The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-04-08 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1168.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
FRIDAY, APRIL 5 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
LETTERS
From the Secretary of State to Mr. Monroe, on the subject of impressments, &c. Also, extracts from, and enclosures in, the letters of Mr. Monroe to the Secretary of State, prior to the joint mission of him and Mr. Pinkney; part 2, accompanying the message of the President of the U. S. received on the 22d of March, 1808.
Mr. Madison to Mr. Monroe.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, January 5, 1804.
Sir,—The information and observations which you have as yet received from me since your arrival in London, on the impressment of our seamen and other violations of our rights, have been in private letters only. The delay in making these injuries the subject of official communications, proceeded, first, from an expectation that the British government would have notified formally to the U. States as a neutral power, the state of war between Great Britain and France, which would have been an apt occasion, for combining with assurances of the fairness with which our neutral obligations would be fulfilled, our just claims on a correspondent respect for our neutral rights, and particularly of those which had been least respected during the last war: secondly, from the expected arrival of Mr. Merry, which, if he should not be charged with such a notification, might be a favorable opportunity for commencing the explanations and discussions which must precede a thorough correction of the wrongs which we experience.
Since the arrival of Mr. Merry, accordingly, no time has been lost in calling his attention to the subject; and in preparing both it and him, for the negotiation which is now to be committed to you. If appearances are to be trusted, his impressions and representations will be friendly to it. In my conversations with him, which have been free and full, he has expressed the best dispositions, has listened with candor to the appeals made, as well to the considerations of justice, as of the solid interest of his nation; and although he suggests serious difficulties on certain points, he will, I believe, sincerely co-operate in lessening them, and in bringing about an arrangement which will be acceptable to this country. The only topic on which any thing has passed in writing between the department of state and him, is that of the pretended blockade of St. Domingo. Copies of my letter to him, and of his answer, are herewith inclosed; as also of the letter written to Mr. Thornton, some time before, and referred to in that to Mr. Merry, in relation to a like blockade of Martinique and Guadalupe.
Although there are many important objects which may be thought to invite conventional regulations between the U. States and Great Britain, it is evidently proper to leave for subsequent consideration, such as are less urgent in their nature, or more difficult in their adjustment; and thereby to render the way plainer and shorter to an agreement with respect to objects which cannot be much longer delayed without danger to the good understanding between the two nations. With this view the plan of a convention contemplated by the President, is limited to the cases of impressments of our seamen, of blockades, of visiting and searching our vessels, of contraband of war, and of the trade with hostile colonies, with a few other cases affecting our maritime rights; embracing however, as inducements to Great Britain to do us justice therein, a provision for the surrender of deserting seamen and soldiers, and for the prevention of contraband supplies to her enemies.
The plan digested for your use is subjoined. The first column contains the articles which are to be proposed in the first instance, and which are considered as within our just expectations: the second modifies the articles into the concessions which the British government may possibly require, and which it may be expedient for us ultimately to admit.
[To save room, instead of arranging the articles in two columns, as done in the project, we have put the contents of the first column in Italics succeeding the contents of the second column.]
A CONVENTION BETWEEN THE U. STATES AND G. BRITAIN.
ART. I. No seaman, seafaring or other person, shall, upon the high
seas and without the jurisdiction of either party, be demanded or taken out of any ship or vessel belonging to the citizens or subjects of one of the parties, by the public or private armed ships belonging to or in the service of the other party, and strict and effectual orders shall be given for the due observance of this engagement: but it is to be understood that this article shall not exempt any person on board the ships of either of the parties, from being taken therefrom by the other party, in cases where they may be liable to be so taken according to the laws of nations, which liability, however, shall not be construed to extend in any case to seamen or seafaring persons, being actually part of the crew of the vessel in which they may be, nor to persons of any description passing from one port to another port of either of the parties.
ART. I. No person whatever shall, upon the high seas and without the jurisdiction of either party, be demanded or taken out of any ship or vessel belonging to citizens or subjects of one of the parties, by the public or private armed ships belonging to or in the service of the other, unless such person be at the time in the military service of an enemy of such other party.
ART. II. No person being a subject or citizen of one of the parties, and resorting to or residing in the dominions of the other, shall in any case be compelled to serve on board any vessel, whether public or private, belonging to such other party: and all citizens or subjects whatever of the respective parties, at this time compulsively serving on board the vessels of the other, shall be forthwith liberated, and enabled, by an adequate recompence, to return to their own country.
ART. II. The same.
ART. III. If the ships of either of the parties shall be met with sailing either along the coasts or on the high seas, by any ship of war or other public or private armed ships of the other party, such ships of war or other armed vessels shall, for avoiding all disorder in visiting and examining the same, remain out of cannon shot, unless the state of the sea or the place of meeting render a nearer approach necessary; and shall in no case compel or require such vessel to send her boat, her papers or any person from on board to the belligerent vessel; but the belligerent vessel may send her own boat to the other, and may enter her to the number of two or three men only, who may, in an orderly manner, make the necessary inquiries concerning the vessel and her cargo; and it is agreed that effectual provision shall be made for punishing violations of any part of this article.
ART. III. The same.
ART. IV. Contraband of war shall consist of the following articles only: salt petre, sulphur, curasses, pikes, swords, sword belts, knapsacks, saddles and bridles, cannons, mortars, fire arms, pistols, bombs, grenades, bullets, fire-locks, flints, matches and gun powder; excepting, however, the quantity of the said articles which may be necessary for the defence or use of the ship and those who compose the crew; and no other articles whatever, not here enumerated, shall be reputed contraband or liable to confiscation, but shall pass freely without being subjected to the smallest difficulty, unless they be enemy's property; and it is to be particularly understood, that under the denomination of enemy's property, is not to be comprized the merchandise of the growth, produce or manufactures of the countries or dominions at war, which shall have been acquired by the citizens, or subjects of the neutral power, and shall be transported for their account; which merchandise cannot, in any case, or on any pretext, be excepted from the freedom of the neutral flag.
ART. IV. The same.
ART. V. In all cases where the prize courts of either party shall pronounce judgment against any vessel or property claimed by citizens or subjects of the other, the sentence or decree shall mention the reasons or motives on which the same shall have been founded; and an authenticated copy of the sentence or decree, and of all the proceedings in the case, shall, if demanded, be delivered to the commander or agent of the said vessel without any delay, he paying the legal fees for the same.
ART. V. The same.
ART. VI. In order to determine what characterises a blockaded port, that denomination is given only to a port where there is by the disposition of the power which attacks it with ships stationary or sufficiently near, an
evident danger in entering.
ART. VI. The same.
ART. VII. [In consideration of the distance of the ports likely to be blockaded by either party, from the ports of the other party, and of other circumstances incident to their relative situations] it is agreed that no vessel sailing from the ports of either, shall, although cleared or bound to a blockaded port be considered as violating in any manner the blockade, unless on her approach towards such port she shall have been previously warned against entering the same.
ART. VII. Omit the preamble.
ART. VIII. It is agreed that no refuge or protection shall be afforded by either party to the "captains, officers, mariners, sailors or other persons not found to be its own citizens or subjects, who shall desert from a vessel of the other party, of the crew whereof the deserter made a part; but on the contrary, all such deserters shall be delivered up on demand, and to the commanders of the vessels from which they shall have deserted, or to the commanding officers of the ships of war of the respective nations, or to such other persons as may be duly authorised to make requisition in that behalf; provided, that proof be made, within two years from the time of desertion, by an exhibition of the ship's papers, or authenticated copies thereof; and by satisfactory evidence of the identity of the person, that the deserters so demanded were actually part of the crew of the vessels in question.
And for the more effectual execution of this article, adequate provision shall be made for causing to be arrested, on the application of the respective consuls or vice consuls to the competent authorities, all deserters as aforesaid, duly proved to be such, in order that they may be sent back to the commanders of the vessels to which they belonged, or removed out of the country, and all due aid and assistance shall be given in searching for, as well as in seizing and arresting the said deserters; who shall even be detained and kept in the prisons of the country at the request and expence of the said consuls or vice consuls, until they shall have found an opportunity of sending them back or removing them as aforesaid. But if they be not so sent back or removed within three months from the day of their arrest, they shall be set at liberty, and shall not again be arrested for the same cause.
ART. VIII. Omit "captains, officers."
ART. IX. It is further agreed that no refuge or protection shall be afforded, by either of the parties, to any "officers or" soldiers, not found to be its own citizens or subjects, who shall desert from the military service of the other; but that, on the contrary, effectual measures shall be taken, in like manner and under like regulations and conditions, as with respect to sailors, for apprehending any such deserting soldiers, and delivering them to the commanding officers of the military posts, forts or garrisons from which they shall have deserted, or to the consuls or vice consuls on either side, or to such person as may be duly authorised to demand their restitution.
ART. IX. Omit "officers, or."
ART. X. It is however understood, that no stipulation herein made, shall be construed to empower the civil or military officers of either of the parties, to enter forcibly into any of the forts, garrisons, posts or other places, or to use violence of any sort within the jurisdiction of the other party, or be construed, in any manner, to contravene or derogate from the stipulation contained in the first of the above articles against demanding or taking any persons out of vessels on the high seas, and without the jurisdiction of either of the parties.
ART. X. Omitted.
