The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-07-18 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1211.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, JULY 13, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
FRIDAY, APRIL 3, 1808.
The report of the select committee in the case of Mr. SMITH of Ohio, being under consideration—
Mr. FRANKLIN moved, that the Senate do now proceed to consider the resolution, with which the report concludes, and which is in the following words:
“Resolved, That JOHN SMITH, a Senator from the state of Ohio, by his participation in the conspiracy of Aaron Burr, against the Peace, Union and Liberties of the people of the United States, has been guilty of conduct incompatible with his duty and station as a Senator of the United States, and that he be, therefore, and hereby is expelled from the Senate of the United States.”
This motion having been agreed to, Mr. ADAMS spoke in substance as follows:
Mr. PRESIDENT.—The question now under consideration appears in strict propriety to import, only a discussion on the point of fact, and its determination can decide only whether Mr. Smith has or has not been a participant in the conspiracy of Aaron Burr, so far as to be no longer worthy of a seat upon this floor. But as the learned and ingenious counsel of Mr. Smith have rested a part of his defence, upon objections against the principles, recommended in the report, and upon which the Senate have hitherto proceeded in this case, I shall be permitted, in the course of the remarks I am now about to submit to the Senate, to make such observations upon the principles contended for by those gentlemen, as have occurred to me, as well as upon the view of the evidence now in our possession, and by which my vote upon the resolution will be governed.
And I cannot but express my satisfaction, that the principles of the report have been brought to so severe an ordeal, and have been called to encounter the whole argument and eloquence of two such powerful adversaries. Far is it from my wish, sir, that those principles should receive the countenance and sanction of this body, unless upon the severest scrutiny they shall be found to stand upon the foundations of reason, of the constitution, and of precedent. If the principles proposed by Mr. Smith and his counsel are more sound, they ought unquestionably to prevail, and in order to try their respective validity, my task will be to examine the objections which the learned counsel have urged against the principles of the report, and to animadvert upon those which they have proposed to substitute in their stead.
The first objection is to the jurisdiction of the Senate. It is said that we had no right to try this case at all; or at least that if we were authorised to enter upon it for purposes of enquiry, we had no right to pursue it for purposes of decision. And although this enquiry was originally solicited with earnestness by Mr. Smith himself, I am not desirous of depriving him of the benefit which he can now derive from a denial of our jurisdiction. His counsel now solemnly protest in his name and their own against our indulgence in granting him his request. If indeed they are right, if we have no authority to try, the consequence would lead further than the gentlemen themselves would be willing to allow. Their argument denies the right of the Senate to take this question at all. A vote of rejection would affirm the jurisdiction of the Senate, as much as a vote of adoption. Acquittal implies the jurisdiction of the tribunal, as much as conviction. This is obvious from the practice of the common law courts, where the plea to the jurisdiction must always be decided before the general issue can be tried. Mr. Smith, however, ought not to be denied the advantage of both his grounds. If there are members of the Senate, who though convinced that the facts are sufficient for his expulsion, have been convinced by the arguments of his counsel that they ought not to have been tried here, they will vote against the resolution. If there are others who believe the course we have taken to be correct, but that the evidence is not sufficient to warrant expulsion, they also will vote against the resolution. The result of every doubt,
whether of right or of fact, will operate in favor of Mr. Smith. I do not incline, therefore, to their separation.
Let us then examine the reasons upon which the jurisdiction of the Senate has been contested. The two gentlemen, who so ably conducted the defence of Mr. Smith, did not in all respects take the same grounds; but I shall notice the arguments adduced by each of them, which appear to me material, without always discriminating by which of them they were urged.
It was said by the gentleman whom we had last the pleasure of hearing on this subject, (Mr. Harper) that if this question were new, he should contend that the power of expulsion given by the constitution to each of the two Houses of Congress, was restricted to a mere regulation of police, for the preservation of order, and that they could institute no enquiry into the conduct of their members, except for offences committed in the presence of the House. But this ground was taken only to be abandoned; for the gentleman admitted that the authority of precedent was against him, and to that authority he was willing for himself and his client to submit. I can subscribe neither to the doctrine, nor to the reason for its abandonment. It is a question of constitutional power; and as such, if the precedents had been ever so much multiplied, they could not avail against the constitution. In the conflict between two such unequal authorities, that of precedent ought always to yield. Besides, there is but one precedent, which could in this case call for submission. I have sometimes heard it said that two precedents were equivalent to a principle; but I never before understood that one precedent could be admitted as of force to silence contradiction. No, sir, there is a better reason than submission to precedent, for rejecting this limitation upon the authority of the Senate. There is no such limitation in the letter of the constitution; there is none such in its spirit; and to introduce such a limitation, would involve us in the absurdity—to my mind the monstrous absurdity, that a man might be convicted of the most infamous crimes that can disgrace the human character, and unless their punishment be capital, would be entitled perhaps, for years to hold his seat in the supreme councils of the nation. This consequence is inevitable; for his constituents cannot recall him; and it has been determined, upon the fullest determination, and by a solemn decision, that a member of the Senate is not liable to the process of impeachment. There is then no remedy but expulsion; for the idea that a man thus blasted in character, and thus debased in conduct, should be permitted to remain a member of the legislature, is so disgraceful to the reputation of this body, and so pernicious to the interest of the whole nation, that it cannot for a moment be admitted. I will only add the remark, that if in this objection there were any substance, it ought to be presented to us in a different form. If any member thinks it has weight, he should offer a resolution to arrest all further proceedings. Its argument is not that this resolution should be rejected, but that the question ought not to be taken. It is in the nature of what we call the previous question.
Another objection, however, was taken, & insisted on with some earnestness by both the counsel. They took a distinction between indictable offences, and offences not indictable . And they contended that the jurisdiction (as they term it) of the Senate is confined to the latter. That for all indictable crimes, if complaint be made to the Senate against one of its members, the Senate might indeed institute an enquiry, but that for trial they must pass a resolution directing the proper law officer to commence a prosecution, and until its issue sequester the member from his seat.
I well remember, and it will be recollected by many other members of this House, that on the impeachment of Judge Chase, this same distinction between indictable and unindictable offences was made. But the argument resulting from it, was directly the reverse of that which is now advanced. It was then insisted, with great plausibility, though I confess not entirely to my conviction, that no offence could be impeachable,
unless it were also indictable. And the counsel dwelt with great force upon the dangerous tendency of the principle that a public officer might be removed, “for paltry errors and indiscretions too insignificant to have a name in the penal code.” There is so much weight in this reasoning, that before hearing the counsel of Mr. Smith, I did expect it would be applied to his case—that it would be asserted that he had done nothing indictable, and that for no other kind of offence could he be liable to expulsion. The counsel however have preferred to try the other side of this two edged sword, and to insist that offences not liable to indictment, are the only kinds of misconduct for which the Senate can remove a member on an investigation of the facts, by themselves.
They say that by the sixth article amendment to the constitution, the trial by jury is secured to every citizen, in all criminal prosecutions. We had occasion yesterday on the court martial bill, to remark that this article must be understood to have reference to the trials in courts of common law. The soldier, under your rules and articles of war, if criminally prosecuted, must be tried not by a jury, but by a court martial. The trial by jury , is secured for the decision of questions arising from what the elementary writers on government call civil rights . The rights which in republican governments are enjoyed alike by every citizen, as subject to the laws. These are altogether different from political rights ; or rights which we enjoy as partakers of the public power; as members of the sovereignty. Among these are the rights of electing and being elected; and the rights of office enjoyed by all public functionaries—such is the right possessed by each of us to his seat upon this floor. One of the greatest writers upon the nature of laws, the ingenious and profound Montesquieu, pointedly cautions his readers and all students in the laws, not to confound the rules and principles belonging to these distinct classes of rights. The trial by jury meant by this article of the constitution, is reserved for the decision of questions affecting the civil, and not the political rights of the citizen. The sentence is to operate upon his individual person, or property, but not upon his political franchises. To decide upon these other courses of proceeding are provided—courts martial for military men—impeachment for civil officers—and for members of the legislative body, the process which we are now pursuing.
But it is said that if the Senate try and decide upon offences committed by their members; they will still remain liable to indictment, and the weight of such a decision by the Senate would have an oppressive influence to dictate the verdict of the jury. This argument pays a very poor compliment to the juries of our country. It rests upon a position which I trust is altogether unfounded, that they will be governed by a bias in direct violation of their oaths. Our juries, sir, are always sworn to give their verdicts according to the evidence, & certainly no vote of expulsion could be offered in evidence, to a jury upon a criminal prosecution. So far as I have any experience of juries, I have always seen them sufficiently guarded against any bias of external circumstances; especially such as might operate unfavorably to the person upon trial. It is the natural character of our countrymen, and it may be safely relied on. No jury would ever be warped from the line of their duty, to condemn a person accused upon a resolution of this body, which could not be adduced to them in evidence.
