garden—the buildings are a convenient FRAME DWELLING HOUSE, SMOKE HOUSE & ICE HOUSE. On the fourth side of Water street, is a wharf sufficiently large to hold 200 cords of wood at once; this part of the property runs to the Hamburg channel, and the situation equal to any in the city for a lumber, coal, or wood yard. The terms will be, one third of the purchase money in hand, the other two thirds in nine and eighteen months on the purchaser giving negotiable notes on either the city or George town banks, with sufficient indorsers, or I will take merchandise in lieu of cash for one half of the purchase money.  JOHN STEPHEN.  April 14—tawit  For Sale, Freight or Charter,  The new patent brig ACHILLES, of 166 63 95 tons burthen, built under the inspection and direction of Mr. G. Livingston, of Poughkeepsie—ALL her plant, whales, knees and oak timber, have been well water seasoned and dried before they were used, (which management has heretofore, on a vessel built at the same place and by the same person, insured a duration of more than 13 years, without a single graving piece in either whales or bottom, although owned and used in the West Indies about 15 years of the time) her two lower rider hinges are copper, as are the spikes at her head ends; all her butt bolts and iron spikes are composition covered, so that she is ready for coppering.  The Achilles has been one voyage to the West Indies, and is, by the captain and mate who sailed in her, supposed to be not only the fastest sailing vessel they ever met with, but one of the best of her boats, carrying her sails and canvas at least equal, if not superior to any other vessel they have ever seen. When going out, although very deeply laden, she made ten miles an hour close haul on the wind; and returning, although her bottom was very foul, in 23 hours from opposite Cape Charles light house, directly east, she ran so as to bring the light house at Sandy Hook directly west, a distance very considerably beyond 300 miles; including the time she made in her course, the average run was between 13 and 14 knots an hour—Enquire of  JOHN BRAZIER, 67 Washington street.  April 14—3t  A LIST OF LETTERS, Remaining in the Post Office at Washington city, on the 1st day of April 1806.  A.—Jonathan Arnold, William Abbott 2, Peter Allen, Thomas G. Addison, E. Avery, Anthony Addison, Lieut. George Armistead, Mr. Anderson, John Armstrong, Jacob W. Albright 4, Thomas Arnold 3.  B.—Mrs. S. Bacon, captain Benjamin Briggs 2, Richard Butler 2, lieutenant Charles A. Budd, rev'd Stephen Bovalle, William Burvan, Phillis Burr, Theodore Burr, Frederick Betz, Samuel Brooke, Alexander Brent, rev'd John Brackenridge, doctor Edward Briscoe, William Bainbridge, William Ballard, James Barry carpenter, John Bowin, William Brent, Eleanor M. Brown, James M. Bradford, Wilson Brown, George Budd, David Bussard, Mr. Brown 2, captain Robert Bailey 3, Johnson Blakely, Benjamin Brown, William Barton, esq. Ignatius Boone of Nichs. Mrs. Rebecca Bickley.  C.—William Cowan, John Coval, Lieut. Eli B. Clarkson, Doros Chrous, Smith Craven, George Chism 3, Thomas Canfield, James Chamberlain, Louis Chadburn, William Coffee, esq. John H. Carr, esq. George Carroll, Mary A. Caton, Robert Coane 4, Enoch Campbell, David J. Cox, dr. Peter Custis, Joseph Cuvier, esq. captain Hugh Geo. Campbell, Thomas Clark, Archibald Chestery 4, John Clark, gen. Henry Carberry, Joseph Cobb, John S. Crawford, Adam Cuzan, George Cozens.  D.—Captain Decatur, Aaron Dayton, William Dolley, William Dunlap, Plumard Derieux, miss Sally Davis, David Duncane, esq. Lewis De Mun, captain John H. Dent, John Darby, Silas Dinsmore 4, miss Dyr, Joseph Duncastle, Je-
