The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-05-09 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1181.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM,
MONDAY, MAY 9, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6.
Debate on the passage of the bill for raising an additional military force.
(CONTINUED.)
MR. G. W. CAMPBELL said, that notwithstanding the long time that had been spent in the discussion of this bill, he felt it his duty to state to the House the reasons that would influence him to vote in favor of it; and he deemed it the more necessary that he should do so, because attempts had been made to impress the public mind with an opinion, that those who were disposed to raise this army, had abandoned the principles they maintained in former times, when they had insisted that standing armies were dangerous to liberty and the rights of man, and that the chief reliance for security and defence ought to be placed on the militia. I am, (said Mr. C.) and always have been one of those who think we ought to rely on the militia as the main support and defence of our country in the day of danger. I consider them as the great bulwark of our liberties, and believe we may repose the highest confidence in their patriotism and courage. I am also, as I always have been, opposed to standing armies. I have considered them and still consider them as the bane of freedom, as the instrument in the hands of a despot, with which to scourge the people, reduce them to submission and deprive them of their liberties. In this view I consider large standing armies in times of peace. But at the same time that I entertain this opinion, I believe that a regular force may in certain cases, and under certain circumstances, be necessary. I consider it as a kind of necessary evil, which we cannot in those cases do without, and which may be essentially useful in repelling invasions of our rights and territory, and rendering more secure, while kept within proper limits, our liberty and independence. I wish it therefore to be distinctly understood, that though I shall vote for the bill on your table, I have not changed my opinion with regard to the confidence we ought to repose in the militia, nor as to their efficiency in ordinary cases for the defence of their country. I have not, sir, altered my opinion on these points, and the only difference which exists between myself and many others on this subject, appears to be that, I consider the present crisis to be such as requires us to prepare for a state of war, while they seem to think there is no necessity for making such preparations. I also believe (what I presume few if any deny) that in a state of war a regular force is necessary to aid and support the militia. This seems to be admitted on all hands, and indeed little or no argument can be necessary to prove that there are certain services to which the militia are not competent, and which ought not to be required of them. It has been said that in ordinary times they may be relied upon for every purpose. Though this position may in the general be true, yet there are some exceptions to it in the present situation of our country, and I may be permitted to state some services which are important, and which ought not to be imposed upon the militia. Among those may be mentioned the protection of the most exposed points on our extensive frontier—I will instance New Orleans.—Should an attempt be made to invade your territory, no place is more exposed or seems to promise a greater prospect of success to the invader than New Orleans. When danger threatens, what is there to protect that city from a sudden attack by either of the belligerent powers. You have no effective militia there sufficiently numerous to defend it, and it is 7 or 800 miles from the body of the militia of the western country. Exhausted by so long a march, is it to be expected that the militia would be willing to remain for months and perhaps years as a permanent protection to that place? Suppose they would submit to any burthens which you should impose upon them, and I am confident they will never shrink from any duty which may be assigned them by their country, is it consistent with propriety, is it honorable to the nation to impose this task exclusively on the militia of the western country? Are
your militia to be called out and to remain out to protect the many exposed points from Detroit to New Orleans, to repel the savages or a neighboring enemy, should he meditate an attack on that quarter? These duties would be too arduous to impose upon them. Their vast distance from the scene of action, and the sickliness of the climate to which they might be called, would expose them to diseases and fatigue, which their constitutions would be incompetent to sustain, and even bear down the strongest constitution, & damp the most ardent disposition to serve their country. I say therefore that whether we are actually at war or threatened by it, it is important to have an active disposable force to be stationed at those places, to repel the first attacks, until your militia can be called out to support them.
But it is said by gentlemen who admit that in time of war a regular force may be necessary, that they will not raise a single man till they see the enemy. I would not have believed that any gentleman would make such an assertion, if I had not heard it on this floor. If I had not heard gentlemen say that though you are surrounded by dangers, they will not vote to raise a single regiment, no not a single man to defend their country. Can gentlemen justify this conduct to the nation? Are they willing to remain inactive and unprepared, with their arms folded up, until you are actually attacked, until the enemy is at your door, and then it will be too late to prepare to resist him? Will this be doing justice to the nation? Will this be acting like men ought to do, who are appointed the guardians of the American people, and to whom are confided the protection of their best rights, their liberty and independence? It will not, sir, the nation will never sanction such conduct. But, sir, if the militia are sufficient under all circumstances to repel an enemy, however formidable, in the first instance, will there be any occasion to raise a regular force to support them, after they have withstood the first impulse and acquired more experience? I should presume not. I have always understood that one great object of regular troops was to give discipline and energy to the militia when first called into service, and that after they had served some time, say one or two years, they in fact became regular troops, for all useful purposes. Though in the first instance considerable inconvenience and difficulty were experienced with regard to them, for want of system, for want of the habit of acting in concert, for want of discipline—a regular force also answers an important purpose, by being distributed at those places where danger is most to be apprehended, and serving as firm bands, around which the militia would rally at the call of their country. The regularity and discipline of the former would give confidence and energy to the latter, while in turn the latter (the militia) being their fellow citizens, and fighting by their side in defence of their country, would add courage with enthusiasm to the skill and discipline of the regular troops. A regular army is made acquainted with and preserves the knowledge of military tactics, and is prepared to infuse it among the militia when called into service. But that we should remain inactive, and wait until our enemy shall come to our doors before we begin to prepare, when it is admitted on all hands that we are threatened with danger, appears to me extraordinary, and is a line of conduct that I could not reconcile to myself, to my constituents, or to my country. I do not feel disposed, like the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Williams) to express my resentment in terms so highly aggravated against Great Britain and France, as he has done. I can see no real benefit likely to result from calling them by hard names—yet I do not mean to reprimand his conduct in this respect. I have no doubt he expressed his real feelings, and I believe, I view the conduct of those nations with as much abhorrence as any man in this House. But how the gentleman can represent them both as so hostile to this country, and their measures towards it, so unjust, so contrary to all the known laws of society, and even of humanity, as to induce him to call one the Tyger and the other the Shark, and yet in the same breath refuse to make
any preparation to raise any force to defend the nation against the ravages of those wild and voracious animals, is to me beyond all comprehension. Can gentlemen be serious when they aggravate and paint in the highest colors the atrocity of the conduct of those nations, and yet tell you there is no necessity to prepare for war. Surely, sir, when this nation is threatened with dangers from abroad, from more quarters than one, as has been stated on this floor, it is high time to prepare for defence, to prepare to resist those dangers, and our preparations ought certainly to bear some proportion to the dangers that threaten us, and be in a great degree regulated by the disposition those powers have manifested in their acts, to harass and destroy our commerce, violate our rights, and murder our fellow citizens.
Much has been said on this floor, particularly by a gentleman from N. Carolina, (Mr. Stanford) with respect to the danger of a standing army—and he stated the horror the people felt, at the beat of the drum in time of recruiting soldiers—and I suppose they must have felt the same horror at the sound of the fife as it generally accompanies the drum on those occasions. I regret that the gentleman has represented his constituents, so timid as to be alarmed even at the sounds that usually accompany war. I must however believe, that this timidity, this horror at the sound of the drum are confined to the grave matrons, the fond mothers and tender-hearted sisters, of those in the gentleman's district, who may be about to risk their lives in defence of their country, and do not affect the people generally in that quarter. I entertain a much more favorable opinion of their patriotism and bravery. But such arguments can have no weight in regard to the present question, whatever plausibility they might claim in relation to a standing army in time of peace, they are entirely misapplied in the present instance. In time of war, or when threatened by war, a military spirit, a martial enthusiasm ought to be encouraged, ought to be cherished and excited among the whole people of this country—in times of peace this is unnecessary. There is little or no analogy between the force proposed to be raised by this bill and a standing army in time of peace, such as the gentleman from N. Carolina seems to have had in view, and which is so terrific to his people. Almost every man in the House is opposed to a large standing army in time of peace, such as could intimidate the civil authority, or endanger liberty—objections that are valid against such an army do not apply to the force intended to be raised by the bill, which is a temporary force, raised on the emergency of the present state of our affairs, and to be disbanded whenever that emergency ceases.
Gentlemen have indeed brought to view our situation in 1798, when they say an army was unnecessarily raised, and also that in 1805—6, when we refused to raise one, and on these two points have insisted that there is no more—nay, some have gone so far as to say that there is not as much occasion for this force now as there was at those respective times for raising an army.