We are told that this is the precise distinction between the two cases, which have heretofore occurred in the Senate. That the case of Mr. Marshall was and that of Mr. Blount was not an indictable offence, that this distinction perfectly reconciles the proceedings in those two cases. But no such distinction appears upon the face of those cases. From the terms in which the report against Mr. Blount was expressed, it would seem as if the reporters had a doubt of the opposite kind; a doubt like that urged on Mr. Chase's impeachment—that is,
whether a member could be expelled for an offence not indictable—for after describing at some length the moral complexion of Mr. Blount's act, they expressly add that it amounts to a high misdemeanor —words which seem expressly chosen to intimate an opinion that the act was indictable; a misdemeanor being the technical language of the law, the special characteristic of an indictable offence.
The course recommended to the Senate, as a substitute instead of that which they have pursued, is itself liable to objections, insuperable to my understanding. I do not find in the constitution any authority given to the Senate to direct any law officer of the United States to commence a prosecution at law, against one of their members. Neither do I find them invested with the power of sequestering a member from his seat. The gentleman said, it was incidental to the power of expulsion. If so the incident is much broader than the power itself. The superstructure far more extensive than the base. The power of expulsion operates only upon the member. The state retains all its right to be represented, and only suffers during the time, which it may require to supply the vacated place. But when you sequester a member from his seat, you also sequester his state from its proportion of representation. You leave her only one member, while all her sisters have two—and if this sequestration is to continue through all the impediments of a prosecution in a court at law, this suspension of the state's representation might last through a whole Senatorial term of duty. The same principle, in its application to the other House, would often sequester a district of people from their share in the national representation during the full Congressional period—not to mention the opportunities it would afford to personal enemies and political opponents of taking an obnoxious member from his seat, by the mere institution of a criminal process against him. Another obstacle to this procedure arises from the danger of transferring the decision upon the qualifications of your members from your own body to a different, and perhaps a distant tribunal. It proposes to place the trial of the cause under one jurisdiction, and the sentence to be pronounced by another. Instead of acting upon evidence and information exhibited to your own view, you must take upon trust the correctness of proceeding of every county court of criminal jurisdiction throughout the Union, and resign the right of your members to their seats into the hands of every jury in a court of quarter sessions. This consequence is so obvious, and so incompatible with the clearest privileges of this body, that the counsel themselves perceived it, and shrunk back from their own conclusions. They admitted that after the trial at law, the verdict of the jury would not be conclusive, as a ground for the decision of the Senate on the question for expulsion—Nay they admitted that even after a verdict of acquittal, the Senate might again enter upon the enquiry. If the acquittal were on fair and honorable grounds, they thought the Senate would be bound to abide by it, but if it should be obtained upon legal exceptions, or by the exclusion of evidence upon objections to the more legal competency of the testimony, we might resume the investigation, and proceed to expel the acquitted member, on such evidence excluded by the formal limitations of practice in the judicial court. But, sir, how are the Senate to know, unless it be from the face of the record, upon what grounds the party was acquitted? His plea to the indictment is, ‘not guilty.’ This is the issue upon the trial, and under this issue the person accused is entitled to the benefit of every exception of legal form as well as of honorable substance. The jury are judges both of the law and the fact. The testimony, whether admitted or excluded, seldom appears upon the record. The jury on combining every point both of law and of testimony, find it insufficient to convict the party accused, and they return a general verdict in the two words of his plea “not guilty.” They give no reasons for their verdict. The jury at Richmond, indeed, on the tri-
al of Mr. Burr for treason, did assign a reason—but this was an extraordinary exception—they are not obliged to give their reasons, and they scarcely ever do give them. How then are we to know whether the acquittal was honorable or otherwise, by reciting testimony? Why then we return to that original foundation of our own sound discretion, upon which I have contended that our authority rests.
We send the party to a court of law for trial, and the court sends him back to us for two—one for himself, and one for the jury which acquitted him. We go from discretion to law; and then with an aggravated burthen return from law to discretion.
Let us however for a moment suppose that this doctrine of Mr. Smith's counsel is correct, and that our authority to try this cause is appellate and not original. The consequence is, that we ought now to do, what they tell us we ought to have done at first. Their argument invites us now to sequester this gentleman from his seat, and send him to a circuit court of the U. States for trial by jury , with directions to the proper law officer to commence a prosecution against him, and with the whole mass of evidence which has been here produced against him; that the personal attendance of the witnesses may be obtained at the proper time and place. If, sir, the object were to deprive Mr. Smith of his seat, for the remainder of his term, this process would answer as effectively as the adoption of the resolution before you. I must therefore believe that it cannot be Mr. Smith's desire, that we should on this occasion renounce our own course, to follow that inculcated upon us by his counsel.
Having disposed then of the objections to the jurisdiction of the Senate, let us pass to those which have been urged with equal solemnity against the species of evidence which has been received. I listened with great attention to the comparison drawn by the gentleman who insisted most upon this point, and in particular to the parallel which he drew between the relative merits of written and oral testimony. There are doubtless advantages to be derived from the examination of witnesses in person, which cannot be communicated to written depositions. But theoretic perfection must necessarily yield to possible practice. The evidence on such an enquiry as this is from the necessity of the case all voluntary. The member whose conduct is implicated, has great advantages for defence, which he would not possess on a trial in a court of law. He is defended by the able counsel admitted at your bar when there is no legal counsel against him. He has the opportunity to collect with all the industry and activity inspired by his interest, every particle of evidence that can be brought in his favor, while that which appears against him, must come without search; must present itself uninvited. No member of this body can be charged with the duty, and surely none would spontaneously undertake the task of summoning witnesses to attend here in person from the two extremities of the union; nor, were they summoned, is it at all clear that they would be compelled to attend. To call exclusively for the evidence of witnesses in person, is therefore to strike at the root of the Senate's power to pursue such an enquiry as this. It is to make the power expressly delegated nugatory. So at least it would be in the great number of cases; and in the present instance it would require us to go through this whole investigation again. We must consider everything hitherto done as an absolute nullity, and send for perhaps an hundred witnesses from New Orleans to New town, in Connecticut, to assemble here at some day of the next session (we shall certainly not have time for it during the present) to testify to the conduct of Mr. Smith, and to the characters of the witnesses for and against him. This objection therefore if valid, would in its operation be as unfriendly to Mr. Smith, as the last. As that would send him to a court of law for the trial of a title, extinct before it could be confirmed, so this would postpone the question upon the right to his seat, until the seat itself will be vacated by the lapse of time. It is I presume from this necessity of the case, that in the British Hou-

of Commons, proceedings of this nature are always in a great degree summary, and that the evidence upon which they proceed is subject to none of the restrictions to which they so rigidly adhere in their courts of law. As our power of expulsion is granted in the constitution, and as it was no doubt originally derived from the English Parliamentary usage, I thought it my duty to consult with as much care and attention as a limited time would allow, the journals and debates of the House of Commons in England, to ascertain what their practice had been in these cases. Nor could I hear without astonishment, the assertion so confidently made by one of the gentlemen of counsel for Mr. Smith (Mr. Key) that no instance of this summary proceeding could be found in the British Parliament, unless it were in the time of Cromwell. Where the gentleman obtained his information it is not my business to enquire; but I can say that in my examination of the journals, I have been unable to find a single instance in which any other than a summary process is pursued, or in which the judicial rules for authenticating evidence are required. That this however may no longer rest upon assertion, I shall now read you, sir, two cases which occurred; not in the time of Cromwell, but in that of Queen Ann.
The first is that of Thomas Ridge, which in the Parliamentary debates is related thus:—vol. 14, p. 177. "On the 3d (of January) Mr. Harley, chancellor of the exchequer, acquainted the Commons, "that on examinations relating to the navy, taken before the lords commissioners of the treasury, some considerable abuses had been discovered in the victualling, and that a member of that House was named therein: upon which the Commons resolved to present an address to the queen, to have those examinations laid before them: which being done accordingly, and the same referred to a committee, Mr. Ridge, the member named therein, desired that he might attend that committee to make his innocence appear."
He attended the committee; they reported against him, and afterwards on the 15th, "The Commons took into consideration the report from the committee appointed to enquire into the abuses of the victualling; and the said report being read, it was unanimously resolved, that it appears to this house that in the management of her majesty's brew-house, as well as in the contracts for furnishing the navy with beer, there have been many notorious imbezlements and scandalous abuses, to the defrauding the public of great sums of money to the injury and discouragement of the seamen: and ordered that the commissioners of victualling have a copy of the said report."
