The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1802-04-23 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER,
AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
Vol. II.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
No. CCXL.
FIVE DOLLS. PER ANN.
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23th, 1802.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
National Intelligencer.
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
SATURDAY, February 26.
DEBATE
On the bill received from the Senate, entitled "An Act to repeal certain acts respecting the organisation of the courts of the United States."
(Mr. Dennis—Concluded)
MR. DENNIS then proceeded—My colleague (Mr. Nicholson) has told us, they have not yet half the officers on their side of the question, and surely they are entitled to a part of the loaves and fishes. I had thought, sir, that as under the former administration, the moment a man became an officer, he was considered as a harpy, preying on the substance of the people, and as all their efforts, as we have frequently been told, before they came into power, were exclusively for the public good, and not for their own, or their friends emolument, they would not have been solicitous for any part of these loaves and fishes.
My colleague has thought proper to enter into a tedious and laborious investigation of the common law, and its applicability to the United States. It is not my intention to pursue them, through all his details, for the subject is of sufficient importance to require a particular and separate examination. But as, I presume, he does not use language, which he does not understand, or introduce technical expressions without being able to give us their definition; when he quoted the doctrine of contempt, he admitted the existence of the common law: for I will defy him to inform me, of the meaning and extent of contempt of judicial authority, without reference to the common law.
The constitution says the judges, and other officers may be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors; but it does not declare what shall constitute those crimes and misdemeanors; and in order to know, in what they consist, you must go to the common law. Although as my colleague has said, the judicial act has given power to the courts to punish contempt, and (I believe they would have had it without it,) yet it has not defined the nature, or extent of their authority, on the subject; and they can only know it, by resorting to the common law.
He says that contempt of the courts, in England, are punished, in some cases, with fine and imprisonment, and the loss of the right hand; and requests to know, if our courts can possibly be possessed of that power.
In Maryland we have adopted the common law, and of course the doctrine of contempt, and it would seem that the same danger may be supposed to exist there, which he supposes to exist, from the exercise of this power in the federal courts.
But the truth is in a vast variety of cases, our lives, liberties, and property, are as much in the power of courts, as he supposes our right hand to be, in this instance. In Maryland we have not regarded the common law, as a grievance, but have claimed it as a right of the first importance: and it is remarkable, that a provision for it, stands the third in order amongst those articles in our bill of rights, which in our enlightened convention was thought essential to our liberty and happiness.
In Maryland, however, a great part of the common law is inoperative, from its inapplicability to our local circumstances and our political situation, but the question of applicability is decided by the courts. So, sir, we only contend for such part of the common law, as is applicable to the government and constitution of the United States; and say that where certain phrases are used, borrowed from that law, it is the dictionary to which we must resort for their application; and also for its application to offences which are no crimes against state authority, but are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or committed against the peace and government of the union.
I think my colleague admitted, that a crime committed in a fort, or any other place within the exclusive jurisdiction of the states, is punishable at common law. If so, there is an end of the question of the existence of the common law:—If he did not, sure I am, that if murder were committed in any place within our exclusive jurisdiction, and if there were
no act of congress, punishing the offence, the courts would have the power to punish it. It is clear the constitution has been predicated on the supposed existence of the common law, and on any other principle, it must have entered into a more particular detail than it has done, of every subject which it embraces. My colleague says, in England many words spoken of the king, are severely punished, which would not be so, if spoken of another person, and wishes to know, if they are to be punished in the same way, if spoken of the President. He proceeds to give his opinion, that they would not be punishable in Maryland, if spoken of the governor; and here we agree, but there it rests with the court to decide, on the subject, and the same rule which would there apply, to prove it inapplicable to the governor, would also apply to the federal courts to shew it inapplicable to the President.
I will now, Mr. Chairman, endeavor to pursue my colleague through his calculation of the comparative expenses of the administration of justice in the state of Maryland and the United States, and I flatter myself, that I shall be able to shew, we have no reason to dread the comparison. Permit me here to remark, that it is somewhat extraordinary that these gentlemen, who undertake to be so completely skilled in the art of financial divination as to be able to tell at this time precisely what will be the diminution sustained in our finances, in the course of the next year, in consequence of the return of peace and the consequent inactivity of a heretofore active capital; who can say how much revenue can be dispensed with, and without borrowing we may still maintain the public faith; should not have been a little more specific on this subject. The costs of this system about to be repealed are estimated (I mean for the salary of the judges) by the secretary of the treasury at the sum of 31,500 dollars, and when the office of one judge of the supreme court shall be vacated, agreeably to the provisions of the act of last session, it will amount to only 28,000 dollars. The whole expense of the administration of justice, in the United States, is estimated at 137,000 dollars, but from the manner in which it has been stated the public will suppose the whole of this sum goes into the pockets of the judges. I will therefore state, without fear of contradiction, that this sum includes the salary of the attorney general, of sixteen district attorneys; of all the marshals; the whole expenses of the district of Columbia; the expense of prosecuting criminals; of renting gaols; (for the United States have no gaols) of juries and all that vast variety of incidental expenditures which in all countries pertain to the administration of justice.
[Here Mr. Dennis went into a minute calculation of the annual expense of the juries in the state of Maryland, amounting to about 30,000 dollars, and into the amount of the annual sum paid to the judges, amounting independently (of the expense of orphans court and magistrates, to the sum of 23,600 dollars) making an aggregate of 53,600 dollars.]
He then proceeded. Now, sir, if the administration of justice in the state of Maryland, which my colleague tells us constitutes only one-fifteenth of the union, costs us the sum of 50,000 dollars, (for I will omit some thousand dollars for possible redundancies, in my calculations) is that an expensive system, for five million of people, scattered over a territory of sixteen hundred miles one way, and of vast extent the other, which costs 137,000 dollars? As to the number of suits depending in these courts, you can form no manner of comparison. This system has been but one year in operation, and though the difference in the number stated by my colleague between the suits in the state and federal courts be correct, yet a great part of those in the state courts, is of a petty nature, and about which no controversy exists. But in the federal courts, questions of immense magnitude arise, questions under treaties, and the laws of nations, and on which peace or war may depend. The system of Virginia has also been brought into comparison with this, and a gentleman from that state (Mr. Thompson) has expressed his astonishment at the number of our judges and the expense of our system compared with the number of judges, and expenses of Virginia. I am not particularly acquainted with their judiciary system, but I believe I shall be correct when I state that they now have eighteen judges in their superior courts, and at least nine hundred magistrates, who hold monthly courts and courts of quarter sessions. From this statement I think
we cannot suffer much from the comparison which he has proposed. But why so much talk about expense? Is it because 31,500 dollars, to people unaccustomed to national expenditures, appears to be a very large sum? But are we accustomed to expend those large sums for no other than judicial purposes? I find from an estimate of the secretary of state, that we have expended in repairs on the French corvette the Berceau, (which we have expended too for the benefit of France) the enormous sum of 32,000 dollars; and this sum can be appropriated without a sigh or a murmur. I suppose we have been considered by the executive as bound to make this expenditure, by virtue of the article of the treaty, which stipulates for the restoration of public ships of France, which we had captured. I have not mentioned this case to criminate the executive, and possibly the construction put on the article may be correct; but I will say that as it appears to me extremely unequal, that we should restore this vessel, pay for her repairs, and pay at the same time for the repairs of the damages done to our own ship, in the engagement; I should with great reluctance, have admitted the construction. I have alluded to this, however, to shew the great facility with which we can appropriate this large sum of money, whilst we cannot afford to give one year's experiment to this system, to ascertain its comparative merits with the old one; when too, it relates to a subject, of all others the most important to our constituents.
