The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1809-06-12 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
Vol. IX
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1353.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, JUNE 12, 1809.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
The National Intelligencer is conducted by SAMUEL H. SMITH, and JOSEPH GALES, Jun. and printed at the office of the former, to whom subscribers and correspondents are requested to address themselves.
The annual price, payable in advance, is Five Dollars.
Advertisements, not exceeding one square in breadth, are inserted the first time at fifty cents, and for every subsequent insertion twenty-five cents. If inserted less than three times a dollar is charged. If inserted but once a week, an addition of one fourth part is made. Other advertisements charged in the same ratio.
Monday, May 29.
DEBATE
On Mr. Randolph's motion for approving the late conduct of the President of the U. States—Continued.
Mr. RANDOLPH having this morning called for a consideration of his motion, at a time when the Speaker conceived it to be out of order, Mr. R. appealed from the decision of the chair, which was confirmed by the House. Mr. R. then renewed his motion for consideration, which, being then declared to be in order, was a greed to. The question being an indefinite postponement,
Mr. RANDOLPH said it was no part of his intention now to enter into any thing like a consideration of the great points supposed to be in dispute between those who approved the conduct of the President of the United States in issuing his proclamation, and giving the construction which he had given to the non-intercourse act. And indeed, if on the last vote which had been taken, (for considering his motion) he could with any sense of decorum or propriety have voted against himself, if he could have voted in the negative on his own motion, he should have taken a pleasure in so doing. For he, as much as any member of this House, wished to hear the communications lying on the table, but he was also anxious to see a question of right with respect to himself decided; and to his perfect satisfaction, the House had supported the decision of the chair, and yet the course which the business would take was precisely the same as if the House had admitted his motion in the first instance to be in order, except that some three quarters of an hour or more had been occupied in discussing the point of order. I wish (said Mr. R.) to make some answer to the objections of a very venerable gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Findley) on the motion which it is now proposed to postpone. I think the principal objection of that gentleman was, that it was improper at any time to discuss or entertain such propositions—that motions in approbation or disapprobation of the conduct of the Executive of the United States ought not to be agitated here; that they are wrong in principle; and that how much soever he might be disposed to applaud the conduct of the President in this or in that particular, he would not countenance a motion approving that conduct. What weight it will have with the other members of this House (said Mr. R.) I know not, but there is a precedent on file which ought not to be destitute of weight with that gentleman, from the 1st session of the 3d Congress, which met at Philadelphia in November, 1793, soon after the late General Washington had issued his celebrated proclamation of neutrality—and I beg the House to carry along with them in their minds the similitude of the two occasions and the dissimilitude too, and to keep in recollection that wherever there is a difference between the two cases, the advantage is on the side of the motion which I have had the honor to lay before you. For example, in the year 1793, previous to the 1st session of the 3d Congress, the late General Washington, conceiving himself to be required by his duty as President of the United States to issue a certain proclamation—and recollect that the present motion is relative to a proclamation, and hinges entirely on it—which proclamation Gen. Washington was not required to issue by any law of the land, I find that at that time the gentleman from Pennsylvania and another gentleman from Pennsylvania, an ancient colleague of his (Mr. Smilie) and several other members of the present Congress were then members of the House of Representatives; and it appears on the journal that on that very day the committee of elections did report that the credentials of these gentlemen entitled them to their seats. I am consequently to suppose their presence, except I were to suppose (what I have no right or disposition to do) that there was some dereliction of duty on their part, and that they were absent from their seats. The Yeas and Nays indeed were not taken; but on Friday the 26th, the House resolved unanimously to address the President of the United States in the words following—I do not mean to fatigue the House or myself with reading the whole of it, but will read extracts.
"The United States having taken no part in the war which had embraced in Europe the powers with whom they have the most extensive relations, the maintenance of peace was justly to be regarded, as one of the most important duties of the magistrate charged with the faithful execution of the laws. We accordingly witnessed with approbation and pleasure, the vigilance with which you have guarded against an interruption of that blessing by your proclamation, admonishing our citizens, of the consequences of illicit or hostile acts towards the belligerent parties; and promoting by a declaration of the existing legal state of things, an easier admission of our right to the immunities belonging to our situation."
Now here, sir, is a vote of approbation proposed on the subject of a proclamation which the President of the United States was called upon by no law of the land to issue, and on the execution of which duty in a manner comporting with their sense of that duty, depended the approbation or disapprobation of this House—and surely, sir, if it was competent for the House of Representatives in the year 1793, to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, and other gentlemen, now members of this House, to approbate the conduct of President Washington in issuing that proclamation, which he was not required to do by any specific statute, it is surely at least as proper now to approve the conduct of President Madison in a case in which it was his special duty to do it. Where there is a variance between the two cases, it is in favor of the motion which I have the honor to submit. But perhaps I shall be told by some of those youthful spirits who have lately made their appearance in this House, that this is a precedent taken from federal times, and therefore ought not to be relied on by good democrats. But, sir, it unfortunately happens for those gentlemen who would thus evade the force of it, that in the very zenith of democracy, a precedent perfectly analogous or even stronger than the one now contended for, was entered upon our journal. At the second session of the 7th Congress (the first which convened after the election of Mr. Jefferson to the chief magistracy) the House of Representatives were moved to come to the following resolution, in relation to the obstruction of the navigation of the river Mississippi and of the right of deposit at New Orleans by the Spanish government of Louisiana.
"Resolved, That this House receive with great sensibility the information of a disposition in certain officers of the Spanish government at New Orleans, to obstruct the navigation of the river Mississippi as secured to the United States by the most solemn stipulations:
"That adhering to that humane and wise policy which ought ever to characterize a free people, and by which the United States have always professed to be governed; willing at the same time to ascribe this breach of compact to the unauthorised misconduct of certain individuals, rather than to a want of good faith on the part of his Catholic Majesty; and relying with perfect confidence on the vigilance and wisdom of the Executive, they will wait the issue of such measures as that department of the government shall have pursued for asserting the rights and vindicating the injuries of the U. States: holding it to be their duty at the same time, to express their unalterable determination to maintain the boundaries and the rights of navigation and commerce through the river Mississippi as established by existing treaties."
On that occasion it did unfortunately happen that there were gentlemen in this House who had no disposition to express any such confidence in the President of the United States, as I am afraid and do verily and in my conscience believe there are now gentlemen who have no disposition to express approbation (because they feel none) of the late conduct of the President of the United States—these gentlemen then moved to strike out these words—(the words in Italic in the above resolution)—which passed in the negative, yeas 30, nays 53. Mr. Randolph here read the names of those who had voted for or against. Now, he said, he was not at all surprised that the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dana) and others who did not feel that confidence in the late President, therefore voted against expressing it; and now also, he presumed, the gentleman would vote, as others would, according to the sentiment he felt. But, said Mr. Randolph, we, who did feel confidence, and had none of that punctilious repugnance at expressing what we felt, and could not see any thing in principle against expressing it, (not having at that time the benefit of the light shed on this sub-
ject by the venerable and reverend gentleman from Pennsylvania) voted in the negative. So much upon the question, whether there ever existed a case in which this House undertook to approve the conduct of the Executive of the United States in a delicate and critical juncture, particularly of our foreign affairs; the evidence which I have produced is conclusive; and the fact is, that if we get rid of this motion after the precedents which have been cited,—I do not say that they are binding; I do not feel them so; if I thought it wrong I should vote against it without reference to former precedent—but if we do become all of a sudden and in this particular point so very squeamish—the fact is, that the President of the U. States, if endowed with half the penetration which I presume he does possess, must take the hint; he must feel that there exists in this body a disapprobation of his conduct, although there be no disposition to express that disapprobation. For, sir, we should not have to go far back to seek for precedent to find a case where in point of practice a decision is condemned, and in point of vote upheld.
We have gotten all of a sudden, sir, into a sort of phobia of abstract proposition; we hear a great deal of passing votes out of which nothing is to grow. I would ask the worthy gentleman from Pennsylvania—I would not put that question to any other member but the worthy gentleman from Pennsylvania, because I understand his ground to be that there does not exist the right if there exists the power in this House to enter into a series of propositions which lead to no law—Now, sir, at the last session, when a member got up and moved that the thanks of the House be given to the Speaker for the faithful and able discharge and so forth of his duties—that was not intended to originate a bill; nothing was to grow out of it, except a very unpleasant situation to the House and the gentleman in the chair. Would the gentleman from Pennsylvania then have contended that such a motion was inadmissible, and therefore ought to be indefinitely postponed? If I am not much misinformed, there was a motion indefinitely to postpone that proposition, which was negatived. Then it seems, sir, that we have an unlimited power of complimenting ourselves, that we may be guilty of self-flattery to any extent—for what is the Speaker of this House, in fact, but ourself? He is the creature of the House; they make him. When they compliment the Speaker, they compliment their own sagacity in selecting a person so competent to the discharge of his duty. For what does the Speaker say when conducted to the chair? That he will discharge the duties of his office agreeably to the wishes of the House; for which I presume he receives the vote of thanks. Now in this case the President of the United States has discharged the duties of his office, if not agreeably to the wishes of the House, certainly agreeably to mine; and therefore I would express my approbation—why? That it may stand on the journals as an expression of my opinion; although, let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, that some twenty or thirty years hence, when the little bickerings of this day are past and forgotten, that vote will be of value. It will tell—it will weigh heavily in the estimate of the character of the person in respect to whom it is passed; for when we go back to the journals, and look at the administration of Gen. Washington twenty years ago, do we think of the little party disputes of that time? We scarcely give ourselves trouble to consider how men were moved to their actions. It is of consequence to posterity too. What will the historian do in relation to the transactions of this administration? He will find that the first act was to restore harmony and intercourse between the United States and a foreign nation. Is he to be met at the threshold, is this conduct to be qualified by a vote upon your journals from which he will inevitably draw this inference—that although there did not exist a disposition openly to condemn the ministry, there existed a majority of a different way of thinking; and who therefore got rid of this question as dexterously as they could? No, sir; this vote (I hope I shall be pardoned for saying so) differs to its advantage from the vote for returning thanks to the Speaker of this House at the end of the last session of Congress. It is a vote out of which some practical good is to grow—a vote by which the President of the United States is to be strengthened in the course which he is now pursuing, and encouraged and invigorated in persisting in that course
hereafter. It is not a mere motion in course, like a motion for a vote of thanks to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, which is at last considered as a matter of form, and has ceased to be a source of any thing but unpleasant sensation to the House; for I believe that from the time of the first Speaker, a member from Pennsylvania (Mr. Muhlenburg) who was succeeded by a member from Connecticut, (Mr. Trumbull) and afterwards by a gentleman from New-Jersey (Mr. Dayton); subsequently by a colleague of yours, Mr. Speaker, (Mr. Sedgwick) and finally until the last Congress, by my worthy friend from North-Carolina, in every case this motion of thanks to the Speaker, which, if my motion be abstract, is equally abstract, has been made and carried—although I believe that the first time the motion was made after I obtained a seat in Congress, it was merely accidental that it carried at all—although no practical result upon gentlemen's own principles could ensue, and it ought therefore (as they say) to have been quashed. I on the contrary contend that practical good can ensue from my motion, and I think that my friend from North Carolina, whom I do not see in his place, (and I am glad that he is not in his place) must have felt his ills in the chair and even a broken constitution to have been amply compensated by three distinct and unanimous votes of three several Houses of Congress, returning thanks to him for his able and impartial conduct in the chair.