"After this Mr. Ridge was heard in his place to the matter of the report relating to him, and being withdrawn it was resolved,"
"1. That it appears to this house that Thomas Ridge, esq. a member of this House, is guilty of great frauds and abuses, by having contracted to furnish 5,513 tons of beer upon his own account, and 2704 of beer in partnership with Mr. Dixon, and having received bills for the whole, although he delivered but 3,213 tons of the first and 1,266 upon the latter contract."
"2. That Thomas Ridge, esq. be for the said frauds and abuses expelled this House."
"3. That an humble address be presented to her majesty, that she will be pleased to give direction to her Attorney-general to prosecute the said Mr. Ridge, for the said frauds and abuses."—p. 181.
Shall we now be told, Mr. President, that the practice of the English House of Commons, on cases of expulsion, is never summary; that they first send the member to a court of law for his trial; that they receive against him none but judicial evidence? Here is a case, not in times of violence and faction; not for political motives, or to remove an able and obnoxious member, but for mere fraud and embezzlement; the member is merely named in certain written examinations; on that evidence, after reference to a committee, and their report, he is expelled, and immediately after, an address to the queen is voted, to direct a prosecution against him for the same acts.
The next case is that of Mr. Walpole. He was implicated in a report from the commissioners of public accounts; he was heard before them, & there had a witness sworn to an affidavit in his favor. On their report, they presented to the house the depositions of this witness, which were received and read. Another witness was called in and examined, apparently not on oath, before the house itself. Mr. Walpole was heard in his place and withdrew; after which the House came to the following resolutions:
"1. That Robert Walpole, esq. (a
member of this house), in receiving the sum of 500 guineas, and in taking a note for 500l. more, on account of two contracts, for forage of her majesty's troops quartered in North Britain, made by him when secretary at war, pursuant to a power granted to him by the late Lord Treasurer, is guilty of a high breach of trust and notorious [not convicted, but notorious] corruption."
"2. That the said Robert Walpole, esq. be for the said offence committed prisoner to the Tower of London, during the pleasure of this House; and that Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant accordingly."
"Then a motion being made and the question put that the house should adjourn, it passed in the negative; and after a small debate it was resolved (though by a small majority of about 30 voices), that the said Robert Walpole, esq. be for the said offence also expelled the house."
The only cases of expulsion which I recollect to have occurred during the present reign are those of Mr. Wilkes, which occasioned so great a fermentation in that country, from a subsequent question raised by the House of Commons in their decision that by the mere fact of expulsion he was incapacitated from being elected again. I shall not refer to this case at all as a precedent, but will barely read to you a few remarks made on it by Mr. Belsham, an historian who has been censured as leaning to an excess in favor of republican principles.
He says, "It could not be denied that the House of Commons had ever exercised a judicial authority, which could in no other hands be so properly placed, in determining upon the validity of returns, and the qualifications of their own members. This authority might undoubtedly be abused, or indiscreetly exercised, but all power is in its own nature liable to abuse; and if so vague an objection be admitted, the powers vested in all political bodies, however constituted, must be annihilated, & the bonds of civil society are at once dissolved. The power of expulsion for such offences, as appear to the house, to render any of its members unworthy of the trust reposed in them, had been exercised in numerous instances, from time immemorial"—and afterwards "It must nevertheless be acknowledged, that a discretionary power of expulsion is liable to be perverted to very bad purposes; and therefore it was judged proper by an act passed in the course of the ensuing session to specify the offences which shall in future render incapacitation the necessary result of expulsion."
There was one other observation of the same gentleman (Mr. Key) contesting a position in the report of the committee, which I think it necessary to notice, because it is the renewal of an objection already refuted upon this floor. In referring to the proceedings on the expulsion of Mr. Blount the report says "In that case the member implicated was called upon in the first instance, to answer whether he was the author of a letter, the copy of which only was produced, and the writing of which was the cause of his expulsion. He was afterwards requested to declare whether he was the author of the letter itself, and declining in both cases to answer the fact of his having written it was established by a comparison of his hand writing, and by the belief of persons who had seen him write, upon inspection of the letter. In all these points the committee perceive the admission of a species of evidence which in courts of criminal jurisdiction would be excluded."
Very soon after the report was made, Mr. Smith, in a letter, I think, addressed to you, Mr. President, asserted that this was a mistake on a point of law—that comparison of hands, and inspection by persons who had seen the party write, was evidence admitted in every day's practice on criminal prosecutions at law. Part of this doctrine was afterwards disclaimed in debate on the floor—It was acknowledged that comparison of hands is never admitted as evidence on criminal trials—I know very well that inspection of the hand writing by persons who have seen the party write, is evidence at law; but it must be upon oath. In Mr. Blount's case, it was received by the committee, without oath, and it was in allusion to this, that the report included it as part of the testimony admitted there, though it would have been excluded from a court of law. I know also that the same testimony was in that case afterwards given in Senate, upon oath—the report never meant to say that formal evidence was excluded—it only noticed the informal evidence which was admitted.
I have now finished my remarks upon that part of Mr. Smith's defence, which rests upon the supposed irregularity of the proceedings which have hitherto been sanctioned by the Se-
nate, on this investigation, and upon objections against the principles, maintained in the report of the committee. The question on the facts remains still to be discussed.
What then is the evidence of Mr. Smith's participation in the conspiracy of Aaron Burr?
Since the resolution now under consideration was first offered to the Senate, the state of the evidence has very considerably changed; in some respects favorably for Mr. Smith's defence; in others, to my mind, more inauspiciously. The testimony of Elias Glover, I consider as totally discredited; but since the depositions produced by Mr. Smith to the committee, with his answers to their queries, I gave very little credit to that witness, even before the accumulation of evidence against him, which Mr. Smith has since obtained, and recently exhibited to the Senate. Even then I thought the testimony of Glover could be of very little weight, otherwise than as it was confirmed by that of others. With the same exception I now give to it no credit at all. Stripped of the confirmation which it may receive, from admitted circumstances, from other testimony, and from Mr. Smith's own acknowledgments, I consider the case as if no affidavit of Glover belonged to it.
But if the credit of Elias Glover has been annihilated, that of Peter Taylor has been beyond all controversy confirmed. In his answers to the committee, Mr. Smith solemnly denied almost all the material facts, (and material in the highest degree they are) attested by Peter Taylor, respecting him on the trials at Richmond; and he declared his belief that he could prove by witnesses of the first respectability, his want of character as a man of truth and veracity. Since then Mr. Smith has had the fullest opportunity to cross examine the man himself, and to take testimony to his general character. And what is the result? The general character of Peter Taylor has risen purified from the furnace. In every witness of whom the question was asked, he has found a panegyrist. One or two mistakes of circumstances perfectly immaterial to Mr. Smith, or to any other person implicated, have been discovered in a lynx-eyed scrutiny of his testimony at Richmond; and the candor with which he instantly acknowledged them, and the firmness with which on Mr. Smith's enquiries he persevered in asserting all the important facts of his narrative, have given to his evidence a much greater weight than it could claim before. So decisive indeed is it, that Mr. Smith's counsel now solemnly admits those facts which Mr. Smith had as solemnly denied in his answer; and argues with his usual ingenuity to dispel their effect.