It appears that the principal difference between us arises from two positions which have been assumed by the opponents to the bill, in both of which I conceive they are mistaken. The one is, that the force to be raised by the bill is a standing army of the kind hitherto so much opposed—and the other, that the present crisis is not such as to require us to prepare for a state of war. With regard to the first position, notwithstanding what has been said by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dana) and his acute knowledge of the grammatical institutes and construction of language, I must deny that the force to be raised by this bill is intended as an addition to the peace establishment or that the bill justifies such an inference. The gentleman admitted the words of the bill would not support this construction, but he insisted according to the spirit of the law it must be so. The bill proposes to raise an additional military force. Now, said the gentleman, a military force and the peace establishment must be the same, because we have at present no military force but the peace establish-
ment. The peace establishment is certainly a military establishment; but an addition made to the peace establishment would be so expressed, and would be different and distinct from troops raised towards a war establishment, as these are. This force if raised will be as stated in the bill, an addition made in service to the present military peace establishment; but will not form a part of it. So the understanding of nine tenths of this House is, that this is a specific force to meet a crisis, which may probably occur in our public affairs—a state of war—and it is distinctly understood that they are to be disbanded when that crisis is over, or the probability of war ceases. But, says a gentleman, it may continue for ever; I do not think it necessary to enter into an enquiry how long it may be requisite to keep these troops in service; it is a sufficient answer to the gentleman from Connecticut, that this establishment is in the power of the government and of this House; and so soon as the exigency ceases, it cannot be supposed that this branch of the government would be disposed to continue them any longer in service. So long as continuing this army remains exclusively in this House, there can be no danger of its being retained any longer than the crisis may require. This House has the power to refuse making appropriations to support such army, and when that is refused it must be disbanded. This is supposing an extreme case—that the other House will not agree with you to discontinue it by repealing the law, which can hardly be expected to occur.
With regard therefore to the position that this is a standing army in the sense in which it has been stated, it is not supported by the bill or by any fair inference from it, and the moment it is examined, it will appear unfounded, and the grounds on which opposition is made to this bill by the gentleman from North-Carolina and others, will thereupon entirely vanish. In the same manner the argument that it will affect the morals of the people and endanger civil liberty, is futile; for the moment that the idea of its being a standing army, such as is to continue in time of peace, ceases, that moment all possible force which those arguments could give to the opposition also ceases and leaves this without being affected by them—we may therefore lay them entirely out of the question.
The second position taken, viz: that the present crisis does not require preparation for a state of war, may require somewhat more particular notice. We are called upon to review the scenes of '98, when our vessels were captured, and which was said to be a time of greater danger than the present. At that time I did not pay much attention to politics, but according to the best information I have been enabled to obtain, our situation then was extremely different from what it is now. The government of France was at that time struggling for existence against a powerful coalition, in which were united the great powers on the continent, as well as Great Britain. Her government was not firmly established; and it was not known how long she could oppose the powerful torrent of that coalition. For this reason it was that those who opposed the regular force at that time said there was no occasion for raising an army. It was contended that France had no land forces to spare, nor had she a maritime force sufficient to transport them to this country; if even she had them to spare at home. It was therefore contended that war was not to be expected.
I understand it was then insisted upon by those who opposed the raising an army, that the government of this country at that time appeared to act as if they wished to court a war with France, and indeed it has been so stated on this floor during the present session by the gentleman from N. C. (Mr. Macon) and because the then minority (who are considered as having become the present majority in a political sense) considered it impolitic and unjust to aggravate or provoke a war, and that the country was not in danger of either invasion or attack from any quarter, they therefore opposed the raising an army.
I take it for granted that these were their reasons; and were this a similar crisis, would oppose the bill
upon your table, and in doing so, should act on the very same principles as that on which I shall now act in voting for it. With regard to our situation in 1805—6, I can speak with somewhat more precision, being here at that time, and having a much better opportunity of being acquainted with the circumstances of our public affairs, and the causes that led to the then differences between us and Spain.
There was indeed some appearance of war on our south-western frontier; but what were the causes of it? Not such as to promise any serious consequences. I will not take up the time of the House in detailing the differences which then took place between some Americans and certain disorderly persons in the Spanish territory; they are already known to the House, and when fairly examined they will clearly prove that Spain had no intention whatever of going to war with us at that time. We have had all the evidence on this subject before us, and there is no proof of any serious hostile disposition towards us, on the part of the Spanish government. One circumstance goes far to prove that the Spanish officers did not intend to commit any act of hostility, or to violate our territory in this transaction—which is, that the Spanish troops remained on their own side of the line, until those persons (the Kempers) whom they had procured to be taken, were delivered to them on their own territory, by some American citizens. This was the clearest proof that they were determined to avoid committing any act of hostility, or even entering on the American territory; and though they may have used fraudulent means to obtain their object, it is clear they had no authority from their government to disturb the peace subsisting between the two nations. With regard to the dispute respecting our boundary west of the Mississippi, it related to a small tract of country uninhabited, bordering on the Sabine river, and extending from that river towards Natchitoches. Whatever our claims were and still are, and however well founded they may be to territory far west of the Sabine, the dispute at that time was confined to the small tract above described. The Spanish commanders informed you they were ordered to maintain the most friendly relations with the American government and people, were expressly ordered not to act on the offensive, but only on the defensive; but that they were directed and thought it their duty to occupy the territory in question, because they believed it belonged to their government. On the other hand our government claimed it under the treaty and convention with France for Louisiana, and considering it as our property we deemed it our duty to take possession of it, and not suffer it to be occupied by a foreign power. The dispute was therefore only co-extensive with that small tract of territory (on which there were no inhabitants,) for neither party evinced any disposition to extend its claim forcibly at that time beyond its limits. It was merely a dispute about the real right to the territory in question, to which each party might honestly consider his claim valid. This was the ground of difference, when at the same time negotiations on this subject were pending at the court of Spain. It was at that time also generally understood that France, was favorably disposed towards the United States in regard to this dispute. There was no apprehensions entertained that she would support Spain in her claim to the territory in question; on the contrary there was reason to believe she would not. Whatever might be the opinion of France in regard to our claim to the Floridas, under our treaty with her, there was no reason to believe from the documents laid before us, and the best information that was possessed, that she would countenance or support the claim of Spain to the territory in question, on the Sabine, claimed by us under the Louisiana treaty, or her claim to any part of the country west of the Mississippi, which we claimed by virtue of that treaty. There was not any reasonable ground to expect a coalition between France and Spain on this subject. Spain stood alone to support her claim. She had only a handful of troops, not exceeding 6 or 800, who declared their intention to act on the defensive only, and who in fact al-

ways retreated when our troops advanced towards them—she had no other troops within an immense distance of the place, and could not reinforce them in any short time. There could not therefore be much danger to be apprehended from that quarter. Those were the circumstances under which it was proposed to raise an army in 1805—6. I was then of opinion, and the event has proved the correctness of that opinion, that the circumstances did not require or justify such a measure. The situation of our country at those periods, which have been spoken of, was not therefore such as it is at this time. But in order to shew this the more clearly, it may be proper to enquire what our present situation is in regard to foreign powers.
On this subject it will not be in my power to say much that has not already been said, and I do not wish to repeat what others have advanced. In regard to G. Britain, it is said that we have no reason to apprehend any attack or invasion from her. Is it necessary for me to state that she has been for years committing aggressions on your commerce, and impressing your seamen. Has she not murdered your citizens in your merchant vessels as well as in your ships of war? And has not the scene of aggressions been completed by the unexampled outrageous attack on the Chesapeake? Have there not been negotiations from time to time attempted on our part, and long pending between the two nations? Has not the late extraordinary mission been considered more important than any other—and what has been the result? A total failure, sir—a total denial on her part of reparation for an offence which she acknowledged she had committed. Instead of making reparation, it would seem as if the object of that nation was to mock negotiation—to send a minister here under pretence of negotiation, whose very first act was to call upon you, the injured party, to make concession for feeling the injury which she has done you, and for expressing those feelings and demanding reparation for the same. This was in substance the requisition; and the demand itself was in fact adding insult to injury. If we had public officers who would submit to such demands and degrade the nation by making such concessions as these, they would deserve to be immediately removed from office—they would be reprobated by the nation. I do not wish to be understood by saying so, as having any desire to go to war, no, I do not—but I trust the people of America are determined never to surrender or barter their honor, their rights or independence for a shameful peace; and should we ever concede one point, they would make further demands, and no one can say when or where they would stop. Let me ask them where is there a single circumstance which ought to quiet our feelings and calm our apprehensions—there is none. Some months ago, it was expressed on this floor by certain gentlemen, that we were either actually at war, or that we acted wrong in not going to war. And here I cannot help remarking as a singular fact, that the same gentlemen now tell us that we are in no danger, not even sufficiently so to induce us to make any preparations, who told us in the commencement of the session that we ought to have gone to war the moment the affair of the Chesapeake took place, that we ought to have seized upon Canada and made a descent upon Jamaica; they were in favor then of such decisive steps as these, and yet at this time they think it unnecessary to adopt any measures calculated to resist aggressions and put the nation in a state of defence. Surely, sir, the failure of the negotiation is a strong reason to induce us to prepare for any event that may happen. It is the strongest proof that G. Britain is not favorably disposed towards us.
