The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-07-01 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1204.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM,
FRIDAY, JULY 1, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Debate on the bill from the Senate authorising the President under certain conditions to suspend the Embargo law.
(CONTINUED.)
TUESDAY, APRIL 19.
MR. KEY said he well knew how painful it was to address gentlemen who had already made up their minds; but the magnitude of this important constitutional question compelled him to trespass for a few moments on the patience of the House. I shall (said he) confine myself to the constitutionality of the bill from the Senate, in hopes that if the House feel the impressions on the subject which I feel, they will reject it; and at least work it so that the power given to the President shall be constitutional. I was in hopes from the talents of the gentleman who spoke the other day, that I should have heard some reply, some attempt made to defeat the constitutional objections which I offered to the resolution; if they did not meet them with fair argument, that they would at least have shown what part of the conclusions which I had drawn were incorrect. Gentlemen say the argument is not true. They must either allow my deductions, or show wherein I am incorrect in drawing them. I call upon the understanding of the House and their attachment to the constitution, to follow me but for a few moments, and see whether we can vest the power contemplated by the bill.
All the respective representatives of the people, of the states at large, and the sovereignty in a political capacity of each state, must concur to enact a law. An honorable gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Campbell) admitted that the power to repeal must be co-extensive with the power to make. If this be admitted, I will not fail to convince you that in the manner in which this law is worded we cannot constitutionally assent to it. What does it propose? To give the President of the United States power to repeal an existing law now in force—upon what? Upon the happening of certain contingencies in Europe? No; but if those contingencies when they happen in his judgment shall render it safe to repeal the law, a discretion is committed to him upon the happening of those events to suspend the law. It is that discretion to which I object. I do not say it would be improperly placed at all; but the power and discretion to judge of the safety of the United States, is a power legislative in its nature and effects, and as such, under the constitution, cannot be exercised by one branch of the legislature. I pray gentlemen to note the distinction: that whenever the events happen, if the President exercise his judgment upon those events, and suspend the law, it is the exercise of a legislative power; the people by the constitution of the country, never meant to confide to any one man the power of legislating for them.
Is the suspension of the law a legislative act? Can any man doubt it? It is as much a legislative act as to repeal or make a law; and the same power which can give any man a right to suspend a law, can give him an equal right to make a law. I ask if these principles are not clear and manifest to any one who will consider them? Is the power to suspend a law a legislative act? Certainly; because it changes the law to a new rule of conduct. For instance—the law is in full force; no ship or vessel can depart from our ports. That prohibition ceases and a new rule is established, by the suspension of the law. Hence the suspension of a law by repealing an old rule of conduct and establishing a new one, is unquestionably a legislative act. If I am correct—and I call upon gentlemen to show in what respect I am not correct; I call upon them by argument or reasoning to prove that the power of suspending a law is not the power of repealing one—I then beg of you to lay your hand on the constitution of the U. States, and say where is the power of confiding the enactment (repeal and enactment requiring the same power) of laws to any individual whatever? None can be found; and till some can be found, we must recognize it as a sacred truth that under the constitution none does exist.
I have endeavored to show that it is a legislative power, and my reason for so doing was, to testify to a gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Quincy) that with this explanation I will give an easy understanding of this question. I do not say that we cannot give the President upon certain predetermined events a power by which the embargo may be taken off. Such may be done. But when it is done, a repeal or suspension must be the act of the Congress of the U. States, operating upon events or facts to which the President by his proclamation may give publicity. Very different is this bill from that; and from the idea of a gentleman who the other day said that the President was only to judge of the fact. Of what fact? Not of the happening of the events solely; for after they do happen, he is to exercise his exclusive judgment whether it will comport with the safety of the United States to suspend the embargo.
The honorable gentleman does not seem to think that I draw a fair conclusion. I think the bill does not restrict the power of the President to suspend the law upon the happening of certain events. The President is to exercise his sole judgment, upon the happening of these events, whether it is consistent with the safety of the United States to remove the embargo. Is he bound upon the happening of these events to take off the embargo? If not, something more is to be done. He is to exercise a sound discretion whether the trade of our country may be safely prosecuted. He is not even then bound to suspend the whole of the embargo act; but to suspend the whole or in part, under certain exceptions or restrictions. Who is to make these exceptions and restrictions? The President of the United States. Then when under this power of suspension, he makes restrictions to which you are bound to adhere, does he not make that suspension a law of the land? Most manifestly. If he does, is not the suspension an actual imposition of new circumstances? He exercises a legislative act by the suspension, and by fixing terms and conditions on which the commerce of the United States may be afterwards carried on. In both cases he exercises a legislative, not an executive power.
I said the other day that to give the President of the United States power to suspend any law, was equal to giving him a power to suspend all laws. And I ask any gentleman attached to the constitution where they will find that power. For if it be true in part it is true in the whole as to the power; though we may not in our discretion confide the exercise of the whole power to him. Now I ask where the constitution gives us a power to enable him to suspend any law? Of all the powers on earth, even were it clear that we possess it, it ought to be exercised with the greatest hesitation. It was perhaps the most dangerous prerogative ever claimed by the crown for several centuries in England—the power of suspending the effects of laws enacted by the people. I call the attention of gentlemen to recollect that when the last of the unfortunate race of Stuart was about to abdicate the throne, one of the greatest reasons for the abdication was his suspending laws; that he undertook to suspend the penal laws respecting the Catholic system, and introduce Popery. The courtiers of those days attempted to justify the power not only as a prerogative of the crown, but as often given to it by the people; and in ransacking the history of England, but two precedents were found. No sooner did the patriot convention meet, but in the most solemn manner they declared that such a power did not exist; and governed as that parliament are now by corruption and intrigues, there never since has been an attempt to give the king the power of suspending laws. My observations flow from no want of confidence in the Executive. I am in conscience and conviction opposed to our having the right to impart a legislative power at all. In England it might be done, because the legislature is omnipotent; but we are limited within the sphere of our constitution; and if the power is not there to be found, it can no where exist. Hence I state that in forming this constitution it was declared that all laws to be enforced must have the assent of the three branches representing three distinct interests of the com-
munity; and to repeal them the same formality is required.
It has been said that powers analogous to that now attempted to be given, have been exercised. One in the case of the non-importation law; where the power to suspend was contained in the body of the law itself. I can satisfy the gentleman from Massachusetts that the powers which he refers to were all executive, capable of being exercised by any one as well as by the President. If we have authority to give the President of the United States the power of suspending a law, have we not a right to select any other man in society, and give him the same power? We cannot transfer it any where. I ask the gentleman if we are capable of giving power to the President of the United States to suspend a law, can we not to any officer of departments? If we cannot, what limits us? How are we bound? By what clause in the constitution and on what principle? The President if it is true is the person to whom, if we had the power, it would be most properly confided; but there is nothing which confines us exclusively to him, or which prevents us if we have authority to delegate the power at all, from giving it to another.
The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Quincy) observed that there is a distinction to be taken in the construction of the constitution, from nature and necessity. I sit so remote from him that I could not distinctly hear him. But I cannot see how there can be any distinction in our power from the nature of things, the whole constitution being in writing, containing limitations to our power; nor from necessity, for if that is to have any weight, the constitution is a perfect panacea. The constitution has limited our power and never even thought of nature or necessity; but told you to revolve in the sphere prescribed to you. As to legislative power, there can be no distinction in it on earth; it is a simple unique power—the right to make, suspend, or repeal laws. There are powers created by that legislative authority; and there the gentleman ought to have taken his distinction. The legislative authority may communicate power to any man in the country to be exercised. They may direct a survey of the country to be made, and empower the President to appoint the person to execute it. This is a power created by the legislature to be exercised by the Executive, not involving a legislative power at all. So by borrowing money. The power of borrowing money was an authority given to Congress to enable them to pledge the faith of the U. States as a guarantee to inspire confidence in those who might lend. When a law passes for borrowing money you may constitute any person in the country an agent to execute the bond which may be given, to negotiate a loan, or to receive the money into the Treasury. Is there in transacting this business any thing of a legislative power? Certainly not. If by this bill the President of the United States was limited upon the happening of certain specified events to issue his proclamation, and thereupon that the law should cease and determine, I should have no objection to it. I will read my ideas which might have met the ideas of the House, and will go far to explain to what point I would go and where I would stop. [Mr. Key then read an amendment somewhat similar to that offered by Mr. Randolph; that in the event of peace or official notification of the rescinding the orders and decrees of the belligerents, &c. the President should issue his proclamation declaring the fact, and thereupon the law imposing an embargo should be repealed.] This, said he, is a legislative repeal or suspension of the act laying an embargo, upon the happening of certain events; involving no power or discretion of any one human being. The suspension or repeal follows by the constitutional exercise of our power, upon the happening of those events which the Executive by proclamation shall notify. And let any gentleman show how any farther power can constitutionally be given.