Although, sir, it be no part of my intention, as I said when I rose, to enter into the merits of the main question, I think it necessary to say a few words in explanation of what fell from me a few days ago, when unprepared to discuss this subject, when perhaps I was misunderstood, and very probably, because I may not have expressed myself as accurately as I could have wished. It has been stated that this offer on the part of the British government and acceptance on the part of ours—this truce or call it what you will, patched up between the two countries, is more disadvantageous to Great Britain than the late offer to suspend the embargo as to Great Britain and keep it on as to France, would have been if accepted. This is one of the cases in which my argument is fairly met, as far at least as it can be met by mere assertion—and, after the decision of this motion for indefinite postponement (which I perceive will be lost) on the discussion of the main question, all I ask of gentlemen is to state the argument as it really was offered, and if they refute it they shall have my best thanks; I shall listen to them with a mind perfectly open to conviction. But if gentlemen state something else, they cannot suppose that I will interrupt them in the course of their career of success against arguments not of my creation but of their own. I shall therefore in the course of this discussion take no kind of notice of any statement of my argument that can be made unless it be a perfectly fair statement, and the true matter be met, any further than finally to recapitulate by way of reply what I conceive to be the true points in dispute. Here is one point: that as far as we have gone in the present adjustment, it is more disadvantageous to Great Britain than the proposal for suspending the embargo. That is a fact on which every man in the House is competent to decide, and one on which I deem the arguments offered by me to you to be so irresistibly conclusive, that I will not notice any thing in the way of assertion on this point farther than to suggest that this has been thrown out in the spirit of the proverb, that good wine needs no bush . Nothing is more common, in the state which I represent, than for a horse dealer having two horses, to dispose of, to give praise to the most indifferent, in proportion precisely as it is inferior to the other, because it is supposed that the good horse will always sell himself, and it is necessary to recommend the other by all the address of which that sort of people are never destitute. Now in the present case of the late adjustment of which nobody openly complains, it is supposed to be one which meets so general an approbation that it is not worth while to say much in its commendation. Now, sir, as this old horse is to be linked in the same team, if the jockey can once establish that he is a better nag than the grey mare, than that which is generally acknowledged to be good, his point is gained. That is the question in dispute; and until I hear the argument which I submitted to you last week answered, I shall say not one word upon it. To be sure, sir, if we allow that the proposition to suspend
the embargo as to Great Britain was more advantageous for her than the late one, we must admit that it is more advantageous to Great Britain to have her ships excluded from our waters than admitted into them; that it is more advantageous to have the old non-importation act in force than to have it repealed; that it is more advantageous for her to have a difficult and hampered trade, and her ships of war excluded whilst those of France were admitted in perfect freedom, than to have her trade with us put on the footing on which it stood prior to the old non-importation act, and our trade to France cut off and French ships excluded. If gentlemen believe this, it is very well—I admire their faith. There is a point of fact on which it unfortunately happens that there has been and does exist in this House too much difference of opinion. It is a fact which can be established conclusively by your journals, and the reading of the documents received from the Executive when he recommended the embargo will convince gentlemen of it. Gentlemen say that the fact of the existence of the orders in council was known here when they are compelled to confess the President intimated nothing of it in his message. Produce the National Intelligencer; produce the passage so often alluded to in relation to these orders—and what conclusion is to be drawn from it?—Why, sir, that some speculation might have been hazarded on the subject, something in the way of conjecture. Do gentlemen believe that the late President of the United States had a peculiar diffidence in the National Intelligencer? Had he any peculiar diffidence in that paper, of all the papers in the world, that, when he sent the proclamation cut out of a British newspaper, he would not have sent us a file of the National Intelligencer or that article from which they say went to establish the existence of the orders in council? Had he any cause for peculiar diffidence in the National Intelligencer, that he would not send us an extract from that paper while he sent us extracts from others—even British papers. Or are gentlemen prepared to say that the conductors of that gazette have more certain information on the subject of our foreign concerns than is possessed by the President of the United States himself? I hope not, sir. The fact of the orders in council being known in this country by our government—they might have been known by the British minister—but their being known by our government and by us, and the embargo growing out of them is the point at issue. A gentleman told me the other day "You forget that though they were not known, the probability of them was known." This is a new discovery—what kind of knowledge is this same knowledge of probability, sir? Their probability might have been conjecture—but did that imply a knowledge that such orders had issued or would issue? And can you assume that fact without throwing on the late President of the United States a degree of odium which in my opinion he is not fairly entitled to. I think it is treating him unjustly and cruelly to suppose that they were known. For, in supposing it, you pre-suppose that he has failed in his duty in communicating it in that message which recommended the embargo. The orders in council were not known in this city or in this House when the President of the United States recommended that embargo. I protest upon my honor that they were not known to me; nor did I hear them mentioned on that day. As to their having been known in New York, you might as well say that they were known in Quebec or Halifax, or even London itself. What does the fact of their having been known in New York prove but that they were known in N. York? Could that knowledge at New York be a rule of conduct for us? If the orders in council were known at the time that the President recommended the embargo, let the proofs be produced; and though I should not be willing to vote either approbation or disapprobation on this subject, I should be at a loss how to refuse a vote of disapprobation on the conduct of the late President of the United States for neglecting to apprise us of their existence. But he did his duty. He knew not of any orders in council, and mentioned none; the embargo grew out of the state of affairs which existed when we were in perfect ignorance of the orders in council, out of the correspondence from Paris in relation to the Berlin decree, and the British proclamation respecting seamen.
Sir, in speaking of the amendment moved by the worthy gentleman from

Massachusetts whom I see in his place, and my reluctance to vote for it, my meaning may have been misunderstood, & probably because it was not very correctly expressed. When we speak of the government of the U. States, what do we mean? Do we mean the President of the United States and his Secretaries, or the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary, but more especially the Executive and Legislature? Now when I spoke of the disposition of the government of the U. S. I had particularly in my eye the manifestation of a spirit in the other House of Congress and in this also, which demonstrated most conclusively to my mind that notwithstanding our celebrated vote of "AND FRANCE"—bringing up France in the rear like a needless Alexandrine, like the latter part of a wounded snake, dragging its slow length along—that there did, under all this smoke of hostility to both belligerents, exist a cool deliberate disposition to go to war with one only—and I take motions made in the other branch of the Legislature and motions and speeches made on this floor and on record as a proof of such disposition. I infer the disposition of government not merely from declarations of the President of the United States himself, but from the semi-official oracular sayings of gentlemen supposed to be, and in fact known to be, in his confidence. I did hear, and I confess I heard it with some pleasure, that there existed a difference of opinion on this subject in the cabinet at the late session of Congress; and that the late President of the U. States (God bless him for it!) on that question was with us, and would not be driven into a war with England—and that the leaders of the war party were deplorably chagrined and disappointed by it. So when I speak of the government of the United States, I wish not to be understood as alluding to any disposition which the late President of the United States had to go to war with Great Britain.—But, sir, I do think, after hearing the report of the late committee of foreign relations, declaring that there were but two alternatives, embargo or war, and seeing all the members but two vote to this effect; that war with one of these nations was submission and submission the most base and abject too to the other—and then hearing gentlemen declare they were for war with one of those nations—the conclusion is irresistible that they were for making that object submission to the other nation; or that it was mere hollow hypocrisy for covering the design of going to war with one of those belligerents and succumbing to the other. I should be childish not to believe that there did exist a disposition such as the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Jackson) intimates did not exist in what he calls the government of the U. S.