I will now proceed, sir, to a slight view of the constitutional question, and to advert to some of the constructions, for which these gentlemen have contended, in order to do away the plain letter of this instrument; and here, sir, I have only to read the constitution to see that its language is as applicable to the legislature as to the executive, and that the onus probandi lies on the other side of the question. If there were any doubts however, as to the power against whom the judges are to hold their offices, from the generality of the expression, those doubts must cease to exist, when we find a restriction which is exclusively applicable to the legislature—viz. That they shall not diminish the salary of the judges. From this restriction it appears, the convention were jealous of the encroachments of Congress, and did not regard them as altogether that harmless and all perfect body, which our opponents seem to suppose. Now, sir, to my mind it is ridiculous to declare, that such has been the jealousy of the convention, as to suppose the legislature might be disposed to establish an influence over the judiciary, by diminishing the salary of the judges, and have therefore forbidden this diminution; but that they intended to leave to Congress the power of depriving them of it altogether. But we are told they do not contend for the power of removing the judge, but only of abolishing his office. If we recollect, that the only reason why the constitution has distinguished the tenure of the judicial, from that of executive officers, is to secure the independency of the judge, the fallacy is at once detected; for no one will say, that his independency is not equally affected by the one act as the other. Says a gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Thompson) he who hurls the judge from his office, violates the constitution, and by the act of last session, that has been done. In the first part of his proposition, I heartily concur, and I say that he who hurls the office from under the judge, equally infracts the constitution; for he equally violates the independency of the judicial character. As to the latter part of the proposition it has again and again been demonstrated, that by that act, no judge was deprived of his commission, or his salary. It is generally declared and admitted by these gentlemen, that we cannot repeal a law for the purpose of ousting one description of judges and substituting another in their place. But in Maryland they have thought otherwise, and it appears that this word good behavior is a very convenient term, for it means, there, a right to repeal a law with a few trifling modifications, for the purpose of getting clear of three of their judges, of one political cast, and substituting others, of opinions more congenial with the sentiments of the ruling party. Here, it only means a right to abolish a useless system. How dangerous is it, sir, to resort to constructions, when the letter of the instrument is so plain and explicit? It is, I believe, a notorious fact in Maryland, that the leave to bring in the bill for repealing the law of that state, was given for the avowed purpose (and it was so stated by the gentleman who made the motion) of displacing the judges. The
law of Maryland, we are told, was a temporary law; but at the session before the last it was continued until eighteen hundred and five, and as it contained not only the organization of the courts, but a vast variety of important details respecting their jurisdiction and other matters, the object of the legislature in making it a temporary law, may be fairly inferred to have been, for the purpose of changing that part of the system, if subsequent events should require it, which might be effected without depriving the judges of their commissions. But, admit that the legislature who made it did not conceive but they had in their power to deprive the judges of their commissions at pleasure, when in the law they declared, they should hold them for life, it only proves, that this subject was not much considered when the law was enacted—for the constitution of Maryland is so explicit, that it cannot be evaded by the artifice now employed, to distinguish between taking away the man and taking away the office. The constitution of Maryland, says, "The chancellor and all judges, &c. shall hold their commissions during good behavior, removable only for misbehavior on conviction in a court of law." They are to hold their commissions & not their offices, &c. and it is impossible to evade that expression there, however we may attempt to pervert the language of this constitution.
When they tell us they cannot turn out one set of judges to put in another, their declarations are at war with this bill; for they are doing the very thing which they say themselves, they cannot perform. They are vacating the offices of these judges, and substituting in their places the judges of the supreme court, and they might as well have made a legislative nomination of A B C, &c. who, are no judges at all, to fill these offices, as of the judges of the supreme court. But they tell us they only restore the former system, by repealing the act which abolished it. Can they discriminate between making a new law, and the moment they have abolished these offices and dismissed the judges, putting new men in their places; and repealing a law, repealing a former law, by which the first is revived? No, sir, when a law is repealed it is as if it never had existed, and reviving that law is tantamount to making a new one. Suppose they should chuse to declare that the supreme court should consist of three judges instead of six, and they could and would abolish the office of three of them as useless; by what process would they make the deduction? And if we had, instead of separating the circuit court from the supreme court and appointing these sixteen judges, added that number to the supreme court; how would they have reduced them? You must have a supreme court; you cannot abolish it. The office then remains, and you are to get clear of the judges.
The executive, you admit, cannot take away their commissions, and I suppose we should ballot to know, who should go out, and who continue in office. The gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Israel Smith) who laid more to the point on this subject, than I have heard altogether, and to whose remarks, I regret, I have not time, to pay more attention, has been very much mistaken in all his premises; but when he had gotten them, drew his deductions, with great ingenuity, and dexterity. He by some means or other contrived, to make the legislature an original power, existing from time immemorial, without tracing its origin, and then went on to shew, that the executive, and judiciary, were derivative powers; the mere creatures of the legislature. His fallacy consisted in confounding the legislature with the people, and in supposing, that the will and authority of the one, over the other departments, was precisely co-extensive with the other.
In illustrating some of his propositions; he said, the President was commander in chief of the army, but we may disband the army, and he ceases to be the commander in chief. I deny the position, for he is still the commander in chief, though you may leave him nothing to command; if not, then you may proceed to take away one executive attribute after another, and so deprive him of his presidency.
On the same principle you cannot, under pretext of there being no necessity of courts, in the United States, repeal your laws organizing the courts, and thereby leave us without any judiciary. The same gentleman has observed, that the Statute of William gave a power to remove the persons of the judges, and it is to be inferred from thence, that the parliament had before the right
to abolish the office of a judge. The inference to my mind is the contrary, for if the parliament had possessed this mode of getting clear of the judges, they would have had no necessity for making the provision in that statute. But the English parliament, with all their omnipotency, never would have dared to abolish the courts of Westminster Hall; to oust obnoxious judges. No; it has remained for us to make this new discovery, of getting clear of an officer, commissioned for life, on the sole condition of good behavior, without alleging the commission of any crime!!! But, Mr. Chairman, we have heard much about privileged orders . One gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Thompson) appears to be very much afraid of the establishment of such orders. Another (Mr. Giles) has read to us a clause in the constitution, which says, no titles of nobility shall be granted; and my colleague (Mr. Nicholson) has talked a deal about the divine right of kings.
It may I think be shewn, that these gentlemen are contending for the establishment of these privileged orders, and I want nothing but their own principles to prove it. It is, sir, one of the prerogatives of the British king, not to be bound by a law, unless expressly named. Is not this the very prerogative they are now claiming, when they say this clause to general in its expressions, was intended to bind the executive, and every body but ourselves? Again; the clause alluded to, by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Giles) says there shall be no title of nobility granted by the United States. May they not contend with the same plausibility, as in this case, that this clause is only restrictive on the executive? May they not tell us that in England the king creates nobility, and this prohibition was devised in order to prevent the President, in analogy to the authority of the king, from granting titles; and that, though the people were jealous of trusting their power in the President, for fear of abuse, they never had any such fear, from the exercise of the power, by their own representatives, and that though the President cannot, congress may create a nobility? They claim not only the prerogatives of the king, but the powers also, of the parliament. For one gentleman (Mr. Giles) has considered the statute of William as our prototype, and as the parliament have the power, expressly reserved to them of removing the judges, ergo we have and ought to have it. They forget that the king both creates the courts and as many of them as he pleases, and appoints to fill them as many judges as he chuses; and that this is the only means of preventing an hereditary monarch from multiplying judges to any amount. They forget that he can make war, treaties of alliance with foreign princes and states; can raise fleets and armies, and stands with one foot on the church and the other on the state; that he has a vast independent hereditary revenue, and an annual grant, and the expenditure of 800,000 sterling. They forget too, that here we, and not the President, possess most of these high authorities, and that without usurping. We have many powers of the parliament likewise. These things they must forget, or else they would not hesitate to suppose with us, that in this country there is infinitely more to be dreaded, from the encroachments of the legislature over the judges, than from the executive, and that much is to be feared from a union of the legislature and the executive, when there shall be over them no controul. But, sir, what sort of logic is it, that because the Parliament of England when they changed the tenure of the judicial office, from a holding during the pleasure of the crown to that of good behavior, and expressly reserved the power of removing a judge by an address to the king, we have the same power, without being able to find any similar authority? But my colleague has said, that in England the term good behavior was not understood to mean a holding for life, on the sole condition of good behavior; for the parliament after the tenure of good behavior was adopted found it necessary to provide and by the statute of George 3d did declare, that the offices of their judges shall not be vacated by the demise of the crown. This is but a parliamentary contrivance, to say the most of it, and may have been made to remove existing doubts of others, rather than because they doubted themselves; and even if such were the opinions of parliament, it cannot operate as an example for us, since there is no sort of analogy between the annihilation of a judicial commission, by the demise of the crown, which is the act of God, and a depriva-

of it by the act of the legislature. But if this proved any thing, it would be what my colleague will not contend for, that all judicial officers in this country would be vacated by the death of the President, or on every Presidential election.
(Continued in 3rd next.)
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Monday, April 5, 1802.
DEBATE respecting the Berceau.
Mr. Griswold remarked that much had been said respecting the money expended on the Berceau. In order to obtain correct information he submitted a resolution, substantially as follows:
Resolved, that the secretary of state be directed to report to this house whether the sum of 32,339 dollars 34 cents, laid out in repairing the corvette Berceau, before her delivery to the French Republic, was expended, in order to equip her for the service of the United States, or for the purpose of delivering her to the French Republic, agreeably to the stipulations of the convention between the United States and France.