Other cases were mentioned where impliedly or directly the President
might or must have power to suspend our laws. I agree with gentleman that we may give these powers in the manner which the constitution requires. The President may have power to suspend our intercourse with any port or country in case of contagion. In this case it depends upon the phraseology of the law whether the power be constitutionally exercised or not. If we state in an intercourse law that if a disease shall exist in any of the West India islands or elsewhere, and that upon proclamation of the existence of such disease the law shall be suspended, the provision made is entirely different from that contemplated by the present bill. I say if gentlemen will attend to the distinction they will find that it is as plain as the sun at noon day. It requires but little discernment to perceive that in the present case you devolve a power of suspension or repeal; while, in the case adduced as parallel, the law suspends itself. It requires but little distinction of ideas to mark a difference between a case in which we ourselves by law suspend an act upon the happening of an event yet in the womb of time, and a case in which we give the Executive a power to suspend the law ad libitum when that event does happen.
I therefore do give the bill from the Senate my decided opposition, on the ground that we cannot pass the bill as sent to us; not that I am unwilling to raise the embargo, for I wish an immediate repeal. Being apparently in a small minority or that question, I am willing to acquiesce in such a measure as that proposed, if it can be done on terms to which I can consistently accede. If there is no difficulty as to events on which the embargo shall be suspended, I feel inclined to hope that my amendment will be adopted. If there be a difficulty it may be modified.
The examples of former times would have little influence on my mind. I should lament that in the early part of our republican government constructions so dangerous had been given. Instead of pursuing them, the wiser way would be to immediately to retrace our steps and rally round the constitution. It will take a weight off my mind, if I can be convinced, 1. That the phraseology of this bill does not give the President a legislative power; and 2. If it does, that there should be a concurrence of sentiment so to modify it as to vest the power in such a manner as to make its exercise consonant with the constitution.
MR. HOLLAND said when this subject had been first introduced he had conceived it to be one of those plain cases which could require no illustration. He had no idea the power could be doubted. He was dissatisfied with the gentleman from Tennessee because he had taken up some time to show that they did possess the power; he then thought all the time taken up on the subject was time lost. It had never been before questioned; the power had been exercised from the commencement of the government to the present time, and never before doubted; and therefore he had been dissatisfied with the gentleman from Tennessee because he took up a few minutes to show that they possessed the power. I am yet (said he) unable to see that the principle of the bill is shaken by the arguments I have heard against it, although much ingenuity has been exercised on the subject by one or two gentlemen; but when we come to examine their arguments, they are far from being plausible, certainly not solid. The gentleman from Maryland supposes that the maxim will not be contradicted that it takes the same power to repeal a law that it does to make it. None will contradict it; but does it apply to this case? Do we vest a power to repeal a law? It is correct that it requires the same power to destroy as to create; that the power creating always has power over the thing which it creates, and can modify it in any manner. If then the power which makes a law says at what particular period and under what particular circumstances this law shall cease to operate, does it follow that the power of suspension given to an agent is an unconstitutional power? If a power be given by the creating power to suspend a law, does it follow that this power has subverted the ori-
ginal intention of the creator? When a power is vested to suspend the operation of a law, the person who exercises this authority, acts in an Executive capacity, and only does what the law enjoins to be done. If I am correct in this, all the arguments of gentlemen in opposition to the bill fall to the ground. One gentleman says that in relation to the non-importation law, the power to suspend that was contained within the law itself. Does he mean to say because this power was not contained in the original embargo law, that we cannot give it by a subsequent act? Certainly the gentleman does not mean this, because this if passed will be a part of the same law; as it is a known principle that all laws on the same subject shall be considered in the same manner as though connected together. It is not material then whether the power of suspension of a law be given in the body of the law itself, or by a subsequent act. The gentleman from Virginia who proposed the amendment under consideration says, if you will authorise a suspension until 20 days after the commencement of the next session of Congress, why not give him power to repeal it altogether? There is some reason why it should not be repealed altogether; for, were it to be repealed, it might be necessary to reinstate it, which would give us the trouble of re-enacting the law; and Congress will be better able then to judge whether it shall be repealed or not, than they are now.
It may be proper, and perhaps it is not out of order, to take some notice of some observations of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) introduced on this subject, not relative to the principle of the bill, for it is so plain that it needs no support, that this power may be given, and that it is expedient to give it: but to take some notice of observations made in the course of the debate.
In the outset of this business he informed the House that he had now discovered that the embargo itself was unconstitutional; that no such power ever did exist under this constitution as the power to lay an embargo. If he be correct in this, there is no necessity to act upon the subject at all; because the judges of your country, if it be unconstitutional, will not permit it to continue in force. However, admitting that it is unconstitutional, he says it is inexpedient. I do not regret the exercise of the power either on the ground of constitutionality or expediency. The gentleman from Virginia has however answered all arguments in opposition to him, by a sweeping denunciation of all lawyers. Perhaps I may be as much liable to the gentleman's displeasure as some others; having been once of a professional character, and gentlemen in that line having been in the habit of advocating right or wrong indiscriminately, no dependence is to be placed on them. It would be well for that gentleman, if instead of an excess of political refinement, he attended a little more to legal distinctions; he would perhaps be more useful in this House, and be better satisfied with his own conduct. Let us examine whether the gentleman is not guilty of the same conduct as that with which he charges other gentlemen. He tells the House that the present embargo is not such an embargo as that which he proposed. What species of embargo did he propose? Was it any wise different from this? For what purpose did he have the journal read on the impost law? Did he do it to show that he opposed the embargo law on constitutional grounds? In what was not his embargo the same as that from the Senate which was adopted? They differ in nothing. Conduct of this kind in a lawyer in or out of court would be chargeable with what is called quibbling; it is too nice and would not reflect honor even on a county court lawyer. I will not be so lost to the politeness which I owe to the gentleman and myself as to say that it actually is equivocating; but really it is a conduct I do not understand.
The gentleman complains that he is frequently misrepresented; that he is scarcely ever understood. It is not necessary for me to say that I do not misrepresent him by design. I will not clear myself of the general aspersion by declarations; actions speak louder than words; I agree with the gentleman from Virginia that those who make many professions cannot

be more relied on than those who make none. Perhaps it would be better for many of us to take up less time with those declarations, and attend more to business. There was a time when I understood the gentleman from Virginia; but that time has gone. I understood him when some years ago he brought forward a proposition in consequence of a message from the Executive in relation to the then agitated question of the right of deposit at New Orleans. The message mentioned "means." The gentleman understood the word and so did the House; they understood money was wanting to purchase Louisiana. The object was effected. But when a proposition of a similar kind came, for purchasing the Floridas, in similar language, I understood it as I did before, to mean money. But the gentleman from Virginia could not understand it. It is well known that he could not or would not understand it; he declared that there was nothing in the message which conveyed that meaning. I confess I did not, could not understand the gentleman then; and I do not understand him yet on that subject.
In 1805 I was equally at a loss to understand the gentleman as I am now. At that time he was for raising a military force. At that time a project of this kind was patronised; it was then for a good purpose, was just and proper. I understood him then to say it was intended to repair the injuries done us by the Spanish nation, as he said, under the influence of the French government. I understood him then to say that G. Britain was fighting the battles of the world, and for the freedom of mankind; and I did not understand him then to say that this army was to be sent upon G. Britain, but upon France and Spain, particularly France. But I understand him now to say that the object he had in view at that time was to bear on France, Spain and England. I cannot understand the gentleman, sir, when he says this; for I understood him at that time to say that England was fighting the battles of the world, and we ought to support her. That army which he wished to raise against France alone, was then proper and of great utility. The present 6000 troops to defend us against England as well as France, are altogether improper, dangerous to the liberties of the nation, and of no use. I cannot understand this, sir.
In 1806, I understood the gentleman to say that the British possessions were worth nothing; and that if we took them we should catch a tartar. But at the commencement of this session, I understood him to say that if he had had the direction of this government, he would have taken Canada and Jamaica, to be held as hostages till the British government came and knocked at our door. If they were worth less than nothing two years ago, how their value is so materially changed, I cannot understand. It is too difficult for my plain understanding.