One other subject I must touch before I sit down. The change in the relations of the U. S. is ascribed to the non-intercourse law. Against that law I most certainly voted. If the merit of that change is to be ascribed to the non-intercourse law, be it so. I have no objection. But who were the advocates of that poor miserable measure? Our worthy chairman of the committee of Ways and Means (Mr. Eppes) portrayed in hideous colors the horrible features of that law; and another gentleman from the same state (Mr. Jackson) made motion after motion till a very late hour in the night to defeat the law, whilst I sat still voting in its favor until the last stage; and I voted against it eventually, not because I felt any opposition to the law on the grounds which those gentlemen did, but because I believed, if we had not got rid of the embargo on those terms, that we should have got rid of it on better. Mine was a sort of negative opposition to the law; theirs positive and unqualified—they said it was absolute disgrace. Now, therefore, sir, if the change in our foreign relations is to be ascribed to that law, I wish the advocates of it to rise up and assert their share in it in the presence of the House. The fact is, that nobody would advocate it; that though it was carried by a majority of two to one, those who finally voted for it condemned it, and all parties seemed ashamed of it; and that, prior to the late restoration of good understanding, all the high-toned men and high-toned presses in this country denounced the majority of this House for passing that law, as having utterly disgraced themselves. If, therefore, any credit be due to the non-intercourse law, I do not wish it to be run away with by those who were enemies to the measure. I voted against the law because I thought we could have got rid of the embargo on better terms. Are those to have the credit of it, who said, that if their opinion was followed, they were for immediate war and with Great Britain—but who, finding their friends could not be screwed up to the war pitch, had made a sort of compromise of their wishes and agreed to accept this stupid unmeaning non-intercourse law by way of appearing to be doing something? No, sir, let those to have the merit of the re-
which, thank God, I had some share in defeating? Are those to have the merit of the good consequences which are alleged to have flowed from the non-intercourse law? Certainly not. I really think, sir, that if there be any merit anywhere, it belongs to those men who prevented a powerful and energetic party in this and the other House of Congress, a party too standing high in Executive confidence, from dragging the Executive against his will and this House and this nation into a war with G. Britain. It is those men who deserve the credit—and I for one, although a desultory kind of partisan, acting on my own impulse, claim my share; for if the great leaders could have been gratified according to their own showing, they would have dragged this country into a war with G. Britain, which certainly would have closed the door to the present happy arrangement. Their war speeches were printed by subscription, bound up—and I venture to say, that some fifty years hence they will form a curiosity in literature—they stand on record against their authors. Now, to be sure, sir, those persons who undertook to stop their wild career were composed of heterogeneous materials—even those who have been designated (I know not why) as ultra-federalists, and citra federalists, if any such there be, united on this vote. There were minority men, caucus men, protesters—in fact, sir, all parties, catholics, protestants, seceders and all, were united in the effort to prevent the leaders of both Houses from plunging the nation into a war with one power, and knocking to the other—from rivetting the chains of French influence, perhaps of French alliance, upon us. Thank God that their designs were proclaimed to the nation, that the President did not give his consent, which would have made us kick the beam—Yes, sir, federalists, minority men, protesters and all, would have kicked the beam if it had ever emanated from the cabinet that the President was for war. It was as much as old Nestor, with trusty Sthenelus by his side, and all the train could do, to arrest these fiery hot-headed steeds who were hurrying the state-carriage down the precipice of French alliance. Suppose that we had given them the reins, where should we have been, and what doing, at this time, sir? We should have been here indeed—discussing abstract propositions, as they are called? No, sir, we should have been voting supplies; we should have gone in full committee of supply and of ways and means, and come out of it almost as soon as we did out of the committee on the state of the union, on the President's message—for our whole arcana of raising money appears to consist in borrowing—loans, loans, loans are the alpha and omega, the sum and substance of our system of political economy; and the worthy gentleman who presides at the head of the Committee of Ways and Means, would now have been calling for loans with all his might. We should have been marching troops to Canada, passing acts for the relief of sufferers in the bombardment of New-York, discussing whether the owners of slaves stolen from the sea-board should be compensated by the general government, or not—This is the situation in which we should have been in fact, instead of being in the situation in which we now are, the merit of which, if any there be, is not due to those who arrogate it to themselves, but to the late President of the United States and that majority, however discordant the materials composing it, who defeated the CABAL in the two Houses of Congress, that was determined to plunge us into a war—who restrained what have been called (and it is no nomenclature of mine) the invincibles —who curbed what has been called (and I am not the sponsor) the family compact .
Before I sit down, sir, permit me to state expressly and unequivocally, and I deem it more especially my duty to state it because the gentleman is not present, that in the course of that discussion and the votes on the subject, the Chairman of the Committee of Foreign Relations (Mr. G. W. Campbell) did act, as I conceived, a consistent and open part; that after declaring that we could not go to war without going to a war with both France and England, that we could not go to war with one without the most abject submission to the other, he was not willing, if I understood him aright, to make that submission by going to war with that other. Other gentlemen, perhaps, to whom my attention was not so much called, not being placed in so conspicuous a station in the house as that gentleman, may have done the same. There was another gentleman in the House, in respect to whom I feel it incumbent on me to say something. He was one of those who have been marked and branded, and are suspected of being minority men—I allude particularly to a worthy friend of mine, now no longer a member of this House (Mr. D. R. Williams) than whom I believe there is not a more honest man breathing, who was not only a minority man, but, worse than all that, "one of the protesters," and whose speech was very much relied on in the best speech made in favor of
the war party. Sir, you recollect that that gentleman declared his disposition, together with my friend who sits before me, of clinging to the embargo, and that was the great point of difference between us; and as to the gentleman who sits before me (Mr. Mason) it is only the third point on which I have had the misfortune to differ with him since I came into public life. When they therefore advocated this war-like doctrine, it was under the belief that nothing was left, if the embargo was raised, but submission or war—and they preferred the embargo to war, but they preferred war to submission. It was particularly the doctrine of the gentleman from South-Carolina, who is no longer a member of this House, to whom these observations, loose and unsatisfactory as they may be, are more especially applied. But there is no other point of contact (as far as within my knowledge) but his partiality to the embargo, and his disposition to go to war if it were raised, between him and those who (thank God!) defeated the war-purposes.
On the subject of a desire to excite a war-spirit, I think it necessary to state that motions and speeches were not only made with that tendency, but with that avowed disposition in both House of Congress—and I repeat it: to whatever source the present situation of the country is to be ascribed, it is not to those who were termed thorough-going men in this House in the last Congress, nor to those of the same description in the Senate—tho' they have been checked, to be sure, by an opposition of the strangest kind; but it is unimportant of what materials it was composed, since it had the effect of saving the nation from war with one of the belligerents, and of producing the present state of things, which gentlemen themselves tell us was the consequence of our having avoided war.
Mr. Johnson said, that at this extra session he had fondly hoped he should have it his power to be a silent member; but he regretted that duty compelled him to address the Speaker at this late hour of the day, when all must be fatigued, and upon a subject that had involved a discussion unpleasant, unprofitable and even mischievous. The Executive in his communication to us (said Mr. J.) has avoided detail upon the subject of the expected negotiation in the late settlement of our differences, and we should avoid it as much as possible. But this motion has been introduced for the laudable purpose of discovering the difference of opinion in this place upon the late transactions respecting our foreign relations with G. Britain, by the settlement of the affair of the Chesapeake, and the renewal of commercial intercourse. The gentleman from Virginia believes there are men in this House who disapprove the conduct of the President. I disbelieve it, because I have no evidence of it. I have heard in this body and out of doors universal approbation. The prospect of peace has been hailed as a political jubilee. No difference does exist upon the subject. But, sir, there is a diversity of sentiment or expectation how the promised negotiation with Great Britain will ultimate. Some are more, and others less sanguine. And when we consult the volume of experience, and recollect the many important subjects of settlement, it is not wonderful if we should have our fears and our hopes on the subject in different degrees. Let us hope for good, but be prepared for evil, that a reverse of the present prospect may not change excessive joy into deep mourning.
The mover of this resolution has attempted to draw a line of distinction between the late and the present administration, in respect to our foreign relations. The two administrations, so far as Mr. Madison has progressed, are the same in principle, and the same in conduct, animated by the same spirit of moderation, firmness and justice towards other nations. But the mover of this motion says the propositions under the two administrations were different, and that the late adjustment is more advantageous to G. Britain. The propositions made by Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison were the same. In the first instance they were rejected by Mr. Canning with a sneering contempt, unworthy a great man. The proposition in each case was this: Rescind your orders in council, and we will suspend the laws interdicting the commercial intercourse between the two nations. Upon what principle did Mr. Canning reject this just offer? Because Bonaparte had blockaded the continent, and he was determined that the present and future generations should see that Great Britain would never relinquish her orders in council until the policy of Bonaparte should be abandoned; that the honor and the power of the British government rested in some good degree upon it. But now the same propositions have been accepted, altho' the continent is more completely blockaded than when the same proposition had been rejected—for even Spain and Portugal, upon which British hopes rested, are now closed. Those who opposed the war measures of our go-
vernment may say, to shield themselves, that we have yielded. We have not yielded. Great Britain has abandoned her unjust system of restriction upon our commerce; and the United States stand redeemed from any charge of inconsistency. It will be a difficult task to convince the enlightened citizens of the United States that there has been a difference in the conduct of the present and the late illustrious President. So far from the shadow of proof that such a difference does exist, the very act of the present chief magistrate grew out of the law of Congress passed under Mr. Jefferson's administration. This law gave certain powers and imposed certain duties to be exercised and performed upon certain and defined contingencies. Upon the happening of these contingencies, viz. the rescinding the orders in council, &c. Mr. Madison promptly performed his duty, by suspending our non-intercourse system as to Great Britain, for the renewal of our commerce. Who is so sagacious in the powers of discrimination as to draw a line of distinction, when the conduct of the administrations are so united and identified, that the act of one grew out of the law of the other? But the measures of our government which have produced such happy results are likely to be popular; and it is necessary for those who tho' we took too high ground to secure a retreat in their defeat, by endeavoring to draw this nice distinction.
But it is said that the late adjustment is more advantageous to Great Britain than the former proposal by us, because our waters are not interdicted to British armed vessels, and because French armed vessels are prohibited. Sir, the interdict which excludes British and French armed vessels still remains in full force and virtue. It has not been taken off as to British armed vessels. The proclamation of the President has only made the trade renewable on the 10th of June. He had no controul over the interdict; nor did the British minister make it a sine qua non, as did Mr. Rose, in settling the affair of the Chesapeake. Here again we have remained firm, and Great Britain has yielded the improper ground which she had previously taken. It is said that French armed vessels are now excluded our waters, and this was not the case when former propositions were made to the British ministry; and that we are now in the situation, as it respects France, that Great Britain wished. Admit all this, and what is the result? That France had done nothing to induce an interdict of her armed vessels when the attack was made on the Chesapeake, which was the principal, though not the only event which produced the proclamation of interdict against Great Britain—and certainly no American would wish to take hostile measures against a nation without previous aggression. After this proclamation of interdict, Bonaparte executed his Berlin decree, issued his Milan decree, burnt our vessels upon the high seas, interrupted our commerce in the Mediterranean and the channel. Congress convened, and in consequence of these aggressions, we passed a law extending the interdict to French and English armed vessels. Governed by the same policy, we proceeded against both nations as our injuries multiplied, and not because either nation required it against the other. The measures of this government have been opposed in this House because it seemed to some that their effects would be more injurious to Great Britain than France. I presume gentlemen will now be satisfied of the strict line of neutral conduct which has characterised the American people towards the two rival powers of Europe; or that our measures were equally hostile as it respected both nations, since it has been asserted even in the Parliament of Great Britain. It has not only been proclaimed in the Parliament, but by the government of Great Britain, through their minister at this place, in the late negotiations. This is a triumph to good principles.
It is a painful subject, sir, but I must speak of the conduct of the opposition, since they modestly assume to themselves the credit of saving this nation from impending calamity. It is novel, though not surprising, (for nothing now is to be wondered at) that those who vote against measures should claim the credit of the good arising from them, while those who supported these measures only should bear the blame, and be responsible for all the evils which naturally result from the best measures. This doctrine once established will make a new code of politics. Those who oppose measures are entitled to all the good resulting from them; and those who voted for them, are to be responsible to the nation for all the evil they produce. This claim is too absurd and ridiculous to need a comment. But let us examine the conduct connected with the politics of the opposition.—We were advised to repeal the partial non-importation law; to rescind the proclamation of interdict against British armed vessels; to repeal the embargo; and, in short, to retrace our steps and undo every thing we had done to resist the aggressions of Great
Britain. In addition to this, we were told by the opposition that Great Britain was fighting for existence; that in fact she was fighting our battles; that she would never yield to our restrictive system; that we had no just cause of complaint against Great Britain; that this government were in the wrong; that we should unfurl the republican banners against the Imperial standard, and much more such language. What humiliation do we find here! The mind of every member of the American community should sicken at the recital. What terms of accommodation would this course have produced? I will not condescend to conjecture them.