ART. XI. Each party will prohibit its citizens or subjects, from clandestinely carrying away from the territories or dominions of the other, any seamen or soldiers belonging to such other party.
ART. XI. The same.
ART. XII. Neither party shall permit any of the articles above enumerated, as contraband of war, to be cleared out from its ports to any place within the jurisdiction of an enemy of the other party; and, in order to enforce this regulation, due proof and security shall be given, that all such articles of contraband as may be exported from the ports of either of the parties, have been actually destined elsewhere, than within the jurisdiction of any enemy of the other party.
ART. XII. The same.
ART. XIII. This convention shall be in force for the term of eight years from the date of the exchange of ratifications. It shall be ratified on both
sides within months from the day of its signature, or sooner if possible; and the ratifications exchanged without delay, in the U. States, at the city of Washington.
ART. XIII. The same.
Observations on the preceding plan.
The first article relates to impressments from American vessels on the high seas. The commanders of British armed vessels have, as is well known, been long in this practice. They have indeed not only continued it, under the sanction of their errors, on the high seas; but have, with impunity, extended it to our own coasts, to neutral ports and to neutral territory; and, in some instances, to our own harbors. The article does not comprehend these latter cases; because it would not be very honorable in Great Britain to stipulate against the practice of such enormities, nor in the United States to recur to stipulations as a security against it; and because it may be presumed that such particular enormities will not be repeated or un-punished, after a general stop shall have been put to impressments.
The article, in its first form, renounces the claim to take from the vessels of the neutral party, on the high seas, any person whatever, not in the military service of an enemy; an exception which we admit to come within the law of nations, on the subject of contraband of war.
With this exception, we consider a neutral flag on the high seas, as a safe guard to those sailing under it. Great Britain, on the contrary, asserts a right to search for, and seize her own subjects; and under that cover, as cannot but happen, are often seized and taken off, citizens of the United States and citizens or subjects of other neutral countries navigating the high seas, under the protection of the American flag.
Were the right of Great Britain in this case not denied, the abuses flowing from it would justify the United States in claiming and expecting a discontinuance of its exercise. But the right is denied, and on the best grounds.
Although Great Britain has not yet adopted, in the same latitude with most other nations, the immunities of a neutral flag, she will not deny the general freedom of the high seas, and of neutral vessels navigating them, with such exceptions only, as are annexed to it, by the law of nations. She must produce then such an exception in the law of nations, in favor of the right she contends for. But in what written and received authority will she find it? In what usage, except her own, will it be found? She will find in both, that a neutral vessel does not protect certain objects denominated contraband of war, including enemies serving in the war, nor articles going into a blockaded port; nor, as she has maintained, and as we have not contested, enemy's property of any kind. But no where will she find an exception to this freedom of the seas, and of neutral flags which justifies the taking away of any person, not an enemy in military service, found on board a neutral vessel.
If treaties, British as well as others, are to be consulted on this subject, it will equally appear that no countenance to the practice can be found in them. Whilst they admit a contraband of war, by enumerating its articles, and the effect of a real blockade by defining it, in no instance do they affirm or imply a right in any sovereign, to enforce his claims to the allegiance of his subjects, on board neutral vessels, on the high seas. On the contrary, whenever a belligerent claim against persons on board a neutral vessel, is referred to in treaties, enemies in military service alone are excepted from the general immunity of persons in that situation; and this exception confirms the immunity of those who are not included in it.
It is not then from the law, or the usage of nations, nor from the tenor of treaties, that any sanction can be derived for the practice in question. And surely it will not be pretended that the sovereignty of any nation extends, in any case whatever, beyond its own dominions, and its own vessels on the high seas. Such a doctrine would give just alarm to all nations, and more than any thing would countenance the imputation of aspiring to an universal empire of the seas. It would be the less admissible too, as it would be applicable to times of peace as well as to times of war, and to property as well as to
persons. If the law of allegiance, which is a municipal law, be in force at all on the high seas, on board foreign vessels, it must be so at all times there, as it is within its acknowledged sphere. If the reason alleged for it be good in time of war, namely, that the sovereign has then a right to the service of all his subjects, it must be good at all times, because at all times he has the same right to their service. War is not the only occasion for which he may want their services; nor is external danger the only danger against which their services may be required for his security. Again, if the authority of a municipal law can operate on persons in foreign vessels on the high seas, because within the dominion of their sovereign they would be subject to that law, and are violating that law by being in that situation; how reject the inference that the authority of a municipal law may equally be enforced on board foreign vessels on the high seas, against articles of property exported in violation of such a law, or belonging to the country from which it was exported? And thus every commercial regulation, in time of peace too, as well as of war, would be made obligatory on foreigners and their vessels, not only whilst within the dominion of the sovereign making the regulation, but in every sea, and at every distance where an armed vessel might meet with them. Another inference deserves attention. If the subjects of one sovereign may be taken by force from the vessels of another, on the high seas, the right of taking them, when found, implies the right of searching, for them, a vexatious right of commerce, especially in time of peace, which has not yet been attempted, and which, for that as well as other reasons, may be regarded as contradicting the principle from which it would flow.
Taking reason and justice for the tests of this practice, it is peculiarly indefensible; because it deprives the dearest rights of persons, of a regular trial, to which the most inconsiderable article of property captured on the high seas, is entitled; and leaves their destiny to the will of an officer, sometimes cruel, often ignorant, and generally interested by his want of mariners, in his own decision. Whenever property found in a neutral vessel is supposed to be liable on any grounds to capture and condemnation, the rule in all cases is, that the question shall not be decided by the captor, but be carried before a legal tribunal, where a regular trial may be had, and where the captor himself is liable to damages for an abuse of his power. Can it be reasonable then or just, that a belligerent commander who is thus restricted and thus responsible in a case of mere property of trivial amount, should be permitted, without recurring to any tribunal whatever, to examine the crew of a neutral vessel, to decide the important question of their respective allegiances, and to carry that decision into instant execution by forcing every individual he may choose, into a service abhorrent to his feelings; cutting him off from his most tender connections, exposing his mind and his person to the most humiliating discipline, and his life itself to the greatest dangers? Reason, justice and humanity unite in protesting against so extravagant a proceeding. And what is the pretext for it? It is that the similarity of language and of features, between American citizens and British subjects, are such as not easily to be distinguished; and that without this arbitrary and summary authority to make the distinction, British subjects would escape under the name of American citizens, from the duty which they owe to their sovereign. Is then the difficulty of distinguishing a mariner of one country from the mariner of the other and the importance of his services, a good plea for referring the question whether he belongs to one or to the other, to an arbitrary decision on the spot, by an interested and irresponsible officer? In all other cases, the difficulty and the importance of questions are considered as reasons for requiring greater care and formality in investigating them, and greater security for a right decision on them. To say that precautions of this sort are incompatible with the object, is to admit that the object is unjustifiable, since the only means by which it can be pursued are such as cannot be justified.
The evil takes a deeper die when viewed in its practice as well as its principles. Were it allowable that British subjects should be taken out

of American vessels on the high seas, it might at least be required that the proof of their allegiance should lie on the British side. This obvious and just rule is however reversed, and every seaman on board, though going from an American port and sailing under the American flag, and some times even speaking an idiom proving him not to be a British subject, is presumed to be such, unless shown to be an American citizen. It may safely be affirmed that this is an outrage & an indignity which has no precedent, and which Great Britain would be among the last nations in the world to suffer if offered to her own subjects, and her own flag. Nor is it always against the right presumption alone, which is in favor of the citizenship corresponding with the flag, that the violence is committed. Not unfrequently it takes place in defiance of the most positive proof, certified in due form by an American officer. Let it not be said that in granting to American seamen, this protection for their rights as such, the point is yielded that they are on the American side, & that the want of it in the prescribed form justifies the inference that the seaman is not of American allegiance. It is distinctly to be understood, that the certificate usually called a protection to American seamen, is not meant to protect them under their own, or even any other neutral flag on the high seas. We can never admit, that in such a situation, any other protection is required for them than the neutral flag itself on the high seas. The document is given to prove their real character, in situations to which neither the law of nations nor the law of their own country are applicable. In other words to protect them within the jurisdiction of the British laws, and to secure to them, within every other jurisdiction, the rights and immunities due to them. If in the course of their navigation even on the high seas, the document should have the effect of repelling wrongs of any sort, it is an incidental advantage only of which they avail themselves, and is by no means to be misconstrued into a right to exact such a proof, or to make any disadvantageous inference from the want of it.
Were it even admitted that certificates for protection might be justly required in time of war, from American seamen, they could only be required in cases, where the lapse of time from its commencement had given an opportunity for the American seamen to provide themselves with such a document. Yet it is certain, that in a variety of instance, seamen have been impressed from American vessels, on the plea that they had not this proof of citizenship, when the dates and places of the impressment, demonstrated the impossibility of their knowing, in time to provide the proof, that a state of war had rendered it necessary.
Whether, therefore, we consult the law of nations, the tenor of treaties or the dictates of reason and justice, no warrant, no pretext can be found for the British practice of making impressment from American vessels on the high seas.