I did not understand him when he talked of holding them as hostages. The expression was to my view improper, and incorrect in principle. I should have understood him better if he had said that he would have taken the British possessions and maintained them forever. Why tell the world that he would hold them as hostages? A restoration of them to their original possessors would have no effect but to warn them to make them more difficult to be re-acquired, if it should become necessary. What purpose had he then in view? I did not understand this, sir.
I do not very well understand, why, at the commencement of the session, he was so anxious for war, that he wished to have taken Canada; and now he is so amazingly pleased that we shall not fight. Neither do I understand why we should not go to war when the time comes that we ought to go to war; but we ought to consult our reason as to the time, and not our passions.
Neither can I understand the gentleman when he tells the nation that Jay's treaty was an infamous treaty, and at the same time tells you that the rejected treaty which was worse still, ought to have been accepted. This I cannot understand. I acknowledge it is beyond my capacity to understand him, as he has been pleased to observe of other gentlemen. I admit that Monroe's treaty was worse than Jay's; for it does not appear that by it we should have gained a single thing which we wanted, while we conceded every thing. It completely cut off the power of laying an embargo. The gentleman once thought the power of laying an embargo was the only strong power we had in our hands; that power is now abandoned as unconstitutional; for he would have accepted Monroe's treaty. I do not understand this.
On the 18th of last December, an
embargo was our only weapon. On the next day (I speak with confidence because I know I shall not be contradicted) it was a bad one. He would have nothing to do with it, because, as I understood him to say, it operated particularly against England and not against France. The gentleman now tells you that it operates exclusively in favor of England; that it is the only thing she wants; that it gives her the commerce of the whole world. At one time it is a strong weapon which will operate against England alone; at another it is all she wants. This is indeed unintelligible to me.
In 1806, the gentleman complained much of the Executive of this country and our unfortunate situation in consequence of our having no cabinet; it would not point out the course to be pursued; and because it did not, was feeble, weak and good for nothing. But now what is our situation? He says the Executive is too strong; has too much power; that it is a concealed monarchy. I do not understand this, sir.
These extremes in my mind cannot be reconciled; nor do I believe the nation can understand them. The gentleman himself alone can understand them; and all the explanations he can make (and he is at liberty to make ten thousand) will not make them intelligible to the community.
According to the professions of the gentleman himself, none is a greater lover of liberty than he is. I do not doubt his motives; but according to him, the motives of a large majority of this House are much to be suspected. No gentleman in this House or the other looks for better treatment than he does; and yet not a gentleman in this House has taken the liberty to be harsher to others than he has been. No gentleman asks so often to explain; and none before him ever refused liberty to another to explain.
A lover of liberty! I cannot understand him, sir. A gentleman asks leave to explain. "No, sir," he says: "I hold you in contempt." "Encore, (says he) more of it; you are not worthy of a reply." He professes for a gentleman who has rebutted his arguments a sovereign contempt; and although on equal ground as representatives, he will allow no replication. [The Chairman observed to the gentleman that he thought he was not in order.] Mr. H. said, he thought it proper, as the gentleman from Virginia was so often misunderstood, to let him know how he understood him. Considering myself as one of the representatives of the people in common with him, and (I trust) possessing common sense, the gentleman ought to be anxious to know that I understand him correctly. His passions at the moment, according to my understanding, seem to govern all his actions. The whim of the moment—[The Chairman reminded Mr. H. that the question before the House was on Mr. Randolph's amendment.] I understand the Chairman, said Mr. H. I am combining reasons why the amendment should not be adopted. I do not trouble the House very often, and as great liberties have been taken by the gentleman from Virginia in relation to others, I wish to make some observations in reply. His passions regulate all his political conduct; and he is so fond of his conduct, that he is fond of all those who support it. They are all men of the highest respectability and talent; very learned and wise, and entitled to great consideration: while those who oppose his measures are disgraced in his opinion.
What I have said as to this character so far, will show the point of view in which I have considered the gentleman and the measures which he has professed. The view I have taken may be wrong; but I take the same view of this amendment: and shall certainly be satisfied if the gentleman will say that my views originate in a want of capacity. If he lets me off in that way I shall be content. There are such a vast number of corresponding circumstances which convince me that no faith is to be put in any measures proposed by him, that he must excuse me for not relying implicitly on the present proposition. It has conceded the position which he himself contested; it admits a discretionary power, putting it in his own language. I think I understand all men who speak the language of their hearts; but if that gentleman speaks the language of his heart I do not understand him; and I have assigned these facts to show why I cannot. I never can understand a person who at one time says a thing is constitutional; and at another, the constitution not being amended, says it is unconstitutional. I do not understand this; nor can I understand a gentleman who makes such positive declarations & sudden recantations. I had rather put my confidence in a man not possessed of the same talents, but more uniformity of
judgment; whose opinion on the same subject at different times would be the same. I am astonished, however, that the recollection of the gentleman has not afforded him a sufficient reason to mistrust his own judgment. If he could go back and take as extensive a view of it as I have, he could not but mistrust it. If he does not mistrust it, however, I am still more astonished that he should impose it so frequently and inconsiderately upon others; & upon those especially who by this time do not pay a very high regard to it. For my part I have felt a considerable degree of injury from sitting so long concealing what I feel; for it is a fact, that I would rely on the judgement of ninety-nine individuals out of an hundred of political men in preference to that of the gentleman from Virginia; and nine-tenths of the people of the U. S. have, I hope, the same opinion of it. I have however been obliged to sit here day after day, week after week, session after session, hearing what is said to be argument, but what I have considered declamation; for all the argument which he has ever used might be confined within a nut shell. This, in common with my fellow-members, I have been compelled to bear with. I have heard the most fulsome praise lavished upon all gentlemen who would support those measures which he proposed, and at the same time all others, no matter how venerable, indiscriminately denounced. Age, rank, and reputation, weighed nothing. Not only individuals, in their official, judicial, and political characters have been denounced on occasions when they had not the slightest concern with the subject before the House, but the constituted authorities have been abused. How often have we been treated with denunciations of the Senate, and an extreme solicitude lest that body should violate the constitution! Where is the use of all this? Is it intended to harmonise the public councils or the nation? Certainly not. Will it inspire confidence in the government at home or abroad? Certainly not. Then why do we hear it on this floor?
I rejoice that no very bad effects have as yet resulted from all this; and I felicitate the nation that whatever has been the design, these things have not operated. Our officers, civil, military and judicial, all retain the confidence of the people, as well as we ourselves. Not only so, but we possess the confidence of the powers abroad; the nations of the world are obliged to respect us—not from our power, but from the purity of the principles which direct our government. There can be no doubt in the sound mind of any man who will examine the conduct of this nation, but that the measures of government, if persisted in, will have the desired effect. No doubt if we go on with a solemn steady step we shall accomplish our object; but let us not go back; let us not put on the same character that the gentleman himself has assumed. No, sir; let men do as they will, when nations move, they should proceed slowly and steadily—never retreat. I therefore think it would be exceedingly fortunate for some gentlemen if they could confine their observations to legislative subjects, and not interfere with the concerns of the other departments, which are beyond their sphere of judging correctly. If they will do this, their conduct may be of some use to the nation and to themselves. But at present those who indiscriminately denounce every eminent man in the nation, can do no honor to their hearts or heads. In England the minority in Parliament are generally respectable, being elected for their talents and independence; but it does not follow in this country, where our institutions are different, that a systematic minority should possess either talents or respectability. They should not from policy oppose every measure. I know not that any gentleman do this exactly, but their conduct is so extremely like system, that it is difficult to tell whether it partakes of it or not.
I have seen with regret, and so have many of his friends, that the gentleman from Virginia has of late pursued this course. It always gives me pain to see talents misapplied; for from misapplication arises injury. I do not regret it so much on account of public injury resulting from it, as on account of that which the individual himself must sustain. The public however may have sustained some injury—not in consequence of any division which this conduct has created in the nation, for the citizens have too much understanding to be misled by it, they are capable of understanding the difference between declamation and solid argument; but I regret that we should have been told on this occasion and others that we cannot go on in the way which we have begun; that we cannot bear the embargo;
that we cannot resist. I do not regret the operation of this language upon the House, for we know how to estimate it; but it will pass over the water. Declamations of this kind have no good effect abroad, if relied on as coming from men of understanding. I regret also that we are told that Great Britain will never relinquish the right of impressment. I regret that we are told by the gentleman from Virginia that we shall not go to war. It is not correct: this nation will go to war when the time comes, and perhaps that may shortly come. The nations of the world ought not to be told the contrary, unless it be with a design to encourage those nations in persisting in those injuries which they have done us. It is said that the English prints have corroborated what is said here—that America will not go to war; that if they persist in their injuries, all will be conceded. This conduct may be American, and correct; but to my understanding it is not.