Of Colonel James Taylor, the testimony has been in one respect counteracted, and in another much strengthened. His character was so well known, and so universally respected, that no attempt could be made to assail it, other than on the basis of a supposed mistake. This mistake, Mr. Smith, in his affidavit, made before he left this place, asserted that he expected to prove by General Findley; the only third person in hearing, according to Colonel Taylor's statement, when the conversation, occasioned by the querist, occurred. Mr. Smith returns without the deposition of General Findley; but in its stead he brings a deposition of his friend Dr. Sellman, and also a private letter to him from the same Dr. Sellman, intimating that General Findley could not confirm Colonel Taylor's testimony; but with a broad insinuation that General Findley would not give that deposition in favor of Mr. Smith, which he ought, for fear of losing his office. On the fact of this particular conversation then, we must balance the weight of testimony apparently contradictory. It is barely possible that the conversations mentioned by the two witnesses, were not the same, but held at different times; and as evidence seemingly variant between two persons of character, ought always, if possible, to be reconciled, perhaps the fair and candid construction would be that. If however it was the same conversation, we must be reduced to the necessity of choosing which of the two witnesses has been most correct in his recollection; I cannot but consider the express testimony of Colonel Taylor, confirmed by the silence of General Findley, as that which is best entitled to our belief. Colonel Taylor we know, was on this occasion a most reluctant witness; he had been the friend and intimate acquaintance of Mr. Smith; his principle obviously was to say as little as possible, consistent with his obligations to speak the truth. The impressions on his mind did not stand singly upon his judgment; he had compared them with those of General Findley, and by that comparison had found them confirm-
ed. They had not slumbered upon his memory for a length of time, so as to lose their distinctness. He had communicated them to the Secretary of State in his letter of 13th of Oct. 1806, written a very few days after the conversation was held. An extract of this letter is in evidence before us, and it tallies exactly with col. Taylor's testimony given to the committee & before the Senate. The impartiality of col. Taylor, his candor, his tenderness for Mr. Smith, the excellency of his general character, and his appeal to the recollection of another respectable witness in confirmation of his own, all combine to give his testimony the highest claim to our belief. With Dr. Sellman I have no personal acquaintance, and can therefore speak of him only as upon the evidence exhibited here on this occasion. He appears at least in the character of a very ardent partizan of Mr. Smith. In the newspapers transmitted to us, I see his name at the foot of several very violent publications, which have not been read, but which shew that fifteen months ago, he had in some sort staked his own character upon the reputation of Mr. Smith. A number of depositions concur to prove that he, in company with a man who has since been convicted of an atrocious robbery, was at the head of a party who burst open the doors, and broke in upon a meeting of private citizens assembled to pass certain resolutions unfavorable to Mr. Smith, and threatened them with a coat of tar and feathers. The insinuation in his private letter to Mr. Smith, against the fair fame of General Findley, bears no distinguishing features of an ingenuous mind. I cannot believe that General Findley, a man of honorable consideration in society, holding an important public trust, could have been actuated by such unworthy motives, in declining to contradict col. Taylor's deposition. Could he have done it, consistently with truth, he had every inducement that could operate upon generous feelings to do it. His contradiction would not have impaired the reputation of Col. Taylor. It would only have induced a probability that he was mistaken. But to Mr. Smith it was of the first importance—his reputation in the world—his seat in the councils of the nation—the comfort of his life—the peace and happiness of his family were all at stake, and called in the most imperious manner, for the testimony of a man, who by merely declaring that he had understood his meaning differently from the witness appealing to him might have removed from him the burthen of this imputation. It is impossible to believe that he was deterred from such an act of signal justice, by the base and contemptible fear of losing his office.
Mr. Adams' speech to be continued.
PUBLIC SALE. By virtue of a decree of the honorable the Circuit Court of the district of Columbia, sitting as a court of Chancery for the county of Washington in the suit of
Gideon Snow—complainant, against Abigail Perkins, widow and administratrix, and Hannah Perkins, sister and heir of Joseph Perkins deceased, and Nathan Bond—Defendants.
Will be sold at public auction to the highest bidder on Monday the twenty-ninth day of August next at Rhodes's hotel in the city of Washington, at the hour of 10 A. M. all the Estate, right, title, claim and demand both in law and equity of the said Joseph and of the said defendant Hannah, as heir at law of the said Joseph, of, in, and to Lots Nos. 5 and 6 in square No. 533, and Lot No. 2 in square No. 408, with their improvements, all lying and being in the city of Washington, and which said lots are laid out and designated in the general plan of said city as above described.
The terms of sale are, a credit of six months, the purchaser or purchasers giving bonds with approved security for the amount of the purchase money, bearing interest from the day of sale.
This sale is not to affect any claim of dower which the said Abigail Perkins may have in said lots.
JOHN G. McDONALD, Trustee. July 18—3wep
DOCTOR CONINGHAM
Is induced, from repeated applications, to resume the practice of PHYSIC, SURGERY, &c.
LUMBER OF GOOD QUALITY, To be sold Cheap, near D-Bois's wharf, above the Navy-Yard. July 15—3t.
FIVE DOLLARS REWARD
RAN AWAY from the subscriber, an apprentice boy by the name of ROBERT GRAVES, plaisterer by trade—all persons are forewarned against harboring or employing said apprentice. The above reward will be given to any person who will secure him in any jail.
JOHN KEDGLE. July 15—3t
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, JULY 18.
JURISCOLA, No. 1. in our next.
Mr. ERSEINE left this city on Friday for Philadelphia.
On Saturday arrived at the Navy-Yard, the French national brig Surveillante , of eighteen guns. She is last from Guadalupe, having made her passage in twelve days. On casting anchor she fired a salute, which was returned from the yard. She brings no European news. The commander states the price of flour at Guadalupe to have been forty dollars a barrel, and beef the same price. Coffee was at thirteen cents the pound, and sugar at four dollars the cwt. The quantity of flour on hand was inconsiderable, and the last supply had been obtained from the British Islands in the neighborhood.
Extract of a letter of 14th April, from Tangiers.
"Seventeen American vessels have lately anchored at this port, from England, provided with licences to take cargoes in Spain and return. I was extremely sorry to see so many engaged in that hazardous trade. The consequences have already justified my apprehensions. Seven of them at Alicante and two at Malaga, have been detained by the Spaniards or taken by the French privateers, and I much fear but few of the others will escape sharing a like fate."
We recently took occasion to lay before the public a few concise remarks on our prospects with regard to the belligerent powers of Europe. In submitting these remarks, we expressed the preponderating opinion that justice was not immediately to be expected from England, the original aggressor on our neutral rights; and earnestly recommended, while the unjust conduct of the belligerents continued, a zealous cultivation of our internal resources. These remarks have been seized with unusual eagerness, as indicative of the ideas and views of the government; and an attempt is made to enforce upon the commercial part of the community the belief that the administration have laid the embargo, and mean to continue it, for the purpose of destroying commerce.
It comports very well with what might be expected from federal prints, to ascribe these remarks, which were altogether those of the Editor, to the government.
It is not the least surprising that men, who laugh at political independence and freedom of opinion, should treat as visionary in others that of which they feel themselves destitute. Strange, however, as it may seem to them, we will, once for all, take the liberty of informing them, that the ideas expressed in this paper, under the Editorial head, are those of the Editor, and that he never has expressed, and never will express a sentiment foreign to his heart; that he values nothing so highly as personal independence, and that, consequently, nothing can induce him to sacrifice it.
These remarks are not made from a perception of the least error, either in point of fact or inference, in the article alluded to; or from a knowledge that it conveys opinions repugnant to those entertained by the administration; the Editor would rather suppose that they are such as are entertained by them in common with all the sensible and unprejudiced men of the country; but, from a desire that they may go exactly for what they are worth, and may be tested, not on authority, but according to their own intrinsic weight.
So much for personal considerations, for which we owe, perhaps, an apology to our readers, who certainly care more for truth, than for the channel in which it flows to them.
Now, as to the points in controversy.
Some expectation of restored harmony with Britain was expressed from her finding the embargo likely to endure much longer than she expected. From this language, the absurd inference is drawn that it is to continue forever, or, at any rate for such a length of time as completely to destroy the commerce of the U. States. Because European embargoes have generally, and probably invariably been limited to a short duration, it was natural to infer that Britain would expect that our embargo would partake of the same character; and that she would, therefore, incur but little injury from it. Was it not equally rational to hope that when she found it was to continue for at least ten months, unless the causes that produced it were removed, that she might perceive her interest in removing those causes? Is it not obvious to the meanest apprehension,

that the difference in the effects produced by an embargo of one month and of ten months, may be almost infinite? And that, consequently, in contrasting the effects of our embargo and her usual embargoes, there was no occasion to decide the question of the permanency of the former. Not a word was uttered on this point. No opinion has been given—it would be indeed rash at present to give it—whether, in case the British orders and French decrees remain long unrelaxed, it will be our interest to continue the embargo, or take war as a lesser evil. This great question, in such event, will come before the representatives of the people, and will be then decided according to existing circumstances. It is an abundant justification of the embargo that present circumstances require it. Its justification is found in the benefits already reaped from it; in the preservation of ships and goods to the value of one hundred millions of dollars; and in the chance it has furnished us of preserving peace, a chance, which no other measure would have afforded.
Great as the evils of the Embargo are admitted to be, there is not an unprejudiced man in the United States, who will not allow, that if its continuance for one year shall, in addition to the salvation of so large a portion of our property, have saved us likewise from war of an indefinite duration, it will have been a wise and beneficial measure. This is a hope, which we still entertain; not an event that, in our opinion, ought to be calculated upon; but one, of the occurrences of which a strong hope may be entertained.
And we do sincerely believe that there is not a more likely means of producing this effect than the cultivation of a vigorous and universal spirit of interior improvements and of frugality. This is strongly recommended by the consideration that our only solid permanent independence must spring from ourselves. There is no other foundation on which it can rest. It can only be protected by the superiority of our power over that of foreign nations. This, we have, on land; we have it not, nor can we for years have it, on the ocean. It is the dictate of reason, of common sense, to cultivate to their greatest extent those means, which we can without molestation, prosecute, instead of those which are held at the precarious tenure of injustice and interfering interests.