Mr. S. SMITH said this object had been already reported upon, and full information obtained. Now gentlemen want to arrive at the motives of the executive, and desire this house to aid them in their efforts. He believed, however, it was the first time the motives of public officers had been called for by congress.
Mr. Griswold. The fact is ascertained that the money has been taken from the navy fund; also that the Berceau became by capture an American vessel; but other important facts are not ascertained. It is a little extraordinary that, if the repairs were made for the Berceau as an armed vessel of the United States, they should have been made after a law had passed reducing the public armed vessels to thirteen. If the information required be a secret of state, it ought not to be disclosed; but I suppose it is no secret; I see no valuable purpose to be answered by secrecy. Further, when these repairs were put on the corvette, the convention was partially ratified, and the vessel in fact was given up before the treaty was returned from France. I suppose, therefore, the repairs were put upon her for the purpose of delivering her up to the French republic. I wish to know whether they were made for this object.
Mr. S. SMITH. The gentleman from Connecticut is under a mistake. The Berceau did not become a vessel of the United States in consequence of her capture. She was purchased in by the navy department. I believe that every thing the house has a right to demand from the executive has been given. I do not see the reason for asking why the executive did such or such a thing. The house has a right to ask for facts, but not for opinions.
Mr. Giles hoped the resolution would be suffered to lie on the table. He did not believe the existed any precedent to warrant it. He was surely one of those who desired every thing to be disclosed. He believed, however, the secretary of state knew nothing about the business of the Berceau, which came not properly before his department. Much had been said respecting the Berceau. He believed very little could be obtained by gentlemen from all the enquiry they could make. The fact was that under the late administration the Berceau had been purchased, and by the late secretary of the navy for the purpose of delivery. This information, Mr. G. said he had from the late secretary himself.
Mr. Bayard. The honorable gentleman from Virginia has given the house sufficient cause for complying with the wishes of the mover of this resolution. He has stated certain information obtained by word of mouth from the late secretary of the navy. I also possess information derived from the same gentleman, but directly the reverse of that given by the gentleman from Virginia. My information too is extremely recent, and therefore such as I cannot but depend upon. However, all this shows the necessity of having written and official information, which can be subject to no misconception. As the gentleman has stated his information, I will state mine, received recently from the secretary at a dinner table.
From the late secretary I understood that after the proceedings in the district court of Massachusetts, and the property was ordered to be sold, it was thought by the secretary of the navy that there would be a great purchase, and he directed her to be bought in; but he expressly directed that there should be no repairs made, as it was not then known whether
she would eventually be the property of the United States; his orders directing barely so much to be done, as to prevent the corvette from being deteriorated. I also understood, that the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. S. Smith) the day after the former secretary went out of office, ordered the repairs.
I do not see how gentlemen can resist agreeing to such a resolution; a resolution which simply calls for information. It is said the secretary of state knows nothing about the business. If so, it is easy to insert the name of the proper officer, viz. the secretary of the navy.
The information required is proper for this house to possess. Before this congress, I never knew that any information had been refused, necessary to enable the members to form opinions on subjects properly under their direction. If such information ever has been refused, it was wrong, and the precedent ought not to govern us.
The gentleman from Maryland says we are not to call for this thing or that thing from the executive officers. But if such a doctrine as that prevails, they will soon cease to be the servants of the nation. And surely they have at present no reason to complain of the trouble we give them, as we are about to be liberal and to augment their salaries.
This resolution contains no reference to motives; it is an enquiry into facts, whether the repairs put upon the Berceau were made for the purpose of retaining her as an armed vessel of the United States, or for the purpose of delivering her to France under the convention with that nation. Are not these facts? Are France and the United States the same nation? Gentlemen can discover no other way of getting rid of this resolution, but by declaring an identity between them. Were we to call upon the executive to say why the Berceau was delivered to the French government, gentlemen might complain—but we simply ask a fact.
If it shall be replied that the repairs were made, in order to deliver her up to France, I am not prepared to say they were improperly made. After the answer is given it will be in season to judge. Our object in making this motion is no secret. We wish to know from what fund the money has been taken, or whether from any fund. Holding the purse strings of the nation, we have a right to be acquainted with these circumstances; that if public money has been properly disbursed, we shall be satisfied of the fact; if wrongly disbursed, that such fact also should be known to us.
Mr. S. SMITH. So far from there being any secret in this business, I read in a late debate, from documents then in my possession, what we related to it. The arguments of gentlemen show that the resolution should be suffered to lie on the table. If it is sent to the secretary of state, he will reply that he knows nothing about the business. It does not properly come under his department. Why then refer a business to him, which he cannot elucidate, especially when his ill state of health should recommend forbearance. The statement of the gentleman from Delaware is not entirely correct; indeed, I am inclined to believe with him he received it at a dinner table. I believe the whole letters will be exhibited, and that there is not the least secret in the whole affair. It is true, that the last order was given by me. But before issuing that order, it was submitted to the former secretary of the navy, and the letter accompanying it was drawn by his advice and with his approbation. The fact is that at that time I was engaged in rendering some assistance to the department, until it should be filled by a permanent officer, and that the place was offered to me and other gentlemen. That letter, to which I have just alluded, gave instructions to put the Berceau in the precise situation she was in at the period of capture.
Mr. Dana said there might be an error in the style of the resolution, and it might be proper to substitute secretary of the navy in the room of secretary of state.
Mr. Giles. The gentleman from Delaware says that the information given to him by the late secretary of the navy differs essentially from that given by me. I believe that is not the case. The information given to me was not verbal but written. The only difference between the gentleman and myself is, that he states that the late secretary did not give the orders, whereas I stated that he had advised and approved them on a new secretary coming into office.
Mr. Bayard. I certainly thought there was a material difference between our statements. I understood that gentleman (Mr. Giles) to have said that the orders were actually given by the former secretary. I may have forgotten what he said; or he may have forgotten, and may deem himself at liberty to retract his expressions. We are now told that the late secretary only advised and approved. I was correct therefore in saying the orders were not given by the late secretary.
I cannot say with certainty what the private opinion of the former secretary is. I am, however, rather inclined to think that he expressed it doubtfully, that his opinion was that the repairs were proper.
The gentleman from Maryland says my statement is not correct, and adds it may have been obtained at a dinner table. But it is perfectly immaterial whether obtained at a dinner or a breakfast table. That gentleman though from his situation better acquainted with the circumstances of this transaction than any member on this floor, has not invalidated any part of my statement.
I do not, however, wish to enquire into the private opinions of the Secretary of the Navy, either those of the past or present officers. I do not know what they have to do with the subject before us. If the orders were given under the present Secretary, or the past Secretary, still the President is answerable for them, and it is totally immaterial who was consulted on the occasion. Our only wish is to get this information, and why we are denied it, I am at a loss to know.
Mr. Randolph moved to postpone the resolution till tomorrow. He was not disposed to deny gentlemen any proper information that they might want. But gentlemen have repeatedly asserted that there was a disposition in those opposed to taking up this resolution at the present time to deny all information.
Mr. Bayard said the gentleman was mistaken; he had said no such thing.
Mr. Randolph. The gentleman asked, why evince this disposition to deny information. Does not the House recollect the words? We have so often heard from gentlemen what are and what are not precedents that have been taken their side in this House, that sometimes I have been tempted to doubt whether I have heretofore been a member of the House. But I will refer to a case where information was asked and denied; such information, as in the opinion of those who required it, was calculated to criminate the executive; and on the refusal of which another resolution, approbatory of the conduct of the President, was grounded. Gentlemen on that occasion declared that they wanted information to form their judgments; yet the information was denied.
[Mr. Randolph referred to the case of Jonathan Robbins.]
I am not, however, for imitating gentlemen in refusing information. But I think it improper to act on a minute's notice. If the information asked be so important, I see no reason why a motion for it was not brought forward at an earlier day. I see no reason for demanding it so instanter , at a period when important business is pressing upon us. I should, indeed, wish to see the practice introduced of notice being given of all business of importance. It is known, that though not strictly conformable to the rules of the house, committees do sit during its session. Without such notice, opportunities may be watched, and facts seized for unfairly carrying a favorite measure.
Mr. Bacon hoped the consideration of the resolution would not be postponed. Gentlemen say there is nothing so intricate in it. It only requires facts to be explained. They disdain all relation to views. Now, what facts do gentlemen want? I verify believe the official document before the house display evinced in relation to the business; one fact is that the Berceau has been repaired another is that she has been delivered to the French Republic; and from these facts it is for us to infer the design.
