The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1802-06-02 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER,
AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
Vol. II
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
No. CXLV.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2d, 1802.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
THURSDAY, April 22, 1802.
DEBATE on the act to amend the judicial system of the United States. The amendment of the select committee, reported yesterday by Mr. Bayard, under consideration.
[Mr. Giles's Speech, continued.]
Four or five hundred old officers have been dismissed, no new ones have been created, and yet we are told that we are in favor of swelling executive patronage. Again I find several foreign ministers dismissed, and still we are told that we are favorers of executive patronage. I deny the point. I deny that we have ever voted for an office that was not necessary. I say, on the other hand, that the number of officers we found in existence has been much lessened, and may be lessened still more.
I must observe that the gentleman from Delaware has come nearer the true point than the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Dennis) who said, if the clerks are the creatures of the court, there would be some force in objecting to their having the selection of jurors. The gentleman from Delaware says the court itself has this right. But how long have we heard this doctrine? For my part when I heard the gentleman make the declaration that the courts had this power, I thought it most singular. But grant that the courts have this power, what does it amount to? If chosen by the courts, will jurors be independent? In the existence of political divisions, are courts impartial? I say, that it is within my own knowledge that jurors have been selected with a view to particular ends.
It is true that they are not now so selected. No! Sir. For if the marshal is on one side, the court is on the other, and is a check on his partiality? The court has the power of directing the jury, and, if they be so directed, a new trial; and permit me to say, nothing can be so dangerous as to write the power of selecting jurors, and of deciding the cause.
We are told there may be commercial cases, which require a select jury. In such cases why may not the marshal make the selection? But suppose a political case should occur. This is the most likely, when it does occur, to be productive of mischief; and I believe, if we have had mechanical and commercial, we have also had political juries.
The gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Bayard) says he is not at a loss to understand this question. No doubt he is not at a loss. He understands all questions. And I wish that that gentleman, as well as every other gentleman, should understand it. I say it is improper that judges should empanel the jury. If there are such marked political divisions, as I fear there are, it is most dangerous to unite the power of empaneling with that of deciding. If you do this, you give the principle, so long contended for, not that of the independence, but the supremacy of the judges. For during the whole of this session gentlemen have been using improper names. No man values more highly than I do the independence of the judges—but the question is a question of supremacy—they are to be made supreme! They are to be control all your laws! You have given them a great variety of powers, and now they are to have the power of empaneling juries.
I beg leave to observe that this amendment will not have the smallest operation on Virginia where the marshal summons all juries; but if there be a part of the United States where this evil exists, it ought to be remedied. Not that I am in favor of any bias whatever in the designation of jurors. I with there was none; I am sorry that our judges are politicians; but so long as the courts are political it seems to me necessary, in order to meet them, that there should be political juries. The courts can almost do anything—they decide the evidence received, they charge the jury, and may grant new trials. It is, therefore, improper that the clerk should empanel the jury.
The gentleman from Delaware says there may be a change of men hereafter. That to me is altogether immaterial, as I am for acting on general principles, which shall equally apply to all men.
Mr. Bayard said he should have no objection to vote for the amendment, if he did not consider it not only harmless but useful. He did not see how political questions had anything to do with striking juries. Such questions arise only on criminal prosecutions, and in those, struck juries are never used: they are summon-
ed in civil actions only. But he considered the amendment as a mere logoglide , it was only a grasp at all power to be placed in the hands of the executive. As to executive patronage, if the repeal of the internal tax is proved that those who voted for the repeal were for reducing executive patronage, it proves also, that those who voted against it were not unwilling to give to the executive a legitimate exercise of patronage where it was necessary for the public good. But he had seen instances, in cases not calculated to alarm the public mind, where a strong disposition had been shown to extend executive patronage.
The question was then taken on Mr. Leib's motion, and carried—Ayes 41—Nays 32.
Mr. Dennis moved to strike out the 15th section, which is in the following words:
"And be it further enacted, That there shall be appointed by the President of the United States, from time to time, as many general commissioners of bankruptcy in each district of the United States, as he may deem necessary; and upon petition to the judge of a district court, for a commissioner of bankruptcy, he shall proceed as is provided, and by an act, intitled 'An act to establish an uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States,' and appoint, not exceeding three of the said general commissioners, as commissioners of bankruptcy against the said commissioners, together with the clerk, shall each be allowed, as a full compensation for their services, when sitting and acting under their commissions, at the rate of six dollars per day, for every day which they may be employed among the several causes on which they may act on the same day, and to be paid out of the respective bankrupt estates: Provided, That the commissioners, who may have been, or may be appointed in any district, before notice shall be given of the appointment of commissioners for such district, by the President, in pursuance of this act, and who shall not then have contemplated their business, shall be authorized to proceed and finish the same, upon the terms of their original appointment."
Mr. Dennis called for the yeas and nays. This section says nothing less than that the courts are not to be trusted; and if this power be vested in the President, I can see no reason why the appointment of commissioners on a petition in chancery may not also be vested in him. Gentlemen have said much about abrogating executive patronage. Permit me to say that this section vests in the President the power of appointing every man, woman and child in the United States a commissioner of bankruptcy. But my great objection is the inconvenience that will attend this mode of appointment. The President must either appoint a vast number of commissioners, or the inconvenience will be very great. In my opinion, it is improper to appoint general commissioners; they ought to be appointed in each special case.
Mr. S. SMITH. The house well knows that I have always been an advocate for the bankrupt system. I am still an advocate of it. I am a friend to it, and it is because I am a friend to it that I shall vote against striking out this section. I believe the mode pointed out in this section will be most agreeable to merchants, who are most interested in it. It will be recollected that at present the commissioners are appointed by the district judge, to whom appeals are to be had, when the commissioners shall be considered as acting wrong. The commissioners, therefore, will be extremely curious how they offend the district judge, and be apt to be too much biased by him. At present the commission is not general, but formed for every special case. With respect to the commissioners of Maryland I have never heard any complaints. They are men of respectability. But I wish this commission to be perfectly independent. This new course will make them more independent. The President will first name the commissioners, from whom the judge will have an opportunity of selecting its characters for each case; and I am convinced that this will be the most satisfactory. As to executive patronage, I can say with the gentleman from Delaware, I can see no patronage created in this measure. With regard to appointments they are constitutionally vested in the President, who will in general discharge the duty well, though he may be sometimes mistaken.
Mr. GILES said, though in favor of the section, he was not very tenacious of it; but he believed the appointment to office ought to be where the constitution
bad placed it, in the hands of the President. The judges have proper subjects on which to exercise their powers; and a proclamation from all other unnecessary objects will best insure their independence. These officers are considered as important and responsible. He did not see any part of the constitution that gave the judge the power of appointing them.
Mr. Giles said his indifference to this subject arose from another reason. He believed the bankrupt law the worst act that Congress had ever passed. He was, however, perfectly willing that experience should test it. He had, since its passage, heard of no new proselytes to it, while he had heard of many complaints against it. He believed that at the next session the force of public opinion would repeal it; and that this effect would be principally produced by the very persons for whose benefit it was formed.
Mr. BAYARD said he had not the smallest doubt of the sincerity of the gentleman from Virginia, when he tells us the courts of law are the worst possible depositories of appointments. Nor was he at any loss to know to what to ascribe this opinion. He says the President is the natural officer to make appointments—He had no doubt that gentleman now thinks so, as well as other gentlemen who until lately thought very differently.
Mr. Bayard said he could convince the gentleman there was no repugnance to the constitution in vesting this power in the judges. Mr. B. here read the second section of article second of the constitution. "Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers as they think proper in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments." After hearing this section of the constitution the gentleman will not say it is more natural to give this power to the President than to the judges. 'Tis a paltry affair. The power to appoint in these cases cannot create a patronage very useful to the President. From all experience under a system of bankrupt laws, the power now to be given to the President ought to belong to the judges. In England the King cannot appoint a commissioner. The power is appurtenant to the court; and the experience of this country has shown no inconvenience from the power vesting in the chancellor. But why, he, on a bill preferring to amend the judiciary system, are we led into a discussion of the bankrupt act? Why are we told the law is to be repealed? And why is this section not relating to the subject of the bill introduced into it? It is the execution of taking a miserable power from the courts to vest in your President. Has there been any complaint, remonstrance or petition against abuse of the power in the judges? I have heard of none. Why then transfer the power from a department possessing no power, to one already possessing exorbitant powers. Gentlemen will find themselves infinitely mistaken in giving this power to the President; it will not extend his influence so far as his disappointment. When gentlemen recollect seriously the duties of the commissioners, they must be convinced of the difficulty of the President's filling these appointments. The ordinary characters fit to fill these offices, and willing to fill them, are infinitely below the knowledge of the President. He must rely on the advice of others. By what light will he be instructed as to the number necessary. In Delaware, there has not been occasion for a single commissioner of bankruptcy; in Pennsylvania, only in Philadelphia; but they may be wanted in other parts of the state, and the nomination must be dispersed over the country. If you are jealous of the judges, how do you operate on them? You take not their power—for after all, the President does not make them commissioners, but only qualifies them to serve when selected by the judge; the men thus preferred to the others are so far obliged by the preference, and if the influence of the judge is feared, here is still a field to exercise it. Your Presidents may fall on men the first victims of the law. The intimate connection of merchants is so intricate, that no previous appointment can be made without the hazard of making men judges in their own cause. Upon the whole, I perceive much injury which may result from this innovation without any benefit. The compensation by the present section, of 24 dollars per day for three commissioners and clerk, will eat up every fragment of the bankrupts estate, for whom nothing will escape, but a miserable remnant.
Mr. BACON. I am apprehensive that the determining who are to perform these duties does not depend on a long chain of reasoning. It appears to me that there is a strong impropriety in vest-
ing the same men with the power of appointing and ascertaining the compensation of the person appointed. This is nearly the same as fixing his own compensation; for he has only to appoint his own friend, and then determine his compensation. This is too great a temptation for human nature; and with me weighs more than the long train of logical reasoning which we have just heard. I am, therefore, against striking out the section.