Great Britain has the less to say in excuse for this practice, as it is in direct contradiction to the principles on which she proceeds in other cases. Whilst she claims and seizes on the high seas, her own subject voluntarily serving in American vessels, she has constantly given, when she could give as a reason for not discharging from her service American citizens that they had voluntarily engaged in it. Nay more, whilst she impresses her own subjects from the American service, although they may have been settled and married and even naturalized in the United States, she constantly refuses to release from hers, American citizens impressed into it whenever she can give for a reason that they were either settled or married within her dominions. Thus, when the voluntary consent of the individual favors her pretensions, she pleads the validity of that consent.—When the voluntary consent of the individual stands in the way of her pretensions, it goes for nothing! When marriage or residence can be pleaded in her favor, she avails herself of the plea. When marriage and residence and even naturalization are against her, no respect whatever is paid to either! She takes by force her own subjects voluntarily serving in our vessels. She keeps by force American citizens involuntarily serving in hers. More flagrant inconsistencies cannot be imagined.
Notwithstanding the powerful motives which ought to be felt by the British government to relinquish a practice which exposes it to so many reproaches, it is foreseen that objections of different sorts will be pressed on you. You will be told first of the great number of British seamen in the American trade, and of the necessity for their services in time of war and danger. Secondly, of the right and the prejudice of the British nation with respect to what are called the British
narrow seas, where its domain would be abandoned by the general stipulation required. Thirdly, of the use which would be made of such a sanctuary as that of American vessels for desertions & traitorous communications to her enemies, especially across the channel to France.
1st. With respect to the British seamen serving in our trade, it may be remarked first, that the number, though considerable, is probably less than may be supposed. Secondly, that what is wrong in itself cannot be made right by considerations of expediency or advantage. Thirdly, that it is proved by the fact, that the number of real British subjects gained by the practice in question, is of inconsiderable importance, even in the scale of advantage. The annexed report to Congress on the subject of impressments, with the addition of such cases as may be in the hands of Mr. Erving, will verify the remark in its application to the present war. The statement made by his predecessor during the last war, and which is also annexed, is in the same view still more conclusive. The statement comprehends not only all the applications made by him in the first instance, for the liberation of impressed seamen, between the month of June, 1797, and September, 1801, but many also which had been made previous to this agency by Mr. Pinckney and Mr. King, and which it was necessary for him to renew. These applications therefore may fairly be considered as embracing the greater part of the period of the war; and as applications are known to be pretty indiscriminately made, they may further be considered as embracing, if not the whole, the far greater part of the impressments, those of British subjects as well as others. Yet the result exhibits 2,059 cases only, and of this number, 102 seamen only detained as being British subjects, which is less than 1-20 of the number impressed, and 1142 discharged or ordered to be so, as not being British subjects, which is more than half of the whole number, leaving 805 for further proof, with the strongest presumption that the greater part, if not the whole, were Americans or other aliens, whose proof of citizenship had been lost or destroyed, or whose situation would account for the difficulties and delays in producing it. So that it is certain, that for all the British seamen gained by this violent proceeding, more than an equal number who were not so, were the victims. It is highly probable that for every British seaman so gained, a number of others not less than ten for one must have been the victims, and it is even possible that this number may have exceeded the proportion of twenty to one.
It cannot therefore be doubted, that the acquisition of British seamen by these impressments, whatever may be its advantage, is lost in the wrong done to Americans, ignorantly or wilfully mistaken for British subjects; in the jealousy and ill will excited among all maritime nations by an adherence to such a practice; and in the particular provocation to measures of redress on the part of the U. States, not less disagreeable to them than embarrassing to Great Britain, and which may threaten the good understanding which ought to be faithfully cultivated by both. The copy of a bill brought into Congress under the influence of violations committed on our flag, gives force to this latter consideration. Whether it will pass into a law, and at the present session, is more than yet can be said. As there is every reason to believe that it has been proposed with reluctance, it will probably not be pursued into effect, if any hope can be supported, of a remedy by an amicable arrangement between the two nations. But such is the feeling through this country, produced by the reiterated and atrocious cases of impressments and other insults on our flag, that a remedy of some kind will ere long be called for in a tone not to be disregarded. A copy of the bill referred to is herewith inclosed.
There is a further consideration which ought to have weight in this question. Although the British seamen employed in carrying on American commerce, be in some respects lost to their own nation, yet such is the intimate and extensive connexion of this commerce, direct and circuitous, with the commerce, the manufactures, the revenue and the general resources of the British nation, that in other respects, its mariners on board American vessels may truly be said to be rendering it the most valuable services. It would not be extravagant to make it a question, whether G. Britain would not suffer more by withdrawing her seamen from the merchant vessels of the U. States, than her enemies would suffer from the addition of them to the crews of her snips of war and cruizers.
Should any difficulty be started concerning seamen born within the British dominions, and naturalized by the U. States since the treaty of 1783, you may remove it by observing, first, that very few if any such naturalizations can take place, the law here requiring a preparatory resi-
dence of five years, with notice of the intention to become a citizen entered of record two years before the last necessary formality, besides a regular proof of good moral character, conditions little likely to be complied with by ordinary seafaring persons. Secondly, that a discontinuance of impressments on the high seas will preclude an actual collusion between the interfering claims. Within the jurisdiction of each nation, and in their respective vessels on the high seas, each will enforce the allegiance which it claims. In other situations, the individuals doubly claimed will be within a jurisdiction independent of both nations.
2d. The British pretensions to domain over the narrow seas are so obsolete, and so indefensible, that they never would have occurred as a probable objection in this case, if they had not actually frustrated an arrangement settled by Mr. King with the British ministry, on the subject of impressments from American vessels on the high seas. At the moment when the articles were expected to be signed, an exception of the "narrow seas" was urged and insisted on by lord St. Vincent, and being utterly inadmissible on our part, the negotiation was abandoned. Mr. King seems to be of opinion, however, that with more time than was left him for the experiment, the objection might have been overcome. This is not improbable, if the objection was not merely an expedient for evading a relinquishment of a favorite practice.
The objection in itself has certainly not the slightest foundation. The time has been indeed, when England not only claimed but exercised pretensions scarcely inferior to full sovereignty over the seas surrounding the British isles, and even as far as Cape Finistere to the south, and Vanstaten in Norway, to the north. It was a time however, when reason had little share in determining the law and the intercourse of nations; when power alone decided questions of right; and when the ignorance and want of concert among other maritime countries facilitated such an usurpation. The progress of civilization and information has produced a change in all those respects, and no principle in the code of public law, is at present better established, than the common freedom of the seas, beyond a very limited distance from the territories washed by them. This distance is not indeed fixed with absolute precision. It is varied in a small degree by written authorities; and perhaps it may be reasonably varied, in some degree, by local peculiarities. But the greatest distance which would now be listened to any where, would make a small proportion of the narrowest part of the narrowest seas in question.
What are in fact the prerogatives claimed and exercised by G. Britain over these seas? If they were really a part of her domain, her authority would be the same there as within her other domains. Foreign vessels would be subject to all the laws and regulations framed for them, as much as if they were within the harbors or rivers of the country. Nothing of this sort is pretended. Nothing of this sort would be tolerated. The only instances in which these seas are distinguished from other seas, or in which Great Britain enjoys within them any distinction over other nations, are first, the compliment paid by other flags to hers; secondly, the extension of her territorial jurisdiction in certain cases to the distance of four leagues from the coast. The first is a relic of ancient usurpation, which has thus long escaped the correction, which modern and more enlightened times have applied to other usurpations. The prerogative has been often contested however, even at the expence of bloody wars, and is still borne with ill will and impatience by her neighbors. At the last treaty of peace at Amiens, the abolition of it was repeatedly and strongly pressed by France, and it is not improbable that at no remote day it will follow the fate of the title of 'King of France' so long worn by the British monarchs, and at length so properly sacrificed to the lessons of a magnanimous wisdom. As far as this homage to the British flag has any foundation at present, it rests merely on long usage and long acquiescence, which are construed, as in a few other cases of maritime claims, into the effect of a general though tacit convention. The second instance is the extension of the territorial jurisdiction to four leagues from the shore. This too, as far as the distance may exceed that which is generally allowed, rests on a like foundation, strengthened perhaps by the local facility of smuggling, and the peculiar interest which G. Britain has in preventing a practice affecting so deeply her whole system of revenue, commerce and manufactures, whilst the limitation itself to four leagues necessarily implies that, beyond that distance no territorial jurisdiction is assumed.
But whatever may be the origin or the value of these prerogatives over foreign flags in one case, and within a
limited portion of these seas in another, it is obvious that neither of them will be violated by the exemption of American vessels from impressments, which are no wise connected with either, having never been made on the pretext either of withholding the wonted homage to the British flag, or of smuggling in defiance of British laws.
This extension of the British law to four leagues from the shore is inferred from an act of parliament passed in the year 1736, (9 G. 2 C. 35) the terms of which comprehend all vessels, foreign as well as British. It is possible, however, that the former are constructively excepted. Should your inquiries ascertain this to be the case, you will find yourself on better ground than the concession here made.
With respect to the compliment paid to the British flag, it is also possible that more is here conceded than you may find to be necessary. After the peace of 1783, this compliment was peremptorily withheld by France, in spite of the remonstrances of G. Britain; and it remains for your inquiry, whether it did not continue to be refused, notwithstanding the failure at Amiens to obtain from Great Britain a formal renunciation of the claim.