In this respect our permanent interests are the same with our temporary interest. In proportion to the cultivation of our fields, the making of roads, and cutting canals, will the quantity of produce be increased and its prices cheapened; and, in the same proportion will the growth of manufactures be aided. And just in the degree in which we prove our independence of the foreign world, will they be disposed to treat us with justice.
Great as the blessings of commerce are, they are not superior to those of manufactures. Each may have its peculiar advantages; but in some important respects, manufactures are much the most desirable. Commerce leads to war; manufactures are connected with peace. Commerce exposes our property to constant jeopardy; manufactures give it absolute security. Commerce exposes the value of the fruits of our labor to unceasing fluctuation and uncertainty; manufactures have a tendency to give them a fixed and certain value. If the sale of our products is to depend on commerce, the demand will hereafter either absolutely diminish, or not keep pace with our increasing capacity of production; whereas internal manufactures and improvements will offer a field constantly increasing, and exactly in the ratio of our wealth and numbers.
These are the just and liberal views, which, in our opinion, ought equally to influence public and private men. They are views, which do not tend to the injury or destruction of commerce; but to the vigorous and impartial cultivation of all our means of happiness and national advancement; views, which not limited to the present fleeting moment, embrace the great future as well as present interests of the country. These views teach us, that however we may value our commerce, but a short period will elapse ere the commerce of the whole world will be but a speck compared to our internal resources; and that consequently, our eventual prosperity must depend principally upon the latter.
The following information, given by the Aurora, furnishes an illustrious proof of the patriotism of South Carolina. In the proceedings of her legislature we perceive embodied genuine American principles. While such principles reign our liberties are secure. Let the same spirit be manifested throughout the union, and our
enemies will be soon at our feet. Their last hopes of success are built on our divisions. This document will convince them that the representatives of three hundred thousand souls entertain but one sentiment.
Since preparing this article for the press, we have received the South Carolina prints, containing the proceedings of the legislature; and are happy to see, in addition to those given in the Aurora, a resolution, unanimously adopted by both Houses, recommending it to the members of the next legislature, to appear at the session to be held in November, in the manufactures of their own state . This is the true spirit of 1776.
From the Aurora. It is upon the ground of the embargo, that is, upon the base mercenary selfishness of the nation, that the federalists rely, and by addressing the base passions, by base means, hope to accomplish base ends.
We are willing—and when the plural we is here used, it is not the metaphor of style, but the solid plural pronoun, the majority of the American people whom we speak for, as of that majority we say, that on this ground the question is at issue—and let the result of the trial determine the question for ever—whether the American people are
Worthy of Liberty and Independence? Or, Prefer baseness and servitude?
These, then, are the questions now to be decided, and although Massachusetts, in her capital, has displayed her degeneracy and her disgrace—and though faction has poisoned the fountain of representative power—the people at large , of Massachusetts, are with the people in soul and sentiment in all parts of the union.
New Hampshire will perform her duty.
Rhode-Island, though divided upon local personalities, will rally round the national standard.
North Carolina, which was supposed to have one doubtful vote, will be unanimous for the nomination of President in the accustomed mode.
Of South Carolina—we give the following extract from the journals of the 29th June, as the best evidence of the republicanism of that respectable state.
EXTRACT. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, In the House of Representatives, June 29, 1808.
We, the people of the state of South Carolina, in general assembly met, deeply impressed with the state of our political affairs, and feeling as freemen ought to feel, whose rights have been violated by the different belligerent nations, conceive it to be our duty at this crisis, to come forward and vindicate republican institutions from the charge of ingratitude, and unequivocally to express our sense of the late measures of the general government. We see in them a sincere desire to preserve to our country the blessings of peace and independence, objects so dear to us as to render personal inconvenience and individual privations, matter unworthy of consideration—therefore,
Resolved, That Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States, in recommending, and the Congress of the United States in passing the acts imposing and enforcing the embargo, have deserved well of their country.
Resolved, That it be, and it is hereby recommended to the good citizens of this state, to give them their aid to carry into execution this important national measure.
Resolved, That this state will, to the utmost of its power, and at all hazards, support the general government, in all measures calculated to maintain the rights, and support the independence of the United States.
Resolved, That the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of this state, forthwith transmit these resolutions to the President of the United States.
On the question being put, to agree to the above resolutions, the same were agreed to unanimously.
R. GRANT, Clerk of H. R. of S. Carolina. Resolved, That the same be sent to the Senate for concurrence.
In the Senate, concurred in unanimously.
H. B. SAXON, Clk. Columbia, South Carolina, June 29th, 1808.
"I take the advantage of this evening's mail, to send you the subjoined resolutions, this day adopted by both branches of the legislature of this state, and which were unanimously agreed to. I have taken them from the minutes of the House in their official form. I think they will prove an excellent counterpart to those passed by the legislature of Massachusetts, and if ours can display or neutralize
the venom in theirs, a good purpose will be answered.
"With respect to the Presidential election, I have never known the state so little divided, we are in fact all of one side, at the utmost there are not more than twenty members in the legislature (which is composed of 160 including both Houses) opposed to Mr. Madison, and although a new election is to take place in October next, there will not be any changes which can affect this question, for this candidate is equally the favorite out of the legislature as within it; I give it therefore as my opinion, backed by the opinions of the most influential men in our country, that Mr. Madison will obtain the unanimous vote of this state—the only weight which Mr. Clinton's name now carries with it here, even as candidate for the Vice-Presidency, is derived from the nomination of the so much decried caucus at Washington; no pains have been taken to counteract the claims of this gentleman, but so much dissatisfaction is felt, that if any attempts were made against him, and a suitable candidate offered in his stead, he would infallibly lose the votes of this state—and whether a candidate in opposition to him is offered or not, it should be well ascertained that he has, or his friends for him, have coalesced with the federalists to help him to the Presidency, this state will drop him; I have hopes that he will not do so, not that I think such a coalition would prevail; but because that so worthy a citizen should not lose that character, for consistency and firmness he has till lately so well preserved—I should be sorry to think that among our old revolutionary characters we had but one Jefferson, but one man now left, that could say to ambition, to personal aggrandizement, get ye behind me .
"I had, two days ago, a letter from colonel Troup, of Georgia, in which he states confidently, that Madison will get the unanimous vote of Georgia—from other respectable sources of information I am assured of the same thing, and believe it."
In the proceedings of the legislature of South Carolina we perceive the following part of a report on the means of defence possessed by the state, which shews not only what has been done or is doing by the general government on this head, but evinces likewise a proper sense entertained respecting it by the people of that state:
"The committee do not think it foreign to the object of their appointment, to report that they have been informed that the defences preparing under the orders of the general government, for the city and harbor of Charleston, are advancing rapidly to completion—that a respectable battery is erected at fort Johnson, and fort M'Kean is reconstructed—and that a large and respectable fort is erecting on Sullivan's Island; so that there is good ground to hope, that important commercial city will shortly be placed, by the cares of the government, in a situation above insult or apprehension."
The two branches of the legislature of South Carolina have passed a bill to alter the representation in the legislature of that state, which, if ratified by the ensuing legislature, will form a part of the Constitution. The reform thus about to be effected is no less important in substance, than interesting in the manner in which it has thus far been accomplished. The representation has heretofore been in the highest degree unequal. By the alteration it is hereafter to be apportioned in the ratio of numbers and taxes, which, for this purpose, are to be ascertained every ten years. Although this reform has hitherto been warmly contested, we now find it agreed to in the House of Representatives, with only two dissenting voices. It thus appears that in this important state the imminence of the crisis is producing the happiest unanimity, as well with regard to internal as external affairs. They have unanimously approved the embargo; they have unanimously resolved to support, to the utmost of their power, and at all hazards, the general government in all measures calculated to maintain the rights and support the independence of the U. States; they have unanimously determined to appear next session in the manufactures of the U. States; and they have almost unanimously agreed to a great reform diffusing far and wide the benefits of equal rights.
Black Lead —A mine of Black Lead has been discovered in the neighborhood of Raleigh North Carolina. It is used as paint, to make the roofs of houses fire proof; and is sold at the mines at 10 dollars per barrel of fifty weight.
It appears by late advices from India, that the British government in Sep-
tember, 1807, sent orders to their three Presidencies, directing the levy of an additional duty of ten per cent. on all goods imported or exported on American bottoms.
Aurora. Extract of a letter from an eminent merchant in London, dated May 10th, 1808, to his correspondent in George Town.
"There is nothing doing here in Maryland tobacco, because it is not fit for the manufacturers of this country, and all the ports on the continent are shut by the French against all exports from England. Several cargoes that were designed for Holland have been forced in here by the late orders in council and must be sacrificed. If this had not been the case, I should have got off about 200 hds. that I have long had on hand, very well; but as things now are, I know not how to sell it at any price, unless your embargo should continue a year or upwards, and in that time the scarcity of Virginia might force the manufacturers to make use of a few Maryland. York and James Rivers are worth 7 1-2d. a 8d.—little demand."