Mr. Goddard said that if he was fully satisfied that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Giles) was correct in his opinion of the bankrupt law (and he was not perfectly satisfied, that he might not be correct) he should not feel so strong objections to the provisions of the section. But being willing to give the system a fair experiment, he could not consent to adopt the section; because he believed it calculated to render the law much more inconvenient to the citizens, and to render it odious. The President by this section is authorized to appoint in each state, as many commissioners of bankruptcy as he might think proper. This provision might not be productive of any considerable inconveniences to the few large cities, and if bankruptcies could be confined to those cities, he should feel indifferent about this provision.
But in the state which he had the honor to represent, there were no very large trading towns, but many smaller ones, and persons who might be liable to bankruptcy, were scattered over all parts of the state. The consequence of this provision would be, that the President must either appoint a host of commissioners in all parts of the state, or rather capacitate a vast number of persons by commission under him, to be appointed commissioners by the judges, or the citizens from the extreme parts of the state, in case no greater number than was originally contemplated (not less than 3 nor more than 12) until travel to one central spot to have this business done, in case of bankruptcies, either of which would be very inconvenient and oppressive. Besides, those named commissioners by the President, in the state of Connecticut, will be thereby incapacitated, under the laws of that state, from being members of the state legislature.
Mr. Elmhurst. From representations made to me I confess I am extremely tenacious of this section. It has been shown by the gentleman from Delaware, that there are but three modes of appointment, first by the President, second by the courts, third by the heads of departments. When these offices are created, they become the subjects of legislative discretion. The practice has been, not as stated by gentlemen for the court to appoint for each particular case, but to appoint a general board. From this practice inconveniences have arisen too intolerable to be borne. Improper persons have been appointed, and enormous emoluments allowed; and the whole fragments of the bankrupts estate have been destroyed. The provisions of the law have been so tortured, that the commissioners have received, under the sanction of the court, six dollars a day for every case of bankruptcy before them. It will be found that the son of a judge has even been appointed. Shall we then continue this power in the hands of the courts? No—We have tried them abundantly. We ought not, therefore, to shrink from imposing this duty upon the President, which the good of the country requires to be vested in him.
I am not a friend to the Bankrupt act, not because I am inimical to a proper system of bankruptcy, but because the same under the present system exceed the benefit which it confers. Under this system from the practice in New-York, it would seem that it was not so much for the benefit of the real bankrupts, as for those, who can afford to pay well, or can give security for those who wish to become bankrupts.
I will ask if the provision of this bill will not be a check on the present abuses, by limiting the total daily compensation to six dollars. I would rather limit the allowance to 4 dollars a day; but I believe 10 times 6 much greater than 6.
I believe that appointments in the state of New-York, are considered as more beneficial than any that can be conferred; and if they are so emolumentary, I fully agree with the gentleman from Virginia that they ought not to be made the instruments of court patronage. Not that I am for giving improper appointments to the President; on the contrary I wish less power of this kind had been reposed in him; but in this respect I am constrained to obey the constitution.
Mr. Mott spoke against the section. When the question was taken by yeas and nays on striking out the 15th section, and lost—Yeas 35—Nays 36—as follows:
YEAS. —Messrs. Archer, Bayard, Bowie, Campbell, Coudy, Cutler, Davenport, Davis, Dennis, Dickson, Folsom, Goddard, Grey, Grew, Hastings, Henderson, Hoyer, Lowndes, L. R. Morris, T. Morris, Mott, Nicholson, Plater, Read, Shepard, Smilie, Stanley, Stanton, Tallmage, Tenney, Tilton, Hart, Upham, Wadsworth, Williams, and Woods.—35.
NAYS. —Messrs. Alston, Bacon, Bailey, Bishop, Brent, Brown, Butler, Claiborne, Clay, Clouston, Coats, Dawson, Elmhurst, Elmer, Fowler, Giles, Hanna, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Leib, Milledge, Mitchell, New, I. Smith, J. Smith (of Virg.) J. Smith, S. Smith, Stanford, Stanton, jun. Stewart, Thomas, Thompson, A. Trigg, and I. Van Horn.—36.
Mr. Bayard offered a new section to this effect: "That this act shall not go into operation, or take effect until the first day of July next," and required the yeas and nays.
Mr. Bayard. The system lately repealed will not go out of operation until the 1st of July; otherwise there will be two contrarious systems in force at the same time. It is difficult to say what would be the effect of a collision of the two systems. I would with gentlemen to say whether the present circuit courts are, or are not to have a spring session. This bill creates new circuit courts to take effect immediately. I am not prepared to say whether the old circuit courts will remain in force after the passing of this act. I am very much inclined to think that the effect of this law may be to suspend the circuit courts now sitting, and the effect may be to annul judgments now given. I would therefore with gentlemen to be explicit.
Mr. Nicholson. The objection, taken by the gentleman, is fully provided against by the 4th section, wherein it is declared, that none of the circuit courts created by this bill shall be held till after the 1st day of July next. There can, therefore, be no kind of contradiction between this, and the repealing law. But, I believe, the effect of the amendment will be to give the supreme court a June session, which is not intended by the bill.
Mr. Bayard. The gentleman from Maryland has not answered my objection. The defect is, that the present circuit courts shall hold a spring session. But this will not be the effect of the bill. The basis of the power of the old judges is derived from the old division of the United States into circuits; now if this basis is changed, by a new division, how can the same judges be circuit judges. The effect will be to have two circuit courts. As legislators, ought we suffer any doubt to remain on a subject, when we can remove it by a single section? Is it not a matter of serious consideration to the judges and jurors, whether the judgments rendered in these courts are nullities? And what objection is there to the section now offered? Why, that it gives a session to the supreme court in June. But is this a source of alarm? Are the justices of the supreme court objects of terror to gentlemen? Was not this section contemplated and expected. The effect of the present bill will be to have no court for 14 months. Is this constitutional? Are the judges to consume their salaries without having anything to do. I call upon gentlemen to consider the alarming principle contained in this bill. They are about to pronounce that the supreme court (a court formed under the constitution) is all not fit for fourteen months instead of sitting in six months. Are gentlemen afraid of the judges? Are they afraid that they will pronounce the repealing law void? If gentlemen think they have no such power, they will conclude that any interpolation of the judges will be rejected by the good sense of the people; and if they have such a power, are they prepared, on a mere political pretence, to deprive them of it? Sir, as far as regards myself, I have not the smallest knowledge that any such interpolation will take place. It is not probable that at present any one judge knows the opinion of another. My own opinion is, that it is scarcely probable they will interpose. I do not see how that question can come before them. It is ten to one that they will not act upon it.
Mr. Nicholson. I have no hesitation to declare, that I am not afraid of the exercise of any constitutional authority of the judges. Such authority can be exercised as well in February as in June. They will have the same opportunity.

city of acting in February as in June. As far as regards myself, I care not whether a pronouncement speaking law or constitutional law or not, though I should regard such an act as I with harmony to prevent between all the departments of the government. My being, therefore, in favor of postponing the session till February does not arise from any design which I entertain to prevent the exercise of power by the judges. But we have as good a right to suppose gentlemen on the other side are as anxious for a session in June, that this power may be exercised, as they have to suppose we wish to avoid it to prevent the exercise.
As to the proposition of one annual session, instead of two, that has been already discussed and decided upon. But if gentlemen merely wish to save the present circuit courts until the 1st of July, though I think that is already provided for by the bill, I will have no objection to an amendment to that effect.
Mr. Griswold. The fourth section either puts down the present circuit courts, or it establishes two sets of circuit courts. It is therefore reasonable and proper to agree to the amendment that this effect may be prevented. And I cannot believe that this house is afraid of having a session in the supreme court in June. I know that it has been said out of doors, that this is the great object of the bill. I know there have been slanderers of this kind—but they are too dastardly to ascribe to this body. Theander cannot, ought not to be admitted. I, therefore, hope that gentlemen will agree to have a session in June next. For my part, I have strong reasons for wishing a session in June. I believe the repealing act is an usurpation of power by the legislature; and whenever I see an usurpation, I think the speaker is checked the better. I have, therefore, no objection to say, with an early sitting of the supreme court. To their judgments I shall submit, and I trust every member in the community will also submit.
Mr. Bacon. I apprehend the gentleman used not very kind to dispel the fears entertained of a sitting of the supreme court. I apprehend there is no cause of fear. Nor as I see the necessity of the amendment to save the constitution, because if the repealing act be unconstitutional, it is no law and not in the way of their meeting. If it is to be considered by the judges they will meet together of course. I, therefore, think that even the gentleman from Connecticut can have no very alarming apprehensions on this score.
The question was then taken by yeas and nays on Mr. Bayard's motion, and lost. Yeas 27—Nays 46—as follows:
YEAS. —Messrs. Allison, Bayard, Campbell, Cutler, Davenport, Dennis, Elmer, Foster, Goddard, Griswold, Hallings, Henderlan, Henshaw, Hager, Lowndes, L. N. Morris, T. Morris, Mott, Pater, Read, Smith, Stanley, Talmadge, Tracy, Tillinghast, Upham, Wadsworth, L. Williams.—27.
NAYS. —Messrs. Ache, Bacon, Bailey, Bishop, Bowie, Brant, Brew, Butler, Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Cotts, Dawson, Dickson, Edmendorf, Fowler, Giles, Gray, Hanna, D. Heller, J. Heller, Holland, Holmes, Leib, Middlesex, Mitchell, New, Nickelson, Smith, J. Smith, (N. Y.) J. Smith, (Virg.) S. Smith, Stanford, Stanton, Stewart, Talmadge, Thomas, Thompson, A. Trigg, J. Trigg, Van Cortlandt, Van Hoine.—46.