It is said by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Masters,) that any treaty, no matter what, is better than war. That does not appear to be the language of an American. It certainly comes from an American; but there is a vast difference between this and the language of '76. At that time, when we were weak and feeble, possessing no common government, and broken into factions, we went to war with one heart and one soul to contend for our rights and liberties. America will do it yet in preference to signing a treaty which commutes their liberties and rights. We may bear—we have borne with transgression and insult, but when the time comes when it will be necessary to bear with them no longer, we shall resent them. The gentleman says that our acts prove that we shall not go to war. Do our acts at this session prove it? Quite the contrary. Our present regular force, with the additional 6000, and our 100,000 militia, are more than competent to reduce British or Spanish America. I should not hesitate to say that the ten thousand regulars alone would be a much more efficient force than any which we had at any time during the revolution. We then went to war. Our strength and resources are more than double. Why is it said then that we will not go to war? This opinion cannot be forced upon me or upon the people of the United States.
It is said that you must take off the embargo because it is incidental to war, and we are not at war. I have always understood it to be a precautionary measure which has preceded war. We will keep the embargo on then, till our rights are respected by the nations abroad; we will give them a reasonable time to consider our rights and make reparation. After that time is spent, and we are thus prepared to assert our rights, if they will not do us justice, we shall be able not only to repeal aggression, but to chastise it. We shall be able to do it, sir, come from what quarter it will.
A gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Key) whose opinion we are told by the gentleman from Virginia, is entitled to very great weight, was once of opinion that the embargo might operate on the nations of Europe through their colonies; but he says an experiment of five months has been made and it has not operated, and he is now convinced it ought to be taken off. How could it have operated in four (not five) months, when it has scarcely been heard of in the colonies; and could it be supposed that in four or five months it should have reduced them to starvation? I was opposed to the embargo—not because I did not think it would be an effectual measure, but because I was in hopes of an adjustment of our differences, without it. But after it is laid, and the nations of Europe have proceeded in their new restrictions on our commerce and refused to make reparation for the injuries committed on our national rights, shall we relax the measures which we have adopted? Certainly not. The gentleman from Maryland went further. He said that no measure which we could take could influence the conduct of those nations. Surely that gentleman has not consulted his friends on this subject, nor had time to form a correct opinion himself. Surely if the nations of Europe depend on our raw materials and provisions, they will be affected by the measures which we have taken; and it will be a mere matter of calculation with them, whether they will grant our right, or suffer from the effect of our measures.
It becomes not members of the Congress—Representatives of the United States to express themselves in this way. A member of Congress has said that we cannot affect the European nations. Infuse that
belief in England and France, and when shall we be respected as we ought? Are we so weak, so far below par already, that we must relinquish every thing? It is degrading to the Representatives of a free and great nation to use this language; it cannot convey the sentiments of the gentleman's own constituents. Surely the people of this country do believe that we had better undergo any suffering short of destruction, rather than by compact surrender our rights; rather have signed the rejected treaty, which was not dictated by that spirit of independence which commenced and terminated the American revolution. It was the genius of republican America, the same spirit of independence which was displayed in '76 that dictated the rejection of the treaty, and will support its rejection: and will sustain our measures until our injuries are repaired or we appeal to the God of war.
(DEBATE TO BE CONTINUED.)
WASHINGTON CITY. FRIDAY, JULY 1.
We have pleasure in giving publicity to the following address of Governor Hull to the citizens of Michigan territory on his re-appointment:
An Address to the Citizens of Michigan Territory, by Governor Hull.
Fellow-Citizens of the Territory of Michigan.
In entering on the duties of my office, under a re-appointment as Governor of this territory, I experience all those grateful sensibilities, which the renewed confidence of my country can inspire.
Feeling a deep interest in the prosperity of the territory, I promise the devotion of my best talents and unceasing exertions to promote it.
It is painful to remember all the scenes which have passed. It is unnecessary to detail the causes which have produced them; they have been fully investigated by a virtuous and discerning administration; and a prompt and effectual remedy has been applied. In future it is desirable that they may be remembered only as a warning to others.
On my public conduct alone I have wished my public character to rest. The laws which have been adopted and published, and all my executive proceedings, are on record, and are semi-annually transmitted to Congress. With a perfect knowledge of the manner I had discharged my public duties, a re-appointment has been made; and I shall trouble my fellow citizens, and the world, with no other answer to all the calumny, which has been so copiously and industriously circulated against me, than this renewed mark of public confidence.
With safety I might appeal to the candor and justice of my fellow citizens, who have witnessed all my conduct. I might ask them, whether there existed the least foundation for a single charge published against me? Whether they know of a single act of oppression in the course of my administration? Whether if in any instance I have erred, it has not been on the side of humanity and tenderness? And finally whether they have not good grounds to believe, that all the disturbances in the territory have been raised by a few unprincipled men, for their own advancement, without any regard to the public interest?
Independence of sentiment, and a spirit of free enquiry are congenial to the principles of a republican government. Such a spirit conducted in a decent, firm, and manly manner, ought ever to be encouraged. But when it degenerates into scurrility and abuse, and has no other object than the gratification of party rage and self interest, it becomes odious and detestable. That the officers of the government may feel and manifest by their conduct a sincere desire to promote the public interest; that plain, practical systems may be adopted, such as have been tested by experience, and sanctioned by time; and that the people may be disposed to co-operate in their measures, and that harmony and good will may in future prevail; are the sincere wishes of my heart.
A recollection of the desolation of this town, at the time when the government commenced, and the distresses to which the people were then subjected; and a consideration of its present situation, and the conveniences with which they are now surrounded, affords cause of congratulation. However improbable it may seem, yet it is verified by fact, that it is at this moment more valuable, than before its destruction by fire; and that more improvements have been made in less than three years, than a century before had produced. This is an ho-

notable testimony of the industry and exertions of the people; and the stockades and block-houses erected for the safety and protection of this remote and exposed frontier, will remain as monuments of the patriotic labors of our militia. I am happy however to inform you that these patriotic labors will be remunerated by the justice and liberality of the nation.
The treaty lately concluded with the several nations of Indians, will have a very important operation on the situation of this territory. Without this the country must have remained nearly in the same state it is at present. An extensive and valuable part of the territory will now be opened for settlement and improvement. On this cession are very valuable improvements, to which the possessors had no legal title. For a liberal adjustment of their claims, they may rely with confidence on the equity of Congress. If our country should be preserved in peace, a wide field will be opened for advantageous improvements; our population will undoubtedly rapidly increase; and such strength will be added to this exposed frontier, as to free the people from future alarms, or any apprehension of danger.
That the blessings of peace will be preserved we have great reason to hope, from the wise and temperate measures of our government. It is one of the peculiar felicitous of our country, that no motives of ambition—no considerations of pride, will ever involve us in the horrors of war. Contented with the limits of our territory, there never can be a wish to enlarge them, by any encroachments, and at the expence of the blood of our citizens. Possessing at the same time a spirit of independence, and a just sense of their national rights; no government, and no people, would, with more cheerfulness meet the dangers to which they might be called by such an occasion. In the preservation of their independence they would manifest the same spirit which was displayed in its acquisition. Fortunate country! Fortunate people! May such a spirit ever be nourished, and may such institutions be patronized, as will ensure a continuance of your invaluable blessings.
From the numerous tribes of Indians, under my superintendence I have received the strongest possible assurances of friendship, and good will to the United States. This is to be attributed to the justice and benevolent policy of our government towards them. I have lately received a number of speeches, from the President of the United States to them, which have been interpreted, and impressed on their minds. In them the views of the government are clearly described—the line of conduct proper for the Indians to pursue in the event of war clearly pointed out; that they are to remain quiet spectators of our quarrels, if we should have any—that we do not wish them to waste their blood in fighting our battles—that we are sufficiently strong without their assistance; and warning them in the most forcible language, of the dreadful consequences of raising the hatchet against us. This language has had a powerful effect, and I have reason to believe they are generally determined to follow the advice.