You are told however, that G. Britain and France press each other so severely and yet so equally at the same time that there is no danger of our having occasion to go to war with either. What evidence have we, supposing the reasoning correct, (which is not admitted) that this equal pressure will continue for a day, a week, or a month; must not one power eventually prevail and the other give way—and will it not be in the power of that nation which prevails to strike a decisive blow, if disposed to do so, which even now may be preparing for us. But if these powers at this moment do press each other so severely that they cannot turn their attention towards us, I ask how it is that one of them has refused to do you that justice which she seems to confess she owes you? I wish gentlemen to attend to this circumstance and they will see that this conduct is no evidence of a friendly disposition towards us—but directly the contrary. If when all the continent of Europe is in arms against her, she refuses to make reparation
for an act which she acknowledges to be hostile, I ask what have you to expect when this pressure upon her is removed? Have you any thing to hope from her justice? And if it is not her interest now to make reparation, will it be more so when this pressure upon her ceases. And if it is the only reason why we are not in danger, viz. that those powers press equally upon each other, this would seem to be the inevitable result: if they are prevented from attacking us because they are opposed to each other, that moment in which they accommodate matters, they may and probably will wreak their vengeance on us. Let us then prepare as well against the one as against the other of those powers. Here it may be proper further to observe, that G. Britain, not satisfied with these extraordinary aggressions on your vessels and seamen, has gone on by her orders of council to interdict your commerce from the whole continent of Europe. I am not disposed to go into a particular detail of the effects of these measures. They are known to all. It is sufficient to state that they are clearly understood in this country, as well as in that from which they originate, to have this effect, that every ship belonging to you that sails the ocean is either made liable to confiscation by G. Britain, or subjected to such conditions as to make it liable to certain confiscation by her enemies. I state this without hazarding a doubt of its correctness or a belief that it will be contradicted. Not a vessel can sail from your ports but is liable to be confiscated or subject to such conditions as will expose to confiscation by another nation. This is understood here as well as there; and though we do not choose to go to war yet it proves her disposition to injure and cripple us as far as it is her power.
Gentlemen do not believe her disposition hostile, or that she will make war because she professes to be friendly to us. If we rely upon such professions we may be lulled into security and remain quiet, until it is her good pleasure to remove her restrictions from our commerce, or until she attacks our towns and march her armies into our country, and then gentlemen will consent to commence the work of preparation. But when her armies are in the bosom of your country it will be too late to raise your force to resist them, this must be evident to every man. I hope therefore we shall not adopt such short-sighted dangerous policy; it is an insult to the understanding of any country to be told that it shall not prepare till war is actually commenced against it. War threatens and we should make preparations to provide against it—not to raise large armies, and pour our whole energy into the field “whenever a speck of war appears in the horizon,” but to make such preparation as will meet the first attacks, resist encroachments and sustain the contest until the energies of the nation could be called into actual service. But let us inquire, what is our situation in regard to France? I wish not to be misunderstood; I declare that I have no other enmity to Great Britain than what results from her acts of hostility towards us, and perhaps I might say that I have with others, very strong reasons to feel the contrary. I am disposed to prepare to meet any attack from whatever quarter it may come. But let us enquire what is our situation in regard to France? It is true, France has not impressed our seamen; she has not harassed our commerce until very lately, as much as Great Britain, nor has she murdered your citizens, nor attacked your ships of war; but she has joined Great Britain in her commercial restrictions, and in her interdictions of your trade. Her blockading decrees operate on our commerce in the most injurious manner, and contribute very much to cut off our trade from Europe. They subject to confiscation every ship that is bound to a British port, that has British goods on board, or that submits to examination by a British ship of war—this is certainly no evidence of a friendly disposition on her part—no proof that we have nothing to fear from her, if it was her interest to attack us. We know that both those nations are disposed to bring us into the contest. We know it now officially; we knew it from newspapers long since; and I cannot believe it proper that we should lull ourselves into security with respect to France, any more than in respect to Great Britain. You are told that France and Spain were identified in 1805—6; if they were so then, they are much more so now, when Spain is indeed but the vassal of France and there is much more probability of her being supported by her in any attack she might make upon our country. On that ground then we are not safe, and should not repose in security with regard to either. I need not on this occasion bring to the minds of this House the consequences which have
resulted from such security as that in which we are called upon to rest. I need not bring to your recollection the case of Copenhagen, so often noticed on this floor—From the best information obtained on this subject, from the statements made in the British Parliament, it is manifest, that the Danish government apprehended no danger, that they were lulled into a state of security, that their troops were on the continent, in Holstein, maintaining inviolate their neutrality—that they had given no just ground of offence to G. Britain, and were reposing in security on the good understanding that appeared to subsist between the two nations, when she was suddenly attacked by a British fleet and army, and spoiled of her richest treasure. The so much famed British Lion , stretched forth his merciless paw—fastened its fangs upon her capital, murdered her people, and robbed her of her navy, the most valuable possession on which was placed her chief reliance for defence. This great national robbery may by some be considered excusable, which if committed in private life would be a criminal offence liable to capital punishment. But if Denmark when innocent, was treated in this manner, what sufficient reason have we to rest assured that a similar line of conduct is not meditated, and will not be adopted in regard to us? What evidence have we that we are safe from the effects of the overgrown power and ambition of either G. Britain or France? For I do not mean to say that France would not pursue the same line of conduct, if it was her interest so to do. When threatened with danger from each of those powers, ought we not to prepare to meet a treatment similar to that other nations have experienced? I presume no one will deny that we ought; and the only difference of opinion must be as to the means to be employed. I cannot see the force of the arguments urged against the bill—to me they are incomprehensible—and gentlemen seem to speak as if they viewed the present state of our public affairs through the medium of jaundiced eyes, and not through clear optics.
There is another circumstance which deserves notice—the disposition which the British government has manifested in her colonies bordering on our territory towards the north east. Have not her officers from the best information which we possess incited the savages on those frontiers to prepare to make war on our citizens, and has she not fortified her towns, and thrown a considerable number of troops into that quarter? For what purpose are those measures adopted? Are they not proof of her disposition to act offensively? We are told indeed that she does all this for her own defence, and that it is evidence of her pacific disposition, as she is apprehensive of an attack from you. In my mind it wears a very different appearance—I consider it as a proof of her hostility to this country, and such as ought to induce us to put the nation in a state of defence. She may not indeed intend to attack us by a force from Canada, but to prepare for an attack by us on Canada in consequence of an assault by her on some quarter of our territory. She may mean to make an attack on New-York or N. Orleans, and may thus prepare herself to repel retaliation on our part.
Your attention is called to our finances, and you are told that the expense ought to prevent you from raising these troops. It is true that the present state of our commerce will affect the revenue; but surely that is no argument in the present case; for if the measure be necessary, the expense ought not to prevent its adoption. Will gentlemen tell you that they are willing to risk the lives, the property, and the liberty of their fellow citizens, rather than incur such expense as may be necessary to preserve them. I presume they will not. The expense can be no objection if the measure be necessary. If it be not necessary, it ought not to be adopted, even suppose it cost you nothing.
You are also told by some gentlemen that the embargo will effect all your purposes; that you have nothing to do but to continue that measure and you will bring those nations to terms. I am extremely happy that gentlemen who formerly thought otherwise, have now come into opinions which a great majority of this House entertained in substance, and expressed when the measure of the embargo was discussed in this House; they are certainly at liberty to change misconceived opinions, and are correct in so doing. I have in myself considerable reliance on the embargo, and believe it has had, and will have a good effect; but I would not rely on it alone. It is not a measure to protect us in case of war—it is not a measure to keep off an invading foe. And if in fact there be
danger of war, we cannot rely on the embargo, to repel it. It was intended to preserve our resources, and prepare us for war, and it is calculated to have that effect.