"I have not lately heard from Holland; but as no tobacco can go there, I presume prices by this time are up to 15 a 16s. and will be much higher if your embargo continues."
"I am surprised to see by your newspapers the clamors against the embargo. Suppose for a moment it was taken off, that would not improve your situation in the smallest degree, unless the British orders in council and the French decrees were also removed. By the orders in council all your produce must come here, or be liable to capture and condemnation; and by the French decrees all coming here is liable to capture and condemnation. But suppose all was to come safe here, it would not pay the freight and other charges of importation, so that the whole cost would be a total loss to the shipper—this is clear and certain—not speculation—and would apply almost to every kind of your produce. Cotton would be the best article; but even that would net little or nothing. Would it not then be better for your produce to perish in America and serve as manure for your lands, than to export it to perish in Europe, after adding to your loss by paying freight, insurance and other charges? England, Scotland, and Ireland, do not consume more than one sixth part of your produce; and if the whole was obliged to come here, this one-sixth would sell for almost nothing, and the other 5-6ths would be a total sacrifice. This is a true state of the case. The measure of your embargo is wise, just and prudent, and ought not to be raised until all your political differences are settled in Europe."
Monitor.
A numerous meeting of the citizens of the second ward of New-York have, with but one dissenting voice, determined to support the nomination of James Madison, as President, and George Clinton, as Vice-President of the United States. We shall give these proceedings at length in our next.
Philadelphia, July 13.
We are told that capt. Palmer, of the schooner _____, in six days from Passamaquoddy, states, that the British June packet had arrived at Halifax, where it was reported that Mr. Rose was soon to return to the United States.
It is also stated on the same authority, that the May packet, which carried an account of the adjournment of Congress, had arrived in England.
Philadelphia, July 14.
We yesterday mentioned the arrival of the British June Packet at Halifax. Captain Carman, arrived at this port from Passamaquoddy, says, that he there saw a London paper, brought by the Packet, which stated that Mr. Rose was to return to America, with Plenipotentiary Powers, in the Latona frigate; and that Copenhagen had been again taken possession of by the British. Captain Carman is well known in this city, as a man of veracity.
It is said the packet arrived in the short passage of seventeen days.
Our readers will recollect, that in Saturday's Gazette, we stated that the Spaniards had risen, attacked, and beat the French army that had entered Spain; that the British squadron off Cadiz was hourly expected to join the Spanish fleet there, to protect and convey the king of Spain and royal family to South America.
This news was communicated to us by captain Van Beuren, of the brig Thomas Jefferson, from Madeira—which place he left the 26th of May, and he received it from a respectable mercantile house in that place. At first we were inclined to believe that
this was a mere report, and not entitled to much credit. But, from the following intelligence, which we yesterday received from capt. Sheffield, of the sch. Mary-Ann, we are induced to believe there is some foundation for the news per capt. Van Beuren. Hear what capt. Sheffield says:
Captain Sheffield, on his arrival at Gibraltar, the 14th of May, found 28 sail of British transports full of troops, getting under way, and was informed by an officer in the health office boat, which boarded him, that they were bound to Cadiz to take possession of that place, which, he said, the Spaniards had given up to the British.—Capt. S. came through the Gut with the above fleet, and left them steering for Cadiz.
SANS SOUCI.
WITHOUT CARE.
MR. WEBSTER
Respectfully informs the inhabitants of George-town and Washington, that on Tuesday evening, July 19, he will give an entertainment at Mr. SEMMES's ball room, written by the celebrated Dibdin, consisting of Dialogues and Songs, called the
SONG SMITH,
OR,
RIGMAROLE REPOSITORY.
In the course of part the first he will sing the following songs: Sally Roy—Fair Ellen—Faithless Emma—The Post Captain—The Willow and the Doldrum.
PART II.
The Glasses Sparkle on the Bourd, Emuin ec Nuich, or Ned of the Hills, translated from the Irish by Miss Owenson—Music ancient Irish. Dear Erin, or Cushmanachree—The Rose—My Grand Mother's Eye Water, and Love and Gratitude.
The Dialogue will consist of Conversation by upwards of 30 characters. The Dialogue and Songs by Mr. WEBSTER.
Tickets one dollar—To be had at the bar of Mr. SEMMES's Tavern.—Doors to open at 7 o'clock. Performance to begin at half past seven.
July 18—
FORTY DOLLARS REWARD.
RAN AWAY from the subscriber, living in St. Mary's county, on Patuxent river, in Hallport neck, two negroes, Baptist and Lydia . Baptist is a black man about 35 years of age, nearly 6 ft high; he is an artful and insinuating fellow, in conversation talks much of his travels; he has been in the bay trade, and once in the West Indies; he has a scar on his breast, short, but the flesh much raised; he has had a bone-breed on his right thumb, that has been recently cured; he plays well on the violin, and probably may have one with him as he carried one off; he had on, when he went away, a new shirt and trousers of low, a blue striped short coat, but I think it needless to describe clothing as they both had pretty good, and they probably may change them, as also their names. Lydia is a low woman of a yellowish complexion, about 18 years of age, pretty far advanced in pregnancy, & it is highly probable she may endeavor to pass for man and wife, and also free people, as they well knew that there are many now that pass and repass in every town and city in the United States without examination.
Whoever takes up and secures the said runaways in any jail so that I get them again, shall be entitled to a reward of five dollars, if taken in this county, or in Montgomery or near home ten dollars, if farther twenty dollars, and if out of the state the above reward, together with all reasonable charges, paid by
JOHN TIPPETT.
N. B. All masters of vessels are forewarned from carrying the above runaways off at their peril. J. T. July 18—w3t
50 DOLLARS REWARD.
RAN AWAY from the subscriber living near Bryan Town, Charles county, Maryland, negroes SARAPHA and RALPH . Stephen ascended on the 5th inst. is a short black man about 20 or 21 years of age; he took with him a white country cloth jacket, double weave, a blue cloth under jacket, an Irish linen shirt, a cotton country shirt and trousers, and a black wool hat.
Ralph ran off on the 14th inst. is about 22 years old, nearly 5 ft 7 or 8 inches high, a bright black complexion, a large scar under his left eye, and another on one of his feet—he took with him a dark bay horse, about 16 hands high, about 9 or 10 years old, a small star on his forehead, with a few white spots on his nose, and is rubbed a little on his shoulders with the gears, trots and gallops. He had on and took with him a black broad cloth coat, striped swansdown under jacket, an old Irish linen shirt, a country cotton shirt and trousers, black wool hat. Stephen and Ralph are brothers, and probably will be found together. A reward of 50 dollars will be given for the delivering of them with the horse, but leave saddle, if brought home, or 15 for either of them, if secured in any jail, so that I get them again, or 10 dollars for the horse, saddle and bridle, if brought home, by
BENEDICT BOARMAN. July 18—w3t

NOTICE
Is hereby given that application is intended to be made to the Treasury of the United States for the renewal of the undermentioned Certificates of Six per Cent Stock issued by Joseph Nourse, Register of the Treasury, in the name of Christian Alexander , of London or of Bath in Great Britain, which certificates were sent in the ship Bristol Packet , capt. Burns, captured and burnt by the French, and lost in the same, viz.
   Denomination of the stock. Dates of the Certificates Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock 1792 December 5. 8268 11,000   1795 May 11. 13168 800   1795 July 16. 13450 250 08   1796 June 11. 14337 2,000   1796 June 14. 14341 247 81   1797 February 7. 5615 1,567 55   1798 February 1. 14942 277 50   1798 February 1. 15605 2,975 25   1799 December 17. 16918 882   19,999 99  
Standing to her credit on the 1st. April 1808.
Also for the following Certificates of six per Cent Stock issued as above, in the name of Jane Alexander of Bath aforesaid, which were also lost in the said ship Bristol Packet , viz.
   Denomination of the stock. Dates of the Certificates Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock. 1796 June 14. 14344 2,000   1796 June 14. 14345 2,000   1796 June 14. 14346 2,000   1796 June 14. 14347 2,000   1796 June 14. 14348 75 42   1796 June 14. 3616 2,000   1796 June 14. 3617 2,000   1796 June 14. 3618 2,000   1796 June 14. 3619 2,000   1796 June 14. 3620 2,000   1796 June 14. 3621 45 15   1797 February 7. 14944 22 05   1797 March 3. 15065 1,500   1797 June 3. 15204 766 78   1797 June 16. 15257 1,700   1798 February 1. 15604 1,505 65   1799 December 17. 16917 980   25,891 05  
Standing to her credit on the 1st April 1808.