FRIDAY, April 23, 1802. The bill to amend the judicial system of the United States was read a third time.
Mr. Bayard. I am decidedly opposed to the passage of this law. Its defects are as numerous as its provisions; and it introduces not a single improvement into the system it is designed to amend. I mean not to trouble the house with an extended or detailed view of the subject. Considering the value of our time, from the small portion which remains before the session will terminate, by the resolution we have passed, I shall content myself with pointing out some objections to the bill—which according to the opinion I entertain, furnish sufficient ground to induce gentlemen to refuse to it their assent.
The 9th section which happens at present to be under my eye, contains a provision not simply absurd but extremely mischievous. I should have moved to recommit the section, could I have flattered myself with the most distant prospect that any motion I made, supported by any reason which could be advanced upon the subject, would have been adopted by a majority of the house.
But, sir, having failed in many amendments, recommended by very plain and long sense, I was unwilling to waste time in a vain effort, which would have been resisted, without the trouble of attending to its object.
The section to which I refer provides, that all causes and protests, either of a civil or criminal nature, which shall be depending or returnable in any of the circuit or district courts of the United
States on the first day of July next, shall be continued, and transferred and returnable to the circuit and district courts established by this act.
Causes depending in, or protests returnable to any district court in the United States, are transferred to the circuit and district courts established by the act.—By the act there is a circuit court instituted in each district, but no new district court is established except in the district of N. Carolina and Tennessee.
One of two things must therefore follow, either that all causes in the district courts of the other districts, must be transferred to the district courts of N. Carolina and of Tennessee, or be carried into the circuit courts, which the act establishes in the several districts. However absurd this operation may be, yet is the power of the legislature to produce it cannot be denied, the express and unequivocal words of the law must take effect.
It is not the design, I presume to abolish the district courts, and though they are suffered to exist, they are capriciously stripped of all their business which is cumulated upon the circuit court.—I ask if gentlemen can give a different construction to this section, if they can deny the operation I attribute to it, and if there be a single member who will undertake its defence.
In looking, Mr. Speaker, through the bill before us, I discover but one defect of the ancient system which it attempts to correct. That is the rotatory constitution of the court, in relation to the judges who composed it. The act confines particular judges of the supreme court, to several circuits which it creates. This provision deludes that the circuit courts shall always be composed of the same judges. This might have been considered as an useful improvement, if pains had not been afterwards taken to render it abortive.—The law has not named though it has entitled to designate permanently the judges of the supreme court, at present assigned to hold the courts in the several circuits. But as successive vacancies happen on the bench of the supreme court, the judges are by allotment to be assigned anew to their different circuits.
This provision reproduces the very evil, and the only one which the bill professes to correct in the old system.
As there are six judges and generally advanced in life, vacancies from death or resignation must occur in very short periods. Upon each vacancy every judge ceases to be attached to a particular circuit and must wait for a new allotment to know the circuit to which he is to be long.—The judges had formerly the power of obliging themselves to particular circuits, and the only change which is introduced is that an allotment of the judges once made, it cannot be varied till a vacancy on the bench occurs. This however must happen so frequently as to expose the circuit court to the same oscillations, in the administration of justice, as were experienced and complained of under the old system.
I would beg all the gentlemen would give me some information upon a point of great importance, and of great doubt, which arises out of the arrangements upon this subject. After a vacancy occurs upon the bench of the supreme court, what is the situation of the circuit courts, before a new allotment is made by the judges of the supreme court?
Upon every new appointment, the allotment is to be made, and until it is made, the power of the judges in their ancient circuits would seem to be suspended. The allotment can only be made at a session of the supreme court, and as the court has but one annual session in the month of February, if a vacancy should happen and an appointment be made, in the month of March or of April, the circuit courts would be suspended for more than a year, and the whole business of the courts destroyed by discontinuance. Is it possible that gentlemen can give their assent to a bill, pregnant with such mischief and injustice. Cap they suppose that this thin veil, this gauzy covering, will conceal from the eyes of the world, the latent design of destroying the judiciary power of the United States, by rendering it incapable of attaining justice and productive only of vexation and expense.
The 8th section of the bill, contains a provision which certainly transcends the power of congress, great as it has appeared during the existing session. It enacts, that the court in the 5th circuit shall be held by the present chief justice and the judge of the district in which the court shall be held. The law has no limitation, and is designed as a permanent system. It supposes therefore that the present chief justice associated with the district judge, is for ever to compose the circuit court of the 5th circuit. This sir, might have been an oversight in draughting the bill, but what will it be when with our eyes open we adopt it in the law. Will the public be satisfied with laughing at the absurdity, without suspecting the integrity of the motive which induced the house to assent to it.
I will not fatigue you, Mr. Speaker, with the useless labour of attending to a critical examination of the incongruities and absurdities which abound in
the bill, but I, and I have a right to call upon the friends of it to come forward, and point out a single particular in which it corrects a defect in the old system.
Do gentlemen suppose that the people of this country have no understanding? Do they imagine that they will always remain the dupes of empty words, that they will look no farther than the title of a law and continue to repose an implicit faith, after finding themselves repeatedly deceived? You call this a 'bill to amend the judicial system of the United States,' but amendment is not the effect, and nothing is more remote from the design of it.
Having enumerated the defects of the ancient system upon a former occasion, I will not now repeat them, but I affirm, and if I am wrong, the advocates of the bill will expose the error, that not one of those defects is removed by the present law.
There is one view of this subject which requires that information should be given not to the house simply but immediately to the nation. Is it the design of gentlemen by this bill to destroy the power of the present judges of the circuit courts during the short period of their political existence, allowed by the repealing act which was lately passed. This law is to take immediate effect. It breaks down all the circuits formed by the act of 1801, and throws the districts into new circuits.
The present judges were appointed & commissioned for certain circuits. A judge commissioned for the first circuit could exercise no authority in the second.
The new arrangement abolishing the old circuits how are the judges to determine the boundaries of their power.
I shall be allowed to exemplify my view by stating the case relative to the state to which I belong. Under the law of 1801, Delaware was a member of the third circuit, by the present bill she is comprehended in the 4th, the question therefore is whether a commission to hold a court in the 3d circuit, will authorize a judge to hold one in the 4th. Is the point exempt from all doubt? And are we excusable in leaving a doubt upon a point of such consequence and responsibility.
While we are passing this law the courts are in session, the judges obedient to the obligations of duty are exercising the solemn functions of their office, and while they are occupied as they believe in administering justice, if we abolish their legitimate authority, we render them their officers and fiduciaries, trustees, and might expose them even to the accusation of murder.
Will not gentlemen avow their intentions on this point, and by a few plain words enable the judges distinctly to perceive the path which they are to pursue.
But sir, when I look to the object of this bill, I become sensible how idle it is for me to ask for any thing, however moderate and reasonable it may be.
To accomplish that object, every objection will be trodden under foot.
This act is not designed to amend the judicial system—that is but pretence. If amendment had been in view, gentlemen would have contrived a better plan than the present bill proposes, which I panegyric by calling a miserable piece of patchwork. No sir, the design of this bill is to prevent the usual session of the supreme court in next June.
It is to prevent that court from expressing their opinion upon the validity of the act lately passed which abolished the offices of the judges of the circuit courts, until the act has gone into full execution, and the excitement of the public mind is abated. I know not that the subject would be brought before the judges, or that they would officially take it up, but it is the fear of their solemn opinion, and a knowledge of the just reverence which the people of this country entertain for judicial decision, which has given birth to the present expedient.
Could a less motive induce gentlemen to agree to suspend the sessions of the supreme court for 14 months. The last session was in December; the judges are forbidden to assemble again till fourteen months from that time have expired. Could a more dangerous precedent than this be established? May it not lead to the virtual abolition of a court, the existence of which is required by the constitution.—If the functions of the court can be expended by law for fourteen months, what time will arrest us before we arrive at ten or twenty years. This objection to the bill alone would be fatal in my mind. We have offered an amendment upon this point enabling the judges of the supreme court to meet in June. We have begged gentlemen to accede to this amendment, if for no other reason than to banish the aspersion as to the object of the bill, but though we are told they are indifferent as to the opinion of the supreme court upon the validity of their late act, yet we find the bill tenaciously adhered to, and that with all its imperfections about it, it is to be converted into a law. The majority, they must have their will, but I am deceived if their triumph is of long duration. The people of America can be governed, but a short time by empty words and hollow pretences.
Mr. Bayard concluded by calling the Yeas and Nays on the passage of the bill, which were Yeas 46—Nays 30; as follows:
YEAS. —Messrs. Allison, Archer, Bacon, Bailey, Bishop, Bowie, Brant, Brown, Butler, Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Cotts, Dawson, Dickson, Edmendorf, Fowler, Giles, Gray, Hanna, D. Heller, J. Heller, Holland, Holmes, Leib, Middlesex, New, Nickelson, Smith, J. Smith, J. Smith, (of New-York) J. Smith, (of Virg.) S. Smith, Stanford, Stanton, Stewart, Talmadge, Thomas, Thompson, A. Trigg, J. Trigg, Van Cortlandt, Van Nels, Van Hoine, Williams.—46.
NAYS. —Messrs. Bayard, Boude, Campbell, Cutler, Dana, Davenport, Davis, Dennis, Elmer, Foster, Goddard, Griswold, Hallings, Henderlan, Lowndes, R. Morris, T. Morris, Mott, Pater, Read, Stanley, Stratton, Talmadge, Tracy, Tillinghast, Upham, Wadsworth, Williams, Woods.—30.
FOR THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
TO RECANTATOR.
However ingenious, however well painted your third Number is, "I cannot allow that the whole of the reasoning is correct or conclusive. You accuse our chief magistrate with want of consistency by comparing what he has respecting the naturalization of foreigners in his notes on Virginia, and in his first message to congress. In drawing this comparison, there is, I think, considerable want of candour in you. Indeed this is so glaring, that you ought not to expect to escape without animadversion. I believe he has been uniformly friendly to aliens.