But another objection is made to this bill, which seems to be a kind of forlorn hope: that it is a half-way measure, neither calculated for war nor peace. One gentleman tells you he would vote for troops to take Canada and drive the English out of the continent, and yet that he will not vote for this bill. I cannot understand the correctness of this doctrine. If the crisis be such as to justify us in raising such a force as would be competent to make war, and conquer and take possession of Canada, it certainly is sufficient to justify the raising a few troops to defend our country in the first instance, and, if it should be necessary to assist in carrying into effect that great design [Mr. Stanfield said that he had said if gentlemen in the majority would come forward and say that the invasion of Canada was the object, he would vote for that number of men which experienced gentlemen should say was proper. If it were judged proper to root out the British name from the continent, he would vote such a force as was sufficient.] Mr. Campbell—The gentleman's meaning then is, that if gentlemen declare that to be the object, he will call for raising a sufficient force to effect it, of course I must understand him as saying that this is such a crisis as would induce him to give his vote for a force sufficient to conquer Canada, if other gentlemen thought it expedient; that is, this is such a crisis as would induce him to give his vote to drive the subjects of Great Britain out of this continent and destroy her power therein, and yet it would not justify the raising 6,000 men to meet any emergency that may happen. I cannot comprehend this sort of reasoning. It is saying that you must remain in perfect tranquility, and submit to every insult and injury, or you must make war in the first instance before you prepare for it. But, sir, war or peace does not depend upon us. We do not wish to go to war, if we could preserve peace; this however may not be in our power. But it is our duty to prepare to defend ourselves from impending danger, from which we ought not to shrink. But this has been reverberated in your years as a half way measure; and you are asked what this force can effect. It might as well be asked what 60,000 men can do, as to ask what 6,000 are good for. It is only pushing the argument a little further in order to shew its absurdity. One thousand men even at New York would be of considerable advantage to assist the people against an attack there. Regular troops well trained, give spirit to the militia. Why then ask the use of six thousand men? They will be of proportionate use with a body of an hundred thousand. With respect to this half way measure, I believe it is the first time that it was ever argued that we must not raise a force except it be sufficient for conquest. It has been considered proper when you raise a force to make the number proportionate to the emergency of the times. But that we should calculate the precise number that may eventually be required is impossible.
I am sorry to detain the House so long; but will make one or two remarks on what fell from the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dana.)
I am not much acquainted with commercial transactions or the hardships experienced by our seamen, but really there can be no great difficulty in answering the question asked by the gentleman, what injury the impressment of her own seamen by Great Britain from our vessels can do our own seamen. It has exposed and still does expose our seamen to impressment by her; they have been impressed from our ships, and forced to serve in British vessels, and treated in a manner which need not be repeated here. The gentleman meant, no doubt, that this principle of impressing her own seamen would not do injury to ours if it were not abused; but it has been abused, and will still be abused in practice; and when the expediency of permitting the principles to be acted upon is enquired into, the result must depend on the effect of the practice. Abuse is the necessary consequence of the practice, and there are more American seamen taken out of our ships under it, than there are British subjects—as the principle is therefore radically wrong, and also highly injurious in its practice, it ought not to be submitted to.
The same gentleman, in shewing that the British were so much engaged in other parts of the world that they could not attack us, told us that they held in subjection 40 millions of souls in Asia. This I believe to be correct;
and it is the strongest proof on earth of their tyrannical disposition, and the determination on their part if in their power to add the American people to those millions. If then these powers have no principle but that which results from power and interest, what confidence can the American people have either in British humanity or French friendship? I presume very, very little.
I need not state to this House that the 6,000 men proposed to be raised by this bill, are not the only force, nor indeed the chief force we rely upon for the defence of the nation. We have authorised the erection of fortifications and the building of gun-boats. These are intended for the protection of your towns and sea coasts; and it would seem equally important that a sufficient force should be provided for the defence of our extensive and exposed frontiers. If the country was not in danger, why erect fortifications and build gun-boats?—If it was and still is in danger, why refuse to raise this force to aid in defending it against such danger. We who are more immediately interested in the security of the western country, joined you in those measures, calculated to protect your sea coast, because we considered it our duty to promote the general welfare of the nation; and we trust that you will join us in raising this force, which may be highly necessary for the defence of our frontiers. Every part of the union ought to be protected; and experience has sufficiently shewn, that we ought not to place too much reliance on the justice or forbearance of those powers when their interest comes in question. In addition to those measures, the President is authorised to call into actual service 100,000 militia, should the exigency require it. Should the bill on your table pass, we shall then have, including the present peace establishment, a regular force of about 10,000 men, which together with the 100,000 militia, would be sufficient to repel any foe that dare attack us. I would however be willing myself to go still further, and organise an additional body of volunteer militia, of 20 or 24,000 men, as proposed by a message to this House. This would in my view provide in a very great degree for the national security. It would furnish, in case of danger, a disposable force of about 130,000 men, which would be sufficient to meet any emergency we have a right to calculate upon. These, I presume, ought not to be called half way measures.
Gentlemen insist that these 6,000 men are not adequate for defence in case of war. If they were alone relied upon this might be true; but that is not a fair way to judge of their efficiency or usefulness. It might as well be said that one gun-boat is not sufficient to defend your coast, and therefore you ought not to build it, or indeed that 100 are not sufficient, and then you ought to build none, unless you can build as many at once as will defend you against the whole world; or that a single fortification will not defend all your harbors, and therefore, though it would defend one important point, it must not be erected. Such logic as this I do not pretend to understand, such reasoning will not go down with the American people, their good sense will detect its fallacy and discover its weakness. This force taken in connection with the other forces and means of defence provided by law, will, we trust, be found competent to answer all our present purposes, and in case of hostility, will be the commencement of a war establishment; but in case of peace will be immediately disbanded.
I sincerely wish these troops may not be called into actual service. I hope there may be no occasion for them. Should this be the case I shall rejoice at the event; but I shall still think I have discharged an important duty to my country, in providing the means of defence against the apparent impending dangers; and I shall consider that duty as honestly and faithfully performed, as if this force should actually have repelled an invading foe.
RUNAWAY
WAS committed to the jail of Washington county, district of Columbia, as a runaway on the 11th inst. a black man who calls himself STEPHEN, and says he belongs to Letty Claxton of Montgomery county, Md. and he is about 24 years of age, 5 ft 9 inches high, stout made; had on when committed, an old black hat, white kersey jacket, striped kersey pantalettes, coarse linen shirt, old shoes, and no other clothes with him, limbs very much in his right leg. His owner is desired to come and prove him and take him away, or he will be sold for his jail and other expenses as the law directs.
C. TIPPET, Keeper of the jail for Washington Boyd marshal.
April 27—w3t

New-York, May 4.
Captain Barry, who arrived at this port on Sunday from Madeira, which island he left on the 10th of March, informs us he read in the French papers at Madeira, that the Emperor Napoleon had created Talleyrand King of Portugal.
Marietta, April 27.
We have received a communication stating that Harman Blannerhasset has been arrested and given bail to appear at Chillicothe to answer to the indictment found against him in January last for a misdeemeanor.
Judge Charlton, in the Superior Court in Equity, Georgia, has issued a writ of injunction to stay sales upon executions, until the first day of September next—the complainant depositing with the sheriff, when required to meet the day of sale, sufficient property, the valuation of which to be ascertained, by the price at market, three months preceding the embargo act.
The Madras Courier of December 16, contains a lengthy description of a dreadful storm which has occasioned incalculable injury along the coast. At Madras the canal forced its banks and overflowed a great space of the country. A great number of lives were lost during its continuance, particularly among the natives, whose mud houses were contiguous to the shore. The inhabitants are reduced to general distress by this awful visitation.
The following extract from an English paper, fully describes the general sense of the people.
PEACE.
A deputation left Leeds on Saturday morning for London, with the petition for peace. The signatures to this petition exceed 28,000 the largest number ever signed to a similar document, in the West Riding of Yorkshire.
A petition for peace is now signing in Manchester, Salford and neighborhood, and such has been the avidity with which it has been supported, that, from Thursday morning to Friday evening, upwards of 10,000 names were subscribed: Another powerful proof of the feelings of the working class at the present crisis.
The most numerous public meeting ever held, perhaps, in the West Riding of Yorkshire took place last Tuesday se'night at Huddersfield. The object of the meeting was to take into consideration the propriety of petitioning his majesty to take an early opportunity to terminate the miseries and distress occasioned by a long protracted war, and to seize the first favorable moment for reviving the reign of peace.
After reading the requisition the chairman recommended that a number of propositions, previously, should be read, and the sense of the meeting should afterwards be taken on each. The propositions being read, previous to their being put separately to the votes, the chairman wished that the general question should be determined and said:—"Those who are for peace, will signify the same by holding up their hands."
In a moment, thousands of hands were raised, and the cheering cry of "Peace!" spread itself through the immense assemblage. On the converse of this question being put, only one hand was held up, and it was immediately explained to the meeting that the circumstance was entirely imputable to a misconception of the question.
Several excellent resolutions were unanimously agreed to, the whole of which, we are sorry we have not room for insertion; the following are deserving of attention:
"That the right of petition is the undoubted privilege of the Subjects of this realm, and that the King wears his crown by virtue of the same solemn compact by which this right is secured to his subjects; and therefore, whoever attempts to control or oppose them, in the exercise of this right, is equally the enemy of the constitution, the King and the people. That should his Majesty be advised to reject the prayer of our petition, we will, from time to time, exercise our constitutional right of petitioning."