But now, sir, of the particular course recommended by the mover of this resolution (Mr. Randolph)—What was his policy?—At one particular period he recommended giving aid to the Spanish patriots against Bonaparte, and fighting Great Britain by taking the Canadas. But when the gentleman matured his system and reduced it to writing, he was for arming your merchant vessels. This was war with our hands tied, the most ineffectual war. Will any gentleman deny that this would have produced war of the most disastrous kind if Great Britain had not yielded? And still that gentleman claims part of the credit in keeping this nation out of war. The republicans did not want war, they preferred the embargo. But they preferred war to submission, when they discovered that the embargo could not be continued, owing to the clamor and infamous conduct of those who violated it. I shall always think war a blessing compared with submission to be taxed by a foreign government. It was that manly stand, it was that warlike attitude which produced the happy result which all are willing to appropriate. When the British ministry sent their acceptance to our propositions, did they know of the partial repeal? They did not. They had before them the report of the committee, which declared that we would not submit to foreign outrage. They had before them the proposition from the Secretary of War for raising 50,000 volunteers. They had before them the speeches made upon the extra meeting of Congress, which declared our object to be justice or war.
I have not only voted my own sentiments but the sentiments of my native state upon the measures, which have produced so much good to this nation. But these measures have been pronounced by many in this House as ruinous and destructive, and by those too who are now anxious to appropriate the result of those measures.
Sir, I am happy to find this a day of reformation, I wish to see it continue. When I voted to make an appropriation for the purchase of supplies after the attack on the Chesapeake I was wrong; when I voted for the embargo I was wrong; when I voted for 6000 regulars to defend Orleans and our frontier settlements against hostile savages, and when British armed vessels hovered on our coast in hostile array, I was wrong; when I voted to give power to the President to suspend the embargo, if Great Britain would rescind her orders in council, I was wrong. The first session ended & a second commenced, and the same word continually assailed my ear. When I voted to enforce the embargo, I was wrong; when I voted for letters of marque and reprisal, I was wrong; and what was most extraordinary with those who denounced these measures, every measure was the very worst measure. And now, sir, we are rejoicing in the happy change produced by these very measures—and rejoicing too, when we had reason to expect, from the predictions of gentlemen, that before this period another Volney might have seated himself upon the ruins of this splendid building, and mourned the downfall of the Great Republic! We were told in the same style that the republican administration had departed from whig principles; but no time could be agreed upon by gentlemen on which this departure good good principles took place. Some gentlemen declared that republicans quit the true faith in 1805-6, others that it was 1807-8. But the greatest number dated this departure from the time Mr. Jefferson was inducted into office. I have reflected on this subject and this is my conclusion:—That the same principles have governed the whole of Mr. Jefferson's administration—and that if there has been a departure from whig principles it commenced in 1801. Let the nation then judge what administration they prefer, the federal or republican. The policy of Mr. Jefferson has been peace and economy. The principles of many who oppose this policy would involve us in external war, in search after that phantom the balance of power, which has desolated Europe without any practical good. Neutrality has been the favorite theme of republicans; and the balance has been held with a steady hand. When we are driven into war it must be for our own wrongs; and when we make peace, we must have no power to consult, no common cause, no alliance. Separated as we are from the wars of Europe it would be madness to France because England is weak.

fight England because France is weak. We do not hold our independence by such a tenure. The folly of such politics for the United States may be illustrated by the examples before us in the war of 1756, and other coalitions put down at the battles of Marengo, Austerlitz and Jena. Public debts, taxes, armies, and famine and death are the fruits of these contests.
The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) stated that there was a strong war party in this House who wanted to select Great Britain as their antagonist, which would have produced alliance with France. A gentleman from South Carolina, the particular friend of the gentleman, was, I believe, the only republican who expressed a wish on this floor to make a selection of Great Britain. The republicans were of opinion that honor required that we should fight both rather than make a selection while both nations continued their aggressions. But it will be recollected that the federal gentlemen asserted and repeated that we ought to make a selection, and an ingenious gentleman from Connecticut almost demonstrated that a triangular war would be an absurdity. I am in favor of an indefinite postponement. But if we vote upon the resolution, I will vote for it, because I approve the conduct of the President. But this is an improper place to introduce such a resolution, as it takes up much time upon a subject not connected with our duties of legislation.
SENATE, JUNE 9.
Mr. Smith, of Maryland, from the committee to whom was referred the bill to amend and continue in force the act entitled "An act to interdict the commercial intercourse between the United States and Great Britain and France and their dependencies," together with the amendment proposed thereto, reported as a substitute a new bill.
June 10.
The resolution yesterday offered by Mr. Giles to adjourn on the 20th inst. was passed unanimously and sent to the House for concurrence.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Friday, June 9, 1809.
OLMSTEAD'S CASE.
The following message received from the President of the United States by Mr. Graham, was read: To the House of Representatives of the U. States.
In consequence of the request of the Legislature of Pennsylvania I transmit to Congress a copy of certain of its proceedings communicated for the purpose by the governor of that state. JAMES MADISON.
June 4, 1809.
[The inclosed document was the detailed report of the Legislature, with the instructions of the Legislature to the Senators and Representatives.]
And on a motion made to print the message and document
Mr. Lyon objected to the motion.
Mr. J. Porter advocated it on the ground of its being the usual course pursued by the House in all communications from the constituted authorities of a state.
Mr. Milnor opposed the printing, principally because no act was now to grow out of it. The paper had been drafted to meet a case then pending, and difficulties which then had existed. Since the adoption of these resolves, these difficulties had been done away by an act of the Legislature of Pennsylvania. It appeared to Mr. M. also that no proceedings would be necessary in consequence of those papers, if only necessary to prevent the recurrence of similar cases in future. Every one who had attended to the reading of these papers must have seen that they related to a case of difficulty which had arisen when this government was merely a confederation of states, when its powers were confined within such narrow limits that Congress could not enforce its decrees, when its acts were nothing more than recommendations to the state legislatures. At that period this question had arisen from a dispute between the United States and the state of Pennsylvania how far each had jurisdiction in the courts of admiralty and courts of appeal. No such case could in future arise, because the constitution had been framed by the people of the states which vested in the Congress of the United States the entire power of appointing courts of admiralty jurisdiction. No state could now take cognizance of admiralty cases; in future there could be no clashing of jurisdiction on this subject. Whether the courts of the United States or those of Pennsylvania were correct in the principles which they had set up in the case under consideration, appeared to him to be a question which it was not necessary to examine at this moment. The case had been completely settled by the payment of the money to Gideon Olmstead. He had hoped that the dispute had been by that means wholly put to rest; and from a belief that it ought to be so, he did not wish this document to be printed, but merely to lie on the table. The resolution of the legislature of Pennsylvania which recommended to the Representatives and instructed the Senators
such an alteration in the Constitution as should establish an independent tribunal for the trial of such causes, had been produced by the idea that the case of Olmstead was a dispute between the United States and the state of Pennsylvania. It had never appeared otherwise to him than as a dispute between the judiciary of the United States and the constituted authority of the state of Pennsylvania. On the part of the judiciary of the U. S. it was an attempt to carry what it believed to be its legal powers into effect. Resistance was made by the constituted authority of Pennsylvania under the idea that this conduct of the judiciary of the U. S. was in consequence of a power assumed by them, a power not delegated by the constitution or the institution of their office. If the judges of the courts of the United States had misconceived their authority, if in their decision they had acted contrary to the constitution or the laws, then are they liable to impeachment for the conduct which they have pursued; but it could not be said that it was a contest between the governments. The government of the United States never interfered. The process issued from the courts of the United States. The marshal executed it; and in compliance with the process the money had been paid. The case appeared to be completely at rest; and the resolutions of the Legislature appeared to be bottomed on a false foundation, so far as they contemplated a difference between the U. S. and Pennsylvania. The judiciary of the U. S. must in this case have been as impartial as any tribunal could be. There was not, in this case, one cent claimed by the U. S. or any officer of the U. S.; the judges were not interested by any affinity with the parties claiming it; and, if not in this case free from prejudice, it was impossible that they ever should be so. Believing, if the judges of the courts of the U. S. had erred, it was an error in judgment and not from corrupt motives, he could never consent that, in a case of this kind, the Congress of the United States should proceed to any further act. He hoped therefore that the papers would not be printed, but would be order to lie on the table.
No other gentleman rising to speak, the motion for printing was negatived 63 to 50; and the message and documents ordered to lie on the table.
BARRED CLAIMS.
Mr. Johnson from the committee of claims made several reports on petitions; amongst which were two or three on petitions of old soldiers, &c. On these the committee reported, without entering into the merits of the several cases, that they were barred by the statute of limitation, and therefore recommended that the prayer of the petitioners ought not to be granted. A report similar to this having been made on the petition of Hannah Foster of Philadelphia, widow of a revolutionary officer, it was negatived by the House.
A motion was made to re-consider this report, on the suggestion of Mr. Stanley that the question had not been understood by the House.
Mr. Goldsborough opposed the motion. He hoped the House would not sanction by its vote the broad principle that every claim, however just, should be barred by the statute of limitation; but that they would decide that it should be no bar to the payment by Congress of all just claims.
Mr. Johnson (the chairman of the committee of claims) expressed his satisfaction that this question had been brought up for the consideration of the House, that by its decision the committee of claims might be guided in its future conduct. The committee were every day presented with cases of hardship which created painful sensations in the breasts of the committee, but which they were compelled, from the uniform conduct of the committee of claims heretofore, to reject because they were barred by the statute of limitation. Thus in the present case the committee had reported, not that the claim was not just, but that they had not examined it because barred by the statute. He should feel happy at a decision which should open the statute to particular claimants, & should not, as a member of the committee ever shrink from the investigation of them. He found himself bound to vote for a re-consideration of the vote on this report, because if the statute was to be opened to particular cases, it should be done by some general rule, and not by a decision on a single case.