Mr. S. SMITH said he was against the postponement. He wished to meet the object fairly. He hoped therefore the gentleman from Connecticut would withdraw his motion, or that the house would reject it, for the purpose of introducing in its room one which he held in his hand, and which he read (calling upon the Secretary of the Navy for all papers respecting the repairs of the Berceau.)
Mr. Griswold. I hope the consideration of the resolution will not be postponed. There is no perplexity in the resolution proposed by me; it is even more simple and correct than that of the gentleman from Maryland. By the messages received from the President, this subject appears to be before the department of state.
Mr. RANDOLPH withdrew his motion of postponement. He said he would only observe, that all the information gentlemen wanted had been already given. Both the gentlemen from Connecticut and Delaware were members of the Committee of Ways and Means. They cannot surely have forgotten the answer of the Secretary of the Navy to a letter from the Secretary of State, who had been applied to on the subject by the Committee of Ways and Means. The amount of that answer was that the Berceau, being a vessel of war of the United States, was repaired, and the expenses of repair derived from the fund provided for the repairing national ships. Gentlemen, therefore, must know, not only the amount of the repairs, but also the fund from which those repairs were paid for.
Mr. Bayard believed the better way would be to call upon the President to decide whether the repairs were made on the Berceau as a national vessel, or for the purpose of her delivery to the French; and also to lay before the house the papers, &c.
Mr. B. said the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. R.) had observed that there was one case in which the house had re-
quested information, and that was the case of Jonathan Robbins. He hoped the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) would excuse him for correcting his statement, which he would do by appealing to the journals, from which it would appear that the only information sought was received and acted upon. He remembered too that the information required by the motion of a gentleman from New-York was of such a nature as to wound the feelings of the then President, inasmuch as it was contemplated as the ground of severe censure; yet the information was not refused.
[Mr. Bayard here read extracts from the journal in the case of Jonathan Robbins.]
He said he hoped the same course would be pursued on this occasion that had been on that.
As to the information being before the Committee of Ways & Means; that was altogether immaterial, since the information possessed by that committee was not in the possession of the house; but the information possessed by that committee does not go to the extent of the resolution; it only goes so far as to ascertain the amount of expense and the fund from which it had been drawn, whereas the object of this resolution is to ascertain whether the repairs were made for an armed national vessel or for a vessel to be delivered to the French under the stipulations of the convention.
RANDOLPH said he did not expect that any difference of opinion would have been manifested on the facts stated by him to have taken place in the case of Jonathan Robbins. He did not state those facts with any view to the drawing them into a precedent on this occasion, for refusing information. God forbid! that this or any other of the transactions attending that case, should be called up by him as a precedent to influence the proceedings of the house. But he had stated it as a fact, to demonstrate the inconsistency of gentlemen, that information contended to be necessary by several members on this floor, had been denied by the majority.
[Mr. Randolph here read extracts from the journals, to show that in the case of Jonathan Robbins, a resolution had been offered for obtaining a certificate of the proceedings of the federal court relative to the delivery of Jonathan Robbins, which resolution was rejected.—Yeas 44—Nays 57.]
Mr. R. said that from the journals it appeared, that among those who voted in the negative were the honorable gentlemen from Delaware and Connecticut (Mr. Bayard and Mr. Griswold.) He said he had never asserted that information asked in this case from the executive had been withheld by the executive; but he had said that information decisive, perhaps, of the important question before the house, had been withheld by the vote of the majority. The proceedings of the court, and the evidence then given were the pivot, on which the case turned, viz. whether Jonathan Robbins was a citizen of the United States or not.
Mr. GRISWOLD agreed to modify the motion by introducing Secretary of the Navy, in the room of Secretary of State, and to add to his original motion, the words calling for papers, as proposed by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. S. Smith.)
Mr. S. SMITH said, he then moved to strike out all the resolution, excepting that which called for papers.
Mr. T. MORRIS called for the yeas and nays on striking out.
Mr. NICHOLSON. I shall vote for the amendment. This is the first time I have ever heard public officers called upon to assign their motives of action. That the Berceau has been repaired, and 32,000 dollars expended, is known to the gentlemen, and not denied by us. Gentlemen do not pretend to say they are not acquainted with these circumstances. But they are not satisfied with a knowledge of these facts, but offer a resolution requiring the Secretary of the Navy to do a thing not in his power to do. The fact is he was not in office when these repairs were made. Now, what was the view with which these repairs were made by the former Secretary of the Navy, or by my colleague, who was in the temporary discharge of the duties of the navy department, it is impossible for the present Secretary to say. But even if the information could be furnished by the present Secretary of the Navy, I cannot see the propriety of calling upon him for his motives, which cannot vary the propriety of the measures. The ship belonged to the United States; there existed a fund out of which vessels of the United States are repaired; out of this fund the Berceau was repaired.—Now, where can be the use of enquiring into the motives of the executive? We know that the Berceau was delivered to France repaired. If improperly delivered, that will form a subject of distinct consideration.
The gentleman from Connecticut says he wants information. All the information the gentleman desires is already before us, derived from the report of the Secretary of the Navy. Gentlemen who suppose this resolution might as well call upon the President to inform them with what view he has recommended certain things to our attention in re-
spect to the judiciary, the internal taxes, and other subjects.
Mr. S. SMITH said, that though he thought the call now made improper, yet being willing to give gentlemen all the information they desired, he would withdraw his motion to strike out, suggesting the propriety of amending the resolution by introducing the words "to purchase," before the word "repairs."
Mr. Griswold said he had no objection.
Mr. ELLIS said he hoped the amendment would go farther, and state the "time of sale, purchase and repair," then the whole business would be before us. This was the more important, as a very material fact was involved in the sale.
Mr. Griswold had no objection to making the resolution as extensive as was desired by the gentleman from Massachusetts. Gentlemen are not correct in saying this resolution is a demand of motives. I will mention a parallel case in which gentlemen will not say that similar information will not involve important and even necessary facts for us to know. Suppose an appropriation is made for cannon ball for the army, and one also for the navy; a purchase of this article is made in the interior of the country; it is necessary to know for which department the purchase is made, that we may determine whether the money disbursed is taken from the army or navy fund.—So in this case, it is equally necessary that we should know whether the Berceau was repaired for the service of the United States, or to be delivered up to the French nation, that we may determine whether the proper fund has been drawn on.
Mr. Giles said, that though he concurred with the gentleman from Maryland, that this was an enquiry into motive, and though it appeared to him to be a pernicious precedent, one which might lead to improper purposes, yet to satisfy the zeal of gentlemen, he was disposed to vote for it. He said he had never felt any disposition to deny useful information to the members of this house, or to the people. So far from this being the case, he had sometimes voted for information, to satisfy the wishes of gentlemen, even when that information was already on the table.
The case put by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Griswold) was not apposite. It would have been apposite had there been connected therewith an enquiry into the motives of the executive in the purchase. As well well might we, said Mr. Giles, demand of gentlemen their motives for this resolution; we might say it was designed to excite popular clamor; not that he believed it would have that effect, for he knew that the more the actions of the executive were examined the more they would be approved.
There was one insinuation often made not only here, but throughout the United States, that a moment's reflection would dispel; an insinuation that could not produce the effect intended; an insinuation that the measures of the executive in the delivery of the Berceau were grounded on a disposition to favor the French republic. Mr. Giles said, he would ask whether such an insinuation was not the most vain, unfounded & irrational that could be conceived. He would beg gentlemen who fostered it, to turn their attention to the situation of the French republic, & they would there see whether there was the smallest probability, or least possibility of the existence of any sympathy between the executive of France, and the American administration; they would see whether in their principles they agreed in a single point. It may not, perhaps, be so easily proper on this floor to say any thing of the leaning of our executive to European powers; but on this occasion, it might be permitted to say that there was no analogy or sympathy between the executive of the one country and the other. There could be no analogy or sympathy while the measures of the two administrations were so essentially different. Mr. Giles said, he believed the executive entertained no sympathy or predilection for any European powers; but there was not a reflecting man in the United States, in France, or in the world, who marked the course of the two governments of the United States and France, who would not mark the essential difference between them. All this, Mr. Giles said, he did not express from any kind of authority, or from personal acquaintance with the executive magistrate, but from the reflection of his own mind.
Mr. Bacon moved for a division of the question. He was in favour of that part of the resolution which called for papers, but opposed to that part which related to the design of the executive.