After quoting from his notes this passage, "If they come of themselves they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship, but I doubt the expediency of inviting them by extraordinary encouragements."
You say, "suffer me to ask, whether they come of themselves, or whether they be invited, is not the effect upon America the same in fact?" I answer, no.
You say, "we are in danger by their coming of having our government degraded, our morals injured, our liberties polluted with licentiousness, and our legislation distracted and confused." You not only say this, but you ask, "will those baneful circumstances less attend them, should they come without an invitation?" If you mean of choice and voluntarily, I answer yes; but if of necessity, I answer no. You could not have written in this manner, had you not been blinded by national pride and prejudice.
You proceed and say, "If it be the policy of America to hold out no extraordinary encouragement, if by so doing, she runs the risk of incurring those dangers, surely no position can be clearer than that she ought to discourage the emigration of them." I cannot agree with you that this conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. If I do not believe politely to a person, does it necessarily follow that I behave rudely? May not even then my conduct be civil? If I am not extravagant and lavish, must it necessarily follow that I am parsimonious?
I believe there are many in the United States, and natives too, who will allow with me, that there are many of those who emigrate to this country from choice, who are a valuable acquisition to it; who stop at temperate liberty, and whose behaviour and habits have a tendency to check licentiousness and to promote order and sobriety. Were it otherwise, you must suppose the very soil and climate here have a wonderful effect in polishing and regenerating mankind.—But is there any other man besides yourself who can think so? This certainly is too absurd a supposition to gain credit with any who are not blinded by prejudice.
No observation can be more just than what the President has made use of in his message, and which you have overlooked, viz. "Considering the ordinary chances of human life, a denial of citizenship under a residence of fourteen years, is a denial to a great proportion of those who ask it, and controls a policy pursued from their first settlement by many of these states, and still believed of consequence to their prosperity."
To show you that others besides the President, who are natives of this country, differ from you in opinion on this subject, I can inform you that one of the Senators of the United States has been heard to say that foreigners ought to be naturalized immediately on their arrival in this country.
Before I conclude, I will ask you one simple question; are there not some who emigrate to this country, believing that the government here established, confers a greater degree of political liberty than any other government on earth does? And it is to enjoy this liberty be the principal motive of their emigrating, is it not probable that they will behave well?
* See Washington Federalist, May 19, 1802.
Latest Foreign Intelligence.
Translated from the Mercantile Advertiser, from Paris Papers to the 24th April, received by the Sophia, captain Hunt, from Havre-de-Grace.
LONDON, April 15. Yesterday morning Mr. Pierrepont embarked at Dover for Calais, accompanied by Mr. Hunter the m. tenger. He is the bearer of the ratification of the definitive treaty on the part of his Britannic majesty.
Lord Whitworth is on the eve of departure for France.
April 16. In the House of Lords, on the 14th, lord Holland enquired if the minister intended to lay before the house the convention lately concluded with the powers of the North? The secretary of state, lord Pelham, replied, he had no reason to suppose that the king would refuse to the house the papers relative to that convention.
April 19. FRENCH REPUBLIC.
Paris, April 19. Yesterday the First Consul ratified the definitive treaty of peace between the republic and his Britannic majesty. The respective ratifications were exchanged this day, Sunday at 9 o'clock in the morning.
A Senatus-Consulte has been issued, in consequence of a message from government, by the conservatory senate, which pronounces an amnesty to the greatest part of the emigrants. It is added that the number of those remaining on the list is only from one thousand to twelve hundred.
This morning, at six o'clock conformably to public notice, a discharge of 60 guns, announced the promulgation of the law on works.—After the diminution of colours, by the First Consul, to several battalions, the procession began to move from the palace of the Tuileries. It was almost noon before the carriage of the first consul, in which were the two other consuls, could get out of the palace yard. Every where, on his passage, the first consul received the congratulations of an immense crowd of people in all directions. On his return from Notre-Dame, the same testimonies of public acknowledgement accompanied him to the palace of the Tuileries. It is a great length of time since Paris offered a spectacle altogether so imposing and majestic as that which its inhabitants have this day witnessed.
PROCLAMATION. The Consuls of the Republic, to the French.
Frenchmen, From the bosom of a revolution, inspired by a love of the country, religious dissensions sprung suddenly amongst you, which became the scourge of your families, the fuel of factions, and the hope of your enemies.
An inconsiderate policy attempted to smother them under the ruins of the altars, even under the ruins of religion itself. At its voice ceased the pious families where citizens used to call each other by the tender name of brother, and acknowledged themselves all equals under the hand of the God who created them; the dying, abandoned to his sufferings, heard no more that consoling voice which calls Christians to a better life; and God himself seemed exiled from nature.
But the public confidence and the sentiment of the independence of opinion, rose up in arms, and, encouraged by our exterior enemies, their explosion soon spread devastation in our departments; some Frenchmen forgot they were Frenchmen, and became the instruments of a foreign hatred.
On the other hand, passions let loose, unprotected morals, unprincipled without a hope in the future, all combined to throw society into disorder.
To stop that disorder it became necessary again to set religion on its basis; and this could not be accomplished otherwise than by measures avowed by religion itself.
Realism and the example of all ages recommended being recourse to the Sovereign Pontiff, in order to unite hearts and re-establish opinions.
The head of the church has weighed in his wisdom and for the interest of the church, the propositions which the interest of the state had dictated. His voice has been heard, by the ministers of religion: Who he approves of, the government agrees to; and the legislators have made it a law of the Republic.
In this manner every element of discord disappears; and all couples which can stain the confidence and all the articles which militate against the return of internal peace, are vanquished.
Witnesses of a religious peace, let the most profound oblivion cover your dissensions, your misfortunes and your failures. Let that religion which unites you attach you all to the same law, by indissoluble ties, to the interest of the country! Display for her all the strength

and influence your ministry gives you over the mind; let your lessons and examples inculcate in one young citizens the love of our institutions, respect and attachment for the tutelary authorities which have been to protect them. Let them learn from you that the God of peace is also the God of the armies, and that he fights for those who defend the independence and the liberty of France.
Citizens, who profess the protestant religion the law has equally extended to you its protection. Let the morality which is common to all christians, that holy and eternal morality, unite them all in the same love for the country, in the same respect for its laws, in the same affection for all the members of the great family.
Let no struggle of doctrine ever alter those sentiments which religion inspires and commands.
Encouragement. Let us all be united for the happiness of the country and of humanity. Let that religion which has civilized Europe become again the bond of union to draw closer the affections of its inhabitants, and let the virtues it requires be always associated with the knowledge with which it enlightens us.
The First Consul, (Signed)
BONAPARTE.
April 23.—The Batavian Legislative body, in its sitting of the 16th April, ratified the treaty of Peace concluded at Amiens, together with the separate convention agreed upon between the two republics.
AUSTRIA.
Vienna, March 23.
The accounts from Hungary become more interesting every day. All the troops cantoned in that country are in movement, and there is now more talk than ever of seizing on several Turkish provinces. Letters from Buda mention the several Austrian battalions which had collected at Glatzenbourg and Wertheimbourg in Transylvania, have received orders to advance to Scharfbourg, Cronstadt and Hermannstadt, and that large bodies of troops were expected at Buda. The number of those who are to assemble in Transylvania is computed to be 24,000 men. It is generally thought they are designed to occupy Bucharest, Tergowit and the other principal places in Wallachia. Other Austrian forces have arrived at Temeiswar, Peterwaradin, Palesowa and in several other places in Hungary and the Banat, to reinforce the corps of gen. J. Habsch, who forms a cordon on the frontiers of Bosnia and Servia. That a numerous Austrian army has been assembled in Eastern Galicia, and particularly at Limberg, is beyond doubt. The troops intended to compose the advance guard of this army, collect at Halicz and Dubno.
The possession of Moldavia appears to be the chief design of the re-union of these forces, which it is reported, will be commanded by Gen. Starray. A body of Russian troops is to co-operate with this army and occupy Chotzyn, Bender and Akiermann. There is yet a diversity of opinion as to the intention of all these preparations, and motives which induce the Austrian and Russian cabinets to act hostily towards the Porte; for it is not to be believed, as is reported by several, that Moldavia and Wallachia are to form the new establishment of the Grand Duke of Tuscany; it being stipulated by the treaty of Luneville that this Prince shall be indemnified in Germany. On the other hand, and to account for the co-operation of Russia, it would seem that it is intended to procure an establishment for the French Pretender or the King of Sardinia. Neither of these reasons, however, is founded upon a solid basis.—Time alone will inform us of what we are to think of this new incident.
NOTICE
To Sandy MECHANICKS and Others, now or late of Washington City.
I purpose to attend on the first Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of June next, viz. in the week next after the date hereof, in the early and later parts of said days, at Mr. Naylor's, on the southern side of Eastern Branch Ferry, and on the middle parts of said days at different places through the city, to meet or find those who have debts yet due them for materials or workmanship of the buildings and improvements in the said city, any way carried on by the late John Nicholson, either alone or in partnership, and which may be chargeable against an assignment made me in trust to liquidate for certain claims by the said John Nicholson against William M. Demeaux and James R. To obtain the advice of the concerned relative to a settlement which will be now had or commenced therefor.
SAMUEL NICHOLSON, trustee.
N. B. All letters on the above business, put (free from postage) into the hand of Mr. Wm. Lowring, of George-town, (Pot. mack) will be called for at action to time, and afterwards will be duly attended to by
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2, 1802.
On Monday arrived in this City James Madison, Secretary of State.
Appointments made, subsequent to the commencement of the session, and confirmed by the Senate.
David Latimer, a member of the Legislative council of the Mississippi territory, in the place of Adam Bugamany declined.
John Taylor of New-York, commissioner to hold a treaty with the Seneca and other Indians.