Numerous and respectable meetings have also been held at Thurleston and the Bingley at which similar resolutions were passed.
We will not say, nor do we think that the men to whose hands the administration of our public affairs is at present entrusted, will ever make peace; they and their party seem much more disposed to excite jealousies and animosities both at home and abroad, than to promote a spirit of conciliation; but we are bold to maintain, that before this day six months, (on the supposition that the petitioning spirit is not suffered to droop) a negotiation for peace will, be set on
foot, and that such negotiation will terminate in peace, except, contrary to our expectations, the demands of the enemy should be found incompatible with the security and essential interests of this country.
(BY AUTHORITY.)
AN ACT
Supplemental to "An act regulating the grants of land in the territory of Michigan."
BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That every person claiming lands within that part of the Michigan territory to which the Indian title hath been extinguished by virtue of any legal grant made by the French government prior to the treaty of Paris of the tenth of February, one thousand seven hundred and sixty-three; or of any legal grant made by the British government subsequent to the said treaty, and prior to the treaty of peace between the United States and Great Britain, of the third of September, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three, or of the second section of the act to which this act is a supplement, shall be allowed until the first day of January next, to deliver to the register of the land office for the district of Detroit, a notice in writing, stating the nature and extent of his claims, together with a plat or plats of the tract or tracts claimed, and if such person shall fail to deliver such notice in writing, together with a plat of the tract claimed, all his right, so far as it may be derived from any act of Congress shall become void, and the commissioners appointed for the purpose of ascertaining and deciding the rights of persons claiming lands in the said district of Detroit, shall have the same powers, and perform the duties in relation to the claims, notices of which shall be thus filed as are provided by the act to which this act is a supplement, in relation to the claims therein described.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That every person whose claim has been or shall be confirmed by the commissioners aforesaid, to a tract of land bordering on the river Detroit, and not exceeding in depth forty arpens, French measure, shall be entitled to a preference in becoming the purchaser of any vacant tract of land adjacent to, and back of his own tract, not exceeding forty arpens, French measure, in depth, nor in quantity of land that which is contained in his own tract, at the same price, and on the same terms and conditions as are provided by law for the other public lands in the said district. And the surveyor general shall be, and he is hereby authorized, as soon as may be, to cause to be surveyed, the tracts claimed by virtue of this section, and in all cases where, by reason of bends in the said river, and of adjacent prior or pre-emption claims, each claimant cannot obtain a tract equal in quantity to the adjacent tract already owned by him, to divide the vacant land, applicable to that object, between the several claimants, in such manner as to him will appear most equitable. And every person entitled to the benefit of this section, shall on or before the first day of January next, deliver to the register of the land office for the district of Detroit, a notice in writing, stating the situation and extent of the tract of land he wishes to purchase, and deposit at the same time one-twentieth part of the purchase money; and shall also, within three months after the return of the survey to the office of the said register, procure to him a receipt from the receiver of public money for the said district, for one-fourth part of the purchase money. And if any such person shall fail to deliver such notice, and make such deposit and payment, at the times abovementioned, his right of pre-emption shall cease and become void.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That every person, who, being the head of a family, did prior to the twenty sixth of March one thousand eight hundred and four, and doth at the time of the passage of this act, inhabit and cultivate a tract of land in the territory of Michigan, not claimed by virtue of a legal French or British grant, or by the second section of the act to which this act is a supplement, shall be entitled to a preference in becoming the purchaser from the United States of such tract of land not exceeding one section, at the price at which the other public lands in the said territory are directed to be sold; and payment may be made therefor in the same manner, and under the same conditions, as are provided by law for such other public lands. And every person entitled to the benefit of this section, shall on or before the first day of January next deliver to register of the land office for the district aforesaid, a notice in writing of the situation and extent of the tract of land he wishes to purchase. The
commissioners aforesaid are hereby authorised to examine and decide the claims of every person claiming the benefit of this section, and whenever it shall appear to them that the claimant is entitled to a right of pre-emption, they shall give a certificate thereof, directed to the register of the land office, which certificate, together with a receipt from the receiver of public money, of at least one-fourth part of the purchase money, shall, on or before the first day of January next, be produced by the claimant, to the register of the land office for the said district. And if any person shall fail to deliver such notice in writing, or produce such certificate and receipt within the times abovementioned, his right of pre-emption shall cease and become void.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That so much of the second section of the act to which this act is a supplement, as provides that not more than one tract or parcel of land shall be granted to any one person, shall be, and the same is hereby repealed.
Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That the lands to which the Indian title has been extinguished, by the treaty made at Detroit, on the seventeenth of November, one thousand eight hundred and seven, shall be attached to and made a part of the district of Detroit, and be offered for sale at that place under the same exceptions and regulations, at the same price, and on the same terms, as other lands lying in that district.
J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. S. SMITH, President of the Senate pro tempore.
April 25, 1808. APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
AN ACT, Making a further appropriation for completing Eightstreet east.
BE it enacted by the First and Second Chambers of the City Council of Washington, That for completing Eight Street, east, from M Street, south, to the Pennsylvania Avenue, the further sum of one hundred and fifty dollars be, and the same is hereby appropriated, to be laid out under the direction of the Mayor and City Commissioners.
FRED. MAY, President of the First Chamber. CHARLES MINIFIE, President of the Second Chamber. Approved—April 29th, 1808. ROBERT BRENT, Mayor.
AN ACT, Authorizing the City Commissioners to permit excavations and filling up of streets.
BE it enacted by the First and Second Chambers of the City Council of Washington, That the City Commissioners each in his ward be, and they are hereby authorised to permit individuals to make excavations, remove the earth to or from streets, when in his judgment it shall be an improvement to the same, any former law to the contrary notwithstanding.
FRED. MAY, President of the First Chamber. CHARLES MINIFIE, President of the Second Chamber. Approved—April 29th, 1808. ROBERT BRENT, Mayor.
NOTICE. THE PRESIDENT and Directors of the Washington Bridge Company will receive sealed proposals at St. Asaph's Hotel on Friday the 13th inst. for the delivery of the whole or any part of the following Bill of SCANTLING:
   F. et long. Inch. Inch.    140 Piles 36 11 by 14  140 40 11 14  280 18 11 11  200 40 11 14  60 38 12 12  15 Caps 27 13 13  190 37 13 13  190 Mud Sills 37 10 12  380 Braces 25 7 9  380 20 9 9  200 Stringers 52 8 15  1540 27 8 15  
170,000 Superficial feet of four inch Plank, white pine, or the heart of yellow pine, each plank 18 feet long.
The above materials, except the plank, must be of the best heart, hard, yellow pine, or of the best white oak, free of sap. The proposals to estimate by the cubic foot.
Written Proposals will be received at the same time for the Iron work, for Carpenters and Laborers. Proposals may be handed in before the day above mentioned to the President.
DANIEL CARROLL, of Du. Pres. N B. All the above timber to be squared and delivered immediately.
TAKE NOTICE.
STRAYED from the corner of the City of Washington, a light GREY HORSE. He is in very good order, and has lately been trimmed about his feet. Whoever will return him to the subscriber shall receive a handsome compensation for their trouble.
CHARLES H. V. DEN, Capitol Hill, Washington City. May 8, 3t
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, MAY 9.
WASHINGTON COMMERCIAL COMPANY.
THE Commissioners of the "Washington Commercial Company," request a meeting of the STOCKHOLDERS at Stelle's Hotel, on Monday the 16th inst. for the purpose of electing TWELVE DIRECTORS, agreeably to the constitution, to be kept open from 12 till 6 o'clock, P. M.
March 6—3t
The PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES left the city on Friday on a short visit to Monticello.
The following lists of characters recommended for Directors of the Commercial Company have been communicated for insertion.
Samuel N. Smallwood, George Blagden, John M'Gowan, Joseph Stretch, James Cassin, John Davidson, James S. Stephenson, Samuel H. Smith, James D. Barry, Alexander Kerr, Griffith Coombe, Henry Ingles.
Thomas Tingey, James Cassin, James S. Stephenson, George Blagden, Adam Lindsay, Buller Cocke, James D. Barry, Henry Ingles, John P. Van Ness, John M'Gowan, Joseph Stretch, James M'Cornick.
Thomas Tingey, James Cassin, James S. Stephenson, Samuel H. Smith, Joseph Stretch, James M'Cornick, Thomas Young, William Prout, John M'Gowan, James D. Barry, Adam Lindsay, Peter Miller.