Mr. T. Morris moved so to amend the resolution, as to make it read that the President be requested to inform this House—with the variation at the close; and to direct the proper officer to lay before the House papers, &c.
Mr. Griswold agreed to this modification—when on motion of Mr. Nicholson the House adjourned. Yeas 65—Nays 30.

FOR THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
No. 1.
You have lately, on mature reflection, selected, to fill the first offices of state, men whom you deemed worthy of the places bestowed. When selected, you preferred them to men who once possessed, but who then ceased to enjoy your confidence. The preference was a preference of principles. By the highest constitutional law, in this country, by the only irresistible power, you pronounced the acts of the last administration vicious; by the same power you called a new administration into existence, to redress past, and to avert future evil.
The new administration of your government has undertaken the patriotic task. Neither elated by false pride, nor humbled before the magnitude of the duty, they have commenced the work of reform. To have hesitated, would have been treason to you, and disgrace to them.
Mark the effect! For a moment guilt is appalled before the energies of justice. Her voice is hushed; and afraid of day-light, she flies to the gloom of obscurity. Soon, however, hypocrisy steps in to her assistance; and the fiend that conceals the dagger of assassination, that the blow may be the more secure, strikes, holds out for a while nothing but smiles.
Federalism is the first to raise, and the most clamorous to swell, the plaudits of Presidential fame! The inaugural address is extolled as wise, moderate, and dignified; the aversion of republican caution to bestow immoderate praise, is tortured into an evidence of hostility; and for a day Thomas Jefferson is the man, not only of the people, but of the federalists!
Such was the reward of his professions! Contrast the recompense of his actions! What he professed he has performed. The good which he promised, he has done. The example he set has been imitated by the legislature; and the patriotic zeal of executive lives only been equalled by the active labours of legislative wisdom. Annual millions have been saved; regiments of useless, or pernicious officers, have been reduced; justice has been vindicated from the pollution of her sanctuary.
While these things were promised, all was right and honorable and wise; now they are done, all is wrong, infamous and weak. The rhetorical diction which, in harmonious period, eulogized the incubations of the closet, fades before the overbearing, the vulgar, the insolent language of vice—lay of vice—for corrupt must be that heart, which countenances the bill-gating that overwhelms the nation; and ignoble the purpose that by means so low, would influence the people.
Were this the language of plebian ignorance , were it the offspring of passions unaided to the restraints of reason, it might be suffered to reign its miserable day, and leave no trace of its existence but the contempt it had inspired. But unfortunately for our peace, and to the disgrace of human nature, the language, so far from being confined to the obscure, falls from the lips of men, who having once ruled this nation by one species of deception, now attempt to subjugate it to another.
The unblushing calumniator stands conspicuous on the house top. He courts elevation that his calumnies may fall with the greater weight; unmineral that while he essays to prop a falling faction, he ruins himself.
Never, since America was free, has there been in so short a period, such an overwhelming torrent of falsehood as has been seen deluging the nation for these five months past. Federalism, having nothing to do, has become a Hercules in words; and the legislator, to whom was confided the performance of public duties, is transformed into a mere public crier.
From the clamours of faction, patriotism, while vigilant, has nothing to fear. But should a sentiment of false security paralyse the mind of the enlightened citizen, and should he in the confidence of his own intelligence, suffer the poison of slander to reach unheeded the unsuspecting ear of his less informed neighbour, those evils may return which we have lately excised at being past; and the enemy may be at our door, ere we are aware of his approach.
If falsehood, detraction, and misrepresentation of every hue, can corrupt an enlightened people, then are the American people in danger of being corrupted, unless the friends of truth take the field, and put down, not by retorted calumny, but by fact and sound sense, the disturbers of national tranquility, and the subverters of the republic.
Recommending this duty to others, it shall be my task, with diffidence to undertake it myself. Possessing but a limited confidence in my own power, I still possess unlimited confidence in the power of truth. With that power as my shield, I shall not fear to drag before the tribunal of justice, before the
tribunal of national indignation, the wealthy, the proud, and the vile, who in vain views hostile to our equal rights. While the shades of private life shall remain unsearched, the turpitude of public crime shall be exposed; and if guilty, the mighty shall tremble.
SIDNEY.
MONDAY, April 26, 1802.
The bill repealing several acts in relation to the establishment of a mint, was read a third time, and passed.
Also a bill making appropriations for the civil government for the year 1802.
An amendment (chiefly explanatory) to the bill for the redemption of the whole of the public debt was received from the senate, and agreed to by the house. This bill therefore only requires the signature of the President to be a law.
A memorial was received from citizens of Washington, praying that the act "for incorporating the city of Washington," may be passed into a law.
The house took up said bill, read it twice, agreed to it, and ordered it to a third reading to-morrow.
A message was received from the President of the United States, stating that the commissioners appointed on the part of the United States had concurred with commissioners on the part of the state of Georgia, in certain terms of amicable adjustment of the limits of said state, &c. subject to ratification within six months.
A message was received from the senate, informing the house that they had rejected the bill for abolishing the mint; and that they had passed the bill for abolishing the board of commissioners of the city of Washington, &c. with certain amendments.
A message was received from the senate informing the house, that they had agreed to all the amendments made by the house to the bill "to amend the judicial system of the United States" excepting one, viz. that which struck out the section that transferred the nomination of commissioners of bankruptcy from the district judges to the President, on which they insist.
Mr. Giles moved that the house should recede from the amendment.
This motion was supported by Messrs. Taliaferro, Elmerdorf, Holland, S. Smith, and Mitchell, and opposed by Messrs. Bayard, Griswold, Goddard and Mott.
The question was taken by Yeas and Nays, and carried—Yeas 45—Nays 27.
The house took up the amendments of the senate to the bill abolishing the board of commissioners of the city of Washington, &c.
One of these amendments contained a number of distinct sections for establishing a company for cutting a canal to unite the main Potomac with the Eastern branch thereof.
Committed.
TUESDAY, April 27, 1802.
The bill for incorporating the City of Washington was read a third time and passed.
Mr. S. Smith presented a bill to revive and continue in force, an act to provide for the establishment of trading houses with the Indian tribes, which was read twice and ordered to a third reading to day.
Dr. Mitchell from the committee, appointed on so much of the President's message as relates to naval scites, &c. made a further report.
The report concludes as follows:
"The committee find that prior to the 4th of March 1801, the sum of one hundred and ninety nine thousand and thirty dollars, and 92 cents, have been expended in purchasing Navy Yards and making improvements upon them, without any law authorising the purchase, or any appropriation of money, either for purchase or improvements."
The amendments of the senate to the bill for the relief of the widows and children of the officers lost in the Pickering and Insurgent, &c. were taken into consideration and agreed to.
These amendments reduce the allowance made by the bill of the house to four months pay.
The house went into committee of the whole—Mr. S. Smith in the chair—on the bill respecting the district of Columbia.
This bill vests certain chancery powers in the courts of the district—alters the periods of holding the courts, viz. for Washington county to be held in July and December; for Alexandria county in June and November—directs that no person shall be held to bail unless resident for two months in the territory—directs that no execution on the person of the debtor shall be issued for judgments under 20 dollars, but that all such process shall hereafter go against the effects of the debtor, execute by a constable, under reduced fees; gives to the corporation of George-town the power of taxing town-lots for specified purposes; repeals so much of acts of 1801, as provides for the compensation of jurors and witnesses, with other provisions.
Mr. Griswold moved to strike out the 4th section, which directs that no person shall be held to bail unless resident for two months in the territory.
This motion was supported by Messrs. Griswold, Henderson, Bayard, and Nicholson; and opposed by Messrs. Taliaferro, and agreed to.
Mr. Griswold moved to strike out the section, which saves the person from arrest for debts under 20 dollars.
The committee then rose and reported the bill.
Mr. Griswold moved to recommit it. Carried.
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, April 28, 1802.
REPEALING ELECTION.
An authentic return of the votes given for governor by seventeen towns has been received, which gives the republican candidate (Penner) a majority of 1,067; in addition to these returns, in Washington county, in which there are seven towns, Penner has also had a great majority, the amount not yet known. Six towns remain to be heard from. Letters from the most respectable sources announce the probable majority to be 2,000.
This election not only decides the governor, but the whole legislature, a great majority of which is republican.
This news is indeed splendid. It transcends the most sanguine expectations of patriotism. It shows that a spirit of political independence exists in New England, which, amidst misrepresentations and falsehoods scarcely paralleled, feigns truth and holds it firm. Two years since federalism in this state was unopposed; at this election it commanded scarcely one third of the votes. Powerful is truth. It will prevail.