From every view of the subject it is reasonable to expect, that the exception of the narrow seas, from the stipulation against impressments, will not be inflexibly maintained. Should it be so, your negotiation will be at an end. The truth is, that so great a proportion of our trade direct and circuitous passes through those channels, and such is its peculiar exposure in them to the wrong practiced, that with such an exception, any remedy would be very partial. And we can never consent to purchase a partial remedy by confirming a general evil, and by subjecting ourselves to our own reproaches, as well as to those of other nations.
3d. It appears as well by a letter from Mr. Thornton, in answer to one from me, of both which copies are inclosed, as from conversations with Mr. Merry, that the facility which would be given, particularly in the British channel, by the immunity claimed for American vessels, to the escape of traitors, and the desertion of others whose services in time of war may be particularly important to an enemy, forms one of the pleas for the British practice of examining American crews, and will be one of the objections to a formal relinquishment of it.
This plea, like all others, admits a solid and satisfactory reply. In the first place, if it could prevail at all against the neutral claim, it would authorize the seizure of the persons described only, and in vessels bound to a hostile country only; whereas the practice of impressing is applied to persons few if any of whom are alleged to be of either description, and to vessels withersoever bound, even to Great Britain herself. In the next place, it is not only a preference of a smaller object on one side to a greater object on the other; but a sacrifice of right on one side, to expediency on the other side.
Considering, nevertheless, the possible adherence of the British government to this last objection, and the extreme importance to our seafaring citizens and commerce, of a stipulation suppressing a practice flagrant in its nature, and still more so in the abuses inseparable from it, you are left at liberty to concur, if necessary, in the modification as it stands in the second column. You will observe that this guards, in all cases, the crews of our vessels from being meddled with; and in referring for an exception to the immunity on board our vessels to the law of nations, yields no principle maintained by the U. States; inasmuch as the reference will be satisfied by the acknowledged exception of enemies in military service. Should persons therefore, other than such, be taken under pretext of the law of nations, the United States will be free to contest the proceeding, and there is the less difficulty in leaving the stipulation on this footing, as the case may never happen, and will be pretty sure to happen but rarely. You will observe also, that in the passage from one port to another of the respective countries, the vessels of the neutral parties are to protect all persons without exception. Independently of the general principle asserted by the U. States, this respect is due to the peculiar character of the coasting trade, and the utter improbability that it will at any time be a vehicle to persons of any obnoxious description.
On Article II. The reasonableness of this article is manifest. Citizens or subjects of one country residing in another, though bound by their temporary allegiance to many common duties, can never be rightfully forced into military service, particularly external service, nor be restrained from leaving their residence when they please. The law of nations protects them against both, and the violation of this law by the avowed impressment of American citizens residing in Great Britain, may be pressed with
the greater force on the British government, as it is in direct inconsistency with her impressment of her own subjects bound by much stronger ties to the United States, as above explained, as well as with the spirit of her commercial laws and policy, by which foreigners are invited to a residence. The liberation of the persons comprehended by this article, therefore, cannot be justly or honorably refused, and the provision for their recompence and their return home, is equally due to the service rendered by, and the wrong done to them.
On Article III. This regulation is conformable to the law of nations, and to the tenor of all treaties which define the belligerent claim of visiting and searching neutral vessels. No treaty can be cited in which the practice of compelling the neutral vessel to send its boat, its officers, its people or its papers, to the belligerent vessel, is authorized. British treaties, as well as those to which she is not a party, in every instance where a regulation of the claim is undertaken, coincide with the article here proposed. The article is in fact almost a transcript of the article of the treaty of 1786 between Great Britain and France.
The regulation is founded in the best reasons. 1st. It is sufficient for the neutral that he acquiesces in the interruption of his voyage, and the trouble of the examination, imposed by the belligerent commander. To require a positive and active co-operation on his part in behalf of the latter, is more than can be justified on any principle. 2d. The belligerent party can always send more conveniently to the neutral vessel, than this can send to the belligerent vessel, having neither such fit boats for the purpose, especially in a rough sea, nor being so abundantly manned. 3d. This last consideration is enforced by the numerous and cruel abuses committed in the practice of requiring the neutral vessel to send to the belligerent. As an example you will find in the documents now transmitted, a case where neither the smallness and leakiness of the boat, nor the boisterous state of the weather, nor the pathetic remonstrances of the neutral commander, had any effect on the imperious injunctions of the belligerent, and where the task was performed at the manifest peril of the boat, the papers, and the lives of the people. The limitation of the number to be sent on board the neutral vessel is a reasonable and usual precaution against the danger of insults and pillage.
On Article IV. This enumeration of contraband articles is copied from the treaty of 1781 between Great Britain and Russia. It is sufficiently limited, and that treaty is an authority more likely than any other to be respected by the British government. The sequel of the article, which protects the productions of a hostile colony converted into neutral property, is taken from the same model, with the addition of the terms "in any case or on any pretext." This addition is meant to embrace more explicitly, our right to trade freely with the colonies at war with Great Britain, and between them and all parts of the world, in colonial productions, being at the time not enemy's, but neutral property; a trade equally legitimate in itself with that between neutral countries directly, and in their respective vessels and such colonies, which her regulations do not contest.
In support of this right, in opposition to the British doctrine, that a trade not allowed by a nation in time of peace, cannot be opened to neutrals in time of war, it may be urged, that all nations are in the practice of varying more or less in time of war, their commercial laws, from the state of these laws in time of peace; a practice agreeable to reason as well as favorable to neutral nations; that the change may be made in time of war, on considerations not incident to a state of war, but on such as are known to have the same effect in time of peace; that Great Britain herself is in the regular practice of changing her navigation and commercial laws, in times of war, particularly in relation to a neutral intercourse with her colonies; that at this time she admits a trade between neutral countries and the colonies of her enemies, when carried on directly between them, or between the former and herself, interrupting only a direct trade between such colonies and their parent state, and between them and countries in Europe, other than those to which the neutral trade may respectively belong; that as she does not contest the right of neutrals to trade with hostile colonies, within these limitations, the trade can be, and actually is carried on indirectly between such colonies and all countries, even those to which the colonies belong; and, consequently, that the effect of her doctrine and her practice, is not to deprive her enemy of their colonial trade, but merely to lessen the value of it in proportion to the charges incident to the circuitous course into which it is forced, an advantage to her which if just in itself, would not be sufficient to balance the impolitic vexations accruing to neutral and friendly nations.

These views of the subject have entered into my conversations with Mr. Merry. He expresses, notwithstanding, a belief that Great Britain will turn an unfavorable ear to any proposition calculated to give her enemies the resources of their colonial trade, beyond the degree in which her present regulations permit. This is doubtless to be apprehended, but considering the proposition as an article which may find a balance in the general bargain, it may not be inadmissible; or if inadmissible in the extent proposed, a middle ground, may perhaps be accepted. The colonial trade in question consists of four branches; first, between the colonies and Great Britain herself; secondly, between the colonies and the neutral countries carrying on the trade; thirdly, between the colonies and neutral countries not themselves carrying on the trade; fourthly, between the colonies and the countries to which they belong, or which are parties to the war with Great Britain.
The first and second branches are those with which her own regulation accord. The last is that to which her aversion will of course be the strongest. Should this aversion be unconquerable, let it be tried then, and then only, whether on our yielding, or rather omitting that point, she will not yield to us in return, the direct trade between hostile colonies and neutral countries generally. You will be careful, however, so to modify the compromise as will mark as little as may be, a positive relinquishment of the direct trade between the belligerent nations and their colonies.
Should such a compromise be altogether rejected, you will limit the article to the simple enumeration of contraband, it being desirable that without a very valuable consideration, no precedent should be given by the United States of a stipulated acknowledgment that free ships do not make free goods. And you will omit the article altogether, if a proper list of contraband cannot be agreed on, particularly one that excludes money, provisions and naval stores.
On Article V. This article taken from the convention of 1800, between the United States and France, is conformable to the general practice of the prize courts in the latter, and is the more worthy of adoption every where, as it would contribute so much to the consistency and stability of the rules of admiralty proceedings. Without a single objection justly lying against it, it will have the important advantages of being a check on the inferior tribunals, of enabling the superior tribunal where a faulty reason appears on the face of the sentence, to correct the wrong without delay or expense, and of being a check moreover on the decision of the superior tribunal itself. As prize causes also are tried by courts not of a third party, but of one of the parties interested, it is but reasonable that the ground should be known to the other on which judgment has passed against its citizens or subjects, in order, if deemed proper, that negotiation may be employed for redressing past or guarding against future injustice.
Mr. Madison's letter to be continued.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
On the passage of the bill for raising an additional military force.
Monday, April 4.
The bill having been read the third time, and the question having been stated, "shall this bill pass."
Mr. CLOPTON said that he deemed it in a manner incumbent on him to address the House before he passed a vote upon this bill. It was well known that in the course of the long and remarkable session of Congress held in the year 1798, a session distinguished for many extraordinary legislative transactions—amongst others a bill was passed for raising twelve additional regiments of infantry. That bill was passed by a very large majority, eleven members only voting in the opposition; that of the Virginia delegation, then composed of 19 members, three only were of that minority, of whom he was one—that another of those three was not now a member of this House. Being thus particularly situated, said Mr. C. I owe it to myself to state to the House the grounds of the vote, which I am about to give, as it will be different from that which I then gave; lest there should seem to be a degree of inconsistency, or something like a dereliction of former principle. No such dereliction, said he, could be rightfully ascribed to him.