remiah Donovan, Joseph Duly, William Dilman, Gustavus Douglass 2, Matthew Davis, Robert Deverson, miss Catherine Derrer, Mr. Dehor, captain Thomas Dulion, Mr. Dryleson.  E.—Rufus Easton, esq. 3, St. Clair Elliott, John H. Elton 2, Jesse D. Elliott, Edward Evans, Elizabeth Evans, Francis Eppes.  F.—Thomas Freeman, messrs. D. Floyd and William Chambers, esqs. Henry Fisher, Robert Fell, Isaac Foster 2, captain John Francis, Elizabeth Flanagan, Mrs. Charlotte Fitzhugh 2, Richard Farrell.  G.—Lewis H. Guerlain, esq. 11, William Gant, Jacob Gibson, esq. William Green 4, Johanna Gallaspy, Catherine Gardiner, Hezzy Gatton, Robert H. Goldsborough, James Gardner, Joseph Gray.  H.—Mr. John Heath 2, captain Halsey, Nathaniel H. Heath, Robert Howison, miss Susannah Hutchinson, care of Richard Cutts, esq. midshipman Wm. E. Hill 2, doctor J. L. Henry 3, Thomas Houghy, Elizabeth Hughes 2, John Henricks, Mary Horner, doctor Lishna Harrison.  I.—Catherine Janvire, Mr. C. Janvire, Mr. Thomas Jenkins, Kinsey Johns 2, William Henry Jackson 2, hon. judge Johnson, Charles Jouett, Susan Johnson, William Jones, care of Thomas Hutchinson, Samuel Johnson, John Junis 2.  K.—James Kenan, Jacob Kleiber, Mr. Kusick, John Kale, Richard King, Edward P. Kennedy 2, George Kennedy.  L.—Captain Meriwether Lewis, Lieut. John Livingston, John Lincoln 2, Abraham B. Lindsley 2, Morris Lewis, miss Sarah Lowmox, Law and Bruce 2, John Lowery, Isaac Lewis, Alexander Laws 3, Andrew Leddy, Jeremiah Love, B. H. Latrobe, esq.  M.—Mrs. Jane Murray, colonel John Mercer 2, Mrs. Hannah Maxwell, John Ripley Madison, Lieut. George Morrill, captain John McClellan 2, Obadiah Maurice, John N. Maus 2, William Morton, esq. 3, captain Leon Mackall, William S. Moore, Elizabeth R. Morris, Bristol Mayo, William Mattox, Washington Morton, esq. 2, colonel Return J. Meigs 3, Malcolm McGee, Franklin Metcalf, Elizabeth Morse 3, Jacob Miller, Moses Mershon, John Moore, captain Alexander Murray 3, John Maysey, John Mackey, William Minchin, Francis Marion, jun. general Francisco de Miranda.  N.—Benjamin Naylor, Jeremiah Nelson, John Nelson, John M. Noyes, Miss Frances W. Nance, doctor Joseph W. New, Rebecca Nalley, Peter Norbury, John M. Naly.  O.—Major O'gden, Nathaniel Ownes, Samuel Overton.  P.—Garrett Penderghast, William Prentiss, Mr. Potts, Mr. Pitman, lieutenant Daniel N. Patterson, Joseph Persons, lieutenant R. Pinckney, 2, John Pringle, Ralph Potts, Robert Patterson, Miss Ann Pryse, William Pitman, Edward Preble, 2, James Pebeis, Norman Pringle, Miss Billy Perry, Mrs. Price.  Q.—Henry Quinley, esq. 2.  R.—James R. Rodgers, Madame La Bland de la Rochefoucault, Joseph Reilly, George H. Rodgers, Mr. Terrien de Riviere, Miss Ridenhouse, Charles D. Ross, esq. Lewis F. Rush.  S.—Captain Amos Stoddard, John Saunders, esq. Jonathan Shoemaker, 2, doctor Simeon Smith, William S. Shaw, Gilbert Stewart, captain James Somerville, Miss Eliza Swaine, John Smith, esq. 2, Mrs. Merier Smith, George Stanley, 2, William Scott, William Sprague, 2, captain John Shaw, Michael Sheely, 2, Walter B. Smallwood, Rays Sands, Samuel Shuter, William Speelman, Eliza Shorter, George Singleton, John B. Scott, colonel commandant, 10, John Strode, esq. 3, Enoch Silsby, 2, Samuel Shaw, Hugh Steel.  T.—Charles Tomkins, 3, Charles Tuckett, esq. John Lloyd Tilghman, John Talk, Richard Teril, Miss E. Thomas, William Tilghman.  V.—Joseph Varden, Lewis Valli, 2, colonel James Van, John Vermonet, Martin Volch.  W.—Joseph J. Wood, esq. Thomas Watson, Timothy Winn, Molly Wright, Thomas Walbert, John Winthrop, esq. Walter Winton, esq. Francis White, Henry R. Warfield, James Wallis, Henry Waddell, George S. Washington, captain Richard Whitley, 2, Francis Wayne, Isaac Williams, captain Thomas Wiley.  Y.—John Yerby.