Linsey Bloodworth of North-Carolina, collector for the district of Wilmington, N. C. vice Guilish M'Ree, deceased.
John Shaeffer of Rhode Island, surveyor of the port of New-Port, R. I. vice Daniel Lyman.
John Graft, jun. Rhode Island, surveyor of the port of Pawtucket, vice George Stillman.
Nathaniel Fullame of New-Hampshire, naval officer for the district of Portsmouth, N. H. vice Edward St. Loe Livermore.
Edward Harris of N. C. judge of the 5th circuit, vice Henry Potter, who has accepted the office of District judge.
Michael McClary of N. H. marshal of the district of New-Hampshire, vice Bradley Gilley, whose commission is expired.
Walter Nichols of Rhode Island, naval officer at New-Port, vice Robert Croke, deceased.
Silas Crane of New-Jersey, collector of Little Egg Harbour, vice William Watson, suspended for non-attendance on his duties.
James L. Shannonhouse of N. Carolina, surveyor and inspector of the Port of Newbern-creek in N. Carolina, vice Frederick Sawyers, who had removed there.
Thomas Worthington of N. W. territory, supervisor of the North Western district.
David Duncan of the Indiana territory, inspector of the port of Michilimackinac.
Peter Gansevoort of New-York, military agent for the northern department.
William Linnard of Pennsylvania, military agent for the middle department.
Abraham D. Amadus of Georgia, to be military agent for the southern department.
Benjamin Gheney of North-Carolina, surveyor and inspector of the port of Beaufort, N. C. vice John Ballou, deceased.
J. in Head of New-Jersey, collector of the port of Perth Amboy, vice D. and M. M'Call, deceased.
FOREIGN AGENTS.
Tobias Lear, general commercial agent in the Island of St. Domingo, vice Edward Stevens, resigned.
John F. Caldwell of New-Jersey, commercial agent for the city of St. Domingo, vice Jas. Blake appointed to Antwerp.
James Blake of Pennsylvania, commercial agent for Antwerp.
Theodore Peters of France, commercial vice-agent at Bondeux.
Bartholomew Dandridge of Virginia commercial agent at Port Republic and St. Domingo.
Edward Jones of Columbia, commercial agent in the Island of Guadaloupe.
Thomas Aborn of Rhode Island, commercial agent at Cayenne.
John I. Murray of New-York, Consul for the Port of Glasgow in Great-Britain.
Joseph Polis of Malta, Consul for the Island of Malta.
Thomas Hewes of Massachusetts, Consul for the Port of Batavia, in the Island of Java.
Jacob Lewis of Massachusetts, Consul for the port of Calcutta in Bengal.
Francis L. Taney of Maryland, commercial agent for Offend, vice John Mitchell nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed.
Charles D. Coxe of Pennsylvania, commercial agent for Duskirk, vice John Hoare, nominated February 18, but not appointed.
Peter Dobell, of Pennsylvania, commercial agent at Havre, vice John M. Forbes, nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed.
Thomas T. Gantt of Maryland, commercial agent at Nantes, vice John J. Walde, nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed.
William Patterson of New-York, commercial agent at L'Orient, vice Joseph Tufes, nominated Feb. 21, but not appointed.
William Lee of Massachusetts, commercial agent at Bordeaux, vice Isaac Cox Barst, nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed.
William Buchanan of Maryland, commercial agent for the Isles of France and Bourbon, vice George Staley, nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed.
Fulwar Skirwith, former consul at Paris, commercial agent at Paris, vice
J. C. Mountfort, nominated Feb. 21, but not appointed.
The Sieur Etienne Cathalan of France, former consul at Marseilles, commercial agent at Marseilles, vice William Lee, nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed.
Joseph Luardi, senior, of Spain, former consul at Cadiz, to be consul at Cadiz, vice Henry Peable, nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed.
The Sieur de la Motte of France, former vice-consul at Havre, to be commercial vice-agent at Havre.
George W. Erwin of Massachusetts, consul at London, vice Samuel Williams removed.
Robert C. Gardiner of Rhode Island, consul at Gottemburg.
William Stewart of Pennsylvania, consul at Smyrna.
James L. Cathcart, heretofore consul at Tripoli, to be consul at Algiers, in the place of Richard O'Brien, resigned.
William Jarvis of Massachusetts, consul at Lisbon, vice John Botsford.
George W. Meloy, consul at Teneriffe, vice John Culman, who has abandoned the place.
Henry Moller of Maryland, consul at Goram.
William Ruggin of Maryland, consul at Trieste, vice John Linton.
Joseph Barnes, consul for the island of Sicily.
John M. Forbes of Massachusetts, consul at Hamburg, vice Joseph Pitcairn.
John Appleton of Massachusetts, commercial agent at Calais.
Bartholomew Dandridge of Virginia, commercial agent at Port-Republic and St. Domingo.
Robert Young of Columbia, commercial agent at the Havanna, in the place of John Morton, resigned.
FEDERAL MISREPRESENTATION.
No. XIII.
Having in this, and the preceding paper, made an enumeration of the civil appointments by the present executive from the third day of March 1801, to the third day of May 1802, with the circumstances under which they were made, so far as we have been able to collect them; which are considered as correct, though they are not exhibited with any pretension to official accuracy; it may now be proper to snall and arrange them. This has been already, in some measure, done, in the National Intelligencer of the 11th of January, so far as related to appointments antecedently made. The present view will comprise the statement then made, with the addition of subsequent appointments, to the third of the last month.
The whole of the appointments amount to 123
Which may be arranged as follows:
Cases of resignation, deletion, promotion or death 26
Of expiration of commissions, not renewed 3
Of vacancies left unsilled by the former administration, mostly confidential, with new consular appointments 37
Of new nominations, in the room of what have been called midnight appointments, viz. those made in the last days or hours of Mr. Adams's being in office 21
Of restoration to offices which the individuals appointed had held before 6
Of removals for misconduct, or revolutionary toryism 14
Of marshals and attorneys removed, and republicans substituted, as a protection for republican citizens against the federalism of the courts 3
Of removals, to give to those, who have been systematically excluded, some share in the administration of the government 8
Of removals on grounds of special property 5
Of new appointments 3
In all 123.
Much has been said of the perfecting spirit of the Executive in the removal of federal officers. The topic is still the text of invective; whenever all others fail. It becomes republican prints as often as the charge is made to repel it; and not only to assert, but to prove, that no administration has even existed, which owed its existence to a revolution in the public sentiments, that has exhibited so much forbearance and magnanimity. To furnish this proof the above statement, with the following elucidating remarks, are published.
During the last session the President, in order to demonstrate the magnitude of executive patronage, and to guard against its possible abuse, presented to congress a document, containing a view of all the existing offices, with the emoluments attached to each.
In the civil department there appear, with the exception of all the postmasters, and a host of inferior officers, to be
Of this number, in a period of 15 months,
33, have been removed on a variety of grounds above specified.
21 new appointments have been made to offices, attempted to be filled by Mr. Adams, after he had lost the confidence of the nation.
54 making altogether.
Of those removed;
Some were guilty of official misconduct by not attending to the discharge of duties.
Some were intemperate in their habits.
Some had not accounted, as by law directed, for public monies.
Some were deemed incompetent.
Some had solemnly declared they would hold no office under the present executive, thereby making themselves obnoxious to the belief that their personal antipathy would frustrate their performance of duty.
Some were in offices, which it is agreed on all hands, ought exclusively to be filled by those who enjoy the entire confidence of the executive.
Some had been the instruments of carrying into effect unconstitutional laws, prostrating the liberty of the press, and persecuting the innocent for an honest difference in political opinion.
Some, from the long enjoyment of office, had acquired great wealth, and no longer, discharging the duties of office themselves, committed the public interests to the management of clerks.
When these circumstances are seriously weighed, and when it is further considered, that in the remote and extended agencies of the government, improper appointments must, some times, taken place, which time alone can expose, and which would induce the same administration that conferred, to revoke a commission; when it is considered, that in the multifarious temptations to which men are subject, a man apparently good to day may be guilty of misconduct to-morrow; can we be surprised that in the course of more than a year 33 officers, or if federalism will have it 54 officers, out of 2,042 have been removed—that is one fourteenth part? Will not our correct astonishment be that the removals have been so few?
Let calumny be silent, when this impressive contrast is exhibited:
The old administration had without provocation, called under its banner all the officers, amounting to 2044.
The present administration has changed only 33
For Sale,
A VERY elegant saddle HORSE, seven years old, paces, trots, and canters, and is in other respects completely broken to the bridle.—For further particulars enquire of Mr. Steele on Capitol Hill, and see the horse at his livery stable.
April 26, 1802.
FOR SALE,
An excellent Blacksmith, together with his wife and three likely children, to wit, two boys, 10 and 8 years of age, and a girl four. The woman has been employed altogether in washing and ironing. An examination of the blacksmith's work will be his best recommendation. To save unnecessary applications the price of the family is 1,400 dollars.
V. PETTON.
Stafford, March 8, 1802.
To be Let,
On the 1st of July next, A HANDSOME and well finished three story brick house, with a brick kitchen adjoining the same, and an excellent pump of water in front of the house, situated on E Street, a few doors east of the bank.—For further particulars, apply to the subscriber on Pennsylvania Avenue, near the market, or to Mr. Webster on the premises.
ROBERT BROWN.
Washington City, May 10, 1802.
George Beall against Eleanor Hopkins, John Hopkins, and Barbara Hawke, Alexander Hopkins and Roland his wife, Thomas Hopkins and James Hopkins.
IN CHANCERY, May 15, 1802.