His vote upon that occasion, said Mr. C. was founded on the then existing state of things, as it appeared to him. He did not believe that at that time there was any ground to apprehend that this country would be involved in a war. Some aggressions had been committed by French cruisers, which indeed excited, and very deservedly excited, the public imagination. But had the government of France, said he, then assumed principles going to a destruction of almost all our neutral maritime rights, and manifested a settled determination to establish systems of outrage, and violations like those now in operation? No. A phantom of war was indeed conjured up, and that became the ground for raising the additional troops proposed by that bill. But he considered the present state of our foreign relations to be very different. Had there
appeared as great a prospect of war at that time as there does now, he should have voted for that bill. If there appeared no greater prospect of war at this time than there did then, he should not vote for this bill. The difference between his vote at that time and his vote at this time did not result, therefore, from any change in his opinion or principles, as to the policy of regular armies; but from the difference between the state of things at that time and the state of things at this time.
This, said Mr. C. is a momentous, an awful crisis. Sir, it is not a time for halting between two opinions. The rubicon is now passed. Our government has taken a ground with respect to our foreign relations, which ought to be maintained with firmness, with vigor and with energy. After a long series of wrongs endured with a patience and a forbearance, perhaps, unparalleled in the annals of any free country, new and more atrocious species of aggressions are superadded to the former ones—and outrages pushed to an extent no longer to be endured. Sir, said he, what would it be tamely to acquiesce in all these outrages? Would it not be to drink deeply of the cup of humiliation? And shall this nation perpetually drink of that cup? Of the cup of humiliation, did I say? The cup of degradation, I should have said. What, sir, shall we not only drink deeply of that delectable cup; but shall we drink up the contents of it to the dregs? Shall we then exalt those dregs to the very bottom? And not content with all that, must we at last swallow the cup itself? This, sir, would not be too strong or too harsh a metaphor, were there to be a descent to so great a degree of national degeneracy, as it would be, if the outrages committed on our national rights were to be acquiesced in.
Sir, said Mr. C. what is the real situation of the U. States at this time? What ground is there to apprehend that a state of actual, formal, avowed hostility will not soon commence? More than a speck of war now appears on our horizon. I fear that the stores of war are gathering thick around us! I fear that the calm, the delightful scenes of peace, ever grateful to the American eye, will ere long vanish from our sight. The wily, the deceitful, the insidious prime aggressor, by every artifice of procrastination, has long been preparing, and still is preparing himself, to be enabled with more effect to strike the meditated blow. To amuse, to deceive and to gain time in order the better to determine how to shape his future course, has been and still is the systematic practice. In this state of things then, shall we remain unconcerned, inactive and unprepared to meet the shock and to defend our country? I trust not; and I feel strong assurance that the efforts of the government will be zealously seconded by the great body of the people throughout the U. S.; that, if there be a spot on the American land where patriotism has heretofore slumbered; if there be a single spot, on which the demon of servility itself had laid its leaden, stupefying wand, even on that spot a spirit must now arise, which, shaking off its lethargy and supineness, must rouse itself, indignantly rouse itself into action, at a crisis so peculiarly important and interesting, as the present one is, to the honor and independence of this country.
That at such a crisis, said Mr. C. provision ought to be made preparatory for the worst state of things, though so sincerely deprecated—so long and so earnestly sought to be avoided by every means compatible with the honor of our country, there can be no doubt. Deep solicitude and anxiety respecting our external relations pervade the American people. Their eyes are all turned upon this body; and the general expectation, no doubt, is that such provision will be made. The public mind, consenting to that idea, manifests its will that the members of the nation's legislature should not separate until after such measures shall have been adopted, as the critical and alarming situation of the country demands: that when the cloud, now impending over our heads, shall burst upon us—when actual hostilities shall commence, we may not be found unprepared, but ready to meet the conflict with ample means of sustaining it. No matter whether he, who dominates on the ocean, or he who sways the sceptre over the European world—no matter whether the British or the Gallic tyrant shall choose to make war upon us, and thus to force us out of our much loved state of repose, let us, said he, be preparing ourselves to meet him. Let the U. S. at the same time scrupulously adhere to the principles of neutrality, and disdaining every thing like partiality or attachment to either party, resist all overtures, all artifices, every species of diplomatical trick, all attempts whatsoever to draw us over to either side.
The great question then is, said Mr. C. what kind of preparation ought we to make in addition to what has been done? I am now brought to a situation, Mr. Speaker, truly distressing to my soul. My aversion to vot. for raising regular troops always has been, and always will be, very great; and yet the peculiarity of the crisis, the necessity if the case, the situation of my country, calls upon me, imperiously calls upon me to give my support to such a measure. But in supporting this measure I beg to be understood, not as sanctioning the idea that regular troops alone should be relied on for the general and permanent defence of the country, even in case of a confirmed state of war; but that the militia ought always to constitute that great bulwark of defence; that in no situation whatsoever regular troops to be embodied to such amount as to form a force superior or nearly equal to that of the body of the militia. This should ever hold the paramount force of the nation. This forms the only safe depositary of the liberties of the nation; and that nation (whatever nation it may be) which does not adhere to the maxim of re-
taining that paramount force in the hands of its militia, places its liberties every hour at hazard.
From the geographical position of the U. S. more than from any other cause, said Mr. C. results the expediency of raising some regular troops. A long line of seaports and an extensive range of frontier posts require a considerable number of troops, as stationary forces, in case of sudden invasions or attacks from sea, or sudden inroads by savages, who may be stimulated to resume the tomahawk and the scalping-knife against our fellow citizens in the western or other frontier settlements. To these purposes regular troops, to a certain amount, appear to be best adapted; for which reason principally he was in favor of the bill. In the event of a state of actual war, said he, if the force contemplated by this bill should be in insufficient, Congress will unquestionably be again in session before the proposed number can be raised; and then such further augmentation may be made, as shall be found requisite. But notwithstanding this remark he would take occasion to declare that under his present impressions he could scarcely imagine that even in such event he could be induced to admit the expediency of increasing the regular forces to a number much greater than they will be when those proposed to be raised by the present bill are added to the present military force. That in all situations and circumstances whatever he considered the militia as the natural and best defence of the nation. That in every possible emergency, he believed, the militia ought principally to be relied on. That an efficient, well organized and disciplined militia not only formed the safeguard of liberty, but were competent to all the purposes of war. That were this country to be surrounded with foes, such a militia would be its safest and surest defence. He considered it as evinced in many nations, particularly such one as the United States, holding civil liberty in such high veneration as they do, under any circumstances to relinquish their reliance on such a militia, and resort to regular military forces as their principal means of defence.
(DEBATE TO BE CONTINUED.)
GREAT BARGAIN.
WILL be exposed to Sale on Tuesday the 19th April, this present month, for ready money, in the city of Washington, at 5 o'clock in the evening before Stetson's hotel, That beautiful and elegant ESTATE , forming the property of Mr. Walter S. Alexander, directly opposite the mouth of the Eastern Branch, and now leased to the Mr. Wise's for a term of years, at the rate of 360 dollars per annum, with other stipulations, which a reference to said lease will fully show. This valuable estate is bounded by the river Potomac a considerable distance, one mile from the contemplated bridge over the river, and city of Washington, and about 2 1/2 from Alexandria, the road as laid off from one to the other, passes nearly through the center of this estate, containing about 425 acres. A good and indisputable title will be made the purchaser by the subscriber, who is legally authorised, as may be seen by the Title papers in the hands of Robert I. Taylor, esq. attorney, will give every information under the peculiar situation which occasions the sale of this valuable and increasing property. Men of money will find it much to their advantage to attend this sale.
At the same time and place, will be sold a parcel of LAND, leased to Wm. Fraser, where he now lives, for a term of years, for 42 dollars and a half per annum, lying on the present George Town road, containing about 50 acres. Any further information may be had by application to R. I. Taylor, esq. or the subscriber, living in Alexandria. Letters on this subject will be duly attended to.
BALDWIN DADE.
Alexandria, April 9—3t
ENGLISH GOODS.
By the JOSEPH ADAMS and ST. JOHN from Liverpool.
APPLETON & CO. 16, Calvert street, Baltimore,
HAVE received their regular supply of Goods, calculated for the present and approaching season:
 Cambric and common Calicoes,  Plain and striped Dimities,  Printed Marseilles Vesting,  White Jeans,  Furniture Chintz,  Do. Dimities,  London Superfine Broad Cloths,  Do. do. Cassimeres,  Yorkshire fine cloths and Cassimeres,  Patent Nankeens,  Grandurells,  Cotton Cassimeres,  6 3/4 and 4 3/4 Cambric Muslins,  Japan, Haricord and Check, do.  Plain and figured Mull do.  Leno, Victory, Riddle, &c. do.  Colored do. do. do.  4 3/4 plain book do.  Gingham,  Silk do.  Sattins, Persians and Sarsenets,  Bonnet Silks,  Silk Glovs,  Silk Hankerchiefs,  Fancy Shawls,  Cotton Umbrellas,  Do. Braces,  Do. Laces and Footings,  Do. Quiltings,  English Kid Gloves,  Cotton Hosiery,  Hankerschiefs,  Frings 5 and Red Lace.  Cotton and Linen Checks,  Buttons,  Birmingham Wares &c. 