Messrs. Holland and Nelson said they never had believed that Congress were barred by the statute of limitations; they believed it was only intended to bar a settlement at the Treasury of document claims, of claims against which the length of time that they had been suffered to sleep was strong presumptive proof. If this principle set up by the committee of claims was to be adhered to, to what purpose was any claim referred to a committee? The reason why these petitions were presented to the House, was that the claims were barred by the statute; for, if not barred, they would long ago have been settled at the Treasury Department. These reports of the
committee of claims had long been considered as reflecting dishonor on the House; and it was believed that the committee of claims ought to examine into the equity of cases presented to them, without reference to the statute of limitations. If that was to bar all claimants, there was a much more ready way of obtaining their answer than by a report of a committee of the House; on application to the Treasury, their claims would be rejected without delay.
The House refused to re-consider the report, 50 to 42; and
On motion of Mr. Eppes, the report was re-committed to the committee of claims, with instructions to report on the merits of the case, 68 to 38.
This decision is understood to operate as an instruction to the committee of claims in future to report on the merits of all cases, without considering the statute of limitations as a bar to their jurisdiction by Congress.
Mr. Love reported a bill respecting the courts of the District of Columbia. Twice read and committed.
Mr. Rhea reported a bill to alter and establish certain Post-roads. Twice read and committed.
MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT.
Mr. Nelson, from the committee to whom was referred so much of the message of the President of the United States as relates to the military establishment and Mr. Randolph's resolution for disbanding the troops lately raised, reported "that under existing circumstances it would be impolitic and unwise to disband any part of the military establishment of the U. S." —Report referred to a committee of the whole.
FORTIFICATIONS.
The bill from the Senate for appropriating money for completing fortifications commenced and erecting new works on the Northern and Western frontiers, was read a third time; and on the question "shall the bill pass?" The votes stood as follows:
YEAS.—Messrs. W. Alston, Anderson, Bacon, Baylies, Blaisdell, Breckenridge, J. C. Chamberlain, W. Chamberlain, Champion, Clittenden, Cobb, Cox, Cutts, Dina, Dawson, Emott, Findley, Fisk, Gardener, Goldsborough, Gold, Hale, Haren, Heister, Helms, Hubbard, Huffey, J. G. Jackson, R. Jackson, Jenkins, Jones, Knickerbacker, Lewis, Livermore, Livingston, Marion, Matthews, McBride, McKim, Miller, Milnor, N. R. Moore, Moseley, Mumford, Nelson, Newton, Nicholson, Pearson, Pickman, Pitkin, P. B. Porter, Potter, Quincy, Rhea, of Ten. Root, Ross, Sage, Sammons, Say, Sheffield, G. Smith, Stanley, Stedman, Stephenson, Sturges, Taggart, Talbott, Taylor, Thompson, Tracy, Upham, Van Horn, Van Rensselaer, Weakley, Wheaton, Whitman, Wilson.—77.
NAYS.—Messrs. L. J. Alston, Bard, Bassett, Bibb, Boyd, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, Clay, Cochran, Crawford, Crist, Desha, Eppes, Franklin, Gannett, Ghudson, Goodwyn, Holland, Johnson, Kennedy, Love, Lyle, Macon, McKee, Montgomery, T. Moore, Morrow, Randolph, Rea of Pen. Richards, Roane, Seaver, Shaw, J. Smith, S. Smith, Southard, Stanfield, Swoope, Whitehill, Winn, Witherspoon.—43.
For the Bill 77—against it 43—absent twenty-one members, of whom two, Messrs. Vandylke and Denning, had not taken their seats this session; and nineteen, Messrs. John Brown, Campbell, Clapton, Cook, Davenport, Ely, Gardner, Gray, Howard, Kenan, Key, Lyon, Newbold, Nichols, John Porter, Sawyer, Smelt, Smilie and Troup were absent from indisposition or other causes.
The bill therefore only requires the signature of the President to become a law.
Nicholas Vandylke, a member from Delaware, appeared and took his seat.
[Remainder of this day's proceedings, excluded by foreign news, in our next.]
WASHINGTON CITY.
Monday, June 12.
ROBERT BRENT, Esq. is re-appointed Mayor of this City.
VERY LATE FROM ENGLAND.
Lieut. Reed, the messenger who went out to England in the Pacific with dispatches, arrived in this city on Saturday about 3 o'clock. The Pacific had a passage of 18 days going and 31 returning. During the 26 days he remained in England, no news had been received from France of the arrival of the Mentor.
By this vessel London papers to the 5th May have been received, the contents of which are very interesting. In addition to the order in Council given below, the papers contain a DECLARATION OF WAR by Francis I. Emperor of Austria, against France; also an address from the archduke Charles to the German nation, both of which papers shall appear in our next; and an address of Marshal Davoust to the army of the Rhine, on the commencement of hostilities by Austria.
Marquis Wellesley is appointed ambassador extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Spain.
Bonaparte has set out for Germany. A dreadful engagement had taken place between an English fleet under admiral Gambier, and a French fleet in Biscay roads, in which 4 of the French 74 gun ships were burnt, and seven vessels run ashore.
There was a report prevalent on the 5th of May at London, that a decisive action had taken place between the French and Austrians, in which after three days fighting the Austrians were defeated with the loss of 30,000 men.
Some of the London papers state, that Mr. Pinckney, and the American merchants, at London, were pleased with the new orders in Council.
In the House of Peers, on the 4th ult. Lord Selkirk rose pursuant to notice, and after some remarks, moved an humble address to his majesty, praying that he would be pleased to direct, that in the negotiation now pending with America, the character of the affair between the frigates Leopard and Chesapeake in 1807, should be ascertained, the causes that led to it, and of the consequences with which it may be attended. It was objected to on the ground that it was improper to agitate this question at a time when negotiations were going on. After a short reply by the mover, the question was put and negatived without a division.
A new schedule of duties was under the consideration of the British Parliament early in May, by which the duties on American produce will be considerably advanced, particularly cotton.
From the London Gazette, April 29, 1809. At the Court at the Queen's Palace, the 26th of April, 1809; present,
The King's Most Excellent Majesty. Whereas his Majesty, by his Orders in Council of the 11th November, 1807, was pleased, for the reasons assigned therein, to order, that "all the ports and places of France and her allies, or of any other country at war with his majesty, and all other ports or places in Europe from which, although not at war with his majesty, the British flag is excluded, and all ports or places in the colonies belonging to his majesty's enemies, should from thenceforth be subject to the same restrictions in point of trade and navigation, as if the same were actually blockaded in the most strict and rigorous manner;" and also to prohibit "all trade in articles which are the produce or manufacture of the said countries or colonies."
And whereas his majesty having been nevertheless desirous not to subject those countries which were in alliance or in amity with his majesty, to any greater inconvenience than was absolutely inseparable for carrying into effect his majesty's just determination to counteract the designs of his enemies, did make certain exceptions and modifications expressed in the said Order of the 11th November, and in certain subsequent orders of the 25th of November, and of the 18th of December, 1807, and of the 50th of March, 1808, declaratory of the aforesaid Order of the 11th of November.
And whereas, in consequence of divers events which have taken place since the date of the first mentioned order, affecting the relation between Great Britain and the territories of other powers, it is expedient that sundry parts and provisions of the said orders shall be altered or revoked.
His majesty is therefore pleased, by and with the advice of his Privy Council, to revoke and annul the said several orders, except as hereinafter expressed, and so much of the said several orders, except as aforesaid, is hereby revoked accordingly.
And his majesty is pleased, by and with the advice of his Privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered, that all the ports and places as far North as the river Ems, inclusively, under the government styling itself the Kingdom of Holland, and all ports and places under the government of France, together with the colonies, plantations, and settlements in the possession of those governments respectively, and all ports and places in the Northern parts of Italy, to be reckoned from the ports of Orbitello and Ponsario inclusively, shall continue and be subject to the same restrictions in point of trade and navigation, without any exceptions, as if the same were actually blockaded by his majesty's naval forces in the most strict and rigorous manner; and that every vessel trading from and to the said countries or colonies, plantations and settlements, together with all goods and merchandise on board, shall be condemned as a prize to the captors.
And his majesty is further pleased to order, and it is hereby ordered, that this order shall have effect from the day of the date thereof, with respect to any ship together with its cargo, which may be captured subsequent to such day, on any voyage which is and shall be rendered legal by this Order, although such voyage at the time of the commencement of the same was unlawful and prohibited under the same former Order, and such ships, upon being brought in shall be released accordingly; and with respect to all ships, together with their cargoes, which may be captured in any voyage which was permitted under the exceptions of the Orders above mentioned, but which is not permitted according to the provisions of this Order; his majesty is pleased to order, and it is hereby ordered, that such ships and their cargoes shall not be liable to condemnation unless they shall have received actual notice of the present Order before their capture, or in default of such notice, until after the expiration of the like intervals from the date of this order as were allowed for constructive notice in the order of the 25th of November, 1807, and the 18th of May, 1808, at the several places and latitudes therein specified.
And the right honorable the Lords Commissioners of his majesty's Treasury, his majesty's principal Secretaries of State, the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, and the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty, and Judges of the courts of vice admiralty, are to give the necessary directions herein, as to them respectively may appertain.
STEPH. COTTRELL.
London, May 1.—The departure of a messenger from Dover to Calais on Friday morning in a flag of truce has given rise to a variety of speculations. He was certainly charged with the new order in council, and dispatches from Mr. Pinckney, to gen. Armstrong, the American minister at Paris.
Boston, June 5.
Yesterday arrived the brig Julian, captain Williams, 40 days from Lisbon. The French had not made any movements towards Lisbon.—Sir David Baird had just arrived with 7000 troops from England, which increased the British forces on that station to 25,000—the Portuguese army was 30,000 strong, well equipped, and in high spirits.—The combined forces had got possession of all the heights and passes for 25 miles round, completely fortified, and were determined to make a stand against the French, if they approached.
Capt. W. confirms the report of the capture of Vigo by the English—also,
the capture of Oporto by the French. After the surrender of Oporto it was given up to the troops for plunder during three days, wherein the most horrid excesses were committed.
The accounts from Spain were contradictory; and but little dependence relied on them.
Translated from Spanish papers.
SEVILLE, April 15.
The Portuguese army, commanded by Gen. Silveira, consisting of 15,000 men, is near Braga, and expected shortly to be joined by 8000 more, who are now at the bridge of Lamego, under the command of Marshal Berthelot. In Vienna every thing is prepared for defence. In the city of Coedes there is not a single Frenchman, and the whole province is inclined to resist them. The French army consists of from 9 to 10,000 men. All Galicia is rising.
DIED at New-York on Thursday last, the celebrated THOMAS PAINE.
The House of Delegates of Maryland has nominated John E. Howard as Senator of the United States.
DEMOCRATIC MEETING.
Washington City.