THE SUPERB BARB, THE BLACK SULTAN,
PRESENTED by the Dey of Tunis, to the government of the United States, and lately brought to this country by the Tunisian ambassador, will find the ensuing season at PETWORTH, the farm of JOHN TAYLOR, esq. near Rock Creek church, and within two miles of the city of Washington, where Mares from a distance will be pastured at 40 cents per week, and fed if desired at the market price. This Royal present being one of the most choice animals of the Regency of Tunis and full fifteen hands high, a desire has prevailed that so valuable a race should be extended as much as possible; it has therefore been directed that he be placed at a low price; he will consequently stand at TWENTY DOLLARS the season, which will begin immediately, and end on the first of August; or before which time the price of the season will be dischargeable by SIXTEEN DOLLARS, with a DOLLAR to the Groom when the Mare is lent.  CHESTER BAILEY, Manager for John Taylor, esq. at Petworth.  April 4—3t&wiv

PUBLIC SALE.
By virtue of a deed in trust from Daniel Early, I will offer for sale on the 3rd day of May next, at 11 o'clock A. M. on the premises, for cash, part of lot number one in square number eight hundred and forty-five in the city of Washington—with a well built two story BRICK HOUSE on the same adjoining the house of Robert Alexander, and now occupied by Mr. Sandford. The title is indisputable as may be seen on application to NICHOLAS VOSS.
April 2—M3
Twenty Dollars Reward,
WILL be given for apprehending negro FANNY a very low and tolerable silly woman about 33 years of age, but from appearance older, very black and much marked with the small pox which has occasioned a facial defect in one of her eyes, has lost one of her foreteeth, she is a very sly and cunning, having procured a free pass, and passes by the name of Charity Sharper; she was formerly the property of John L. Hite of this county, and was removed away for about eight years, was apprehended and sold to me in 1832, and was hired by me to a certain Thomas King of Prince George's county, from whom she absconded in Oct. 1832 and has been lurking, I do suppose near where she was hired, or gone to Calvert county where I have understood her husband has been. The above reward will be given to any person who will lodge her in jail so that after her arrest, or deliver her to Mr. Samuel Speake of Washington, or to the Sub-Officer living in Charles county Maryland, near Port Tobacco.
P. S. I forewarn any person from harboring or employing said woman, at their peril. MASSY SIMMS.
Nov. 27—tf
CHARLES H. VARDEN, MERCHANT TAYLOR, NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NEAR THE CAPITOL.
Respectfully informs the gentlemen of the District of Columbia that in addition to his former stock he has received by late arrivals at Philadelphia from London a choice assortment of superfine cloths, single and double milled cassimeres, Hibernian patent cord, woolveteen and waistcoating, fancy and black silk molekins, all of superior quality, and newest fashion, plain and stripe black velvets, constitution cord, knap coatings, finishing flannels, &c. &c. with a variety of other articles in his line, and he pledges himself, to those gentlemen who shall favor him with their orders to complete them in the newest style of fashion. B Ladies' habite, regimentals, navy uniforms, made in the most fashionable manner. Washington Dec 12—tf
COMMITTED to my custody on the 13th day of this month as runaway a negro woman and her two children; the woman calls her name Hamer and her children by the names of Miel and Bell—Hamer says that she and her two children are the property of Eliza Bury of Prince George's county—Hamer is about a feet 8 or 10 inches high, her children are small and one at the breast; their mother is old and much worn. Their master is requested to come and prove his property, pay the fees, and take them away, or they will be sold, agreeable to law. BULTON WEEMS, Sheriff Calvert county. April 12—3t
By virtue of a deed of trust from the heirs of John Brown late of Prince George's county deceased, I will offer at
PUBLIC AUCTION, on the premises at 12 o'clock on Tuesday the 12th day of May next, if fair, if not the next fair day thereafter.