IN STORE.
A few dozen Gentlemen's best BEAVER HATS from Marseilles.
These Goods will be sold low for cash or undoubted paper at 60 days.
April 8—10t
WASHINGTON CITY.
Friday, April 8.
We have the satisfaction of stating that the whole number of shares, for the erection of a BRIDGE over the POTOMAC, have been subscribed. There is consequently no obstacle in the way of the early accomplishment of this object, which it is the determination of the company to carry into effect with the least possible delay.
For this purpose the Commissioners are requested to meet at Stetson's hotel on Saturday, at 12 o'clock.
Mr. Daniel Bedinger, late Navy-Agent at Norfolk, has just published a pamphlet complaining of his removal from office. The Secretary of the Navy, we are informed, has some time since made the necessary official arrangements to obtain full statements in writing, in relation to certain vessels that had been freighted in behalf of the government by Mr. Bedinger, in relation to various purchases stated by Mr. Bedinger to have been made from Solomon Bedinger, his brother—from a Francis M. Armstrong a clerk of Solomon Bedinger, and from James and Wm. Bennet, and also in relation to repairs that had from time to time been made at the public Navy Yard upon the vessels of Mr. Bedinger. These statements are to be obtained, it is said, not for the newspaper vindication of the Executive, nor for the newspaper crimination of Mr. Bedinger, but for the solemn consideration of the Attorney General of the United States.
Erratum. —In the Journal of secret proceedings in our last, in the fifth column of the 2d page of the paper, instead of "A motion was made by Mr. Blackledge and seconded, that the House do agree to the following order: Ordered that the secret journal, &c."—Read "A motion was made by Mr. Randolph, &c."
CASE OF JOHN SMITH.
Wednesday, April 6.
Messrs. Russel, and Gardener, Representatives from New York, were examined as to the credibility of several of the deponents on the part of Mr. Smith.
When Mr. Harper concluded the defence of Mr. Smith in a speech of about three hours length.
Thursday, April 7.
Mr. Anderson moved to postpone the consideration of the report in this case until to-morrow, to give the members an opportunity to collate the new testimony offered.
This motion was lost.
Mr. S. Smith offered a resolution requesting the President to lay before the Senate the letter of Judge Nimmo to him, the letter of Mr. Smith, covering the depositions of himself & his son, and such other papers as may be in the possession of the Executive touching any alleged connection between Mr. Smith and Burr's conspiracy.
This motion was agreed to, subject to the understanding that it should not interrupt the progress of any discussion which might arise on the report.
Mr. Anderson, having expressed his surprise at the attempt to precipitate a decision, and declared his inability to take that full view of the subject (which he desired to do), before to-morrow, on motion of Mr. White, its further consideration was postponed until to-morrow.
In the course of the remarks, which fell from Mr. Giles, he observed that he considered Elias Glover as so completely discredited, that he desired no further information to make up his opinion.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Wednesday, April 6.
Messrs. Porter and Gardener obtained leave of absence.
The House took up the unfinished business, the bill for raising an additional military force, the debate on which continued till past four o'clock, when the House adjourned without taking a question.
Messrs. Tallmadge, Southard, G. W. Campbell, supported the bill, and Messrs. Mosely, Sloan and Dana opposed it.
Thursday, April 7.
Mr. Findley from the committee appointed to confer with the committee of the Senate on the subject of adjournment, made a report concluding with a resolution to adjourn on the 25th instant, which was ordered to lie on the table.
The House were this day wholly occupied in the discussion of the bill for raising an additional military force, till past 5 o'clock, when the question was taken and the bill passed 95 to 16.
Messrs. Eppes, Key, and Clopton, supported the bill, and Messrs. Randolph, Dana, Stanford and D. R. Williams opposed it.
A motion previously made by Mr. Randolph to re-commit it was negatived, Ayes 30.
The title of the bill was amended on motion of Mr. Blount, after repeated motions for amending it, for reconsidering the vote on the bill, and for adjournment, 60 to 25, so as to read "An act to raise for a limited time an additional military force," when the House adjourned at a little past 7 o'clock.
Average Price Current at Bordeaux, Feb. 14, 1808.
 Coffee, St. Domingo, 70 cts. per lb.  Martinique, 80  Cocoa, Carraque, 70  St. Domingo, 60  Cotton, Long staple, 100 $ per cwt.  Short do. 71  Louisiana, 74  Indigo, Spanish, 3 1-2 $ pr lb  Louisiana, 2 1-2  Carolina, 2  Logwood, 117 $ per cwt.  Pepper, 55 cts. per lb.  Rice, 9 $ per cwt.  Sugar, white clayed, 43  Brown, 33  Muscovado, 28  Potashes, 18  *Tobacco, 45 
* A choice parcel sold at 57 dolls. per cwt. duty about 20.
New-York, April 4.
By the Newport packet Alonzo , captain Westcott, we have been enabled to make a valuable addition to the marine list of the Mercurante Advertiser from the Boston Gazette of Thursday. A passenger informs us that the ship George and Mary , of Newport, had just arrived at Tarpaulin Cove in 28 days from Falmouth, but brings no political news of importance.
Captain Alcorn from Cadiz, informs that 80,000 French troops were momentarily expected in Spain, and that Bonaparte was looked for at Madrid; the Russian fleet in Lisbon, and Spanish fleet in Cadiz, were endeavoring to form a junction, but were closely blockaded by the British, four at Cadiz had been sold at 12 cons. but was on the rise.
Captain Herrick who arrived at Newburyport on Sunday the 27th ult. from Gibraltar, informs: That on his passage down the Straits, 28th January off Cape de Gat was boarded and sent in by the English sloop of war Surinam , which was then passing up charged with dispatches for Lord Collingwood, who was off Sicily with 10 or 12 sail, advising him that the Rochefort squadron was out; that on the next day January 22, he passed the Rochefort squadron consisting of 6 sail* of the line and one brig, steering eastward; that on the 10th of February a large English squadron passed Gibraltar, bound up: that on the morning of the 11th a number of transports full of troops got under way, destination unknown; immediately after a gale came on from the Eastward, in which several were lost; there were 30 or 40 more transports there with troops, when the violent gale came on, in which capt. Herrick was drove out.
Capt. H. heard but little said of the threatened siege of Gibraltar.
* The Rochefort squadron consists of the Najestagua , Lys , Ajax , Suffren , Magnum & Sauvage of the line— Flora , 24—and Surveillante , 16.
New-York, April 4.
A vessel arrived at Barbary on Monday last, in 36 days from Rochelle, brings dispatches from Mr. Armstrong, for our government. The bearer was landed at Portland and is supposed to have proceeded on to Washington.
Extract of a letter from Cadiz, dated February 13.
"The French have levied on the inhabitants of Lisbon a contribution of twenty millions of dollars; and as the Prince Regent carried off all the specie in his expedition to the Brazils, the church plate has been seized and two thirds of the church revenues held in sequestration for the payment.
RUNAWAY.
WAS committed to the jail in Washington county, district of Columbia as a runaway on the 29th of March last, a black man who calls himself JOHN, and says he belongs to John Clarke of Alexandria; he is about 40 years of age, 5 ft. 10 1/2 inches high, slender build, pitted with the small pox, and has lost his left eye; had on when committed, a blue jacket, the crown covered with canvas, grey great coat, blue pantaloons, and old shoes—his owner is desired to come and prove him and take him away or he will be sold for his jail fees and other expenses as the law directs.
CARWRIGHT TIPPETT,
Keeper of the jail for W. Boyd, marshal.
April 8—w3t
NOTICE.
The subscriber under painful sensations announces to the public his intention to apply to the next Prince Georges county court, or in its recess to one of the judges thereof, for the benefit of an act of Assembly, entitled, "An act for the benefit of insolvent debtors," passed November session, 1805, and the "Act supplementary thereto," passed November session 1806.
ROBT. MCKOY.
April 1—w3t

AMERICAN MILITARY LIBRARY.
Just received and for sale at R. C. Weightman's Bookstore, Pennsylvania Avenue, Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of the American Military Library. Horror of St. Domingo. Lay of an Irish Harp, by Miss O'Brien. A Sailor's Friendship and A Soldier's Love, a new novel, by Miss Porter. Ivory and Bone Chessmen. Battledores and Shuttlecocks. Leather Chessboards. April 4-3t.
CHARLOTTE HALL.
MARCH 27, 1808. WHEN the emulation and exertions of youth are sanctioned by the respectability and experience of riper years how serious is the calamity which deprives them of a Friend. The Washington Society unanimously have resolved to wear crape upon the left arm for the space of one month as a small but sincere token of respect to the memory of NATHANIEL C. WEEMS, Esq. of Prince Georges county late an honorary member of that Society. Signed by order, ROBERT MURPHY, Secretary. April 4-3t.
FOR SALE.
A handsome new GIG & HARNESS COMPLETE. Enquire of the Printer. Washington, April 6-
PHILADELPHIA.