Among the laws which have been adopted, since the commencement of this government, none have met with the disapprobation of Congress, except the one establishing the bank of Detroit. To this law I gave my assent. It was done from the same motives which have influenced all my public conduct. I believed it would give facility to the commerce and business of the country, and promote the public interest. The government from which I derive my authority, have thought differently, and have disapproved the law. It therefore is void. It was well understood by the stock-holders, to be subject to that contingency.
A private institution has since been established in the same building, under the direction of some of the same officers, and the bills appear, and are in circulation, in the form of bank bills; they are signed by a President and Cashier, payable to bearer, and pass without endorsement. The government of this territory have no knowledge of its concerns, nor of the principles on which it is established, unless what appears on the face of the bills. On them a promise is made, that they shall be paid by the President and Directors out of the capital stock and funds; and the stockholders jointly and severally guarantee the payment at their office of discount and deposit, at Detroit. The amount of the capital stock—who are the stockholders—what quantity of bills are in circulation—are circumstances unknown to the government, and of which they have no legal right to demand information. In some of the
original states, laws have been enacted, to restrain private banks, in some of the governments of Europe, they are considered useful institutions, and are rather patronized than discouraged. Since this establishment, a sufficient number of judges have not been present to form a legislative board. The expediency of adopting a restraining law, or any other regulations, on the subject, will be for the consideration of the legislature, whenever a board shall be formed.
As the first magistrate of the territory, and feeling the highest respect for the opinion of the government from which I derive my authority; and as the present operation may have the same effect, as the original institution, which has been disapproved by that government, I have considered it my duty to make this public communication.
At the same time, it is a justice due to those who have the direction of this business, to declare, that no instance of a want of good faith, or punctuality in fulfilling their engagements, has come to my knowledge; and from their respectable characters, there is every reason to expect, it will be conducted with honor and fidelity. The question rests with the legislative authority of the territory, and if the privilege is allowed to one individual or to a company, without any restrictions or regulations, it must be common to all our citizens.
It is unfortunate, my fellow-citizens, that for a year past we have had only one judge in the territory, and have been unable to exercise the legislative authority. It is to be hoped the difficulty will be soon removed, and we shall be in a situation with union and harmony, to adopt such regulations as will promote the public interest. During this period none of our duties as commissioners, under an act of Congress, for "providing for the adjustment of titles of land in the town of Detroit, and territory of Michigan, and for other purposes," could be performed. Individuals entitled to donations under this act, have been subjected to inconveniences; and the territory has been deprived of the bounty contemplated by the government for the erection of public buildings.
By a statement of the accounts of the treasurer, which may be seen by any of the citizens, at his office, or at the office of the secretary of the legislative board, there appears to be a balance of about six hundred dollars in the treasury, unappropriated. While it will be a pleasing circumstance to the people to know that they are free from debt, and have money in advance, it will afford a strong evidence of the economy with which the affairs of the territory have been managed; especially when it is considered that the taxes have been light.
Our government, my fellow-citizens, is yet in its infancy; it has not arrived to the age of three years. If nothing had happened to impede its growth, from its age, it must have been feeble and weak. Since its birth it has been seized with convulsions, and terrified by the tomahawk and scalping knife. In addition to this it has experienced other diseases which have agitated other parts of the world. Under all these circumstances, the most which could have been expected was the preservation of its existence. Its convulsions have now ceased, and it appears to be gaining health; some of the old physicians have been dismissed, and new ones called in, more skillful it is to be hoped than the old. It will now be necessary to infuse into it, moral health, to make every necessary provision for its safety, and to lay a solid foundation for the important destinies which await it. In the performance of this arduous, and important duty, I invite my associates to engage with harmony and zeal, and all who are interested in its welfare to co-operate with candor and liberality.
WILLIAM HULL.
It is with satisfaction we state the republication in this country of the celebrated speech of Henry Brougham on the British Orders, delivered before the House of Commons on the 1st of April. It is a masterly performance, in the happiest manner uniting eloquence and argument; and demonstrates, not merely the futility of the orders, but their absolute destructiveness to the interests of Great Britain. We shall, as soon as possible, lay copious extracts before our readers. In the mean time we invite their attention to the following, which presents in a somewhat new light a part of the subject discussed; and shews that the justification of the British orders on the ground of retaliation is among the idlest subterfuges ever resorted to, to vindicate a measure radically vicious in itself.
"Late in the year 1806, Bonaparte, in a moment, it should seem, of elation, unhappily by no means unnatu-
ral in his situation, thought of issuing a decree which might affect the trade and navigation of this country, as extensively as those other decrees which he had issued upon the continent, and had executed by half a million of armed men. This decree was not then for the first time tried, nor was it accounted by him an experiment of a very novel description, although received in this country as something wholly new. It had been repeatedly tried before, and had in every instance manifestly failed. Not to go back to the war of 1739, I may only observe that in the war of 1756, the principle was broadly laid down by the French government, that the seizure of any manufactures or produce of the British dominions should render the whole cargo, among which they were found, liable to confiscation. Towards the end of the American war a similar principle was partially attempted to be introduced: but of these I need not say much; for in the course of the revolutionary war two decrees similar to the former, though still more near the Berlin decree, were issued. Of these it may be necessary for me to mention the substance. The first of them was issued in 1796, and after a variety of other clauses, it subjects all ships carrying British goods to seizure and detention. We find not merely the detail of the Berlin decree introduced as to the goods, but also the provision requiring a certificate of origin (as this document has since been called,) which was deemed a sine qua non for saving the ship and cargo from detention. A similar decree was issued in 1800, after Bonaparte's arrival in France. It was generally promulgated, and remains, as far as any such decrees can be, in force. In 1797 those belligerent principles were extended from the cargo to affect the ship; and I hold in my hand a decree issued by the council of Five Hundred, enacting that the characters of vessels shall be determined by their cargoes. In consequence of this enactment, every vessel, loaded in whole or in part with English goods, was declared lawful prize. The second article declares that no foreign vessel, which in the course of her voyage shall have entered an English port, shall be permitted to enter any port in the French dominions."
"It is surely needless for me to prove that, although these orders were thus promulgated, they never were executed. I need not bring evidence to show that these commercial decrees were nugatory. After they were issued the progress of our exports proceeded not merely increasing, but in a short period almost to double the amount of former times. It is notorious that France, in spite of all such prohibitions, has been consuming daily more and more of the produce of this country, down to the period of the Berlin edict. But, however efficacious these boasts may have proved, the enemy, it seems, determined once more to try their effect. He resolved to have another decree at us and at our trade, expecting perhaps to frighten, if he could not hurt us. Accordingly, in the month of November, 1806, he issued that one which forms the pretext for our Orders in Council. This decree consists of three branches. It condemns all cargoes of British produce or manufacture; it threatens the seizure of all vessels going to or from England; and it shuts the ports of the enemy against all vessels which have last cleared out from British ports. It may be asked what chance was there that such a decree as this should succeed? Was it that France had determined suddenly to assemble all her fleets, and venture to send them to sea, which she had not dared to do before? Was it that she then intended to engage all our blockading and cruising squadrons, which till now she never durst look in the face? Was it that she purposed in this manner to beat us out of the water, and destroy, as it were, our naval superiority? Or was it that without these preliminary steps, she was, by her mere influence and great name upon the continent of Europe, to stop all vessels sailing upon the sea to or from England, to seize every article of our produce which could be found floating on the ocean, to do that which we, even we, with all our naval superiority, are not able to effect? Surely if France had not the power to execute her design in some of these ways, it might have been calmly regarded as a mere empty menace; nay, a stale one too. We might really have hoped, that so vapourish and spiritless a boast would not again have taken in those who had been so often before duped into a vain alarm by it. Nevertheless it should seem that the enemy knew us better; for we no sooner heard of it than we fell into our old error of supposing that, because it was a French manifesto, regularly drawn up, and enforced by
Bonaparte's power on shore (where it might produce some effect) therefore it was also to have similar effects by sea."
"Sir, until our Orders in Council were issued, it appears clearly, without any reasoning, to any one who looks at the subject, that there was no possibility whatever of Bonaparte putting his threats into execution. But in order to show this more evidently than could possibly be effected by any arguments, we have brought witnesses to your bar, merchants engaged in trade with the continent, who have been able to state distinctly by dates, names and circumstances, the manner in which those decrees operated."
"We learn by the Raleigh Register, that Messrs. Franklin, Holland, and M. Williams, Representatives from the state of North-Carolina, have declined a re-election to Congress."