During the present session of Congress frequent attempts have been made to excite the public sensibility with regard to the application of public money without any legal appropriation; and in the debate on the Berceau, the publication of which is this day commenced, the reader will remark the reiterated effort, in a side and unfair way, to alarm the people with the suspicion that the President had laid out 32,000 dollars without a legal appropriation, though the expenditure is allowed to have been made under the paramount provisions of a treaty, and is in itself acknowledged to be perfectly right. The reader will also remark that these insinuations are repelled and completely refuted by official facts appealed to in reply; and that the executive, in this case, as in every other, has been shown to have manifested the most scrupulous adherence to law.
While we hesitate not to bestow our full tribute of admiration on the bold and unselfish efforts of federalism to misrepresent and distort the measures of the present executive, we take the liberty of preserving some respect for truth, and feel some disposition to transfer into the public mind a portion of the same respect. With this view, we call upon the nation to contrast the rigid adherence of the present administration to the legal expenditure of public money, with the wanton, unauthorised & immense expenditure made by the former administration in the single case below stated.
Yesterday the committee to whom was referred so much of the President's message of December 8th as relates to naval scites and naval preparation made a report, the conclusion of which is as follows:
"The committee find that prior to the 4th of March 1801, the sum of one hundred and ninety nine thousand and thirty dollars, and 92 cents, have been expended in purchasing Navy Yards and making improvements upon them, without any law authorising the purchase, or any appropriation of money, either for purchase or improvements."
Massachusetts Election for Governor.
316 towns for Mr. Strong 26 554
Mr. Gerry 17 434
Majority 9,120
New-Hampshire Election.
For Mr. Gilman 9,156
Mr. Langdon 3,676
Majority 480
We have received, by the late arrivals, the London Times of the 5th, and 6th of March; among other articles of interest, which shall appear in our next paper, is a debate in the House of Commons, on the commitment of the American Treaty Bill, which authorises the King, in the recess of Parliament, to take off the countervailing duties.
The provisions of the bill were advocated by the chancellor of the exchequer, lord Hawkesbury, Mr. Vanfittart, Mr. Nicholls, and Mr. O'Hara; and opposed by general Galcoigne, Dr. Lawrence, Mr. Windham.
It was committed for Tuesday ensuing; and from the support it receives from the ministry, there would appear to be little doubt of its final passage.
The reader will obtain a more correct idea of Mr. Bacon's observations "respecting the admission of the North Western Territory as a state into the union," by inserting between the first and second paragraphs, after the word union (col. 3, p. 2,) the following words: "but no new state shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned, as well as of the Congress." The proposition goes to the formation of a new state, and at the same time to the dismembering of that state, after it shall be formed, of one of the most essential and important powers vested by the constitution in each state. It goes not only to direct the state, when formed and admitted into the union, of one of the essential powers of a state, viz. of giving or withholding its "consent," but of the particular mode prescribed by the constitution for expressing that consent, which is by the "legislature."
We are indebted to Dr. Mitchell for the following communication. The plan, which it suggests, appears from cursory consideration, to be a very happy one; and to be eminently calculated to advance the improvement of agriculture, which must, so long as we remain a free people, be the basis of our strength. We hope the felicity of the conception, which has devised the plan, will be followed by sufficient zeal to carry it into effect.
One modification of it will however, be absolutely necessary; viz. the admission to membership of a certain number of permanently resident members at the seat of government. This will be indispensable, as the society ought to be a permanent deposit of information, and possess the capacity of uninterrupted correspondence with foreign or domestic institutions or individuals.
Other advantages, little short of these, will be derived from the accession of such members, many of whom, should the society now be organized, would be citizens, who though high in political station, have devoted a large portion of their time to the agricultural occupations, such has been the case with the present chief magistrate, and the secretaries of state and war.
Society for the promotion of Agriculture, Art and Manufactures. State of New-York.
Albany, March 24th, 1802.
Whereas it is conceived, that it would essentially conduce to the more effectual attainment of the objects of the various societies in the United States, that have been instituted for the promotion of arts and sciences, were a general medium of connection and communication established between them; and that more especially such an establishment, by bringing together the various experiments and improvements that have been, or may be made in the theory and practice of agriculture, will better afford the means of advancing towards perfection in such pursuits, than any other institution that can be devised in addition to those already existing: therefore,
Resolved, That the President be requested to write circular letters to all such societies in the United States, inviting them to appoint delegates annually, to convene, in a general meeting, at the seat of congress, and to continue their meetings, by periodical adjournments, during the times that congress shall be in session—Which delegates, when so met, shall elect their President, and form rules for the government of their proceedings, and make the improvement of agriculture, and the diffusion of all such knowledge as may tend to that general end, their primary object.
Extract from the Minutes, B. De WITT, Sec.
March 31st, 1802.
Resolved, That the members of both Houses of congress, being members of this society, be, ex-officio, delegates to meet the delegates from the societies in the different states at the seat of congress, conformably to a resolution of this society, passed the 24th of March instant.
Extract from the Minutes, B. De WITT, Sec.
The following plan of an Agricultural Society, has lately been proposed in the State of New-York.
Albany, April 3d, 1802.
Sir,
I have the honor of transmitting to you herewith, certain resolutions of the society for the promotion of Agriculture, Arts and Manufactures, which you will please to lay before the society over which you preside, and request their concurrence in the said measure. You will oblige our society, by caus-
ing the result thereof to be communicated to the secretary at this city.
I am with great respect, Your most obedient servant, EZRA L. HOMMEDEG, Vice Pres.
Baltimore, April 26.
By a gentleman who arrived in the Anthony Mangin, we have verbal information that the British government had sent express orders to Lord Cornwallis, to obtain from Bonaparte a final answer respecting the signing of the treaty, the 15th of March, with assurances, that unless that was the case, hostilities should immediately re-commence. For what purpose, it was not generally known, but the fleets were ordered to be victualled, &c. for five months.
FOR SALE,
LOT numbered 3, square 233, City of Washington, containing about 6,300 square feet, fifty-five feet six inches front on North Street, near the Branch Bank of the United States, and within one square of the President's square, and in the thickest settled part of the City—on which is erected a comfortable two story frame HOUSE with a good Cellar, Kitchen, St. ble, &c. the lot well included, and a handsome Garden in front. One LOT 28 feet six inches front, adjoining Stell's Hotel, and about ninety-six feet deep, with the privilege of a brick wall the whole depth. Also, one other LOT, 23 feet 4 inches front, on the market square, on square 432, with the benefit of a back alley of 12 feet wide. The terms of sale: one third cash, one third dry goods, and one third West India produce. Apply to JAMES R. DERMOTT
City of Washington, } April 26th. 1802. } N. B. The Lot No. 3 will be rented if not sold.
LAND FOR SALE,
LYING in Westmoreland county, in an agreeable neighbourhood, containing two hundred and seventy five acres, and lying on the mouth of Yemomico river. The soil is well adapted to the culture of small grain, corn and tobacco. About one hundred acres is in excellent pine timber, and a saw-mill within four miles, and the timber may be rafted up to the mill. On the land is a dwelling house, with four rooms on the first floor, two above, and three fire places below, and convenient out houses, with a sufficiency of oak for fire wood. No place can surpass it for the convenience of ferry-oysters, having a delightful cove making from the Yemomico river up to the foot of the garden. A further description is thought unnecessary, as it is presumed any person wishing to purchase will first view the premises. For terms apply to PETER RUST
Richmond county, April 18th, 1802.
FOR SALE,
THREE tracts of land, situate in Charles county, about 20 miles from the city of Washington, excellent meadow and wood land, well watered; also a very fine garden. About 199 acres in the whole. Likewise 2 Negroes. The sale to begin at 11 o'clock on Monday next 2d May, at Mr. Charles Duvall's, on the New Jersey Avenue. M C THIAS REDMOND
April 26th, 1802.
EDUCATION.
THOMAS ROSE respectfully informs his fellow citizens, that he has taken a convenient room, near the Capitol, where he intends opening a school on Monday the 9th of May, for the instruction of youth of both sexes, in Reading, Writing and Arithmetick. Capitol hill, April 27, 1802.
FOR SALE,
For Sale, cheap, and on easy terms of payment, together or separate, TWO adjoining building Lots in the neighbourhood of the executive office, west of the President's house, on the north side of G street, square No. 141, part of Lots No. 6 & 7, each Lot is 93 feet 6 inches x 12 front, 183 feet deep containing 6133 square feet. The title is indisputable. Apply to James Lyon, living near the premises. 314 WTWTF
District of Columbia, } Washington County. } 35.