THE object of the bill in this case is to obtain a decree to reoed a deed executed on the twenty-second day of January in the year eighteen hundred and one by the defendants, for conveying into the complainant's part of a tract of land called and known by the name of "I was not thinking of it," containing one hundred and seventy one and one half acres of land, more or less.—Also all that tract of land called "Hopkins's Choice" containing sixty three acres of land, more or less.—And one other tract of land called "Keans's Look Out," containing twenty acres of land, more or less.—All which said land is lying and being in Montgomery county, state of Maryland. The bill states that the above mentioned defendants reside in the county of Washington, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and out of the reach of the process of this court. It is thereupon prayed and ordered, that the complainant, by causing a copy of this decree to be inserted in the National Intelligencer once in each of three successive weeks, before the last day of June next, give notice of this, his application, and of the substance and object of his bill, that the said defendants or any other person who may conceive himself interested, may be warned to appear here in person or by solicitor, on or before the first Tuesday of October next, to show cause (if any they have) wherefore a decree should not pass as prayed.
(True Copy)
SAMUEL H. HOWARD,
Reg. Cur. Can.
May 26, 1802.
Notice is hereby given,
TO all persons having claims against Mr. NOBLE YOUNG deceased, to render them properly authenticated to Robert Brent, in the City of Washington, and all those indebted to him are requested to make payment.
BENJ. YOUNG, } Ex'rs. NICHOL. YOUNG, } ROBERT BRENT, }
April 19, 1802.
New Invention.
The IMPROVED SAW-MILL, for which the subscriber has obtained a Patent.
THIS improvement faces the sawyer much nearer, and the work is able much more expeditious. The log being calked, turned down, and the saw started, the whole operation proceeds without further manual aid; for the instant the cut is finished, the log moves back, and at the same time is guided to the union excelsior by the machine, ready for another cut in two thirds of a minute. The saw resumes its action in the log, and thus moves in alternate surges until the whole be cut up in any given dimensions, at which time the mill stops if required, or at any number of cuts for which the sawyer prepares, for his attendance is unnecessary.
Any person or persons inclining to purchase the privilege of erecting this valuable and simple machine, or of adding the improvement, which may readily be added to any saw mill already in use, will please to apply to the subscriber at Well-Brandywine Bridge, on the Philadelphia and Lancaster turnpike road, Pennsylvania, or to Dr. Thornton, coal-mill owner, City of Washington.
MOSES COATES.
Washington, April 5, 1802.
We the subscribers, inhabitants of Chester county in Pennsylvania, having been called upon by Moses Coates, to view his new invented plan of sawing, were eye witnesses to the following facts:
First, that in consequence of hands playing on a rag now attached to the common rag wheel, the saw is relieved from the saw.
Secondly, that by the action of another principle the log is moved the required distance for the next cut, and that the saw is kept in motion after the log is finished and turned down, until the same is cut into the kind of board required. The whole of the above is accomplished by his new invented plan exclusive of manual labour.
Francis Gardiner, John Fleming, Esq. Isaac Coates, Thomas C. Vickers, William Baily.
FOR SALE.
THE Subscriber offers at private sale, those adjoining and highly improved lots in the town of Camden, on which he now lives, having an east front of 123 feet on Broad Street, & a west of the same extent on Church Street, a north front of 198 feet on the central square of said town, and being 328 feet deep from Broad to Church Street.
On the premises is the corner of Broad Street and the square, is a large commodious and well finished dwelling house, measuring 25 feet by 30, two stories high, containing six rooms, apartment in the garret, a piazza, and a cellar under the whole building. In a brick house, fronting 30 by 32 feet on Broad Street, with a tiled roof, having on the first floor a dry goods store, and one for groceries, &c. communicating with each other, also a counting house with a key piece; on the second floor two rooms, one of which is used for the store room of dry goods, and the other as a chamber for clerks. This building, taking into view its fitness from accident by fire, with the convenience of its plan, for mercantile business, is superior to any in this place.—Also a back lot of 13 by 28 feet, and a salt house of 26 by 14 feet, both adjacent to the brick store before described.—Also a convenient brick eat and wash house with a free place in rear, and lodging room for servants, a brick oven, a smoke house, poultry house, carriage house and stable, a pump with good water in the yard, and a large garden, in excellent order, with a number of choice fruit trees. The front on Broad Street handsomely enclosed with a brick wall, and the whole on the premises on the other sides with a good plank fence; having part thereof separately enclosed as a grass plot or horse, &c. with every other accommodation suitable for a large and general family, and for carrying on the mercantile business extensively; the stand being acknowledged equal to any in the place.
Situated as the town of Camden is, on a fine navigable river communicating with Charleston by the Santee Canal, as well as by its natural channel with a trade for several late years, has increased with a rapidity almost unequalled, renders it unnecessary to comment on the advantages so obvious to a purchaser of the above described property, who intends to advance his fortune in the commercial line.
This valuable property is only offered for sale on account of the subscriber's intention to decline the mercantile business which he has carried on for several years past.
Terms will be one fourth of the purchase money in hand, and the remaining three fourths in three equal annual payments, with a mortgage on the premises, as security for the three latter payments, and interest from the date.—For further particulars, and for a view of the premises, apply to the subscriber in Camden.
JOHN ADAMSON.
Camden, S. C. May 17, 1802.
NOTICE.
WHEREAS several trespasses have lately been committed upon my land formerly called Elton Head, Manory now denominated Charles's Gift, by persons fowling, fishing and hunting, greatly to my prejudice. This is therefore to caution and warn all persons from entering upon my said plantation for the purposes aforesaid, as I am determined rigidly to enforce the laws of the country against any and every person infringing this prohibition.
NICHOLAS SEWALL.
St. Marys county, April 1.

Journeyman Printer.
A GOOD JOURNEYMAN PRINTER is wanted at the office of the American Literary Advertiser, opposite the Seven Buildings, Pennsylvania Avenue. Immediate application may secure a durable and very advantageous situation. May 28, 1832. ept3
Ten Dollars Reward.
RAN AWAY on the morning of the 25th inst. a Negro Woman named Priscilla, she is about forty-five years of age, a short woman and very black; her clothing is not known only a negro cotton jacket and petticoat. It is likely she may change her clothing; she had a fore on her right hip, it is perceivable from the other. I bought her from Mr John Stephens, City of Washington. She lived for some time near the Great Falls of the Potomac, with Mrs Martin Huger. I will give the above Reward to any person that will apprehend the said wench and deliver her to me or secure her in any jail that I get her again. JOHN SASSEER, Near Nottingham. ept3
NOTICE.
THE legal voters in the City of Washington are hereby informed that the Ballots for City Council will be received as follows: For the first division or ward, comprehending all that part of the city south, including the south side of Pennsylvania Avenue, and west, including the west side of Sixth street west, at Morin's Tavern, Pennsylvania Avenue. For the second division or ward, all that part of the city north, including the north side of Pennsylvania Avenue, and west, including the west side, of sixth street west, at Rhodes's Hotel. For the third division or ward, all that part of the city east, including the east side, of Sixth street west, at Sully's Hotel. The Polls will be open on the first Monday in June next, precisely at 8 o'clock in the morning, and continue open until 7 o'clock in the evening. DANIEL CARROL, of Dudn CORNL CUNNINGHAM, BENJAMIN MOORE. May 28, 1832. ept3
Public Sale.
In pursuance of an order of the orphans court for the county of Washington in the district of Columbia, will be exposed to Public Sale, on Thursday the 16th day of June next, at 10 o'clock in the morning (and continue from day to day until the whole is sold) at the corner of South E street and New Jersey Avenue, in the City of Washington.
All the personal property of Jasper De A. Cerny late of the county aforesaid, deceased, consisting of a quantity of store goods of various kinds, chiefly in the dry goods line—Also household and kitchen furniture, Beds, Bedsteads, Tables, Chairs, Looking Glasses, and a variety of other articles. Terms of sale, all sums under 20 dollars, cash, all above that amount 6 months credit, the buyer giving bond with approved security, bearing interest from the day of sale.
HENRY INGLE, Administrator. ELIZ. DE CARNAP, Administrator. May 28, 1832. ept3
City Hotel,
BROADWAY NEW-YORK.
THE Subscriber most respectfully informs his friends and the public, that the above Hotel will be opened on the first of May ensuing, when their patronage is earnestly solicited. He avails himself of this opportunity to return his sincere and grateful thanks to those societies, parties, and gentlemen who have given him their support, and assures them that a continuance of their favors will be a stimulus to future exertions to please; and that the utmost attention shall be given for their comfort and accommodation. Boarding may be had by the day, week, month or year. Families travelling, may be elegantly accommodated with lodging and fitting rooms; and, if preferred, have dinners &c. in their apartments. The Hotel being so well known, it is almost useless to say, that it is situated in one of the most healthy and pleasant parts of the city; commanding an extensive view in every direction, not only of the city itself, but also of the Narrows, the North and East Rivers, the State of New-Jersey, York and Long-Island, &c. &c. A handsome coffee-room will be fitted up in the principal story; where gentlemen may have tea, coffee, chocolate, soups, and refreshments in general, at the shortest notice. All the leading newspapers in the union, will be regularly taken in. Public dinners and suppers in a plain or elegant style, either for large or small parties. Also, beef steaks, oysters, &c. regularly furnished. An ordinary every day at half past 2 o'clock, by the public's obedient servant, JOHN LOVEITT. N. B. Rooms to let by the month or year. April 21, 1832. ept3
TO RENT,
And possession given immediately. A TWO STORY brick house on E street near the War Office, containing two parlors, five bed rooms, and a kitchen, with an excellent garden, coach house, stable, &c. The house is newly painted and papered; it was formerly occupied by Mr. Dexter, and lately by Mr. John Brown. Enquire of Clement Dorsey, Esq. George-Town; or of the subscriber, who has for sale a well finished three story brick house opposite the Six Buildings, and a variety of City Lots in the most eligible situations. The above House will be sold for less than any gentleman could build it. The payments will be made easy on the whole of the above property. WILLIAM DYER. April 7, 1832. ept3
Building Materials will be taken in part payment. W.D.