Thomas Tingey, John P. Van Ness, James D. Barry, James Hoban, Peter Miller, John M'Gowan, Adam Lindsay, Richard Forrest, Buller Cocke, Peter Lenox, William Prout, Michael Nourse, Thomas C. Wright, Geo. Blagden, Thomas Munroe, Matthew Wright, Charles Goldsborough, Wm. Brent, Andrew Way.
SPIRIT OF THE TIMES.
STATE OF VERMONT.
General Assembly, Nov. 9, 1807.
Whereas it becomes the interest of the good people of this and the United States, as far as possible to encourage domestic manufactures, and more especially when the peace of this country is threatened by the nation with whom we have the greatest commercial intercourse; and whereas the most ready method of introducing such manufactures will be to take proper measures to make them fashionable—Therefore,
Resolved, The Governor and Council concurring herein, that it be recommended to the Governor, members of the Council and House of Representatives, to appear at the next session of the Legislature, clothed in the manufactures of this or some of the United States.
LETTER
Of Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney to Mr. Madison, accompanying the treaty concluded on the 31st of December, 1806.
LONDON, JAN. 3, 1807.
(CONTINUED.)
The only mode in which it could be supposed to be possible that this unpleasant distinction could be removed, was by applying to the subject the rule of the most favored nation. Great Britain was not likely in her present situation, to stipulate against all export duties, or even to agree to a maximum. Neither was she likely by considering the actual duties, as originally & even now convoy duties and therefore in their principle applicable only to the navigation which her convoys protect, to relieve from them wholly or in part such merchandise as should be carried to our country in American vessels, and leave them to oppress her own tonnage: thus offering a bounty in favor of American ships against her own. The rule of the most favored nation was therefore finally suggested with a hope that it would meet with no objection. It was however perseveringly opposed. We were told that the single effect of such an arrangement would be to compel Great Britain to raise the export duties against other countries, not to reduce them as to us, and that this would be of no advantage to the United States, but might be a serious embarrassment to Great Britain. It was urged on our part that if Great Britain could not give up entirely the excess of export duty now paid by us, it did not follow that it might not be fairly distributed among the consumers of her merchandise in every part of the world, so as still to produce the same revenue with more regard to justice; that as her best customers, we had a
right to be placed upon at least an equal footing with other nations, and to complain if we were rather distinguished by the peculiar burdens which she undertook to impose upon us; that the discrimination against us upon the notion that the duty had reference to convoy was a fallacy, since part of the discrimination was permanent and of course a peace as well as a war duty, since we who paid the duty derived no benefit from the convoy which was professed to be the consideration of it, and since the protection of their own trade in their own navigation being a general and national concern, there was no sound reason why the relative expense of particular convoys should be allowed to suggest the relative measure of the duties, which were to supply the means of affording them. They replied to the idea of distributing the amount of the discrimination among all the consumers of their merchandise by referring us to the present state of Europe. They reminded us that their own colonies in America paid the same export duty that was paid by us, and repeated that as it was only the discrimination between the U. States and Europe, of which we could not demand to have any part of the duty against which we have any right to complain withdrawn from us, and we could gain nothing by forcing this country to add to the burdens of others already overwhelmed and impoverished by the calamities of war. We were obliged though very reluctantly to abandon this object.
The sixth article relates to the commerce with the W. Indies, which it was found impossible to arrange in a satisfactory manner. There were many serious obstacles to an agreement on this point, some of which seemed to be peculiarly applicable to the present time. The British West India merchants had, at an early stage, represented that by the trade which our citizens enjoyed with the colonies of their enemies, we had so completely stocked the markets of the continent with West-India productions, as to shut those markets on them. They had remonstrated earnestly against any arrangement of that point, which should sanction, in any degree, our trade with those colonies. This question had taken deep hold of the minds of a great proportion of this community, among whom may be classed, not those in the mercantile only, who were immediately engaged in the trade, but the whole commercial interest, and many in other circles of great consideration in the country. Of this fact sufficient proof was furnished by the debate which took place in the last session of parliament, on the bill for regulating the intercourse between the United States and the West Indies. The British commissioners seemed to have taken from that debate, more especially from the support which their opponents apparently received from the public, a very strong admonition not to touch the subject by treaty at this time. They were apprehensive that any regulation of this trade, however fair it might be, which should accompany their sanction of that with the colonies of their enemies, would produce the worst effect, with all parties, and endanger any treaty which might be formed. They were therefore desirous of postponing the subject for the present; to which we agreed. In the stipulation which provides for the postponement, we have, as you will perceive, in conformity with our instructions, reserved the right to our government to counteract any regulations by which the British government may exclude us from a fair participation in that commerce. While the war lasts we shall enjoy it in a certain degree by the consent of the British government, by necessity. And the reservation cannot fail to be considered by it as a powerful weapon of defence, to be used, when occasion calls for it. It must be seen that it will be impossible for the Congress to prohibit an intercourse between the United States and the West Indies in British vessels, without producing a very serious effect on their whole navigation and commercial interests. We flatter ourselves therefore, that it may be found practicable, and perhaps not difficult to arrange this business hereafter, to the satisfaction of both countries.
The seventh article relates to the appointment of consuls by each party in the territories and ports of the other. It was taken from the treaty of 1794.
(Letter to be continued.)
HAVING sustained great injury by the passage of persons through my inclosure, I must give notice that I will prosecute as the law directs, all persons trespassing in that way in future, or building within said inclosure with log or gun.
GEO. CALVERT.
May 9, 1808.

TO RENT,
AND possession given the 13th June next, that house on Pennsylvania Avenue, the property of the Washington Building Company, at present occupied by Mr. Solomon Myers—it being so well known, it is not deemed necessary to give a peculiar description of it, suffice it to say, it is calculated for an extensive tavern and boarding house—for terms, apply to Mr. THOMAS HERTY, Sec. to said Company.
April 29—tf.
TUNIS CRAVEN
HAS removed his entire stock of DRY GOODS from Alexandria to Washington, and is now opening, at his new Store, between the Marine Garrison and Navy Yard Gate, an assortment equal to any in the District;—among which are,
 Wood's best London cloths,  Do. double milled & plain cassimeres,  Bennett's cords and velvets,  Constitution Gerrow, hunting, Trafalgar, and silver cords,  Velvets,  Imperial, Brunswick waistcoating,  Silk moleskins do.  Tollnets, swansdown do.  Plain and figured Marseilles do.  Bearskin coatings,  Plain, kerseys, halfhicks,  Rose and duffel blankets, flannels,  Superfine green cloth table covers,  Calicoes, colored cambrics,  Gingham, silk and cotton chambrays,  Furniture Chintz,  Cambric and jaconet muslins,  India and British book do.  India mull figured and plain,  Plain and figured lenoes,  Laced cambrics,  Elegant tamboured mulls,  Grecian robes and Belise dresses,  8-4 damask and raw silk shawls,  Damask scarfs,  Camel's hair and swansdown do.  Down scarfs,  Long and short lace sleeves, spider & nett sleeves,  Extra long and habit kid gloves,  Do. do. silk do.  Do. do. raw silk do.  Cross-barred and plain Mantuas and lutestrings,  Persians and Medes,  Thread and cotton laces,  Lace caps and handkerchiefs,  Book muslin and leno cap patterns,  4-4 7-8 Irish linens,  Long lawns, linen cambrics,  Irish diapers, table-cloths, napkins,  Cotton counterpanes,  Cambric Dimities,  Common do.  Furniture do.  Ladies' and gentlemen's silk, thread, cotton, worsted, lamb's wool & Angola hose,  Gentlemen's pantaloons do.  Silk cords and buttons,  Ribbons, floss threads,  Scarlet and other colored bombazets,  Hearth rugs, Russia sheeting, ticklingburgs,  Osaburgs, baftas, gurrals, &c. &c.  ALSO,  Imperial and young hyson tea of a superior quality in small boxes, to suit families, or by the pound—Also genuine Havana segars.  T. C. is determined to sell on the lowest terms.
February 8—tf
I AM desirous of Renting the WHARF and WARE-HOUSE, lately occupied by Mr. Griffith Coombe. The wharf is advantageously situated for the reception and sale of Lumber, and the Warehouse well calculated for storage of flour, or any kind of country produce, as well as West India produce. The terms will be reasonable and immediate possession given. Vessels drawing 13 feet water can come to the wharf.
ROBERT BRENT,
PORT WINE, Of very good quality in casks, each one enclosed in a dry case for security against any adult ration, with a small parcel of other excellent Wines in casks and in bottles; among which are Red & White Claret, Dry Lisbon, and very old Brazil Madeira Wine, just received and for sale, by JOHN GOULDING
Who has on hand as usual an assortment of choice LIQUORS of most kinds used here. Georgetown, March 25—
AMERICAN MILITARY LIBRARY.