THE board of commissioners for the county aforesaid, are requested to meet on Friday next, at 10 o'clock A. M. at the capitol. J. T. FROST, Clk.
April 26th, 1802.
EDUCATION.
THE Subscriber begs leave to inform the citizens of Washington, that he has opened a school at Mr. Boyne's boarding house in front of the President's house; where he will instruct those committed to his care in spelling, reading, writing, vulgar and decimal arithmetic, book-keeping and mensuration, &c. according to the most approved methods. Those desirous of seeing his recommendations from where he last taught, will please apply as above, to PATRICK EDWARDS.
April 26, 1802.
Water Lot for Sale.
A VALUABLE Lot on the Eastern Branch, midway between South Capitol Street and the Eastern Branch in the Georgia Avenue. No situation can excel this in point of convenience to a wholesale merchant, being near the junction of the canal and the waters of said branch. The price will be moderate for cash if early application is made—title indisputable.
FOR SALE, upwards of 1,000 lots in the best situations in the City. Enquire of Thomas Herty, Conveyancer, near the Treasury Department.
April 9, 1802.

For Sale, A VERY elegant saddle HORSE, seven years old, paces, trots, and canters... and is in other respects completely broken to the bridle... For further particulars enquire of Mr. Belle on Capitol Hill, and see the horse at his livery stable. April 26, 1802. epif
For Sale, A NEGRO WOMAN about 38 years of age; she is an excellent Cook, and good washer. For Terms apply to the Editor. April 5, 1802. epif
BOLTING CLOTHS. A GENERAL ASSORTMENT OF BOLTING CLOTHS Of the best qualities and most importations, are kept for sale by OLIVER EVANS, at the corner of Market and Ninth streets, Philadelphia, and By OLIVER & EVAN EVANS, With BOHN and SLINGLUFF, at the corner of Market and Howard streets, Baltimore. Also, with DEAN & GARDNER, Union street, Alexandria. The book entitled the YOUNG MILL-WRIGHT and MILLER'S GUIDE, may also be had at the above places. Jan. 29, 1802. ep4w&cop4w
CHARLES VARDEN, Merchant Taylor, from Philadelphia, GRATEFULLY acknowledges the favors conferred on him by the gentlemen of this City, and flatters himself that the general satisfaction he has already given will merit a continuation of the same. He has also received a handsome assortment of goods from Philadelphia, consisting of Best superfine cloths, Cashmeres, Swansdown, Coylenettes, Velverettes, Fancy Cords, Coatings, Flannels, &c. N B Regiments, Naval Uniforms, and Ladies' Habits, made in the neatest and most fashionable manner, and at the shortest notice—Washington City, New Jersey Avenue, next to Mr. Rapine's book store. Dec. 16, 1801. epif
NOTICE. WAS committed to the jail of Washington county, District of Columbia, a negro Man by the name of JESSE, says he belongs to Peyton Wayal of Georgia; is five feet eight inches high, has a scar on each side of his nose, and his back much scarred. The owner of the above slave is desired to come, prove property, pay charges, and take him away; or he will be sold for his fees agreeable to law. DANIEL C. BRENT, Marshal of the District of Columbia. April 14, 1802. ep3w
Ten Dollars Reward. STRAYED from the subscribers on the 14th instant, a dark bay horse between 5 and 6 years old, about 14 hands high, with a small white star in the forehead, thick mane and tail, her fore top cut short, canters and trots. She was seen in the afternoon of the same day following a gentleman riding a white creature on the Pennsylvania Avenue. She was also seen at the Potomac bridge, about sunset of the same day in company with two other stray creatures. Whoever will take up and deliver the said mare to the subscribers, shall receive the above reward. BROH. W.N. & BYTS, Greenleaf's Point. April 21, 1802.
Robbery! ON the night of Saturday the 17th instant, the house of the subscriber was entered by some villain or villains, between the hours of twelve and five o'clock in the morning, who took from there a double dale silver watch with sunk wheels and capped, No. 7644, maker J. Jackson, London—Also, six flower teapots, marked D. O. with an M in the centre on the top, with fundy other articles. Whoever delivers the above articles to the subscriber, and secures the perpetrator or perpetrators to condign punishment, shall be liberally rewarded. DAVID GILVIE. April 21, 1802. ep3t
FOR SALE, LOOKING-GLASSES & FURNITURE. The subscriber respectfully informs the public, that he has just received from New York various kinds of Looking-Glasses, from 5 to 70 dollars each—Also card tables, bureaus, &c. of an elegant and fashionable make. He continues to manufacture and sell all kinds of ornaments for chimney-pieces, door caps, frontispiece pieces, metal tables, &c. &c. GEORGE ANDREWS. April 14, 1802. epif
NOTICE. Three Cents, a peck of potatoes, and the Sweepings of the jail, REWARD, FOR apprehending and securing William O'Connor, an Irishman who was born in the County of Tipperary, who absconded from the Washington county jail, District of Columbia, on Saturday evening the 10th inst. I have reason to believe he has gone to Baltimore, where his family resides. Any person that will bring the above named runaway to the jail aforesaid, shall receive the above Reward; but no charges paid, by ROBERT MCLEAN, Gaoler. April 16, 1802. ep3t
HATS. THE Subscriber has received per the General Hunter from Liverpool, an elegant assortment of men, boys, and children's Hats, which he will sell very cheap for cash. ALEX. MCCORMICK. April 21, 1802. epif
For Sale, Or to Let on Ground Rent for ever, FIFTY LOTS, SITUATE between the President's House and Capitol.—The titles to which is indisputable. ISAAC POLOCK. Dec. 16. epif
WANTED, A LOAN of from one to two thousand dollars, to be secured by a mortgage of improved real property; the title to which is unexceptionable, and unincumbered.—For particulars apply to THOMAS HERTY, Conveyancer, near the Treasury Department. April 21, 1802. ep3t
Notice is hereby given, TO all persons having claims against Mr. NOBLE YOUNG deceased, to render them properly authenticated to Robert Brent, in the City of Washington; and all those indebted to him are requested to make payment. BENJ. YOUNG, NICHOLS YOUNG, } Ex'trs. ROBERT BRENT, } April 19, 1802. ep6w
TO RENT, And possession given immediately, A TWO STORY brick house on F street near the War Office, containing two parlors, six bedrooms, and a kitchen, with an excellent garden, coach house, stable, &c.—The house is newly painted and papered; it was formerly occupied by Mr. Dexter, and lately by Mr. John Brown Esquire of Clement Dorsey, Esq. George-Town; or of the subscriber, who has for sale a well finished three story brick house opposite the Six Buildings, and a variety of City Lots in the most eligible situations. The above House will be sold for less than any gentleman could build it if he payments will be made easy on the whole of the above property. WILLIAM DYER. April 7, 1802. epif
Building Materials will be taken in part payment. W.D.
The MAIL PILOT, Will, during the SUMMER SEASON, LEAVE the Columbian Inn, Georgetown at 5 o'clock A. M. and Mr. William Tunnicliff's, City of Washington, at 6 o'clock, every day; for Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New-York; arrive at Baltimore about three o'clock. Leave Baltimore next morning and arrive at Philadelphia next day to breakfast. Returning—Leave Philadelphia at 7 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Baltimore the next day to dine. Leave Baltimore at 6 o'clock A. M. and arrive at Washington at 3 o'clock P. M. Fare and allowance of baggage as usual—All baggage at the risk of the owners. J. H. BARNEY. April 14, 1802. ep3m
N. B. Passengers coming in this line will be sent on to Alexandria, if required, the same evening; and to accommodate my customers a private stage will be sent to Baltimore or Alexandria at short notice.