All that valuable tract of Land formerly the property and in the occupation of the late deceased, lying in the neighborhood of Robert Sewell, esq. about seven miles from Piscataway and 12 from the city of Washington, containing about 360 acres of rich fertile land, well adapted to the culture of tobacco, corn, and every kind of small grain. Upwards of 25 acres of fine meadow. Land and a very great proportion of wood and timber of the most valuable kind. Terms will be made known on the day of sale.
CHARLES D. HODGES. April 11—tdof
STELLE'S HOTEL & CITY TAVERN.
THE Subscriber takes this method of thanking his friends and the public for their favors whilst on the Capitol Square and begs leave to acquaint them that he has taken the Station Hotel lately erected by Mr. Carroll, near the Capitol. The hotel being above one hundred feet in front, and containing fifty rooms enables the subscriber to offer every accommodation to members of Congress and travellers which can be expected in a public house. PONTIUS D. STELLE. Washington City, March 25—tf
N. B.—P. D. S. will rent the house lately occupied by him on the adjoining square
FOR SALE.
I WILL sell or exchange for new goods Two BRICK BUILDINGS, well calculated for a retail store, being opposite the Centre Market—for further particulars enquire of the subscriber on the premises. ROBERT HARRISON. April 2—tf
TO RENT.
THE STORE & DWELLING HOUSE, now occupied Dr. Patterson, next door to James Madison's, esq. Possession given the first day of April next—I will also rent the Wharf formerly belonging to Mr. Lewis Delholis on the Eastern Branch, one square above the Navy Yard. Its situation for a Lumber, Coal, and Wood yard, is equal to any in the city of Washington—for terms apply to John Hewitt, esq. or to the subscriber near the Navy Yard. NICHOLAS VOSS. City of Washington, March 14—2awtf
By virtue of a decree of the honorable the Circuit court of the District of Columbia for the county of Washington, in the suit of James Barry, complainant, against Dorothy O'Brien, James O'Brien, Mary Anne O'Brien and John O'Brien, defendants in Chancery;
Will be sold at Public Auction, To the highest bidder on Monday the 28th of April inst. at Steele's hotel, all those two parcels of land situate in the city of Washington near the Eastern Branch, and contiguous to Booth's wharf, bounded as follows:
The first beginning at the intersection at the west side of South Capitol Street, with Water Street, and running thence with South Capitol Street eighty-four feet, thence due west thirty feet two inches to Water Street, and thence with Water Street to the beginning. The second part beginning at the end of one hundred and fifty feet measured westerly from the north east corner of square numbered six hundred and sixty-two on the south side of South R Street, running thence south one hundred and thirty feet, thence west sixty four feet three inches, thence north one hundred and thirty feet to South R Street, and thence east with the line of said Street to the beginning, with the improvements and appurtenances on the same two pieces of land or either of them being or appertaining. The only improvement on the first piece or parcel of ground abovementioned is a two story framed Dwelling House, and on the other a single story framed building—any person desirous of purchasing said property can be shown it by applying at the Clerk's Office.
The sale to commence at 12 o'clock precisely. The terms ready money, or money to be paid immediately on the Court ratifying and confirming said sale. The time of which ratification and confirmation, will be noticed in the same papers in which the sale is advertised. LENTS FORD, Trustee. April 7—3w
This is to give Notice,
THAT the subscriber hath obtained letters of administration on the personal estate of JOHN BOYCE, deceased—all persons having claims against the said deceased, are requested to forward their accounts agreeable to law—all those indebted are warned to make immediate payment. Given under my hand. SARAH BOYCE. March 19—tf
A BARGAIN.