Just received and for sale at R. C. Weightman's book store, Pennsylvania Avenue,
 NOS. 5 and 6 Military Library,  Medical Reports on the effects of water, cold and warm as a remedy in fever and other diseases by James Currie, M. D. F. R. S.  Darwin's Botanic Gardener,  Life of Dr. Blair,  Wild Irish Girl,  Memoirs of Samuel Foote,  Fife's Anatomy,  Ivory and Bone Chessmen,  Ornamented leather Backgammon and Chessboards.  Winter in London, 2 vols. a new novel just published.  May 2 1808. 3t
LINDSAY'S HOTEL.
The Subscriber has taken that well calculated house on the Capitol Hill Late occupied by Mr. Frost formerly by Mr. Steele—Where he intends to open a Tavern on the 24th October. Those gentlemen who may favor him with their Custom may rely on every attention in the Power of the Public's devoted Servant.
GEO. W. LINDSAY. N.B.—EIGHT or TEN BOARDERS may be conveniently accommodated, October 19—tf.
TO BE LET,
After the 20th June next, THAT elegant, well built two-story BRICK HOUSE, lately the property of Mr. Wm. Woodward, on Pennsylvania Avenue. The stand is well known. Solomon Myers's lease for three years, at the rate of 250 dollars per annum, will expire on that day.—For terms enquire at Robert Underwood's, directly opposite. April 27—eplf
NOTICE.
THE Subscriber being anxious to settle all his business, has sold his entire stock of goods to John Peter; he therefore requests all those indebted to him to call and pay their accounts, (particularly such as are of long standing, as further indulgence cannot be given them). His Books are removed to the counting house of Baker, Riggs, and Co. where all his accounts will be ready for settlement by his assistant Mr. Samuel C. Offut, or
ELISHA RIGGS. George Town, March 16—tf
BURNS AND BULL.
WOOLLEN drapers, men's mercers, and tailors, New Jersey Avenue, opposite the Secretary of the Navy's, respectfully inform the public that they have commenced business in the above line, where they will endeavor to give satisfaction—they have on hand a fresh supply of the most fashionable goods, suitable for the approaching season, all fresh and of the very best quality.
N. B. Regimentals and naval uniforms made in the most elegant and fashionable stile with neatness and dispatch. October 23—tf
CHARLES H. VARDEN
MERCHANT TAILOR, RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia and public in general, that he has just received by a late arrival from Philadelphia,
A CHOICE ASSORTMENT
Of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, single and double milled, superfine Coatings, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment of Spaniards and rich silk Molekins for waistcoats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season.
Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform stile of fashion.
Richard Horwell's celebrated patent parallel SUSPENDERS far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms retail, as at his manufactory. November 27—tf
SPRING GOODS.
THOS. W. PAIRO, has just received his new supply of spring goods, which makes his assortment extensive; he has
 Superfine cloths and some cassimeres  Calicoes  Shirt and dress buttons  Cat gut  Lininen and cotton checks  Crapes, playing cards  Tortoise shell combs  Mock do. do.  Fine tooth do.  Spinning cotton  Sowing do.  Diaper, Russia duck  Dimities  Gingham  A handsome assortment of glassware  Gloves of great variety  Superfine hats  Bandanna handkerchiefs  Lininen & cotton do.  Madras do.  White and coloured jeans  Irish linens  German do. aham some assortment  Thread and cotton laces  Very ch ap cambric muslins  Book muslin  India do. and chambrays  Yellow nankeens  Blue and white do.  Striped do.  Best needles  Pins, ribbons  Cotton shawls  Silk do. very hand Caps.  Also, the following groceries and liquors.  Madeira wine ale  Sherry, Malaga Excellent vinegar  Brandy by the cask Teas, loaf and lump or gallon sugar.  Jamaica spirits pepper  Gin, cherry bounce Fig blue  Whiskey Candles and soap.  Claret, porter and Currants. 
T. W. PAIRO expects with the first packet from Baltimore, Port wine and Lisbon of the first quality, raisins, filberts, an assortment of nails and augurs, all of which he will sell cheap for cash, or to his punctual customers. April 29—3t
THE GARDEN SEEDS, &c.
THE Subscriber having recently received a supply of European Garden Seeds, &c. which added to the various sorts saved by him the last summer, makes his assortment extensive and which are for sale at his Nursery Garden, Eastern Branch and at Dr. Ott's Medicine Store, Georgetown.
THEO: HOLT Washington city, Jan. 11—taw
United States, District of Columbia, county of Washington, to wit: IN CHANCERY, 9th OCTOBER, 1807. Benjamin Stoddert and John Mason, versus Thomas Waters Griffith, John R. Livingston, Jonathan Burrell, Gabault & Dodrey, James C. Montflore, I. I. Picard and James Davidson.
THE bill states that the defendant, Thomas Waters Griffith was the agent of the house of Taney and Simmond for the delivery of a cargo of flour belonging to the said Taney and Simmond to the French government. That the French government not being able to pay ready money for the said cargo, the balance due thereon from the said government was placed to the credit of the said Griffith, the agent, instead of being placed to the credit of the real owners Taney and Simmond. That the debt so due hath been liquidated under the Louisiana Convention in the said Griffith's name, for the sum of one hundred and ninety thousand, two hundred and seventy francs, French money of the value of 35,675 dollars. That the said Thomas Waters Griffith, now residing and for several years past having resided in Baltimore city in the state of Maryland, well knowing all the circumstances mentioned in the complaints and bill, and that the debt aforesaid was liquidated in his name in Paris under the Louisiana Convention was in truth and in fact a debt due to the said complainants as the trustees of Francis Lewis, Taney, and Taney and Simmond, did execute a writing transferring all the interest of said Griffith in the said debt to the said complainants as trustees aforesaid. That notwithstanding the above circumstances the said Griffith did employ James C. Montflore of Paris to receive for his own account and use the aforesaid debt, which actually belongs to the said complainants as trustees aforesaid; and the said Montflore did actually receive the bills or the ministers of the United States, on the Treasury of the United States in part payment of the said debt in four sets of bills drawn in favor of said Thomas Waters Griffith, and which bills have been fraudulently endorsed by the said Montflore, with a view as the said complainants believe, to defraud them the said complainants, and under a real or pretended power from the said Griffith and as his attorney to the said I. I. Pacard, who endorsed the same over to John R. Livingston, who has endorsed the same over to Jonathan Burrell, cashier of the Bank of Discount and Deposit at New York, who has endorsed the same over to James Davidson cashier of the Branch Bank of the United States in the city of Washington who now holds the same for collection. The complainants further state that four other bills for the balance of the aforesaid claim on the French government liquidated in the name of the said Griffith, but actually belonging to said complainants as trustees as aforesaid, have been drawn in favor of Gobault and Dodrey as transferees of Thomas Waters Griffith, for thirty thousand francs French money of the value of 5625 dollars, which said four bills have also been sent to the aforesaid James Davidson, and endorsed over to him for collection in the same manner as in the case of the four other bills first herein recited. That all the aforesaid eight bills of exchange drawn by the American minister at Paris on the treasury of the United States under the Louisiana Convention for the debt liquidated in the name of Thomas Waters Griffith, are actually the property of said complainants as trustees aforesaid. The object of the said bill is to save and protect the said complainants from the fraud projected against them on the part of the said Thomas Waters Griffith, and his coadjutors, and to obtain a writ of injunction directed to all the before-mentioned defendants, &c. and particularly to the said James Davidson, enjoining and commanding him from paying over to any person besides the said complainants the money that may be paid by the Treasury of the United States in virtue of the said bill of exchange, and particularly enjoining the said James Davidson from paying the said money arising from the said bills, or parting with the said bills until the further order of this court in the premises.
It is represented by the complainants that the said Thomas W. Griffith, John R. Livingston, Jonathan Burrell, Gabault and Dodrey, James C. Montflore, and I. I. Picard, defendants in this cause all reside out of the district of Columbia, and are not within the reach of the process of this court. It is therefore ordered that the complainants cause a copy of this order to be inserted once each week for six months previous to the first Monday in June next in the National Intelligencer, to the intent that the said defendants may have notice of this application and of the object of this bill and to be warned to appear in this court in person or by solicitor on or before the first Monday of June next, to show cause, if any, why a decree shall not pass as prayed.
By order, WM. BRENT, Ck. December 4—w6m
VENDUE
Will be sold at public vendue, on Thursday the 12th of May next, at the dwelling house of the late John Beckley, Esq. all the personal property of the deceased, consisting of BEDS, Bedsteads and Furniture, Window Curtains, Tables, Chairs, Sideboard, &c. The sale to commence at 12 o'clock, and will be continued until the whole is sold. For all sums under 20 dollars cash will be required, and for all above that sum a credit will be given of 90 days—the purchasers giving bonds or notes with satisfactory security.