Fifteen or twenty Shares
The Washington Building Company to be offered at public sale on Saturday evening next at 7 o'clock, at Mr. Morin's tavern on the Pennsylvania Avenue, if not sold before by private sale.
THE flourishing state of the stock may be seen at Mr. Herty's office, who is secretary for the company. If one half calls advance will be an accommodation to the purchaser it may be lodged in the hands of the Secretary until the next Saturday evening when the certificates will be delivered.—Apply to WILLIAM DYER. May 17, 1832. ept3
The sale of the above advertised shares in the Washington Building Company, is postponed until Monday evening the 31st inst. May 26, 1832. 3t
Annapolis, May 4, 1832. St. John's College.
ON the 22nd day of June next the trustees of St. John's College purpose to proceed to the appointment of a professor of English and Grammar in St. John's College, who shall receive for his services at the rate of 200, to be paid quarterly—Dolls 533 33.
His duty is, in conjunction with an assistant, to teach English grammatically, and the Latin grammar, the vocabulary, and Corderius, so as to prepare students for the schools of languages. He and his assistant are likewise to teach writing and arithmetic, and the lower branches of the mathematics, if required, to such of the students as are not destined for the upper schools.
By order of the visitors and governor of St. John's College. A. C. HANSON. May 14, 1832. ept3
NOTICE.
THE subscriber takes the liberty to inform the inhabitants of Washington (who may not attend particularly to that part of the Corporation law respecting the right of suffrage) that unless their taxes be paid prior to the first Monday in June next, the day appointed for the election of common council for the City of Washington, they will be deprived of their right of voting. He also informs those who may make it convenient to call on him for the purpose of settling their dues that he may be seen at his lodgings (at Mr. Johnson's) every day from 5 to 8 o'clock A. M. and on Friday and Saturday from 4 to 6 o'clock P. M. at Mr. Rhodes's Little Hotel until the first Monday in June. WASHINGTON BOYD, Collector for the county of Washington. May 12, 1832. ept3
FOR SALE.
A TRACT of land containing 2,500 acres lying immediately on the river Potomac, in the county of Northumberland, Virginia, late the residence of PRESLEY THORNTON, Esq. Seventeen hundred acres of which are of the most valuable kind of low grounds on the river; between three and four hundred acres heavily timbered, the remainder is wavy high land extremely productive. The soil of this tract is equal to any in the state for cultivation of corn, wheat, tobacco, timothy, and small grain of all kinds. On this tract are a large commodious two story brick mansion house and two others, a large brick stable, a valuable barn, cow house and many other out-houses, all in good repair. The orchards and garden contain a variety of valuable fruit trees, and the waters abound with excellent fish and oysters. It is situated about a day's sail from Alexandria, Potomac or Norfolk. There are two good mill sites for grist, or sawmills on this estate, and plenty of cedar and chestnut timber, exclusive of the heavy timber, which if saved up into scattering will command a price in the City of Washington, nearly equal to the value of the land. The terms will be made easy to the purchaser or purchasers, and the tract will be divided into two or more plantations if necessary.—Apply to RICHARD PETERS, junr. No. 85, Walnut-Street Philadelphia. Philadelphia, Nov. 11. ept3
Now Landing AND FOR SALE,
By the subscriber at his store in Jefferson street, at very reduced prices, by wholesale and retail, for cash, country produce, or approved notes at 60 and 70 days.
 Loaf, lump and brown Pepper,  Sugars, Nutmegs,  Molasses, Mace,  Run of different kinds, Cloves,  Holland gin, Madder,  Cherry bounce, Indigo,  Madeira, Sherry, Lit. Fig Blue,  bon, and Malaga Scotch snuff in bottles,  wines, Real Havana segars,  Claret in boxes—of superior quality, First quality chewing tobacco,  French Liquors, Coarse and fine salt,  Hylon, Young Hyson, Shad and herrings in barrels,  Imperial and Souchong teas, Hams, Shoulders, and rindlings of bacon,  Coffee, Georgia Cotton,  Chocolate, Portland pitchers,  Almonds, China Bowls,  Raisins, Glass ware assorted  Pruens, Sets of tea China,  Fresh Lucca oil, Port wine in quarter  Capers, or bottles,  Anchovies, Patent cheese,  Olives, Porter in bottles,  Lemons, Powder, shot, & bar lead  Brown and white soap, Russia Glue,  Mould and dipped candles, Allum,  Ginger, Pimento,  And a few dozen very cheap long and short kid and fancy gloves. B. G. ORR. April 30, 1832. ept3
Wanted Immediately,
AT William Duane's Printing Office, Washington City, A good steady PRESSMAN.—None need apply but those who can give satisfactory recommendations of their good behaviour. May 22, 1832. ept3
FOR SALE,
LOOKING-GLASSES & FURNITURE.
The subscriber respectfully informs the public, that he has just received from New-York various kinds of Looking-Glasses, from 5 to 70 dollars each.—Also card tables, bureaus, &c. of an elegant and fashionable make. He continues to manufacture and sell all kinds of ornaments for chimney-pieces, door caps, furniture pieces, metal tables, &c. &c. GEORGE ANDREWS. April 14, 1832. ept3
Thomas Carpenter, TAYLOR,
HAS just received an elegant and fashionable assortment of summer goods, consisting of London superfine cloths and cambrics; India, Manchester, and silk striped nankeens; cotton cambrics, boslepoor, Bengal elegant white chord for pantaloons, white and coloured marcelles, janes and satin croissavers, silk ginghams, black and other coloured striped lins, &c.—All which he will make up on the most reasonable terms, and in the most near and fashionable manner.—Pennsylvania Avenue, west of the President's square. May 24, 1832. ept3
CHARLES VARDEN,
Merchant Taylor, from Philadelphia, GRATEFULLY acknowledges the favors conferred on him by the gentlemen of this City, and flatters himself that the general satisfaction he has already given will merit a continuation of the same. He has also received a handsome assortment of goods from Philadelphia, consisting of, Best superfine cloths, Cassimeres, Swandown, Toylenettes, Velveretts, Fancy Cords, Costings, Flannels, &c. N.B. Regimentals, Naval Uniforms, and Ladies' Habits, made in the neatest and most fashionable manner, and at the shortest notice.—Washington City, New-Jersey Avenue, next to Mr. Rapine's book store. Dec. 16, 1831. ept3
John Weems against John Weems jun. Sarah Weems, Wilhelmina Gantt, Henry Gantt, Philip Barton Key, and Charles Lowndes. IN CHANCERY, May 12, 1832.
THE object of the bill filed in this cause is to obtain partial relief against a bond, executed by the complainant to the said John Weems jun. for 2500, and a bond to Philip Barton Key, for 500. It states, that the said bonds were executed by the complainant, to secure a supposed balance to Amelia Weems, one of his sister's representative, due from him, as executor to his father, that the said balance was not justly due from him, because since the decree of this court, directing him to pay money on account of which the said bonds were given, the complainant, as executor aforesaid, hath had a decree against him at the suit of Daniel Keat, for the sum of 1395 18 1-2 and that several other suits have been instituted against him as executor.
It states likewise, that the said balance was not due from him, because he was entitled to a contribution from the said Amelia, made of a sum brought against him by William Loch Clew, for the recovery of a tract of land called Loch Eden, which suit his father, by his last will had directed to be defended to the last resort, at the expense of his estate. It is further stated that some of the defendants reside out of the state.
It is, on the complainant's motion, therefore ordered, That he cause a copy of this order to be inserted, at least once in each of three successive weeks in the Nation Intelligencer, before the 12th day of June next, to the intent, that the non-resident defendants may have notice of the complainant's application to this court, and of the substance and object of their bill, and may be warned to appear before him or before the second Wednesday in October next, to show cause wherefore a decree should not pass as prayed. (True Copy) Tell. SAMUEL H. HOWARD. Rev. Cur. Can. May 19, 1832. ept3
To be Sold,
On the fifth day of June next, in the town of Nottingham, in Prince George county, for cash only, for the benefit of the creditors of Ignatius Boone, the following property to wit:
A LOT of Land containing an half acre, on which there are a dwelling house, kitchen and granary, all new, with a good inclosed garden and yard; this house is now occupied as a tavern and is sufficiently large for that use. Three small framed houses standing adjoining the aforesaid lot on the country side, and may be removed. A moiety of fourteen acres of land adjoining the town, about one third of the purchase money for this land not paid. Seven or eight negroes consisting of men, women and children; some horses and cattle, all his household furniture, a billiard table, and about sixty or seventy pounds Baltimore cash, or remnants of goods. The sale will commence at nine o'clock and continue until all is sold. ROBERT BOWIE. Trustee for Ignatius Boone. May 21, 1832. wjt
Last Notice,
In the matter of JOHN STICKNEY, a BANKRUPT.
NOTICE is hereby given to the creditors of John Stickney, that on the fifteenth day of June 1832, between the hours of ten and eleven A. M. at the clerk's office of the district of Columbia for the county of Washington, a certificate of discharge will be given to the said John Stickney, who is declared a bankrupt, unless cause be then and there shown to the contrary by the said creditors or some of them.
By order of the hon. William Kley, Esq. chief judge of the circuit court of the district of Columbia, this 24th day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and two. URIAH FORREST, Clerk of the circuit court, district of Columbia. May 26, 1832. wjt
PROPOSALS
For carrying the Mails of the United States on the following Post Roads, will be received at the General Post Office in Washington City, until the 14th day of July next, inclusive.
IN NEW-YORK.