PORTER & ALE, CELLAR.  LEWIS ZIMMER, at his store near the NAVY YARD, begs leave to inform the Public that he is just opening a PORTER CELLAR, near the gate of the Navy Yard, where the best kind of Porter and Ale from Philadelphia shall at all times be procured in bottles or otherwise. He has also received from Philadelphia, a parcel of the very best LIQUID BLACKING, for Boots and Shoes in bottles and half bottles—the fine shining gloss of this blacking is so well fixed on the surface of the leather, that you may pass a white handkerchief over your boots without soiling them in the least; in short, it is difficult to describe all the admirable qualities of this Liquid Blacking. He continues to keep a general assortment of GROCERIES & DRY GOODS, which he offers for sale on very moderate prices. April 6-2t.
Board.
M. LEONARD, at the SIX BUILDINGS has her best Drawing Room and Four Bed Chambers unoccupied with Stables and Carriage houses. April 6-3t.
ROSS AND GILTY.
HAVE for sale at their store George Town, the following articles just received from Philadelphia, by the schooner Carolina, capt. HAND, jun. viz. 30 kegs butter, 20 barrels, New Town, Pippin Apples, 10 do. buck wheat flour, 10 do. Cranberries, and 10 do. small bark hickory nuts. Also a small assignment of very elegant Looking Glasses, Waiters, Trays, polished steel Shovel and Tongs, with cutlery, brass heads, &c. &c. January 9-1t.
AGREEMENT BARGAIN.
JOSEPH WHEATON Broker and Commission Merchant, has put into his hands for sale, at his office in F street near the Bank, a valuable property in the city of Washington, consisting of 646,453 square feet of city LOTS advantageously situated on the most prominent and valuable streets, and near the Navy Yard and Bridge, and to be had on the most reasonable terms of payment. This great bargain is recommended to gentlemen desirous of securing an early fortune, in this truly growing and flourishing city; the permanent residence and seat of the government of the United States. Other city property to be had—Houses and Lots—Enquire as above. All kinds of STOCKS bought and sold. Wanted to Purchase a few MILITARY LAND WARRANTS. Washington City, Dec. 11-tf.
SALE.
By order of the Orphan's Court of Montgomery county, will be sold, at Public Sale, on Saturday the 23d of April, at the dwelling of Absalom Beddo, deceased, The Property remaining unsold, consisting of Hogs, Plantation Utensils, and a number of other articles too tedious to enumerate. A credit of nine months will be given to the purchaser, by giving note, with approved security. Sale to commence at 10 o'clock. JAMES BEDDO, Ex'r. April 1-3t.
40 DOLLARS REWARD.
FOR apprehending and delivering Negro HARRY to the subscriber in the city of Washington or twenty five dollars for securing said slave so that I get him again. Harry ran off on the 11th day of March 1808, he is about 5 feet 7 or 8 inches high, well made, thick lips, light black color, has the wool shaved off the back of the head the size of a dollar, and a scar on the same, and a small wen on the breast; had on when he went off a blue cloth coat, drab color bear skin round jacket (as a spruce) Harry was purchased of Mr. George Cole of Poplar Hill, Saint Mary's county. N. B. Having reason to believe that he was persuaded and aided in his elopement, I offer 50 dollars reward to any person who will prove to conviction in a court of justice the person guilty of such acts. PETER LENOX. April 6-tawtf.
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, Voo's best London cloths, Do. double milled & plain cassimeres, Bennett's cords and velvets, Constitution Gerrow, hunting, Trailing, 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 duffil blankets, flannels, Superfine green cloth table covers, Calicoes, colored cambrics, Gingham, silk and cotton chambrays, Furniture Chintz, Cambric and jaconet muslins, India and British book do. India mull-mull figured and plain, Plain and figured lenoes, Laced cambrics, Elegant tamboured mulls, Grecian robes and Pelisse dresses, 8-4 damask and raw silk shawls, Damask scarfs, Camel's hair and swansdown do. Down scarfs, Long and short lace sleeves, spider & nett sleeves, Extra long and habit kid gloves, Do. do. silk do. Do. do. raw silk do. Cross-barred and plain Mantuas and lute strings, Persians and Medes, Thread and cotton laces, Lice caps and handkerchiefs, Book muslin and leno cap patterns, 4-4-7-8 Irish linens, Long lawns, linen cambrics, Irish diap-rs, 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, Searl 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.
PORTRAITS.
PAINTED IN OIL COLORS. By C. BOYLE, at the Building formerly occupied by Mr. G. Stewart, Pennsylvania avenue. Washington, March 11-tf.
HURAS AND BRALL.
WOOLLEN drapers, men's mercers, and tailors, New Jersey Avenue, opposite the Secretary of the Navy's, respectfully inform the public that they have commenced business in the above line, where they will endeavor to give satisfaction—they have on hand a fresh supply of the most fashionable goods, suitable for the approaching season, all fresh and of the very best quality. N. B. Regimentals and naval uniforms made in the most elegant and fashionable stile with neatness and dispatch. October 23-tf.
NOTICE.
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-pids.
THE SUBSCRIBER
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 his brother Romulus Riggs, where all his accounts will be ready for settlement by his assistant Mr. Samuel C. Offut, or ELISHA RIGGS. George Town, M. 16-tf.
FAMILY PHYSICIAN.
A new and greatly improved Family Physician, entitled "The Planter's and Mariner's Companion," FOR SALE AT R. C. WEIGHTMAN'S Bookstore, Washington city. J. MILLIGAN'S George-Town, And Kid & Thomas's, Market street Baltimore. March 28-3w.
THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE,
That the subscriber of St. Mary's county hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of St. Mary's county in Maryland Letters Testamentary on the personal estate of of Comand Plowden late of the county aforesaid deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same with vouchers thereof to the subscriber, at or before the 25th day of September next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Given under my hand this 18th day of March, eight hundred & eight. HENRY NEALE, Ex'r. March 25-6w.
CHARLES A. VANDER
MERCHANT TAYLOR.
RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the District of Columbia and public in general, that he has just received by a late arrival from Philadelphia, A CHOICE ASSORTMENT Of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, single and double milled, superfine Coatings, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment of Spaniels and rich silk Mol-skins for waistcoats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season. Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform stile of fashion. Richard Horwell's celebrated patent parallel suspenders far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms retail, as at his manufactory. November 27-tf.
PUBLIC SALE.
By order of the Orphan's Court of Washington county, District of Columbia, the subscriber will offer at Public Sale, on Friday the 8th of April, PART of the Personal Estate of John Wight, deceased, consisting of Wheat, Corn, Oats, Rye, Horses, horned Cattle; among which there is one yoke of valuable Oxen, Hogs, Sheep, Plantation Utensils, &c. The sale will commence at 11 o'clock, A. M.—Terms all sums under 20 dollars cash, above that sum a credit of six months, the purchaser giving bond, with approved security, to bear interest from the date.
WASHINGTON BOYD
Ex'rs of GEORGE MOORE,
PUBLIC SALE.
By virtue of a decree of the honorable the High Court of Chancery of Maryland, will be exposed to sale on the 8th day of April next at 12 o'clock at the store of Thomas Duval, a Tract of LAND, containing One Hundred and Eighty-Seven acres, called Brashears Pacson, the property of John Turner deceased, lying in Prince George's county, about 7 miles from Bladensburg, 10 from the city of Washington, and 25 from Annapolis; about one third in wood, the remainder in a state of productive cultivation. The terms of the above sale are, that the purchaser shall give bond with good security such as shall be approved of by the trustee for paying one half within 9 months, and the other half within 18 months with interest on each payment from the day of sale. GEO. PAGE, Trustee. The Creditors of John Turner, deceased, who have not yet exhibited their claims, are hereby notified to bring the same into the Chancery Court, with the vouchers thereof within six months from the day of sale. G. PAGE. March 16-3w.
IN CHANCERY, MARCH 21, 1808.
Robert H. Smith,
versus
Elizabeth C. Smith.
THE bill in this case states that the complainant as executor of John H. Smith has in settling the estate and discharging the claims against the deceased, overpaid the personal estate to a considerable amount. It further states that the said John H. Smith devised a considerable real estate situate in Calvert county, to his two daughters, Elizabeth Chew Smith & Mary Smith, who is since dead intestate and without issue, and that the said Elizabeth Chew Smith is sole seized now as the heir at law of her sister of the whole of the real estate of her father John H. Smith. The bill further states, the said Elizabeth is an infant under the age of twenty one years and now resides in the state of Kentucky near George Town in Scott county, and prays that the real estate of the said John H. Smith may be sold to reimburse to him the money he has advanced to pay the debts of the said John H. Smith; all the personal estate being exhausted. It is thereupon this 21st day of March lighteen hundred and eight, by William Kilty, chancellor and by the authority of this court ordered and adjudged that the complainant cause a copy of this order to be inserted at least three successive weeks before the first day of May next, in the National Intelligencer that the said Elizabeth C. Smith may be warned to appear in this court in person or by solicitor on or before the 1st day of September next, to show cause why a decree should not pass as prayed. True copy Nichs. BREWER, R. C. C. April 1-w3t.
PUBLIC NOTICE.
By order of the Orphan's Court of Prince George's county, will be sold on Thursday the 21st day of April next, at his late dwelling in Prince George's county, all the personal estate of John Rustin, late of said county, deceased, consisting of Horses, Cattle, Hogs, Plantation Utensils and a variety of other articles too numerous to mention. The terms of sale are six months credit, for all sums above ten dollars, the purchaser giving bond with two good sureties bearing interest from the day of sale; for all sums to the amount of ten dollars and under, the cash must be paid. The sale to commence at 12 o'clock. JOHN H. HALL, Adm'r. March 25-3w.