THE subscriber offers for sale the farm he now occupies, containing near 300 acres with or without the stock thereon. It is distant from the city of Georgetown and Washington, about five miles, and well known as a healthy situation. There is much fine fruit thereon, and abounds with springs, affording as good water as in the United States, a considerable proportion of the land has been in clover, and from thirty to fifty acres fit for the beets the ensuing summer. It is now in a very improving state, being altogether clear of broom ledge, and from 40 to 50 acres ploughed and prepared for a spring crop, and from 30 to 40 acres well set with wheat and rye—some part of the land is calculated for tobacco; and plaster of paris answers well with it all. The dwelling house and other improvements may with small repairs, be rendered very comfortable—From its vicinity to two growing cities many advantages result in supplying the markets. A purchaser may calculate on a good bargain, particularly if an early application be made. Some part of the purchase money will be required in cash or approved negotiable paper; the remainder rendered easy—or negroes received in payment. The subscriber or William Searcy residing on the farm will show it when required, and the terms made known by application to Mr. John Thompson, George Town, or Dr. WM. THORNTON, Washington. Isaac Pollock, Fruit Hill, Some Lands calculated for the culture of cotton, Indian corn and small grain, situated on a navigable river in the healthful part of the state of Georgia, will also be sold on reasonable terms or exchanged for negroes. I. P. Jan. 20—epf
WILLIAM H. DORSEY, ATTORNEY AT LAW,
Has opened an office in George Town next door to the Bank of Columbia. He will attend Montgomery county court and the courts held in Washington county in the district of Columbia. April 4—tm
In the case of RICHARD MORGAN an insolvent debtor.
SIX months from and after the first day of February next is limited and appointed for the creditors of the said Richard Morgan to bring in and exhibit their claims to the trustee. It is ordered that this notice be published in the National Intelligencer three times prior to the first day of May next. By order of the hon. Wm. Cranch, esq. WM. BRANT, Ck. April 14—3t
On a liberal credit.
THE subscriber will dispose of at private sale, his estate called Chichester, lying on the eastern branch, immediately opposite the city of Washington. This tract of land containing 697 acres is laid off in lots from 83 to 124 acres for the convenience of purchasers. Plats of the estate and the terms of sale are in the hands of colonel Hanson at the navy yard, and Charles Wayman of George Town. The lots will be shown by Mr. Wedden, living on the premises, near the Eastern Branch bridge. ANTHONY ADDISON. Barnaby, 12th June 1805—tf
City of Washington, Sept. 9, 1805. Several persons under the impression that the public lots in this city are to be disposed of in future by public sales only, having made enquiries when the next sale will probably take place, we are requested to state that those lots may at any time be purchased at private sale of the Superintendent of the City. Sept. 9—tf
This is to give notice that if the heirs of a certain STEPHEN REYNOLDS, who died on his way from the western country in the month of August 1803, and supposed to have been a native of the state of New Hampshire or one of the Eastern States will apply to JOHN RINE administrator living in the town of Cumberland, Alleghany county, state of Maryland, will hear of something to their advantage. By order of Alleghany county orphans court March 3—ep2m
ON Monday the 21st day of April next, if fair, if not the next fair day, will be sold on the premises at 12 o'clock at public sale to the highest bidder, the dwelling plantation of the late WM. DICEY, containing 230 acres of Land—there is on the premises a handsome commodious dwelling house, stable, barn and negro quarters—the Land lies level, is of good quality and well suited to planter—there is an excellent garden and a great deal of choice fruit—the dwelling house is situate 4 miles from George town; and from the beauty of its situation, its healthiness and other advantages, a more desirable place for the residence of a gentleman cannot be offered. It is at present subject to the life estate of a lady upwards of 70 years old, and will be sold under that incumbency. And at the same time and place will be sold, plantation on Rock creek, containing 215 acres, of which 100 acres is in wood—This tract has on it a fine Mill seat, distant about 5 miles from the city of Washington. And at the same time and place will be sold between 15 & 20 valuable likely negroes—men, women and children, among the former are some valuable tradesmen and farmers—the negroes are orderly and sober, and all raised in the family, and nothing but the embarrasments of the estate could compel a sale of them—Terms of sale for the negroes, notes with approved indorsers payable 1.3 in 60, 1.3 in 90 and 1.3 in 120 days—the land on a credit of 1, 2, and 3 years with interest from day of sale—If any default in payment of any installment, the whole to become due. JOSEPH W. CLAGETT, } Trustees PHILIP B. KEY, } March 17—ep4w