June 20—ep6w
PURSUANT to an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed at November session, 1806, entitled "An act authorizing the collection of certain ground rents due on lots in the Town of Cumberland, in Allegany county," and a supplement thereto, passed at November session, 1807, Public Notice is hereby given that all persons holding unimproved lots in said town, on which ground rents are now due, that unless the said rents are paid on or before the first day of December next, the said lots will on that day be offered at public sale to the highest bidder, on a credit of 60 days. The sale to be held at Mr. J. Rine's tavern in said town, to commence at ten o'clock, A.M. and continue from day to day, until the whole are sold.
THOMAS BEALL, of Saml. March 21—eptds
CHARLES H. VARDEN MERCHANT TAILOR,
RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia and public in general, that he has just received by a late arrival from Philadelphia, a CHOICE ASSORTMENT Of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, single and double milled, superfine Coatings, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment of Spangles and rich silk Molekins for waistcoats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season.
Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform style of fashion. Richard Horwell's celebrated patent parallel suspender is far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms as at his manufactory. November 27—tf
FOR SALE.
BY virtue of a decree of the high court of Chancery of the state of Maryland, will be exposed to public sale , in the town of Port Tobacco, Charles county, at the court house at 3 o'clock in the afternoon of the second day of the next August term of Charles county court (which commences on the fourth Monday of August next) a parcel of land situate, the property of John D. Scott deceased, being part of a tract of land called Paynton Manor, lying upon a branch of Nanjemoy creek on the post road leading to Nanjemoy from Port Tobacco, near the "Hill Top" & about seven miles from Port Tobacco. This land consists of about 300 acres, of which between 50 and 100 acres are well timbered, about twenty acres are in marsh, and the remainder arable and very productive.
The terms of sale are that the purchaser shall give bond with sufficient security to pay the purchase money in twelve months from the sale. It will be sold entire or in parcels as may best suit the persons inclined to purchase. F. S. KEY, Trustee. July 4—tdos
BURNS AND BEALL.
WOOLLEN drapers, mens mercers, and tailors, New Jersey Avenue, opposite the Secretary of the Navy's, respectfully inform the public that they have commenced business in the above line, where they will endeavor to give satisfaction—they have on hand a fresh supply of the most fashionable goods, suitable for the approaching season, all fresh and of the very best quality.
N. B. Regimentals and naval uniforms made in the most elegant and fashionable style with neatness and dispatch. October 23—tf
The ADVERTISEMENT dated April 26, 1808, is withdrawn.
PROPOSALS
For carrying Mails of the U. States on the following Post Roads, will be received at the General Post Office in Washington City until the first day of August next, inclusive. 25. From Woodbridge, (N. J.) to Annapolis, three times a week. Leave Woodbridge Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at 6 P. M. and arrive at Annapolis by 7 P. M. Leave Annapolis every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at noon, and arrive at Woodbridge by 1 P. M. 26. From New Lisbon to Canton, (Ohio). Leave New Lisbon every Sunday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Canton by 6 P. M. Leave Canton every Monday at 8 A. M. and arrive at New Lisbon by 6 P. M. 27. From Boston by Dorchester, Quincy, Braintree, Weymouth, Hanover, Plymouth, & Kingston, to Plymouth, three times a week. Leave Boston every Tuesday Thursday and Saturday, at 6 A. M. and arrive at Plymouth by 6 P. M. Leave Plymouth every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Boston by 6 P. M.
NOTES.
 1. The mail will be carried on the routes, number four to fourteen inclusive, in the same time through the year; and the contractor must calculate upon conveying the mail in a sulkey, when the roads will not admit of its being conveyed by the usual stage; or if it shall be shewn, that the roads are too bad for a sulkey, the mail of letters will be separated from the newspapers, which are to be conveyed by stage, as fast as the roads will admit, and the letters conveyed on horseback within the time limited, so that bad roads shall never be admitted as an excuse for non-performance.  2. The Postmaster General may expedite the mails and alter the times of arrival and departure at any time during the continuance of the contracts; he previously stipulating an adequate compensation for any extra expence that may be occasioned thereby.  3. Fifteen minutes shall be allowed for opening and closing the mail at all offices where no particular time is specified.  4. For every thirty minutes delay (unavoidable accidents excepted) in arriving after the times prescribed in any contract, the contractor shall forfeit one dollar; and if the delay continue until the departure of the next mail, whereby the mails destined for such depending mail lose a trip a forfeiture of double the amount allowed for carrying the mail one trip shall be incurred, unless it shall be made to appear that the delay was occasioned by unavoidable accident, in which case the amount of pay for the trip will, in all cases, be forfeited and retained.  5. Persons making proposals, are desired to state their prices by the year. Those who contract will receive their pay quarterly, in the months of February, May August and November, one month after the expiration of each quarter.  6. No other than a free white person shall be employed to convey the mail.  7. Where the proposer intends to convey the mail in the body of a stage carriage he is desired to state it in his proposals.  8. The Postmaster General reserves to himself the right of declaring any contract at an end, whenever three failures happen, which amount to the loss of a trip each.  9. The contracts for the routes 
numbered 1 to 16, are to be in operation on the first day of Oct. next and to continue in force two years from that time; for the routes from No. 17 to 25 to commence at the same time, & to continue in force until the 31st of March, 1811 For the routes, 26, 27, and 28, to commence at the same time, and continue in force one year.
GIDEON GRANGER, Postmaster General General Post-Office, Washington City, May 26, 1808. Ma 16—vtA.
TO RENT, And possession given the 13th June next, that house on Pennsylvania Avenue, the property of the Washington Building Company, at present occupied by Mr. Solomon Myers—it being so well known, it is not deemed necessary to give a peculiar description of it, suffice it to say, it is calculated for an extensive tavern and boarding house—for terms, apply to Mr. THOMAS HERTY, Sec. to said Company. April 29—tf
TO HIRE BY the month or year, a Negro man COOK, about 23 years of age who is supposed to be perfectly acquainted with the business, as he has been for the last six or seven years learning the art of Cooking in the first taverns in Baltimore. For terms, &c. apply to the Printer. July 8—
LANDING THIS DAY, From on board the schooner MARIA, capt. Fitzhugh, from New York—A quantity of prime St. Croix sugar, Coffee, Molasses, Port Wine, Nutmegs, and Chocolate. Also, Gun Powder, Imperial, and Hyson Teas, in chests, half and quarter chests and canisters of this spring's importation, For sale by ROSS & GETTY. George Town, June 20—tf
CHINA GOODS. THOMPSON & MOXLEY have landed from on board ship Unity, Capt. HAND, from Philadelphia, 38 packages CHINA.
CONSISTING OF DINING Sets from 100 to 198 pieces, Tea Sets from 49 to 80 pieces, superb patterns, Evening Cups and Saucers by box & doz. Coffee, do. do. bell shape, do. do. do. upright, B wles, plates, dishes, &c. &c. Also by same vessel, a quantity of pnt shot assorted sizes, and a few packages of elegant cut glass, &c. &c.
And in Store, Prime Old Madeira, Lisbon, Teneriff, and Geneva Port Wines. Cognac Brandy from 2 to 6 years old, P each brandy 5 proof, superior quality, 2 years old. Jamaica Rum, imported in 1803, Holland and country gin, L af, lump and brown sugar, Imperi-1 Hyson, young Hyson, and Hyson Skin Teas, Mould, dipt and Spermaceti candles, Olives, C pers and Sweet Oil, Cloves, Nutmegs and black Pepper, Ground and Rice Ging r, Muscatel and Bloom Raisins, Together with a general assortment of goods in their line, which they are disposed to sell at reduced prices for Cash, or on short credits, to punctual customers. George Town, July 11—St
PUBLIC SALE. ON Monday the 18th of July next will be sold at Public Auction a two Story BRICK HOUSE, with adjacent FRAME Building, and the Lots No. 10 and 11, on Square No. 925, near the Marine Barracks. The house was lately inhabited by Lt. Col. Wharton, now in the occupancy of Mr. Thomas Carberry. The terms will be made known on the day of sale, at Steller's hotel. The Sale to commence at 12 o'clock. SAMUEL SPEAKE, Auct'r. June 15—tdos
FRESH TURNIP SEED. Early Turnip, V low do. Ruta baga or Swedish do. Hanover do. Large white do. For sale at Theo. Holt's Nursery Garden, Eastern Branch, and Dr. Ott's Medicine store, George Town, Washington city, June 20—w6w
THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE, THAT the subscriber, of Prince Georges county, hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of Prince Georges county in Maryland, letters of administration with a copy of the will annexed, on the personal Estate of Zachariah Baldwin late of said county, deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same, with the vouchers thereof, to the subscriber, at or before the tenth day of January next; they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said Estate. Given under my hand this 6th day of July 1808. HENRY CULVER, Adm'r. July 11—w6t
FOR SALE THE Two story Brick HOUSE, situate on square number 930 in the city of Washington now occupied by Mr. Tunis Craven, as a retail store. The eligibility of this stand for the retail business is excelled by none in this city; being situate on the principal street to the Navy Yard, and very near the Navy Yard Gate. Any person desirous of purchasing the above property may be shewn it by applying to the subscriber, who will also make known the terms of sale Wm BRENT. Washington city, Dec. 18—wtf
20 DOLLARS REWARD. RAN AWAY from the subscriber on the 28th May, a negro man named BAPTIST, about 21 or 22 years old, 5 feet 6 or 8 inches high, well made, is neither black nor yellow—had on when he went away a pair of dark corded pantalettes, a home spun round about cotton waistcoat with large red spots, a felt hat half worn, but he will probably change his clothing; he plays the fiddle and is somewhat knock kneed, walks with his toes well out, tells different stories when examined and will try to make his escape. I suppose he has made for St. Mary's county, where he was born, as he was seen near the Long Old Field, on the day that he left home. Whoever takes him up and secures him so that I get him again shall receive the above reward, and if brought home all reasonable charges paid by me. OBID BEALL, near Bladensburg. July 15—St
Treasurer's office, Washington city, July 1, 1808.