Agreeably to public notice given in the newspapers of this city, a numerous and respectable assemblage of the Democrats thereof took place on Saturday evening the 10th of June, 1809, at Lindsay's Hotel, when JAMES H. BLAKE, Esq. was called to the chair, and BERNARD SMITH appointed Secretary.
The chairman having returned his thanks to the meeting for the honor done him, and stated the object contemplated, the following resolution was offered, and unanimously adopted—Resolved, by this meeting, That Joel Barlow, Walter Jones, James H. Blake, and Cornelius Cunningham, be appointed a Committee of Arrangement to act with similar Committees appointed for like purposes by the Democrats of Georgetown and Alexandria, who shall be vested with full powers for making all necessary arrangements for celebrating the ensuing Anniversary of our National Independence.
(Signed) JAMES H. BLAKE, Chm. B. SMITH, Sec'y.
Washington, June 3d, 1809.
The undersigned Judges and Associate Judges of Election, for Members of the City Council, held on Monday the 5th inst. consider it to be their duty to state for the information of the citizens, the reasons which induced them to refuse their signatures to the notifications which were sent to the persons who, by two of the Judges (and consequently not a majority) are said to have had the greater number of legal votes, and therefore to be duly elected.
First. The fourth section of the act of incorporation makes it the duty of the judges, on closing the polls, to seal their ballot boxes, and to meet on the day following, when, in the presence of the council, the seals are to be broken and the votes counted. This part of their duty the undersigned performed in part, that is, they repaired to the council chamber on the morning of the day after that on which the election was held with their ballot boxes sealed, but not finding the council present, they did not feel themselves authorized to break the seals and count the votes. It appears, however, that the votes of the 1st and 2nd wards were counted, and so far as respects those for the first ward, without the knowledge or consent of the judges of that ward.
Secondly. By an act of the City Council, approved the 3rd day of November, 1808, the Judges of Election are to be furnished with lists of the free white male persons assessed and residing in the city, on which lists those who have paid taxes are to be distinguished from those who have not; and it is made their duty to refuse the votes of those whose names do not appear on those lists, and who had not paid taxes previous to the day of election.
It was admitted by the judges from the third and fourth wards, that a number of votes had been taken by them of persons whose names did not appear on either of the lists; and they contended that such votes were legal, though contrary to the act of council. In this opinion, the undersigned neither did nor could concur, but they considered all such votes as illegal, and therefore inadmissible, for, if not assessed, the money paid was not a tax, but a free gift or voluntary contribution. This they deemed an insurmountable difficulty, because there was no mode of selecting the ballots of illegal from those of legal voters.
The undersigned believe that they have performed their duty. It will remain with the inhabitants of the 1st & 2nd wards to decide whether any and what measures shall be pursued, in order to prevent a confirmation of the election, and a recurrence of the abuses complained of, which have more than once taken place.
RICHARD S. BRISCOE,
Judge of the First Ward.
THOS. HEWITT,
Associate Judges of the First Ward.
PIERCE PURCELL,
Judge of the Second Ward.
T. H. GILLISS,
Associate Judges of the Second Ward.
WANTED, IN THE CITY, An elderly WHITE WOMAN capable of Kitchen Concern, and somewhat acquainted with a small Dairy. A person so preferred.—Apply at this office. Washington, June 12, 1809.

THE WASHINGTON THEATRE Will open on Tuesday, June 13, 1809, With the Celebrated Comedy, called TOWN AND COUNTRY; OR, WHICH IS BEST? And the Musical Entertainment, THE PRIZE; OR, 2, 5, 3, 8. Price of admission—Box, one dollar. The doors will open at six, and the curtain rise at seven o'clock precisely. June 9—2.
TO LET. CAPTAIN BARRY'S Wharf and Ware- house, together with a Neat and com- fortable dwelling house, Eastern Branch.— Possession can be had immediately. Apply to Mr. J. D. BARRY. June 9—2.
A WET NURSE WANTED. A young healthy woman, with a good breast of Milk, is wanted—Enquire at the office of the National Intelligencer. June 9—2.
CONVEYANCING. DEEDS of conveyance, Mortgages, Bills of Sale, Bonds, Articles of Agree- ment and all other instruments of writing, drawn with accuracy and agreeing with the most approved forms, may be had at the office of the subscriber, corner of north F street and 14th street west. JAMES KEARNEY. June 9—36.
FOR NEW ORLEANS. THE Schooner DORCHESTER, a staunch, good vessel, will sail in six days—For freight of 200 barrels which will be taken low, or for pas- sage, for which there is good accommo- dation, apply to the master on board, lying at the Navy Yard wharf. June 9—41.
HOUSES TO RENT. TO rent and possession given immediate- ly, a store-house on Pennsylvania Ave- nue, opposite Lindsay's Hotel. The house contains a store room twenty by twenty-six feet, with a good dry cellar below and loft above of the same size. This situation is as well calculated for a dry good or gro- cery store as any in the city. Also a Two Story Brick House on F street, a few doors east of the B. nk, and the next to Mr. Shoe- maker's. This house has six rooms, four of which have five places, and a good sized garden attached to it. I will sell the last mentioned property low and on a long credit. To rent or purchase apply to the Subscriber, or in his absence to H. C. Weightman. JOHN WILLIS. Washington, June 9th—41.
TOMMUS EGGS. Has just received and opening at his New Cash Store, a complete and well selected assortment of SEASONABLE AND FANCY GOODS, which being purchased for money, gives him the opportunity of offering the same at Baltimore and Philadelphia Prices. As he is determined to sell for very small profits. He intends keeping on hand a good assortment of Goods, to be sold by the piece; and those who purchase to sell again, will be furnished at as low rates as they can purchase in any market in the United States, being determined to sell. CASH GIVEN FOR TOBACCO Inspected at the Georgetown Warehouse. June 9—41.
FOR RENT. THE upper part of the House I now occu- py, which has six well furnished Rooms, and every necessary back building, all new- ly furnished and in complete order—The rent will be low to a genteel family, if ap- plication is immediately made. June 9—41.
TEN DOLLARS REWARD. I WILL pay the above, to any person, who will apprehend and secure in any jail, ROSETTA, a Mulatto Girl, 18 years old, the property of Rachel Gantt. She is of the middle size, and has that kind of hair or wool which negroes commonly have. She took with her one jacket and petticoat of cotton and wool, blue and white striped, another of wool, and some other clothes which I cannot describe. It is pro- bable that she will offer her services to any person who will hire her in the city of Washington, if she is not with her mother at a farm of Mr. Stoddert's near Bladens- burg. EDWARD GANTT. June 9—37.
TO BE LET ON GROUND RENT, for 99 years (renewable forever), On Saturday the 24th inst. (June) at the toll house of the Washington Bridge, at five o'clock in the evening. A CONSIDERABLE PART, if not the whole, of square 327, fronting on Maryland Avenue, which leads from the bridge over the Potomac to the Capitol, and contiguous to the foot of the bridge. The square will be laid out into convenient lots, so as to suit those who are disposed to rent. This square being in a most healthy, high and dry situation, and immediately on a great thoroughfare of the city, it is un- necessary to dwell on the probable advantages it will afford for business or for houses of public entertainment. The title is indispu- table. S. SPEARE, Auctioneer. N. B. At the same time will be rented, for one or three years, the Wharf and Ware- house below the bridge, on square 472, late- ly in the occupation of Griffith Coombs. June 9—41.
FOR SALE. ALL or any part of the Estate of the Subscriber, lying on the Eastern Branch of the Potomac, between the two Bridges, and immediately opposite the city of Washington; a considerable part of the Estate is heavily wooded, and the whole is divided into convenient Farms, each con- taining a proper proportion of wood and arable land. On payment of one fourth part of the purchase money, indisputable titles will be made, and reasonable credit or the residue, secured by bond and mort- gage. Also for sale, The whole, or any part of the Estates of the "North American Land Company" and "Aggregate Fund," consisting of divers large bodies of Land variously situated, in the states of New York, Pennsylvania, Mar- yland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Kentucky; and of Horses & Horse Lorns in the City of Washington. On the Sale of which, indis- putable title and very liberal terms, both as to price and periods of payment, will be offered to persons, particularly settlers or farmers. Information, and terms, apply to the Subscriber, in Philadelphia. June 9—41.
PATENT KNAPSACKS. THE Subscriber having obtained from the United States, a patent for an improved KNAPSACK, which in point of durability and con- venience, has been pronounced by the best judges, infi- nitely superior to any hitherto in use. The offi- cers of the different volunteer companies in the United States, are respectfully solicited to adopt them. They may be had in any quantity, and will be sold on the most reasonable terms by JOHN P. LHERBETTE, 31, Maiden Lane, New-York. To whom applications addressed by post may be made, or to B. H. Latrobe, at the city of Washington. May 19—cod4m.