This is to give Notice,
That the subscriber hath obtained from the Orphans court of Calvert county in Maryland letters of administration on the personal estate of Samuel V. Whittington late of Calvert county deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased, are hereby warned to exhibit the same with the proper vouchers thereof to the subscriber at or before the first day of October next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Given under my hand this 19th day of March, eighteen hundred and six. WILLIAM WHITTINGTON, Adm'r. N. B. All persons having claims against the partnership of Samuel V. Whittington and company are requested to make them known to the subscriber as speedily as possible. Those who are indebted to make immediate payment to WILLIAM WHITTINGTON, Assignee of Francis Whittington, the surviving partner of S. Whittington & Co. March 26—3w
ELIAS B. CALDWELL, ATTORNEY AT LAW,
HAS removed his Office, to the house lately occupied by Mr. LAW, on Capitol Hill. Washington, July 26—tf
FOR SALE.
UPWARDS of 2000 acres of Land lying on each side of Little River in Loudon county being part of the Goose Creek tract of land purchased of the late col. Charles Carter; the river runs nearly through the middle of it and forms on each side upwards of two hundred acres of low grounds, of which about forty acres is timber. It is in general good farm land, and remarkable for the production of grass and of timothy in particular. About three fourths of the tract in my own occupation, the remainder in the possession of tenants. The land lies well, abounds in good springs and has a sufficiency of white and red oak timber, and some fine poplars. The purchaser may be supplied with flock of every kind, also with from 20 to about 30 negroes in families, and taking them in that manner upon very reasonable terms; the land lies at the same distance (40 miles from Washington, Alexandria, and Dumfries, eight miles from Leesburg & six from Middlebury; there is on the part in my occupation a small dwelling house containing two rooms and an entry below, and two rooms above stairs, a kitchen, good stable and carriage house and other necessary buildings, all of them erected within the last five years, a good garden. The purchaser may be accommodated in the payments. JOSEPH JONES. Near Leesburg, Loudon County, April 7—ep1m
War Department, March 1, 1806. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN.
THAT separate proposals will be received at the office of the Secretary for the Department of War, until 12 o'clock at noon of the first Wednesday in June next, for the supply of all rations that may be required for the use of the United States, from the 1st day of October 1806, until the 30th day of September 1807, both days inclusive, at the following places: viz. First, At Niagara, Detroit, Michilimackinac, Fort Wayne, Chicago, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of Ohio, and territory of Michigan, and at any place or places within the Indian territory north of the 4th degree of north latitude. Second, At South-West Point, Tellico, Knoxville, Nashville, and within the Cherokee nation between Tennessee and Georgia, and on the road between said river and Nashville, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited within the state of Kentucky and Tennessee. Third, At the garrison near Vincennes on the river Wabash, at Fort Mifflin, New Madrid, Chickasaw Bluffs, Arkansas, Natchez, & Fort Adams, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited in the Mississippi territory, except the county of Washington, and at any place or places in the Indiana territory south of the 4th degree of north latitude and fifty miles east of the Mississippi river.
FOR SALE, A handsome second hand GIG
On liberal terms. Enquire of the Editor or Mr. Joseph Cahu near the Navy Yard. April 4—6t
Fourth, At St. Louis, St. Charles, Kaskaskia, Cahokia, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched or retired within the territory of Louisiana north of New Madrid, and at any place or places in the Indiana territory within fifty miles east of the Mississippi river, & south of the 4th degree of north latitude, Fort Massac excepted. Fifth, At New Orleans, Plaquemines, Point Coupee, Opelousas, Natchitoches, Appomattox, Attakapas, Fort Stodder, Fort St. Stephens, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited within the territory of Orleans, or in the county of Washington in the Mississippi territory, and at any place or places on the west side of the Mississippi river below Arkansas. Separate proposals will also be received as aforesaid for the supply of all rations, which may be required for the use of the United States, from the 1st day of January 1807, to the 31st day of December of the same year, both days inclusive, within the several states heretofore mentioned, viz.