United States District of Columbia,
county of Washington, to wit.
IN CHANCERY, 9th OCTOBER, 1807.
Benjamin Stoddert and John Mason,
versus
Thomas Waters Griffith, John R. Livingston, Jonathan Burrell, Gault & Doyrey, James C. Montflore, I. I. Picaud and James Davidson.
THE bill states that the defendant, Thomas Waters Griffith was the agent of the house of Taney and Simond for the delivery of a cargo of flour belonging to the said Taney and Simond to the French government. That the French government not being able to pay ready money for the said cargo, the balance due thereon from the said government was placed to the credit of the said Griffith, the agent, instead of being placed to the credit of the real owners Taney and Simond. That the debt due hath been liquidated under the Louisiana Convention in the said Griffith's name, for the sum of one hundred and ninety thousand, two hundred and seventy francs, French money of the value of 35,675 dollars. That the said Thomas Waters Griffith, now residing and for several years past having resided in Baltimore city in the state of Maryland, well knowing all the circumstances mentioned in the complaints said bill, and that the debt aforesaid was liquidated in his name in Paris under the Louisiana Convention was in truth and in fact a debt due to the said complainants as the trustees of Francis Lewis, Taney, and Taney and Simond, did execute a writing transferring all the interest of said Griffith in the said debt to the said complainants as trustees aforesaid. That notwithstanding the above circumstances the said Griffith did employ James C. Montflore of Paris to receive for his own account and use the aforesaid debt, which actually belongs to the said complainants as trustees aforesaid; and the said Montflore did actually receive the bills on the ministers of the United States, on the Treasury of the United States in part payment of the said debt in four sets of bills drawn in favor of said Thomas Waters Griffith, and which bills have been fraudulently endorsed by the said Montflore, with a view as the said complainants believe, to defraud them of the said complainants, and under a real or pretended power from the said Griffith and as his attorney to the said I. I. Picaud, who endorsed the same over to John R. Livingston, who has endorsed the same over to Jonathan Burrell, cashier of the Bank of Discount and Deposit at New York, who has endorsed the same over to James Davidson cashier of the Branch Bank of the United States in the city of Washington who now holds the same for collection. The complainants further state that four other bills for the balance of the aforesaid claim in the French government liquidated in the name of the said Griffith, but actually belonging to said complainants as trustees as aforesaid, have been drawn in favor of Gault and Doyrey as trustees of Thomas Waters Griffith, for thirty thousand francs French money of the value of 5625 dollars, which said four bills have also been sent to the aforesaid James Davidson, and endorsed over to him for collection in the same manner as in the case of the four other bills herein recited. That all the aforesaid eight bills of exchange drawn by the American minister at Paris on the treasury of the United States under the Louisiana Convention for the debt liquidated in the name of Thomas Waters Griffith, are actually the property of said complainants as trustees aforesaid. The object of the said bill is to save and protect the said complainants from the fraud projected against them on the part of the said Thomas Waters Griffith, and his coadjutors, and to obtain a writ of injunction directed to all the before-mentioned defendants, &c. and particularly to the said James Davidson enjoining and commanding him from paying over to any person besides the said complainants the money that may be paid by the Treasury of the United States in virtue of the said bills of exchange, and particularly enjoining the said James Davidson from paying the said money arising from the said bills, or parting with the said bills until the further order of this court in the premises. It is represented by the complainants that the said Thomas W. Griffith, John R. Livingston, Jonathan Burrell, Gault and Doyrey, James C. Montflore, and I. I. Picaud, defendants in this cause all reside out of the district of Columbia and are not within the reach of the process of this court. It is therefore ordered that the complainants cause a copy of this order to be inserted once each week for six months previous to the first Monday in June next in the National Intelligencer, to the intent that the said defendants may have notice of this application and of the object of this bill and to be warned to appear in this court in person or by solicitor on or before the first Monday of June next, to show cause, if any, why a decree shall not pass as prayed. By order, WM. BRENT, Ck. December 4-6m.
20 DOLLARS REWARD.
RAN away, on the 1st day of Oct. 1807, from the subscriber, in Prince George's county, two miles from the Governor's Bridge, a negro man named SAM, but sometimes call himself SAM JOINTER, he is about five feet seven inches high, a little bow legged, stoops as he walks, has short wool, and is fond of strong liquor; he is upwards of 50 years of age; his clothing unknown; he may change his name, and endeavor to pass for a free man; I suspect he is harbored either at Mr. Fielder Gantt's, or maj. Stoddert's quarters, or the Federal city, where he has relations. Whoever takes up said negro, and brings him home, or secures him in jail, so that I get him again, shall receive the above reward. M. REEN DUVAL. All masters of vessels, and others, are forbidden harboring, employing, or carrying off said fellow, at their peril. April 1-3t.
PORT WINE.
Of very good quality in casks, each one inclosed in a dry case for security against any adulteration, with a small parcel of other excellent Wines in casks and in bottles; among which are Red & White Claret, Dry Lisbon, and very old Brazil Madeira Wine, just received and for sale, by JOHN GOULDING
Who has on hand as usual an assortment of choice LIQUORS of most kinds used here. Georgetown, March 25-
WHEREAS the SUBSCRIBER together with John Stockwell the Elder, and George Johnston and Jane his wife of the county of Tyrone in the kingdom of Ireland, executed a power of attorney, dated the 9th day of April 1806, authorizing John Stockwell, jun. to receive, and to sell and convey all the estate, real and personal to which we were entitled under the wills or as heirs at law of Mark Stockwell late of the city of Washington, or of Henry Stockwell late of Philadelphia consisting principally of Lots in the city of Washington, and Lands in Greenbrier, and Kenaway, counties in Virginia. Now know all to whom this writing shall come, that we, for good causes, do hereby revoke and entirely annul the said letter of attorney herein before mentioned. Given under our hands and seals this 28th day of March 1808. (Seal) JAMES HANCOCK. March 30-3t.
A Stock of well Assorted HARDWARE,
FOR SALE.
THE subscriber wishes to decline the Hardware business, and offers his entire stock in that line at a low advance upon the first cost, to a person wishing to purchase the same, a credit will be given, upon giving approved security. HENRY INGLE. March 18-2w tm.
THE CAPITOL PRIZE.
Tick No. 6974 was drawn the 36th day in St. Mary's College Lottery, a prize of 30,000 dollars. The ticket was sold at G. and R. WAITE's truly fortunate Lottery office, corner of Market & Charles streets, to Mr. Dobbins, who we understand after was disposed of it to another person in this city. Ticket No. 15,564, which was drawn the second capital prize 15,000 dollars. Ticket No. 7,001, which was drawn the third capital prize, 10,000 dollars, and Ticket No. 1977 was drawn the 4th capital prize, 5,000 dollars, were all sold at the same lottery office. STATE LOTTERY—A NEW YORK. For the promotion of Literature, and for other purposes. Positively commences drawing on the First Tuesday in April next. Payment of prizes guaranteed by the state Legislature. HIGHEST PRIZES, 1 25,000 dollars. 1 10,000 dollars. 2 5,000 dollars. 4 2,000 dollars. 7 1,000 dollars. And a very considerable number of inferior prizes. Less than two blanks to a prize. The tickets are now offered for sale in a variety of numbers at G. & R. WAITE's truly fortunate Lottery Offices in New York, at the following prices, Whole 7 50 Quarters 2 Halves 3 75 Eighths 1 But will in a few days advance in price. All prizes purchased of G. & R. Waite will be paid by them, and every information relative to the Lottery will be given to distant adventurers gratis. Prize tickets in the New York and Baltimore Lottery taken in payment. Orders for G. and R. Waite, taken and punctually attended to, at J. MARCH's Book-Store, High street George Town. March 18-6t.
This is to give Notice—
THAT the subscriber of St. Mary's hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of Saint Mary's county in Maryland, Letters Testamentary on the personal estate of Wilfred Neale, late of Saint Mary's county, deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased, are hereby warned to exhibit the same with the vouchers thereof to the subscriber at or before the 25th day of September next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Given under my hand this 20th day of March 1808. HENRY NEALE, Ex'r. March 25-6w.
PROPOSALS
For publishing by subscription, a new work, entitled,
"THE LAWYER; or MAN AS HE OUGHT NOT TO BE."
A Tale.
CONDITIONS.
1. This work will be printed on fine paper, and handsomely bound in boards. 2. It will be published in one duodecimo volume of about 250 pages, and delivered to subscribers at one dollar. 3. Those who shall obtain 12 subscribers, shall be entitled to one copy gratis. 4. As the expence of publication will be considerable, a discount of one eighth of a dollar will be allowed to such as pay in advance.
Subscriptions for the above work are received at the book store of D. Rasine, Capitol Hill, where a general assortment of books and stationary are always kept for sale. March 30, 1808. — 6.
LINDSAY'S HOTEL.
THE Subscriber has taken that well calculated house on the Capitol Hill, late occupied by Mr. Frost formerly by Mr. Stelle—Where he intends to open a Tavern on the 24th October. Those gentlemen who may favor him with their Custom may rely on every attention in the Power of the Public's devoted Servant. GEO. W. LINDSAY.
N. B.—EIGHT or TEN BOARDERS may be conveniently accommodated. October 19-1f.