MARIA BECKLEY, } Exrs. MARY PRINCE. April 27—ept12M.
ROSS AND GETTY,
HAVE for sale at their store George Town, the following articles just received from Philadelphia, by the schooner Carolina, capt. HAND, jun. viz. 30 kegs butter, 20 barrels, New Town, Pippin Apples, 10 do. buck wheat flour, 10 do. Cranberries, and 10 do. shell bark hickory nuts. Also a small assignment of very elegant Looking Glasses, Waiters, Trays, polished steel Shovel and Tongs, with cu and brass heads, &c. &c. January 9—tf
40 DOLLARS REWARD,
FOR apprehending and bringing home, or the one half for securing in jail so that we get them again, OLIVER & DAVID who runaway from the subscribers living in Madison county, Virginia, on the 17th of Feb. last, Oliver, a middling stout made fellow, near 6 feet high, about 46 years old, some few grey hairs to be seen about his temples, a little yellow complexioned. David, a large stout made fellow, about 6 feet high, 26 years old, thick lips and full face, and has a brand with the letter G on his right cheek, it looks dim, hardly discoverable without close inspection; dark complexioned. Said negroes runaway last summer, and was apprehended. One was committed to Fairfax jail, and the other was committed to Dumfries jail, and do expect they have gone that way again, aiming for Maryland, and may have provided themselves with a pass and attempt to pass as free people. We do hereby forewarn all masters of vessels and others from taking on board the vessels the said negroes or secreting them any other way under the strictest penalties of the law.
THOS. GRAVES, Jun. THEOPHILUS EDDINS. April 25—4w
NOTICE is hereby given that the Subscribers have obtained from the Orphan's Court of Prince Georges county, letters of administration on the personal estate of William Bowie late of said county deceased; all those who have claims against said estate are hereby warned to exhibit the same to the subscribers with the vouchers thereof on or before the first day of October next, otherwise they may be excluded from all benefit of said estate—all those indebted to the above estate are requested to come forward and make immediate payment. Given under our hands and seals the 22nd day of April 1808. JOHN B. BOWIE, WM. M. BOWIE. May 4—3t
ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS REWARD.
RAN away from the subscriber, in Westmoreland county, near Kinsale, Virga, Henry a black man, in the year of 1806; was formerly the property of James A. Thompson, deceased. The said Henry formerly worked on Jo. Thompson, James A. Thompson, Chas. Thompson & William S. Thompson, in Alexandria, when the said Thompson was merchant in Alexandria. This said Henry is very well acquainted in all parts, as he did formerly wait on the Messrs. Thompsons in all parts, especially in Alexandria and George Town, where he has some relations, and also Washington city, Baltimore, and Philadelphia. This said Henry was born and raised in St. Mary's county, near Leonardtown, in Maryland, where he has some relations, as I believe, as Mr. Richard Jackson informs me, whom I bought the said Negro from, and also Mr. Charles Thompson informs me. Henry is I believe 40 or 45 years old, as near as I can guess, is 5 feet high, has very small legs, as far as I can recollect. Henry was brought up a house servant, is an excellent gardener, and a good hostler. Henry when quick spoke to stammers in his speech. Henry I expect has altered his name, and has procured some free papers by some means or other, and passes for one of Carter's free negroes, or some other free negro, as he is a very artful fellow. Any person who will deliver him to me at Kinsale, in Westmoreland county, Virginia, or secure him in any jail in the United States, so that I get him again, shall receive the above reward by me. RICHARD STRAUGHAN. May 4—4t
BAKER, RIGGS & Co.
At E. Reggs' old stand, (sign of the Plough) a few doors above the Union Tavern, Have just received a large supply of SPRING GOODS;
 Among them are fancy muslins, unpressed chintzes, ginghams, linen cambrics, cambric handkerchiefs, long lawns, fancy printed robes, long shawls, Leno veils, Italian silks, spring bonnets, gloves, flowers, hosiery, ribbons, ladies' and gentlemen's umbrellas, India crapes, white jeans, fancy Marseilles, tablecloths, Irish linens, superfine cloths, 4-4 and 3-4 Russia diapers, and many other fancy and substantial articles; all of which have been selected at the best markets, (principally for cash) enables them to sell very low. Geo. Town, April 5—M&F6w 
TO PAPER-MAKERS.
WANTED To go to North-Carolina in M.V. a Paper-maker, who is a good workman, and is sober and industrious. To such a person good wages will be given. Apply to the Editor of this paper. April 29
FRESH FIGS.
THE Subscriber has just received on consignment, 20 Boxes fresh FIGS which he will dispose of on reasonable terms, wholesale or retail. JOHN OTT, Druggist. George Town, May 6—4t
UNITED STATES, District of Columbia, Washington county, to wit: IN CHANCERY, Circuit Court, December term 1807. Gideon Snow—complainant, against Abigail Perkins widow and adm'x. and Hanah Perkins, sister and heir of Joseph Perkins, deceased and Nathan Bond—defendants.
THE bill states that Joseph Perkins, formerly of Boston, now deceased, being indebted unto the United States for duties to the amount of seven hundred and fifty seven dollars and fifty cents current money, requested the complainant as his security to enter into two several obligations for the payment thereof, that in compliance with said request he the said complainant, did so become his security; that when the said bonds became due, the said Joseph Perkins failed to pay the same, and the said complainant was obliged to pay the same; that the said Joseph Perkins, died intestate, having no lineal heirs, and having a widow, Abigail Perkins, and a sister, Hanah Perkins, above named, who both reside in Boston; that the said Joseph Perkins left a personal estate inadequate to the payment of his debts, and the whole of the same has been fully administered; that the equitable interest in and to lots numbered five and six in square numbered five hundred and thirty-three, and lot numbered two in square numbered four hundred and eight, all lying and being in the city of Washington, county and district aforesaid, were conveyed to said Joseph Perkins, by a certain Nathan Bond, also of Boston, and that the whole of the purchase money hath been paid for the same—The said bill, further prays a decree for the sale of said lots, for the payment of the said money so paid by said complainant, as security for the said Joseph Perkins.
It is on the complainant's motion, ordered, that he procure a copy of this order, to be inserted once a week in each of three successive weeks in the National Intelligencer, and once a week in each of three successive weeks in some newspaper published in Boston before the third Monday of June next, ensuing, to the end that the said Abigail Perkins, Hanah Perkins and Nathan Bond and all other persons (if any there be) interested in the premises may have notice of the complainant's application, and of the object of his said bill, and that the said defendants may be warned to appear in person or by solicitor in this court, on or before the third Monday in June next ensuing, to show cause if any they can why a decree as prayed for, in and by said bill, should not be made. By order, WM. BRENT, Ck. May 4—w3t
THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE—
That the subscriber of St. Mary's hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of Saint Mary's county in Maryland, Letters Testamentary on the personal estate of Wilfred Neale, late of Saint Mary's county, deceased. All persons having claims against he said deceased, are hereby warned to exhibit the same with the vouchers thereof to the subscriber at or before the 25th day of September next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Given under my hand this 20th day of March 1808. HENRY NEALE, Ex'r. March 25—6w
A GREAT BARGAIN.
JOSEPH WHEATON Broker and Commission Merchant, has put into his hands for sale, at his office in F street near the Bank, a valuable property in the city of Washington, consisting of 646,453 square feet of city LOTS advantageously situated on the most prominent and valuable streets, and near the Navy Yard and Bridge, and to be had on the most reasonable terms of payment. This great bargain is recommended to gentlemen desirous of securing an early fortune, in this truly growing and flourishing city; the permanent residence and seat of the government of the United States. Other city property to be had—Houses and Lots—Enquire as above. All kinds of Stocks bought and sold. 17 Wanted to Purchase a few MILITARY LAND WARRANTS. Washington city, Dec. 11—tf
THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE,
That the subscriber has obtained from the Orphan's Court of Montgomery county, Maryland, letters of administration De bonis non on the personal Estate of William Chambers, and likewise letters of administration on the personal Estates of Sarah and Ann Chambers, deceased, all of Montgomery county, Maryland. All persons having claims against the deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same, with the vouchers thereof, to the subscriber, on or before the first day of November next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of said estates. Given under my hand this 28th day of April, 1808. DENNIS LACKLAND, Administrator. w3t May 2—
FOR SALE.
THE Two story Brick HOUSE, situated on square number 980 in the city of Washington now occupied by Mr. Tunis Craven, as a retail store. The eligibility of this stand for the retail business is excelled by none in this city; being situated on the principal street to the Navy Yard, and very near the Navy Yard Gate. Any person desirous of purchasing the above property may be shown it by applying to the subscriber, who will also make known the terms of sale. WM. BRENT. Washington city, Dec. 18—wtf