The following paragraph is extracted from the answer of the Senate of the state of New Hampshire to the Governor's speech at the opening of the session.
"From the view we have been able to take of the subject, we have the highest confidence in the virtue, integrity, and ability of those who administer our general government; a confidence which we feel a bounden duty, particularly at this time, to express in this public manner. A confidence, which if universally expressed by the citizens of the U. States, would give new nerve and energy to government. We believe our general government has taken that commanding and dignified yet that conciliatory and amicable stand, in relation to its general conduct, towards the great belligerent powers of Europe, which under the smiles of our Heavenly Guardian, has and ought to preserve us, and we most ardently hope, may long continue to protect us from the numerous evils incident to and inseparable from war."
The following is an extract of the answer of the House of Representatives to the same address.
"Your opinion respecting the measures of the general government coincides with our own; we believe the President of the U. States wise, patriotic and faithful. We believe the objects of his administration, from the time of his elevation to the Presidential chair until the present day, have been the honor and happiness of his country. And we rest satisfied, that at the present crisis in our affairs the measures pursuing, are founded in wisdom and the purest patriotism; and are consistent with a regard to our own safety and honor, to a love of justice and to a desire of peace with all nations."
The following paragraph is from a Charleston paper of the 17th of June:
"A letter from Savannah, to a gentleman in Charleston dated the 12th instant states, that the French privateers L'Exchange and La Jeune Estelle, boarded, off Amelia island, a brig from Baltimore, capt. Brownlow, and took from her 203 barrels flour, and a quantity of other provisions, upon which they fixed their own prices, and gave the captain an order on a person in Charleston, for the amount."
"There is but too much reason to believe that this is another case of violation of the embargo laws; the property having been taken by connivance of the captain of the brig. Indeed a Charleston paper states that it is known that the captain had declared, previous to leaving port, that he would sell his whole cargo to the privateersmen, if he could get a good price for it. These instances of "plunder" and "barbarity," have not been rare of late."
"On the 13th inst. a transport with a company of artillery, arrived at Halifax from Cork. She parted company on the passage, with another transport, with artillerymen also bound to Halifax—they were part of a fleet of 75 vessels, under convoy of the Nemesis and Plover, the rest bound to Newfoundland and Quebec."
Aurora.
"By a late trial before the U. S. circuit court for the district of Georgia, the principal has been established, that the individual states have a right to impose a tax on the U. S. Bank, or its branches, established within their territorial jurisdiction. It is said, however, that an appeal will be made to the supreme court."
Dali. Evening Post.
"The inhabitants of Hinesburgh, have held a meeting on the subject of the Embargo, and have adopted a memorial highly approving of the measure."
Vi. Cent.
KINGSTON, (Jam.) May 19.
"We are informed that a petition has been laid before the duke of Manchester, praying that the American vessels, lately arrived from the U. S. in ballast, may be permitted to load with such articles of colonial produce as are allowed in return for the enumerated articles of provisions lumber, &c. imported into this island in neutrals. We have reason however to believe that such a measure under existing circumstances with regard to America, is by no means the general wish of the community, and the policy of it seems to be very questionable. What British subject is there who could feel insensible on learning that vessels, bearing his country's flag, should be obliged, by the mandate of a foreign power, to quit its ports, and in a few weeks after see the vessels of that government, coming in ballast to load in the colonies of this country, under the pretence of taking returns for debts due to the citizens thereof? We hope that the vessels in question will be sent away as they came, in ballast. We can and ought to prove, (particularly at this moment,) that our existence does not depend on the United States as has been improperly stated by some. Let us therefore act as becomes us on the present occasion—with moderation and dignified firmness."
American flour in consequence of the Embargo sold at Port-au-Prince, a short time since at fifty dollars per barrel.
Kingston Paper.
Departed this life on Tuesday the 25th, at Alexandria, after a short but severe illness, Mrs. ANN WARREN, the amiable consort of Mr. William Warren, Manager of the Philadelphia and Baltimore Theatres.
Died on the 24th inst. at the seat of his son in St. Marys county, William Brown, for many years a respectable inhabitant of the city of Annapolis.
THE EDITOR OF THE FREAKS OF COLUMBIA.
A publication, which was to have made its appearance on the fourth of July, respectfully informs the public, that his late indisposition, which lasted for a fortnight, has prevented his carrying his friendly efforts for the Author into effect; but, in order that the Author may not be disappointed, he implores the indulgence of the public for six days, so as to put off the fourth of July for that period. It will be necessary changing the Style from the Old to the New, and it will be nothing extraordinary absurd, as in the year 1796, an Edition of the Moon, was postponed in the London Newspapers, in order to make room for Mrs. Seddon's benefit.
July 1
NOTICE is hereby given to the subscribers to the Washington Institution for the Education of Youth, that an election will be held at Mr. Speeden's tavern, square 400, on Monday the 11th inst. for the purpose of choosing six trustees on their part for said institution during the ensuing year. The election will be open from 9 A. M. to 7 P. M.
Nicholas King, Henry Angle, R. Underwood.
July 1—St
COLUMBIAN DRAGOONS.
YOU are hereby notified to attend parade on the usual ground, in full uniform on MONDAY next the FOURTH inst. precisely at nine o'clock in the morning.
Punctual attendance is required. By order of the captain, R. C. WEIGHTMAN.
July 1—2t
St. Marys county, Orphans Court, June term, 1808.
ORDERED by the court, that Monica Jones, administratrix of Solomon Jones, deceased, sell at Public Auction the whole of the deceased's Personal Estate for ready money, after giving four weeks previous notice of the same, in the American and Commercial Advertiser, National Intelligencer, and Washington Federalist.
Test JAMES FORREST, Register Wills for ST. MARY's county.
NOTICE.
IN VIRTUE of the above order, will be offered for sale, for ready money, on Saturday the 30th day of July next, at the late dwelling of the deceased, near the Great Mill in St. Mary's county, all his Personal Estate, consisting of seven very likely young Negroes, Stock of all kinds, house and kitchen furniture, plantation utensils, and other property which it is unnecessary to mention.
MONICA JONES, Adm'rx. July 1—W4t
DR. JAMES H. BLAKE, OFFERS his services in the line of his Profession, to the inhabitants of Washington city and its vicinity. His residence is on 13th street, between the Pennsylvania avenue and F street. June 29—3t

COMMERCIAL COMPANY OF WASHINGTON.  ON Tuesday the 6th day of July, the Third Instalment , agreeably to the Articles of association, will be due. Attendance will be given at Drummond's tavern, and at the Office of Discount and Deposit for the receipt on that day.  JOSEPH FORREST, Pr. June 27—3t.