WHEREAS by an act of the City Council of Washington, entitled "An act laying a tax on slaves the property of non-residents," it is among other things enacted, that from and after the 1st day of July 1808, there shall be paid for all slaves hired to labor or service in the city of Washington, & owned by persons not residing in the city, by the owners of such slaves respectively, the following sums, to wit:
For all male slaves under eighteen years of age, eight dollars per annum; for all male slaves above eighteen years of age, fifteen dollars per annum; for all female slaves under sixteen years of age, four dollars per annum; and for all female slaves above sixteen years of age, six dollars per annum. Notice is therefore hereby given to all persons hiring slaves of the above description, that the subscriber will at tend at his office, near the Theatre, every day (Sunday excepted) from 12 o'clock in the forenoon until 2 o'clock in the afternoon, to receive the taxes due thereon. HENRY WHETCROFT, Treasurer of Washington city. July 8—
TUNIS CRAVEN HAS removed his entire stock of DRY GOODS from Alexandria to Washington, and is now opening, at his new Store, between the Marine Garrison and Navy Yard Gate, an assortment equal to any in the District;—among which are, Wood's best London cloths, Do. double milled & plain cassimeres, Bennett's cords and velvets, Constitution Gerrow, hunting, Trafalgar, and silver cords, Velvets, Imperial, Brunswick waistcoating, Silk molskins do. Tollinets, swansdown do. Plain and figured Marseilles do. Bearskin coatings, Plains, kerseys, halfthicks, Rose and duffel blankets, flannels, Superfine green cloth table covers, Calicoes, colored cambrics, Ginghams, silk and cotton chambrays Furniture Chintz, Cambric and jaconet muslins, India and British book do. India mullmull figured and plain, Plain and figured lenoes, Laced cambrics, Elegant tamboured mulls, Grecian robes and Pelisse dresses, 8-4 damask and raw silk shawls, Damask scarfs, Camel's hair and swansdown do. Down scarfs, Long and short lace sleeves, spider & nett sleeves, Extra long and habit kid gloves, Do. do. silk do. Do. do. raw silk do. Cross-barred and plain Mantuas and lute strings, Persians and Medes, Thread and cotton laces, Lace caps and handkerchiefs, Book muslin and leno cap patterns, 4-4 7 8 Irish linens, Long lawns, linen cambrics, Irish diapers, table-cloths, napkins, Cotton counterpanes, Cambric Dimities, Common do. Furniture do. Ladies and gentlemen's silk, thread, cotton, worsted, lamb's wool & Angola hose, Gentlemen's pantaloons do. Silk cords and buttons, Ribbons, floss threads, Scarlet and other colored bombazets, Hearth rugs, Russia sheeting, ticklingburg, Osnaburgs, baftas, gurrahs, &c. &c. ALSO, Imperial and young hyson tea of a superior quality in small boxes, to suit families, or by the pound—Also genuine Havana segars. T. C. is determined to sell on the lowest terms. February 3—tf
WANTED
AT the Woodyard for the ensuing year a Manager, to take charge of the whole estate. He must be a sober, diligent and discreet man—well acquainted with the culture of wheat, corn and tobacco, and the management of negroes. To such a man who can produce unquestionable testimonials of his capacity, sobriety and fidelity, high wages will be given. A person not connected in the neighborhood will be preferred. Apply to RD W. WEST, Woodyard. N B Application must be made before the 1st. of Nov. next. May 13—eptS
Fredericktown Maryland. THIS IS TO CERTIFY that agreeable to a contract with us, the subscribers, appointed by the Legislature of this state, Managers of a Lottery to raise money for such purpose, the bearer, John Achman, has constructed a FIRE ENGINE, which we have accepted as fully complete. It throws water through a tube 3-4ths of an inch diameter, 100 feet distance, and through a hose of 104 feet in length, with a tube 1-2 inch diameter, the additional distance of 70 feet. The plan on which this Engine is constructed, is new to us, and he says is according to the late improvements. The box is made of copper, the pumps of brass, and the rest of the works of iron, on four wheels adapted to the convenience of such occasions as may require its use. We further certify, that we consider Mr. Achman as possessing a competent knowledge of the mechanism of this description, from the above specimen of his work. Given under our hands this 24th day of June, 1808. Henry Bantz, Jacob Medert, Francis Manz, Peter Buckhart, Henry Steiner, George Creager, sen. Lewis Weithheimer.
THE subscriber also makes Hose and Engines with suckers. He can make every description of Engines to suit any person who may wish to contract with him. The materials he uses are brass, iron and copper. JOHN ACHMAN. Fredericktown, Md. July 13—St
St. Mary's county court, March term 1808. ON application of Benjamin Tabbs of St. Mary's county to the judges of the said county court, by petition in writing, praying the benefit of the act for the relief of sundry insolvent debtors, on the terms mentioned in said act, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his said petition, and the said county court being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said Benjamin Tabbs has resided the two preceding years prior to the passage of the said act, within the state of Maryland. It is thereupon adjudged and ordered by the said court that the said Benjamin Tabbs give notice to his creditors of his intention to apply to the next county court to be held at Leonard Town in said county on the first Monday of August next, for a discharge from his debts, and to warn his said creditors to appear before the said judges on the day and at the place aforesaid to shew cause if any they have why the said Benjamin Tabbs should not be discharged agreeably to his said petition, by causing a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer, weekly for three months successively. By order, JOSEPH HARRIS, Ck. May 2—w3m
IN CHANCERY, JUNE 24, 1808 James Egerton, versus James Eden, and William Mills. ORDERED that the sale made by William Mills the Trustee in this case be confirmed unless cause be shewn to the contrary on or before the 30th day of August next; provided a copy of this order be inserted in the National Intelligencer once in each of three successive weeks before the 30th day of July next. The report states that the land in the bill mentioned whereon John Eden the grandfather of the defendant, James Eden, formerly lived, consisting of several tracts of land, and containing two hundred and seventy-seven acres more or less by the trustee sold to William Thomas of St. Mary's county for the sum of thirty-one hundred and eleven dollars. True copy, Test NICH. BREWER, Reg. Cur. Can. July 4—w3t
SPEECH Against the ORDERS IN COUNCIL, Just received and for sale at R. C. WRIGHTMAN'S Bookstore. Pennsylvania Avenue. Brougham's speech before the House of Commons against the Orders in Council—price 57 1 2 J. Q. Adams' letter to H. G. Otis, 12 1 2 Sampson Memoirs, 2 50 T. Clae Biography, 3 vols. Bds. 6 00 Salmagundi, 2 vols. 3 25 Esprit des Loix, 2 vols. 2 00 Winter in London, 2 vols. 2 00 Corinna or Italy, 2 vols. 2 50 Debates on the British Treaty, 2 50 Ennui's map of Europe, splendid, 15 00 Military Library No. 9, per number, 50 Printing Ink, first quality. July 13—6t
AMERICAN HEMP.
THE Secretary of the Navy will receive until the 1st. November next, proposals for furnishing water rotted Hemp of the growth of the United States, to be delivered either at Portsmouth, N. H.; Boston; New London; New York; Philadelphia, Newcastle; Baltimore; Norfolk; Wilmington, N. C.; Charleston, S. C.; Savannah, Geo. or New Orleans. For well water rotted and well cleaned American Hemp, the Secretary of the Navy is disposed to allow a liberal price beyond the usual price of such Hemp when water rotted. Navy Department, May 3—w1N