FOR SALE AT PUBLIC AUCTION, On the Premises on the 15th day of June next, at 10 o'clock in the forenoon. LOTS No. 15 and 17, in Sq. 101, in the city of Washington, together with the Buildings thereon standing. Said property is directly opposite Mr. Wm. O'Neal's houses near the West Market, and is most advantageously situated, it being the estate formerly owned by Mr. Samuel Wilson, de- ceased. The terms of payment are one fourth cash in hand, the remainder divided into three equal annual payments which are interest annually on these three payments which are to be secured by good notes negotiable Bank and a mortgage on the property. Also at the same time and place, Two SHARES in the Theatre. April 17—tds
NOW OPENING AND FOR SALE. MR. C. WEIGHTMAN'S Book-Store, Pennsylvania Avenue, a hand- some assortment of Books, and Stationary, amongst which are the following: LAW BOOKS. Harrison's Chancery, 2 vols. Sugden's Law of Vendors, Newland on Contracts, Roberts on Fraudulent Conveyances, Kid on Awards, Schwy's Nisi Prius, 3 vols. Maxwell's Law Dictionary, Watson on Partnership, Butler's Horse, etc. Burrow's Reports, 5 vols. Admiralty Decisions, 2 vols. Douglas's Reports, 2 vols. Robinson's Admi- ralty Reports, 5 vols. Roberts on Fraud, Amiesley on Insurance, Brady on Distresses, Peake's Evidence, Burdameque on Law, 2 vols. Booth on Real Actions, Noy's Max- ims, Jones on Bailment, Montague on Set- off, Pothier on Obligations, M'Nally's evi- dence, 2 vols. Peake's Nisi Prius, Vernon's Chancery, 2 vols. Lawes on Pleading, Pow- ell on Devises, Parke on Insurance, Cruise on Real Property, 5 vols. Plowden's Re- ports, 2 vols. Hale's Common Law, Notes to Blackstone, Burne's Justice, 4 vols. Attor- ney's Manual, Kyd on Bills, Burne's In- surance, East's Crown Law, 2 vols. Foster's Reports, Dallas' Reports, 3 vols. Study of Law, Day's Espinasse, 2 vols. Buller's Nisi Prius, Gilbert's Law of Evidence, Gray- don's Digest, Tidd's Practice 2 vols. Espi- nasse's Nisi Prius, 2 vols. etc. etc. MISCELLANEOUS. Capt. Fauning's Memoirs, Montgomery's Poems, Chaptall's Chemistry, Barton's St. Pierre 3 vols. Burne's Obstetrical Works, Ramsay's Washington, Campaigns of Bon- aparte, 2 vols. Virgil's Georgics, Complete Farmer, Military Tutor, Lacroix's Military and Political Hints, Military Mentor, 2 vols. Military Library, by Lt. Col. Duane, 2 vols. and 1 vol. plates, Kosciusko's Manoeuvres of Horse Artillery, Rollin's Ancient Histo- ry, 5 vols. 8vo. Lempriere's Classical Dic- tionary, Aiken's Annual Review for 1807, Edinburgh Review for October 1808, etc. M'Culloch's Music, Irish Melodies by Ana- son Moore, etc. etc. NEW NOVELS. Woman, or Ida of Athens, by Miss Ow- enson, Thaddeus of Warsaw, by Miss For- ster, Laura, Exiles of Siberia, Match Girl by Mrs. Edgeworth, 3 vols. etc. MINIATURE EDITIONS. Sharpe's British Theatre 18 vols. Zimmer- man on Solitude, 2 vols. Iliad, Odyssey, Roderick Random, Junius, Old English Ba- ron, Pope, Dryden's Virgil, Ossian, Thom- son's Seasons, Gulliver, Cotton and Moore, Akenside, Gray, Petrarch, Shipwreck, Ste- vens's Lecture on heads, Dictionaries in Or- namented cases, etc. A general assortment of paper, quills, etc. wholesale and retail. Arrowsmith's maps of Europe, and Ame- rica, on rollers, and in portable form, Writ- ing Secretaries, Mathematical Instruments, etc. etc. Printing Ink of the first quality. A few boxes of best Havana Segars. June 5—6t.
MRS. THOMPSON, IN THE SIX BUILDINGS, Can accommodate a few more Gentlemen, or a family, with good bed chambers and the use of a drawing room, with carriage house and sta- bles. May 31—6t.
THIS IS TO FOREWARN all whom it may con- cern from crediting any person on my account, as I am determined to pay no debts contracted by any person but myself after this day. JAMES BODDINGTON. June 7—3t.
CHARLES J. NOURSE Offers for sale—Chateaux Margaux Claret in boxes of 1 dozen. Genuine Old London Particular wine in half pipes and quarter casks. Best Sallad Oil in baskets of 6 bottles each, &c. &c. &c. George Town, May 24—tf.
WEISKOPF and KELLER, CONFECTIONERS, High Street, George-Town, BEG leave to inform the ladies and gen- tlemen of the city of Washington, that they will be daily supplied with ICE CREAMS, to be served up either at their store or privately by giving a previous no- tice thereof. They will constantly be supplied with the various articles of confectionary, preserves, and candies of an exquisite taste. Ladies and gentlemen who will please to favor them, will meet with an anxious de- sire to give general satisfaction. May 26—12t.
A CARD. Mr. DUPORT, respectfully informs the ladies and gentlemen of Georgetown and Washington, that he will open his Dancing School on Tuesday 6th inst. at Mr. A. Ri- chie's, High Street, Georgetown. The sub- scription paper is left at J. Milligan's Book- store, where ladies and gentlemen will please to apply previous to that time. Mr. D's engagements will not permit him to re- main longer than three months. N. B. School for ladies at 4 o'clock P. M. for gentlemen at half past seven. No person can be admitted after the first week.
ROOT MAKING. JOHN MINCHIN, BOOT-MAKER, New Jersey Avenue, near the Capitol, has on hand and manufactures, BOOTS of the first quality, of the best materials and workmanship, and equal in neatness and durability to any in the United States—he can employ FIFTY MEN more to make young shoes, to whom constant employ- ment will be given.
SEBASTIAN SPRING. SITUATED near the new turnpike road between Washington and Alexandria, about three quarters of a mile from the Washington Bridge. The Subscriber has opened a House of Entertainment for the accommodation of travellers, the citizens of both places and their vicinity—Public Dinners and Tea Parties, &c. &c. will be furnished on a short notice in the stile required. He will always keep supplied with the best of Madeira, Port, Claret and Cham- pagne—and will endeavor generally to keep the dainties of the season. A private room will be kept for the accommodation of La- dies. Ladies can be supplied with Syllabus in- der the Cow every morning until six, and every evening until seven o'clock. He flatters himself that the encourage- ment he may receive, will enable him to extend his present plans. A. LINDO. N. B. Just received from New-York, a fresh supply of Champagne, Burgundy and Old Hocks. Strawberries and Cream, while in season, every afternoon. If for a large party a day's notice is requested. ** Liberal wages for one or two smart boys. May 24—4f.
WASHINGTON BRIDGE COMPANY. —NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN— TO THE STOCKHOLDERS of the Wash- ington Bridge Company, that the FIFTH INSTALMENT of TEN dollars on each share is hereby called for, which must be paid on or before the 15th of June next, agreeably to the act of Congress, entitled, "An act authorising the erection of a Bridge over the river Potomac, within the District of Columbia." By order of the Directors, DANL. CARROLL, of Dud. President. May 26—4d15thJun.
TWENTY DOLLARS REWARD. RANAWAY from the subscriber living in Alexandria, on the 22d ult. THO- MAS BURNETT, an apprentice to the sail making business, about nineteen years of age, five feet three or four inches high, fair complexion, and has but little to say except when spoken to. As his mother keeps house for a Mr. Clark, up Rock Creek, into Montgomery county about 12 miles, I ex- pect he may be found there or thereabouts. The constables of this and the adjoining counties are requested to pay attention to this advertisement. The above reward will be given to any person who will secure him so that I get him again, or if brought home all reasonable charges will be paid. All persons are forewarned from harboring, em- ploying, or carrying him away, as I am de- termined to put the law in full force against any such offender. DANIEL M'DOUGALL. June 7—3t.
WALTER COX, Has just received for sale at T. Craven's Store, Navy-Yard, a valuable collec- tion of books On Law, Physic, Divinity, History, Voyages, Novels, low priced Family Bibles, and School Books. June 2—7t.
TO BE SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION, AT Northumberland court house, in the county of Northumberland, and state of Virginia, on Tuesday the 5th of Sep- tember next, at 11 o'clock in the forenoon, five contiguous plantations, amounting together to about 2,700 acres, situate on the river Potomac, and within about three miles of the court house. These estates formerly belonged to Presley Thornton, Esq. and are the same on which he lived. They have ne- ver been seen by either of the subscribers, but it is understood, that about 1700 acres of them are as valuable low grounds as any on the river, and a considerable part there- of heavily timbered. The uplands consist of about 1000 acres, and the whole is well calculated for the production of corn, wheat, tobacco, timothy and small grain of all kinds, in great abundance. The waters are said to abound with excellent fish, oysters and wild fowl. The water carriage is easy and convenient to Norfolk, Baltimore, Alex- andria and the city of Washington; and as these estates possess several good mill seats, with an abundance of water and a plentiful supply of timber, they must be very valua- ble. The premises will be shown to persons in- clining to purchase, by col. James Moore, who lives on them, or by Samuel Blackwell, Esq. who lives near to them; and the terms of payment may be known a sufficient time before the sale, by applying to either of them, or to THOMAS ROBINSON, Near Chester, Delaware, Or to W. LEWIS, at Phila. June 7—4ds.
GRAND NATIONAL FESTIVAL FOR THE FOURTH OF JULY, 1809. THE subscriber proposes, should it be approved of by the citizens of the district of Columbia, to furnish a dinner for a number not exceeding 500 persons, in the grove adjoining his spring, which forms a beautiful shade and will be covered with a thousand yards of canvas handsomely deco- rated. He also proposes illuminating the grove in the evening with variegated color- ed lamps, and to conclude the mirth of the day with fireworks. The best band of mu- sic that can be obtained will be procured to assist in the grand festival. Should his plan be approved of, an early notice would be necessary, in which case the co-operation of two gentlemen of the district in his line of business will be solicited. A. LINDO, Sebastian Spring. June 7—.
AT PUBLIC SALE. WILL be sold on Thursday the 15th in- stant, at 11 o'clock A. M. at Lindsay's Ho- tel, on Pennsylvania Avenue, Lot No. 15 in square 489, in this city, either whole or di- vided into two equal parts of 25 feet 6 in each, in front, and nearly one hun- dred feet in depth, as will best accommo- date purchasers. The premises are el- egantly situated, east of the great Hotel, in an elevated position, fronting on the Judi- ciary square, and commanding a most inter- esting and extensive view. The terms of sale will be one third cash in hand, another third at 60 days, and the remainder at 90 days. The two last payments to be secured by approved and endorsed notes, negotiable at the bank. June 7—tds.
JUST RECEIVED AT REILLY'S STORE, ON PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, Fresh Lemons, A few boxes good Raisins, Jameison's celebrated Crackers, and Flour for family use of a superior quality.
FOR SALE AT PUBLIC AUCTION, On the Premises on the 15th day of June next, at 5 o'clock in the afternoon. LOT No. 3, in Sq. No. 161 in the city of Washington together with a Dwelling House and Slaughtering-House thereon. Said property is well situated for a butcher. A fine run of water passes near it. It was former- ly owned by Daniel Guyer. Terms of pay- ment, one fourth cash in hand, one fourth payable in six months from the sale with interest, one fourth payable at the end of 12 months with interest and the remainder payable at the end of 18 months with inter- est. Said payments are to be secured by good notes negotiable at the Bank and a mortgage on the property. April 17—tds
CHARLES H. VARDEN, MERCHANT TAYLOR, RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia and Public in general, that he has received by a late arri- val from Philadelphia, a Choice Assortment of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, single and double milled, superfine Coating, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment Sponcetelets & rich silk Molekins for Waist- coats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season. Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform stile of fashion. Richard Horwell's celebrated PATENT PARALLEL SUSPENDERS far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms retail, as at his Manufactory. November 27—4f.