LANDING THIS DAY, From on board the schooner MARIA , capt. Fitzhugh, from New York—A quantity of prime St. Croix sugar, Coffee, Molasses, Port Wine, Nutmegs, and Chocolate. Also, Gun-Powder, Imperial, and Hyson Teas, in chests, half and quarter chests, and canisters of this spring's importation.  For sale by ROSS & GETTY. George Town, June 20—4t
PUBLIC SALE. ON Monday the 11th of July next will be sold at Public Auction a two Story BRICK HOUSE, with adjacent FRAME Building, and the Lots No. 10 and 11, on Square No. 93, near the Marine Barracks. The house was lately inhabited by Lt. Col. Wharton, now in the occupancy of Mr. Thomas Carberry. The terms will be made known on the day of sale, at Stelle's hotel. The Sale to commence at 12 o'clock. June 15—tdos
TUNIS CRAVEN has removed his entire stock of DRY GOODS from Alexandria to Washington, and is now opening, at his new Store, between the Marine Garrison and Navy Yard Gate, an assortment equal to any in the District;—among which are, Wood's best London cloths, Do. double milled & plain cassimeres, Bennett's cords and velvets, Constitution Gerrow, hunting, Trafalgar, and silver cords, Velvets, Imperial, Brunswick waistcoating, Silk moleskins do. Toilnets, swansdown do. Plain and figured Marseilles do. Bearskin coatings, Plains, kerseys, halfthicks, Rose and duffel blankets, flannels, Superfine green cloth table covers, Calicoes, colored cambrics, Gingham, silk and cotton chambrays Furniture Chintz, Cambric and jaconet muslins, India and British book do. India millmull figured and plain, Plain and figured lenoes, Laced cambrics, Elegant tamboured mulls, Grecian robes and Pelisse dresses, 8-4 damask and raw silk shawls, Damask scarfs, Camel's hair and swansdown do. Down scarfs, Long and short lace sleeves, spider & nett sleeves, Extra long and habit kid gloves, Do. do. silk do. Do. do. raw silk do. Cross-barred and plain Mantuas and Int. strings, Persians and Medes, Thread and cotton laces, Lace caps and handkerchiefs, Book muslin and bob cap patterns, 4-4 7-8 Irish linens, Long lawns, linen cambrics, Irish diapers, table-cloths, napkins, Cotton counterpanes, Cambric Dimities, Common do. Furniture do. Ladies and gentlemen's silk, thread, cotton, worsted, lamb's wool & Angola hose, Gentlemen's pantaloons do. Silk cords and buttons, Ribbons, floss threads, Scarlet and other colored bombazets, Heath rugs, Russia sheeting, tickling, Osnaburgs, baftas, gurrahs, &c. &c.  ALSO, Imperial and young hyson tea of a superior quality in small boxes, to suit families, or by the pound—Also genuine Havana segars. T.C. is determined to sell on the lowest terms. February 3—tf
WANTED AT the Woodyard for the ensuing year a Manager, to take charge of the whole estate. He must be a sober, diligent and discreet man—well acquainted with the culture of wheat, corn and tobacco, and the management of negroes. To such a man who can produce unquestionable testimonials of his capacity, sobriety and fidelity, high wages will be given. A person not connected in the neighborhood will be preferred. Apply to RD. W. WEST, Woodyard. N. B. Application must be made before the 1st. Sept. next. May 13—eptS
BY Virtue of an order of the Orphans Court of Calvert county the subscriber will offer at PUBLIC SALE at the late residence of Gilbert Smith, of the aforesaid county, on Wednesday the 29th inst. at 2 o'clock if fair, if not the first fair day thereafter, all the Personal Property of the said Gilbert Smith, consisting of two Negro men, 2 boys 1 Woman, and 3 Girls, Horses, Cows, Hogs, Household and Kitchen Furniture, Plantation Utensils, five hogheads Tobacco, and the crop on the ground—the greater part of this property will be sold for cash, and the balance on a credit of six months—the particulars will be made known on the day of sale by MORDECAI SMITH, Adm'r. June 24—tdos
FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS REWARD. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, May 28th, 1808.  It has recently been made known to this department, that on the first day of June, 1807, the first moieties of the under-mentioned notes of the bank of the United States, were enclosed by William Keais, Esq. Collector of the Customs at Washington, North Carolina, in a letter addressed to Thomas Tudor Tucker, Esq. Treasurer of the United States, and put into the Post office at that place; and on the 8th day of June, 1807, the second moieties of the said Bank notes were enclosed, addressed and put into the Post Office as aforesaid; neither of which letters, with the notes enclosed, have been received. On the back of each moiety of every note was written the name of William Keais, and on one part of the back of all or of most of the notes, was written the name of Lewis Leroy; from which circumstance the notes may with certainty be traced and detected. Payment of the notes has been stopped at the Bank of the United States and its several offices of Discount and Deposit; and a reward of FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS will be paid to any person who shall give such information to this department, as shall produce the conviction of the offender by whom the letters containing the said notes were purloined or stolen.  ALBERT GALLATIN, secretary of the Treasury.
DESCRIPTION OF NOTES.     No. Date. To whom payable. Dollars     1401 20th July, 1804, Adam Gilchrist or bearer at Charleston, for 100   1428 20th July, 1804, Do. 100   2284 12th March, 1805, Do. 100   4729 27th Feb. 1807, Do. 100   4790 27th Feb. 1807, Do. 100   2641 19th March, 1805, Joseph Habersham, Savannah, 100   2620 Do. do. do. do. do. 100   2656 Do. do. do. do. do. 100   2774 Do. do. do. do. do. 100   35 2d April, 1806, W. Warner at the Bank of the U. States, 100   3061 16th April, 1805, Cornelius Ray, New York, 100   3841 22d Jan. 1802, do. do. 100   1973 20th July, 1804, Adam Gilchrist, Charleston, 50   3609 12th March, 1805, do. do. 50   2183 20th July, 1804, do. do. 50   1265 23d March, 1804, Joseph Habersham, Savannah, 50   1355 23d do. do. do. do. 50   5597 18th Nov. 1806, do. do. 50   Dollars 1,500  
NOTICE Is hereby given that application is intended to be made to the Treasury of the United States for the renewal of the undermentioned Certificates of Six per Cent Stock issued by Joseph Nourse, Register of the Treasury, in the name of Christian Alexander , of London or of Bath in Great Britain, which certificates were sent in the ship Bristol Packet , capt. Burns, captured and burnt by the French, and lost in the same, viz.  N.B. The name is sometimes written Christine but it is the same person.     Denomination of the stock. Dates of the Certificates Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock 1792 December 5. 8268 11,000   1795 May 11. 13168 800   1795 July 16. 13450 250 08   1796 June 11. 14337 2,000   1796 14341 247 81   1797 February 7. 14942 277 50   1798 February 1. 15605 2,975 25   1799 December 17. 16918 882   19,999 99    Standing to her credit on the 1st. April 1808.
Also for the following Certificates of six per Cent Stock issued as above, in the name of Jane Alexander of Bath aforesaid, which were also lost in the said ship Bristol Packet , viz.     Denomination of the Stock. Dates of the Certificates Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock, 1796 June 14. 14344 2,000   1796 14345 2,000   1796 14346 2,000   1796 14347 2,000   1796 14348 75 42   1796 3616 2,000   1796 3617 2,000   1796 3618 2,000   1796 3619 2,000   1796 3620 2,000   1796 3621 45 15   1797 February 7. 14944 22 05   1797 March 3. 15005 1,500   1797 June 3. 15204 766 78   1797 15257 1,700   1798 February 1. 15604 1,503 65   1799 December 17. 16917 980   25,891 05    Standing to her credit on the 1st April 1808. WILLIAM WHANN.