 65. From New-York by Bergen N. J. Hackinack, Paramus, New Antrim, New-Y. Chester, Goshen, Wardbridge, Shawangunk and New Paltz to Kingston once a week. Leave New-York every Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Goshen on Saturday by 6 P M. Leave Goshen at 7 P M and arrive at Kingston on Sunday by 7 P M. Returning—Leave Kingston every Monday at 6 A M and arrive at Goshen by 7 P M. Leave Goshen on Tuesday by 6 A M and arrive at New-York on Wednesday by 6 P M.  66. From Fishkill to Newburg twice a week. Leave Newburg every Tuesday and Friday at 2 P M and arrive at Fishkill by 4 P M. Leave Fishkill every Tuesday and Friday at half past 4 P M and arrive at Newburg by 6 P M.  67. From Newburg by New Windsor, Goshen, Warwick, Harnady, Newtown, Johnsonburg, Hope, Belvidere and Easton, to Bethlehem, Pa. once a week. Leave Newburg every Monday at 1 P M and arrive at Warwick on Tuesday by 7 A M and at Newtown on Wednesday by 9 A M and at Easton on Thursday by 11 A M and at Bethlehem at 2 P M. Returning—Leave Bethlehem every Thursday at 4 P M and arrive at Easton by 7 P M. Leave Easton on Friday at 4 A M and arrive at Newtown by 7 P M and at Newburg on Saturday by 9 P M.  68. From Rhinebeck to Kingston twice a week. Leave Rhinebeck every Monday and Friday at 11 A M and arrive at Kingston by 1 P M. Leave Kingston every Monday and Friday at 8 A M and arrive at Rhinebeck by 10 A M.  69. From Hudson to Catskill twice a week. Leave Hudson every Monday and Friday at 3 P M and arrive at Catskill by 5 P M. Leave Catskill every Monday and Friday at 8 A M and arrive at Hudson by 10 A M.  70. From Catskill by Presheld, New Durham, Benheim, Head of Delaware, Harsfield, Kortright, Meredith, Franklin and Oquaga to Union, and from Union by Windham, Walton, Delhi, Head of Delaware, and the same route thence to Catskill once a week. Leave Catskill every Monday at 6 P M and arrive at Union the next Thursday by 6 P M. Leave Union on Friday at 6 A M and return to Catskill the next Monday by 7 A M.  71. From Albany by Troy to Lansingburg six times a week. Leave Lansingburg every day Sunday excepted at 9 A M and arrive at Albany by 11 A M. Leave Albany at 4 P M and arrive at Lansingburg same day by 6 P M.  72. From Lansingburg by Yates's, Camberidge, Salem, Harnady, Granville, Hampton and Pownal, Vt. to Raitsbury, Vt. once a week. Leave Lansingburg every Friday at 8 A M and arrive at Salem on Saturday by 10 A M. Leave Salem at 11 A M and arrive at Raitsbury on Monday by 10 A M. Returning—Leave Raitsbury every Monday at 2 P M and arrive at Salem on Tuesday by 10 A M. Leave Salem on Wednesday at 6 A M and arrive at Lansingburg on Thursday by 3 P M.  73. From Lansingburg by Waterford, Stillwater, Westfield, Fort Miller, Fort Edward, Sandhill, Kingsbury, Fort Ann and Whitehall to Fairhaven once a week. Leave Lansingburg every Saturday at 8 A M and arrive at Sandhill on Sunday by 8 A M and arrive at Fairhaven on Monday by 10 A M. Returning—Leave Fairhaven every Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Sandhill by 4 P M and at Lansingburg on Friday by 6 P M.  74. From Albany by Schenectady, Tripp's Hill, Conesjohary, Herkimer, Utica and Whitehall to Rome twice a week. Leave Albany every Monday & Thursday at 2 P M and arrive at Schenectady by 6 P M. Leave Schenectady on Tuesday and Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Conesjohary by 6 P M. Leave Conesjohary every Wednesday and Saturday at 6 A M and arrive at Utica by 6 P M. Leave Utica every Sunday and Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Rome by 11 A M. Returning—Leave Rome every Sunday and Thursday at 2 P M and arrive at Utica by 5 P M. Leave Utica on Tuesday and Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Conesjohary by 6 P M. Leave Conesjohary every Wednesday and Saturday at 6 A M and arrive at Schenectady by 6 P M. Leave Schenectady every Monday and Thursday at 5 A M and arrive at Albany by noon.  75. From Utica by New Hartford, Wellmoreland, Oneida, Manlius, Onondaga, Marcellus, Amichus, Cayuga & Geneva to Canandaigua, once a week. Leave Utica every Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Oneida by 2 P M and arrive at Manlius by 7 P M. Leave Manlius on Friday at 5 A M and arrive at Canandaigua on Saturday by 9 A M and at Canandaigua by 6 P M. Returning—Leave Canandaigua every Monday at 6 A M and arrive at Utica the next Wednesday by 6 P M.  76. From Canandaigua by Hartford to Niagara once a week. Leave Canandaigua every Monday at 6 A M and arrive at Niagara the next Thursday by 9 A M. Leave Niagara every Thursday by 3 P M and arrive at Canandaigua the next Monday by 6 P M.  77. From Cayuga to Scipio once a week. Leave Cayuga every Saturday at 11 A M and arrive at Scipio by 2 P M. Leave Scipio at 4 P M and arrive at Cayuga by 7 P M.  78. From Oneida to Canandaigua once a week. Leave Oneida every Thursday at 3 P M and arrive at Canandaigua by 7 P M. Leave Canandaigua every Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Oneida by 10 A M.  79. From Utica by New Hartford, Paris, Hamilton and Sherburne to Oxford once a week. Leave Utica every Monday at 5 A M and arrive at Oxford on Tuesday by 6 P M. Leave Oxford every Wednesday by 6 A M and arrive at Utica on Thursday by 6 P M.  80. From Conesjohary by Cherry Valley, Cooperstown, Butternuts, Oxford, Union and Owego to Athens Pa. once a week. Leave Conesjohary every Sunday at 1 P M and arrive at Oxford on Tuesday by 10 A M and at Union on Wednesday by 10 A M. Leave Union same day at 11 A M and arrive at Athens by 7 P M. Returning—Leave Athens every Thursday at 5 A M and arrive at Conesjohary the next Sunday by 11 A M.  81. From Athens Pa. by Chemung N. Y. Newtown, Painted Post, Bath, Jerashall, and Pottersfield to Canandaigua once a week. Leave Athens every Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Canandaigua on Saturday by 7 P M. Leave Canandaigua every Monday at 5 A M and arrive at Athens on Wednesday by 7 P M.  82. From Cooperstown by Burlington, Brookfield, Sherburne, Dwyer, Fabius, Tully, and Sempromus to Scipio, once a week. Leave Cooperstown every Tuesday at 6 A M and arrive at Scipio on Thursday by 6 P M. Leave Scipio every Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Cooperstown on Sunday by 6 P M.  83. From Tripp's Hill to Johnstown twice a week. Leave Tripp's Hill every Tuesday and Friday at 3 P M and arrive at Johnstown by 4 P M. Leave Johnstown every Tuesday and Friday at 5 P M and arrive at Tripp's Hill by 6 P M.  84. From Schenectady by Balltown Springs, Saratoga Springs and Glensbridge to Sandyhill once a week. Leave Schenectady every Tuesday at 7 A M and arrive at Sandyhill by 7 P M. Leave Sandyhill on Wednesday at 7 A M and arrive at Schenectady by 7 P M.  85. From Albany by Duaneburg and Durlock to Cherry Valley once a week. Leave Albany every Thursday at 2 P M and arrive at Cherry Valley on Friday by 6 P M. Leave Cherry Valley every Wednesday at 6 A M and arrive at Albany on Thursday by 10 A M.  86. From Vergennes Vt. by Whiteboro Peru and Plattsburg, to Champlain town once a week. Leave Vergennes every Wednesday at 6 A M and arrive at Champlain town on Friday by 6 P M. Leave Champlain town on Sunday by 3 P M and arrive at Vergennes on Tuesday by 6 P M.  87. From Newark by Gnatham, Morristown, Boonton, Rockaway and Sparta to Newtown, and from thence by Johnstown, Hacketstown, Black River, Mendon, Morristown and Chatham to Newark once a week. Leave Newark every Thursday at 8 A M and arrive at Newtown on Friday by 6 P M. Leave Newtown every Saturday at 6 A M and arrive at Newark the next Monday by 7 P M.  88. From Trenton by Allentown, Monmouth c. h. Shrewsbury, Middletown Point, Spottiswood, New Brunswick, Somerset c. h. Pluckemin, Raritan, New Germantown, Pittston, Alexandria, Plumstead Pa. Flemington and Pennington to Trenton, and the same route (leaving out Plumstead) back to Trenton every week. Leave Trenton every Tuesday at 8 A M, pass by Allentown, &c. and return to Trenton the next Tuesday at 6 A M. Leave Trenton every Tuesday at 9 A M, pass by Pennington, Flemington, &c. and arrive at Plumstead and return to Trenton the next Tuesday by 6 A M.  89. From Trenton by Bordentown, Slabtown, New Mills, Mount Holly, Moorestown, Haddonfield and Cooperstown to Philadelphia once a week. Leave Trenton every Tuesday at 9 A M and arrive at Philadelphia on Wednesday by 11 A M. Leave Philadelphia every Wednesday at 2 P M and arrive at Trenton the next Thursday by 3 P M.  90. From Philadelphia Pa. by Haddonfield, Taunton and Aston to Tuckerton once a week. Leave Philadelphia every Thursday at 10 A M and arrive at Tuckerton by 8 P M. Leave Tuckerton every Tuesday at 6 A M and arrive at Philadelphia on Wednesday by 2 P M.  91. From Philadelphia by Gloucester, Swedeboro, and Woodbury to Salem once a week. Leave Philadelphia every Wednesday at 3 P M and arrive at Salem on Thursday by 2 P M. Leave Salem every Tuesday at 6 A M and arrive at Philadelphia on Wednesday by 7 A M. 
FOR SALE,
A NEGRO WOMAN about 38 years of age; she is an excellent Cook, and good washer. For Terms apply to the Editor. April 5, 1832. ept3