WILLIAM S. NICHOLLS, Has just received from Philadelphia, AND OPENED FOR SALE, At his Store, opposite the Coffee House, an extensive assortment OF SPRING & SUMMER GOODS, Which being purchased on the very lowest terms—principally for cash—he will sell them as low as any person in this place. His assortment has generally been very complete; but he can assure his friends that it is better this spring than usual. He has many goods which he will sell by the piece lower than can be had in this place. Purchasers who wish to buy to sell again, will find it to their advantage to call on him. Georgetown, May 29—Sw.
BATH. THE trustees for the town of Bath, Ber- kley County, Virginia, think it their duty to state to the public that the old tim- bers which formed the Bath and lower part of the Bath House have been removed and their places supplied with new baths, trunks, &c. built with sound timber, which will no doubt add to the health and pleasure of persons who may visit the place the ensu- ing season. The inhabitants have promised that cleanliness shall be strictly attended to, so that nothing will remain to affect the health of the place. Rawleigh Colston, Elisha Boyd, David Hunter, John Baker, Henry St. Geo. Tucker, Philip C. Pendleton, Alfred P. Powell, Henry S. Turner, Hugh Holmes, Adam S. Danbridge, Trustees. June 7—3t.
A GENEROUS price will be given for four or five likely NEGROES, boys or girls, between twelve and fifteen years old. Enquire of the printer. June 7—3t.
CITY AUCTIONEERS. THE subscribers beg leave to inform their friends and the public, that having gi- ven the security required by law, they ob- tained a license to sell goods, wares and merchandise at vendue in this city. To ac- commodate those who may be pleased to employ them, they have taken a commodi- ous house in the street directly opposite the Marine Barracks, and from their close at- tention to business, they flatter themselves that they will give general satisfaction. NICHOLAS L. QUEEN, HENRY M. QUEEN. May 29—4f.
THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE, THAT I intend to petition to the next County Court of Charles, for the be- nefit of an act of insolvency. GEORGE BOARMAN. Charles County, April 26—wfm
SPRING GOODS. BAKER & RIGGS—SIGN OF THE PLOUGH, Has received by the late arrivals an extensive assortment of DRY GOODS, Which they will sell at reduced prices for cash, or to punctual customers at short dates. Among their stock are— 550 Pieces Calicoes, Cambrie Muslins, Gingham, Dimities, Chintzes & Shirt- ing Muslins. 500 Pieces of coarse and fine India Mus- lins. 2500 Yds. Bright Ingrane and Venetian Car- petting. 600 Yds. Italian, French and India Silks. Noted, Ceded, Mubnal and Leno Muslins. Fancy Robes, Long Shawls, Spencers and Veils. Silk and Cotton Hosiery, Sleeves and Gloves. Cloths, Fancy Waistcoating, and fine Hats. Elegant Silk Shawls, Linnen Cambrics and Laces. 10 Cases Furred and Wool Hats—Cheap. Furniture Calicoes, Dimities and Checks. Furniture Fringe, Lace, Tassels and Hat- ters Trimmings. Bed Ticking, Sheetings, Table Cloths and Diapers. White Janes, Country Linen and Ozna burgs, &c. —ALSO— Many other articles not mentioned.—A lib- eral deduction will be made to large buyers and those that buy to sell again. Also—Just received from the manufactory in Rhode Island, 1200 yards of American made PRINTING. Cheaper and sup- June 7—.
JUST RECEIVED AT REILLY'S STORE, ON PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, Fresh Lemons, A few boxes good Raisins, Jameison's celebrated Crackers, and Flour for family use of a superior quality.
FORTY DOLLARS REWARD. RANAWAY from the subscriber living in Essex, about 12 miles below Tappa- hannock, a likely negro man named CHARLES. Of a dark complexion, large white eyes, large black whiskers, inclined to be bow- legged. Had on when he went away, a dark great coat lined with green baze, and took with him sundry other clothing that at pre- sent cannot be recollected. He has a wife living at Capt. Henry Garnet's in this coun- ty—his mother belongs to Mrs. Blair in Fredericksburg. It is probable he may be lurking about one or other of those places. The above re- ward will be paid for apprehending and de- livering the above described fellow to me, or securing him in any jail so that I get him again, if taken out of the state of Virginia. If taken within the state, I will give twenty dollars for his apprehension and delivery. JAMES ROY. Letters directed to me, at Tappahannock, Virg. will be attended to J. R. June 7—3t.
FOR SALE AT PUBLIC AUCTION, On the Premises on the 15th day of June next, at 5 o'clock in the afternoon. LOT No. 3, in Sq. No. 161 in the city of Washington together with a Dwelling House and Slaughtering-House thereon. Said property is well situated for a butcher. A fine run of water passes near it. It was former- ly owned by Daniel Guyer. Terms of pay- ment, one fourth cash in hand, one fourth payable in six months from the sale with interest, one fourth payable at the end of 12 months with interest and the remainder payable at the end of 18 months with inter- est. Said payments are to be secured by good notes negotiable at the Bank and a mortgage on the property. April 17—tds
CHARLES H. VARDEN, MERCHANT TAYLOR, RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia and Public in general, that he has received by a late arri- val from Philadelphia, a Choice Assortment of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, single and double milled, superfine Coating, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment Sponcetelets & rich silk Molekins for Waist- coats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season. Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform stile of fashion. Richard Horwell's celebrated PATENT PARALLEL SUSPENDERS far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms retail, as at his Manufactory. November 27—4f.
WILLIAM S. NICHOLLS, Has just received from Philadelphia, AND OPENED FOR SALE, At his Store, opposite the Coffee House, an extensive assortment OF SPRING & SUMMER GOODS, Which being purchased on the very lowest terms—principally for cash—he will sell them as low as any person in this place. His assortment has generally been very complete; but he can assure his friends that it is better this spring than usual. He has many goods which he will sell by the piece lower than can be had in this place. Purchasers who wish to buy to sell again, will find it to their advantage to call on him. Georgetown, May 29—Sw.
BATH. THE trustees for the town of Bath, Ber- kley County, Virginia, think it their duty to state to the public that the old tim- bers which formed the Bath and lower part of the Bath House have been removed and their places supplied with new baths, trunks, &c. built with sound timber, which will no doubt add to the health and pleasure of persons who may visit the place the ensu- ing season. The inhabitants have promised that cleanliness shall be strictly attended to, so that nothing will remain to affect the health of the place. Rawleigh Colston, Elisha Boyd, David Hunter, John Baker, Henry St. Geo. Tucker, Philip C. Pendleton, Alfred P. Powell, Henry S. Turner, Hugh Holmes, Adam S. Danbridge, Trustees. June 7—3t.
A GENEROUS price will be given for four or five likely NEGROES, boys or girls, between twelve and fifteen years old. Enquire of the printer. June 7—3t.
CITY AUCTIONEERS. THE subscribers beg leave to inform their friends and the public, that having gi- ven the security required by law, they ob- tained a license to sell goods, wares and merchandise at vendue in this city. To ac- commodate those who may be pleased to employ them, they have taken a commodi- ous house in the street directly opposite the Marine Barracks, and from their close at- tention to business, they flatter themselves that they will give general satisfaction. NICHOLAS L. QUEEN, HENRY M. QUEEN. May 29—4f.
THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE, THAT I intend to petition to the next County Court of Charles, for the be- nefit of an act of insolvency. GEORGE BOARMAN. Charles County, April 26—wfm
SPRING GOODS. BAKER & RIGGS—SIGN OF THE PLOUGH, Has received by the late arrivals an extensive assortment of DRY GOODS, Which they will sell at reduced prices for cash, or to punctual customers at short dates. Among their stock are— 550 Pieces Calicoes, Cambrie Muslins, Gingham, Dimities, Chintzes & Shirt- ing Muslins. 500 Pieces of coarse and fine India Mus- lins. 2500 Yds. Bright Ingrane and Venetian Car- petting. 600 Yds. Italian, French and India Silks. Noted, Ceded, Mubnal and Leno Muslins. Fancy Robes, Long Shawls, Spencers and Veils. Silk and Cotton Hosiery, Sleeves and Gloves. Cloths, Fancy Waistcoating, and fine Hats. Elegant Silk Shawls, Linnen Cambrics and Laces. 10 Cases Furred and Wool Hats—Cheap. Furniture Calicoes, Dimities and Checks. Furniture Fringe, Lace, Tassels and Hat- ters Trimmings. Bed Ticking, Sheetings, Table Cloths and Diapers. White Janes, Country Linen and Ozna burgs, &c. —ALSO— Many other articles not mentioned.—A lib- eral deduction will be made to large buyers and those that buy to sell again. Also—Just received from the manufactory in Rhode Island, 1200 yards of American made PRINTING. Cheaper and sup- June 7—.
UNITED STATES—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ss. In Chancery, December Term 1808. Benjamin Stoddert and John Mason, versus Thomas Waters Griffith, John R. Livingston, Jonathan Burrell, Gobault and Dodrey, James C. Montflorece, I. I. Picard, James Davidson, Robert R. Livingston and Daniel Parker. THE bill states that the defendant Tho- mas Waters Griffith was the agent of the house of Taney and Simmond for the delivery of a cargo of flour belonging to the said Taney and Simmond to the French government—that the French gov- ernment not being able to pay ready money for the said cargo the balance due thereon from the said government was placed to the credit of the said Griffith the agent, instead of being placed to the credit of the real owners Taney and Simmond; that the debt so due hath been liquidated under the Loui- siana Convention in the said Griffith's name, for the sum of one hundred and ninety thou- sand two hundred and seventy seven French money of the value of 35,675 dollars; that the said Thomas Waters Griffith, now resid- ing and for several years past having resid- ed in Baltimore city in the state of Maryland well knowing all the circumstances men- tioned in the complaints said bill, and that the debt aforesaid was liquidated in his name in Paris, under the Louisiana Conven- tion, was in truth and in fact a debt due to the said complainants, as the trustees of Francis Lewis Taney, and Taney and Sim- mond, did execute a writing transferring all the interest of said Griffith in the said debt due to the complainants as trustees aforesaid; that notwithstanding the above circumstances the said Griffith did employ James C. Montflorece of Paris to receive for his own account and use the aforesaid debt which actually belongs to the said com- plainants as trustees aforesaid; & the said Montflorece did actually receive the bills of the Minister of the United States on the Treasury of the United States in part pay- ment of the said debt in four sets of bills drawn in favor of said Thomas Waters Griffith, and which bills have been fraudulently endorsed by the said Montflorece with a view as the said complainants believe to de- fraud them the said complainants, and under a real or pretended power from the said Griffith, & as his attorney to the said I. I. Picard, who endorsed the same over to John R