TO RENT, AND possession given the 13th June next, that house on Pennsylvania Avenue, the property of the Washington Building Company, at present occupied by Mr. Solomon Myers—it being so well known, it is not deemed necessary to give a peculiar description of it, suffice it to say, it is calculated for an extensive tavern and boarding house—for terms, apply to Mr. THOMAS HERTY, Sec. to said Company. April 29—tf  PURSUANT to an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed at November session, 1806, entitled "An act authorizing the collection of certain ground rents due on lots in the Town of Cumberland, in Allegany county," and a supplement thereto, passed at November session, 1807, Public Notice is hereby given to all persons holding unimproved lots in said town, on which ground rents are now due, that unless the said rents are paid on or before the first day of December next, the said lots will on that day be offered at public sale to the highest bidder, on a credit of 60 days. The sale to be held at Mr. J. Rine's tavern in said town, to commence at ten o'clock, A. M. and continue from day to day, until the whole are sold. THOMAS BEALL, of Saml. March 21—eptds
NOTICE. THE Subscriber being anxious to settle all his business, has sold his entire stock of goods to John Peter; he therefore requests all those indebted to him to call and pay their accounts, (particularly such as are of long standing, as further indulgence cannot be given them). His Books are removed to the counting house of Baker, Riggs, and Co. where all his accounts will be ready for settlement by his assistant Mr. Samuel C. Offutt, or ELISHA RIGGS, George Town, March 16—tf
May 1, to Dec. 1. Leave Richmond every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at 7 A. M. and arrive at Norfolk on the next days by 10 A. M. in 27 hours. Leave Norfolk every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at 2 P. M. and arrive at Richmond the next days by 5 P. M. in 27 hours.  Dec. 1, to May 1. Leave Richmond every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 7 A. M. & arrive at Norfolk on the next days by 5 P. M. in 34 hours. Leave Norfolk every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 7 A. M. and arrive at Richmond the next days by 5 P. M. in 34 hours.  16. From Petersburg by Cabinpoint, Smithfield, Surry court house, & Sleepy hole ferry, to Norfolk, 3 times a week. May 1, to Dec. 1. Leave Petersburg, every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, at 1 P. M. and arrive at Norfolk the next days by 10 A. M. Leave Norfolk every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, at 2 P. M. and arrive at Petersburg the next days by 11 A. M. in 21 hours.  Dec. 1, to May 1. Leave Petersburg every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday at 1 P. M. and arrive at Norfolk the next days by 5 P. M. Leave Norfolk every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, at 7 A. M. and arrive at Petersburg the next days by 11 A. M.  17. From Charleston by Jacksonboro', Pocotaligo and Coosawatchy to Savannah, three times a week. Leave Charleston every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, at 2 P. M. and arrive at Pocotaligo by 8 P. M. Leave Pocotaligo every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, at 2 A. M. & arrive at Savannah by 8 P. M.  Leave Savannah every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, at 4 A. M. and arrive at Pocotaligo by 8 P. M. Leave Pocotaligo every Tuesday, Thursday & Saturday, at 2 A. M. and arrive at Charleston by 10 A. M.  18. From Augusta by Jacksonboro' and Ebenezer, to Savannah once a week. Leave Savannah every Friday, at 8 A. M. and arrive at Augusta on Sunday by 3 P. M. Leave Augusta every Tuesday at 5 A. M. and arrive at Savannah on Thursday by 3 P. M.  19. From Augusta by Wanesboro' and Louisville to Savannah once a week. Leave Augusta every Thursday at 2 P. M. and arrive at Louisville on Friday by 10 A. M. Leave Louisville at 11 A. M. and arrive at Savannah on Sunday by 6 P. M.  Leave Savannah every Monday at 8 A. M. and arrived at Louisville on Wednesday by 9 A. M. Leave Louisville same day at 10 A. M. and arrive Augusta on Thursday by 10 A. M.  20. From Savannah by Bryan court house, M'Intosh church, Riceboro' J'f'erson, M'Intosh court house, and Darien, to St. Mary's, once a week by land. Leave Savannah every Monday at 8 A. M. and arrive at St. Mary's on Thursday by 10 A. M. Leave St. Mary's every Thursday at 2 P. M. & arrive at Savannah the next Sunday by 6 P. M.  21. From Darien by Brunswick, to Frederica, once a week. Leave Darien every Wednesday at 5 A. M. & arrive at Frederica on Thursday by 10 A. M. Leave Frederica at 2 P. M. and arrive at Darien by 6 P. M. on Friday.  22. From Milledgeville (c.) to Athens, (c.) once a week. Leave Milledgeville every Friday at 4 A. M. and arrive at Athens on Saturday, by 11 A. M. Leave Athens every Saturday at 1 P. M. and arrive at Milledgeville on Sunday, by 8 P. M.  23. From Spartia by Milledgeville and Jonesboro' to Fort Ocmulgee, once a week. Leave Spartia every Saturday, at 6 A. M. and arrive at Ocmulgee on Saturday by 6 P. M. Leave Ocmulgee every Monday, at 6 A. M. and arrive at Spartia on Tuesday by 6 P. M.  24. From Milledgeville by Putnam c. h. and Morgan c. h. to Randolph c. h. once in two weeks. Leave Milledgeville every other Monday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Randolph c. h. on Tuesday, by 6 P. M. Leave Randolph c. h. the next day at 6 A. M. and arrive at Milledgeville on Wednesday by 6 P. M.  25. From Woodbridge, (N. J.) to Amboy, three times a week. Leave Woodbridge Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at 6 P. M. and arrive at Amboy by 7 P. M. Leave Amboy every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at noon, and arrive at Woodbridge by 1 P. M.  26. From New Lisbon to Canton, (Ohio). Leave New Lisbon every Sunday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Canton by 6 P. M. Leave Canton every Monday by 8 A. M. and arrive at New Lisbon by 6 P. M.  27. From Boston by Dorchester, Quincy, Braintree, Weymouth, Hanover, Plymouth & Kingston, to Plymouth, three times a week. Leave Boston every Tuesday Thursday and Saturday, at 6 A. M. and arrive at Plymouth by 6 P. M. Leave Plymouth every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Boston by 6 P. M.  NOTES. 1. The mail will be carried on the routes, number four to fourteen inclusive, in the same time throughout the year; and the contractor must calculate upon conveying the mail in a sulkey, when the roads will not admit of its being conveyed by the usual stage; or if it shall be shewn, that the roads are too bad for a sulkey, the mail of letters will be separated from the newspapers which are to be conveyed by stage, as fast as the roads will admit, and the letters conveyed on horseback within the time limited, so that bad roads shall never be admitted as an excuse for non performance. 2. The Postmaster General may ex-
pedite the mails and alter the times of arrival and departure at any time during the continuance of the contracts; he previously stipulating an adequate compensation for any extra expense that may be occasioned thereby.  3. Fifteen minutes shall be allowed for opening and closing the mail at all offices where no particular time is specified.  4. For every thirty minutes delay (unavoidable accidents excepted) in arriving after the times prescribed in any contract, the contractor shall forfeit one dollar; and if the delay continue until the departure of any succeeding mail, whereby the mails destined for such succeeding mail lose a trip a forfeiture of double the amount allowed for carrying the mail one trip shall be incurred, unless it shall be made to appear that the delay was occasioned by unavoidable accident, in which case the amount of pay for the trip will, in all cases, be forfeited and retained.  5. Persons making proposals, are desired to state their prices by the year. Those who contract will receive their pay quarterly, in the months of February, May August and November, one month after the expiration of each quarter.  6. No other than a free white person shall be employed to convey the mail.  7. Where the proposer intends to convey the mail in the body of a stage carriage he is desired to state it in his proposals.  8. The Postmaster General reserves to himself the right of declaring any contract at an end, whenever three failures happen, which amount to the loss of a trip each.  9. The contracts for the routes numbered 1 to 16, are to be in operation on the first day of Oct. next and to continue in force two years from that time; for the routes from No. 17 to 25 to commence at the same time, & to continue in force until the 31st of March, 1811. For the routes, 26, 27, and 28, to commence at the same time, and continue in force one year.  GIDEON GRANGER, Postmaster General General Post Office, Washington City, May 26, 1808. May 16—wtd.
ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS REWARD. RAN away on the evening of the 7th inst. a bright Mulatto Man, named BOB, who calls himself Robert Thomas, about 5 feet 10 inches high, 24 or 25 years of age, has large black eyebrows, large full eyes, not very dark, and is a stout, well made, handsome fellow. His hair is thick, but not quite straight, and he wears it nicely trimmed, combed and ridged on the top. His beard appears very black if suffered to grow for a day or two, but he usually shaves it very closely. He has recently received an injury on the forefinger of the left hand, and has it bound up, and may probably lose the first joint of it. He speaks deliberately, and is more correct in conversation than persons of his color usually are. He walks slowly, is a very good waiter, but delights particularly in attending to horses. He has a variety of cloaths, and took with him one dark green broadcloth coat and pantaloons with yellow buttons, one cloth coat and pantaloons nearly of the same color, but the cloth of inferior quality, with white metal buttons, one blue cloth coat much worn, one old brown suitout coat with covered buttons, a good hat, and a pair of black top boots. The rest of his apparel I am unable particularly to describe. He is fond of wearing boots, and pays great attention to his dress.  As he can read and write very well, he may probably produce a forged authority for him to pass, or procure the certificate of some one of the Negroes, who, a few years ago, petitioned by the name of Thomas, and obtained their freedom in Maryland. If taken out of the state of Maryland and district of Columbia, and secured in any jail, so that I shall get him again, the above reward will be given, or sixty dollars if taken and secured within the said state or district; all reasonable expenses will all be paid, if he should be delivered to me in the city of Washington, or to Dr. Richard Dockett, in Prince George's county, Maryland. He is well acquainted in Annapolis, Baltimore, Geo. Town, and the city of Washington.  ALLEN B. DUCKETT. June 12—opt
PUBLIC SALE. BY virtue of an order of the Orphan's Court of Prince George's county will be exposed to public sale at the late Dwelling Plantation of Zephaniah Prather, deceased, on Monday the 11th of July next the whole of the deceased's Personal Estate, remaining unsold, consisting of Negroes and sundry articles of Household Furniture. A credit of six months will be given in the purchasers giving bond with two good securities with interest from the date.  Sale to commence at 10 o'clock. ZEPH NIAH PRATHER, Adm'r. Prince George's county, June 22—tds  BURAS AND BRILL. WOOLLEN drapers, men's mercers, and tailors, New Jersey Avenue, opposite the Secretary of the Navy's, respectfully inform the public that they have commenced business in the above line, where they will endeavor to give satisfaction—they have on hand a fresh supply of the most fashionable goods, suitable for the approaching season, all fresh and of the very best quality.  N. B. Regimentals and naval uniforms made in the most elegant and fashionable style with neatness and dispatch. October 23—tf