Sixth, At Fort Wilkinson, Cockspur Island, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited within the state of Georgia, and on the Indian boundary between Georgia and the Creek nation. Seventh, at Charleston, Rocky Mount, on the head waters of the Santee, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the states of North and South Carolina. Eighth, At Roanoke, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the state of Virginia.
Ninth, At Fort M'Henry, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the state of Maryland and the district of Columbia. Tenth, At Fort Mifflin, Carlisle, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the state of Pennsylvania, east of the Mountains, and within the states of New Jersey, and Delaware. Eleventh, At Pittsburg, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the state of Pennsylvania, west of the mountains. Twelfth, At Fort Jay, West Point, Albany, Schenectady, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the state of New York, Niagara and its dependencies excepted. Thirteenth, At Fort Trumbull, Fort Wolcott, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the states of Connecticut, Rhode Island and Vermont. Fourteenth, At Fort Independence, (Boston harbor) and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the state of Massachusetts, the town of Springfield, and the district of Maine, excepted. Fifteenth, At Portsmouth, Portland, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of New Hampshire and the district of Maine.
Sixteenth, Proposals will also be received as aforesaid, for the supply of all rations, which may be required by the United States, for the troops which are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the town of Springfield in the state of Massachusetts, and for the armorers and other persons employed in the United States' armory at that place, from the 1st day of January 1807 to the 31st day of December in the same year, both days inclusive. A ration to consist of one pound and one quarter of beef, or three quarters of a pound of pork, eighteen ounces of bread or flour, one gill of rum, whiskey or brandy, and at the rate of two quarts of salt, four quarts of vinegar, four pounds of soap, and one pound and a half of candles, to every hundred rations. The prices of the several component parts of the ration shall be specified; but the U. S. reserves the right of making such alterations in the price of the component parts of the ration aforesaid, as shall make the price of each part thereof bear a just proportion to the proposed price of the whole ration. The rations are to be furnished in such quantities, that there shall at all times, during the term of the proposed contract, be sufficient for the consumption of the troops at Michilimackinac, Detroit and Chicago, for six months in advance; and at each of the other posts on the western waters, for at least three months in advance, of good and wholesome provisions, if the same shall be required. It is also to be permitted to all and every of the commandants of fortified places or posts, to call for, at seasons when the same can be transported, or at any time in case of urgency, such supplies of like provisions in advance, as in the discretion of the commandant shall be deemed proper. It is understood that the contract of to be at the expence and risk of issuing the supplies to the troops, and that all losses sustained by the depredations of an enemy, or by means of the troops of the U. S. shall be paid by the U. S. at the price of the articles captured, or destroyed as aforesaid, on the deposition of two or more persons of creditable characters, and the certificate of a commissioned officer, stating the circumstances of the loss, and the amount of the articles for which compensation shall be claimed. The privilege is understood to be reserved to the U. S. of requiring that none of the supplies, which may be furnished under any of the proposed contracts, shall be issued, until the supplies which have been or may be furnished under contracts now in force, have been consumed; and that a supply in advance may be always required at any of the fixed posts on the seaboard, or Indian frontier, not exceeding three months. H. DEARBORN, Secretary of War. March 5—2aw6w.
Bank of Columbia.
THE board of directors having this day declared a dividend for the half year ending the 30th inst. at the rate of two per cent. per annum. The same will be paid to the stock holders or their representatives on or after Thursday the 20th inst. WILLIAM WHANN, Cashier. March 20—6w.
All persons having claims against the estate of Uriah Forrest deceased since his bankruptcy, are requested to have them proved according to law, and presented to Philip B. Key, before the 1st day of June next, that a distribution of the personal assets may be made as early as practicable. REBECCA FORREST, Executrix. April 4—47
TO RENT,
THE COMMODOIOUS BRICK STORE near the CAPITOL, now in the occupation of Messrs. P. HEALY & Co. Possession to be given on the 1st of May. Enquire of Frederick May. March 28—tf
WANTED, either a school master or mistress, to reside with a gentleman in the upper part of Virginia, apply at this office. March 19—
INFORMATION TO TRAVELLERS.
THE subscribers beg leave to inform the public that on the first day of April next, a new, expeditionary and convenient LINE OF STAGES, will be established between the cities of Philadelphia and Washington—to run in the following order of time and place:
A stage, with the mail, will leave Brenton's tavern, in Wilmington, every Monday and Wednesday, at 5 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Chester town early in the evening on the same day. A stage with the mail, will leave Chester town on every Tuesday and Thursday, at 5 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Rock Hall by early breakfast. A comfortable and fast sailing packet, with the mail, will leave Rock Hall on every Tuesday and Thursday, at 8 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Annapolis, with a favorable wind, in the course of two and a half hours, at any rate in the course of the same day. A stage with the Eastern Shore of Maryland and Delaware mails, will leave Annapolis on Wednesdays and Fridays, and arrive at Washington and George-town on the same days. The stage will leave M'Laughlin's hotel in George-town, and Steele's in Washington, on every Thursday and Sunday, at 5 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Annapolis on the same days. A packet will leave Annapolis on Mondays and Fridays, at 8 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Rock Hall on the same days in time to proceed on to Chester town on the same evenings. The stage will leave Chester town on Tuesdays and Saturdays, at 5 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Wilmington on the same days; from whence a stage runs to Philadelphia every day. One of the subscribers likewise begs leave to inform the public that he is now established at the ancient and well known ferry, Rock Hall, and has provided good, safe and commodious packets, fitted up in the neatest manner for the accommodation of passengers, that a large and comfortable packet will leave Rock Hall, for Baltimore on the same days that the mail crosses to Annapolis, Tuesdays and Thursdays, at 9 o'clock A. M. and will leave Baltimore, from the lower end of Bowy's wharf, on Wednesdays and Saturdays, at 9 o'clock A. M. for Rock Hall. Each of the above packets are well calculated for the conveyance of horses and carriages. Horses and carriages will always be in readiness for the conveyance of passengers on their arrival at Rock Hall, to whatever place they may wish to proceed, in any neighboring part of the country, or to Chester town, from whence they may be conveyed to the northward or southward, by the regular line of stages; and that the Annapolis packet will leave Annapolis on Wednesdays for Rock Hall, and will leave Rock Hall on Sundays for Annapolis, besides the regular day of carrying the mail, as above mentioned. He also flatters himself, that from his experience in maritime pursuits, and the confidence placed in him by many of the most respectable merchants in Baltimore, whilst following the sea faring life, that he has a competent knowledge to keep his boats in good order, for the comfort and convenience of passengers, and that he shall merit the patronage of a generous public, which he hereby respectfully solicits. It is unnecessary to make any comments on the advantages which entitles this route to a preference, to that round the waters of the Chesapeake bay. This affords a safe dry road, through a beautiful, level, and fertile country, from the Delaware state to the seat of government, whilst the other presents one continual scene of hills and valleys, generally filled with water and mire. Travellers on this route will not only derive advantage from good roads, shortening the distance, and incurring less expence, but will avoid the danger of injuring their health, by not being exposed to traveling by night. THOMAS HARRIS, Rock Hall, DAVID WETHERSPOON, Annapolis Town, March 26—tawtf
TWENTY DOLLARS REWARD will be given for apprehending and securing so that the owner may get her again, a likely negro girl named ANN, about twenty years of age—of dark complexion, large eyes of rather a down look—& of middle stature. She absconded from George town about four or five weeks ago. She formerly belonged to John Brent, Esq. near Port Tobacco, in Charles County, state of Maryland. She took with her sundry articles of wearing apparel, among which were a black silk short gown, and a red pink ditto. She appears, when spoken to, confident and unassuming. The above reward will be paid if she is taken out of this district, and ten dollars if taken in it. GEORGE GLOYD, one of the constables of George town. March 21—2awtf.