WANTED, A BARR and BOOK-KEEPER. A young man, who can come well recommended for the above business, will meet with employ at the Columbian Inn; and generous wages, by J. H. BARNEY. April 16, 1802. ep3m
City Hotel, BROADWAY, NEW-YORK. The Subscriber most respectfully informs his friends and the public, that the above Hotel will be opened on the first of May ensuing, when their patronage is earnestly solicited. He avails himself of this opportunity to return his sincere and grateful thanks to those societies, parties, and gentlemen, who have given him their support, and assures them that a continuance of their favors will be a stimulus to future exertions to please; and that the utmost attention shall be given for their comfort and accommodation. Boarding may be had by the day, week, month, or year. Families travelling, may be elegantly accommodated with lodging and fitting rooms; and, if preferred, have dinners &c. in their apartments. The Hotel being so well known, it is almost useless to say, that it is situated in one of the most healthy and pleasant parts of the city; commanding an extensive view in every direction, not only of the city itself, but also of the Narrows, the North and East Rivers, the state of New-Jersey, York and Long-Island, &c. &c. A handsome coffee-room will be fitted up in the principal floor; where gentlemen may have tea, coffee, chocolate, soups, and refreshments in general, at the shortest notice. All the leading newspapers in the union, will be regularly taken in. Public dinners and suppers in a plain or elegant style either for large or small parties. Also, beef steaks, oysters, &c. regularly furnished. An ordinary every day at half past 2 o'clock, by the public's obedient servant, JOHN LOVETT. N. B. Rooms to let by the month or year. April 21, 1802. epif
For Sale, A NEGRO WOMAN about 21 years old who is a good Cook, and a complete house servant in every other respect.—Also a large well formed horse, that goes well in a carriage, and pleasant under the saddle.—Enquire at this office. March 5, 1802. ptf
Lots for Sale, Or to Let on Ground-Rent. THE Subscriber offers to sell or to lease one hundred Lots, advantageously situated: Some in the vicinity of the Capitol, and others near the Navy Yard; for cash, credit, or wet or dry goods. WILLIAM PROUT. Washington City, April 5, 1802. 2aw
STATE OF MARYLAND. Mark Pringle, vs. Nathaniel Washington, and Margaret his wife, Henderson Sim Butler and Susannah Greenfield Butler his wife, and John True-man Hawkins. IN CHANCERY, April 10, 1802.
THE object of this petition is to obtain a decree for recording a deed executed on the twenty ninth day of August in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy four, by George Frazier Hawkins, formerly of Prince George County deceased, for conveying unto William Russell of Baltimore county and his heirs, all that tract or parcel of land called Calcedonia, then lying in Frederick county, containing in the patent thereof three thousand two hundred acres, of land more or less; contained within the courses in the said patent mentioned; & it is since the filing of the said petition suggested that the said George Frazier Hawkins, John Trueman Hawkins, Susannah Greenfield Butler, and Henderson Sim Butler, all reside in the City of Washington, in the district of Columbia, out of the state of Maryland. It is thereupon adjudged and ordered, that the petitioner cause a copy of this order to be inserted once in each of three successive weeks before the fifteenth day of May next, in the National Intelligencer; in order that the said George Frazier Hawkins, John Trueman Hawkins, Susannah Greenfield Butler, and Henderson Sim Butler, may have notice of his application to the court, and of the substance and object of the petition, and be warned to appear in this court either in person or by solicitor, on or before the first Tuesday of October next, to show cause wherefore a decree should not pass as prayed. (True Copy) Talt. SAMUEL H. HOWARD, Reg. Cur. Can. April 19, 1802.
PROPOSALS By THOMAS HERTY, For publishing by subscription an Appendix to his Digest of the Laws of the United States.
It will contain all the public acts of the two preceding and present session of Congress, that is, the acts of the first and second sessions of the Sixth, and the first session of the Seventh Congress. It will be printed in the same order of arrangement, and have reference to such parts of the aforesaid work, as shall be repealed, is suffered to expire, or which may otherwise undergo alterations, subject to which, will be given, a correct table of the duties on imports and tonnage, and a new Index; this, connected with the foregoing, will embrace the whole law in force.
CONDITIONS. It will be put to press immediately after the close of the present session of Congress, (provided a sufficient number offer to defray the expense of the work) and be ready for delivery in about two months thereafter. The price to subscribers will be one dollar and fifty cents in boards, to be paid for on delivery. It shall be neatly printed on good paper. Subscriptions received by the Editor, at his Conveyancing Office, near the Treasury Department, City of Washington; and by those in whose hands proposals are left. March 12, 1802. rawt
VALUABLE LAND for SALE. FOR sale about 4500 acres of land belonging to the estate of Judge Mercer, deceased, and situated in the county of Loudoun, on the waters of Goose Creek, about 40 miles from Alexandria and the Federal City. A large portion of this tract is meadow ground, of good quality, and the soil of the high land is well adapted to every species of produce usually cultivated on land similarly situated in the upper country. Such portion of it as remains uncultivated, affords an extensive and excellent range for stock of every kind. On one part of this land is one of the most valuable mill seats in the state. The supply of water is inexhaustible, and the mill could be erected immediately on the side of the public road leading from Winchester to Alexandria. It is computed that the number of wagons almost constantly travelling along this road, amount to at least 3 or 500. So that a ready market might always be had here, for a very considerable quantity of grain and hay. It is deemed unnecessary to describe more particularly the many advantages of this tract of land, as it is expected that all persons disposed to purchase, will first view the premises. To accommodate purchasers the whole tract will be divided into lots of 4 or 500 acres each, with as much wood and meadow land to every lot as circumstances will admit. And it is believed that the whole 4500 acres may be sold off into farms of the above-mentioned size, as to leave in each as much wood and meadow land as would be desired. The price and time of payment will be made known by the subscribers. Letters directed to John T. Brooke, Fredericksburg, or to James M. Garnett, Laytons, will be answered without delay. JOHN T. BROOKE, JAMES M. GARNETT, } Adm'rs Feb. 3, 1802. epif
Public Sale. Will be exposed to Public Sale for ready cash only, on the 29th instant, at the dwelling House of Anthony Addison, TWENTY valuable negro slaves, consisting of men, women and children, and a tract of land known by the name of Barnaby Manor, containing one thousand acres; late the property of the said Addison. Taken by virtue of two writs of fieri facias, issued from the general court at the suit of William Stewart, and one at the suit of Nathaniel Washington for the use of George Hawkins. The sale to commence precisely at twelve o'clock. THOMAS MACGILL, Sheriff. April 21, 1802. 1awts
A LIST Of Letters remaining in the Post Office at Washington City, on the 1st day of April, 1802. A. William O. Allen, Archibald Alexander, 2. B. James Barnes, Samuel Boots, Tarleton Bates, Joel Brown, James Boram, Enos Bronson, 3. Alexander Bradey, 2, John Barney, Wiggleworth Budditt, Jonathan Bedford, Thomas Burnee, Sarah Beckitt, James Barr, Joseph Bonie. C. Hugh Carey, Alexander Cunningham, Captain Dan. Carmick, Captain Thomas Carberry, Matthew Carey, John Cogley, John H. Carr, Mr. Cobbett, William Crafts, Rev. Mr. Cotton, Esther Carey, Overton Carr, Junr. James Gammerson, Peter Colson, Col. Arthur Campbell, Thomas Collins, Jacob Chandler, William Coglin, 2. D. Samuel Dester, 2, Aaron Dyer, 2, Cornelius Delavan, Monsieur Dulacque, Richard Dahiels, Eleanor Davis, Isaac Davis, Aaron Dunlap, Capt. Thomas Dalton, John Deterly, Mr. Davis. E. Ruffes Ellet, Griffith Evans. F. Elizabeth Fisher, Joseph Forman, John Forbes, Washington L. Finney. G. William Grindage, 3, William Guest, Ann G. Grose, James Giles, John Gatewood, Junr. Edward Gobin, John Gardiner. H. Capt. Charles Hyde, 2, Col. David Henley, James Heron, John Hall, Joshua Hathaway, 2. Laurence Howard, Dr. Alexander Humphreys, Roger Humphreys, Miss Frances D. Henley, 2, David Humphreys & Co. Nicholas Heiner, William Hawkins, Cpt. Gervais Hall, Samuel Hardesty, Mrs. Hadgelfin. I. Col. John Jenkins, 2, Richard Jones, Ephraim Izau, Thomas Johnson, 2. K. Patrick Kainteen, John Kern, Thomas Knapp, William King, Philip B. Key. L. Julian and Nancy Leary, Levin Lake, Betty Logan, Lewis Littlepage, Noah Linley, James Lyon. M. George C. Morton, 3, George M. Elroy, Charles Morris, 3, Robert Morris, Junr. 2, John I. May, James Magee, Jacob Mixel, Isabella McCallien, John M'Cluchen, James Morris, Samuel Mickel, William Marshall, James Miles, Capt. Daniel M'Lane, 3. N. Col. Lewis Nicholas, 2, Robert H. Nicholls, Charles Newbold. O. Blicker Olson, 2, Edward O'Brien, Francis I. Oliver. P. Col. Joseph Pannell, 2, David Phipps, William Pickering, Noah A. Phelps, Thomas Paxton, George W. Pollock, Isaac Patterson. R. George Rowland. S. Samuel Shuckell, George F. Stras, Joseph Shephard, John Spalding, George Speeth, James Strawbridge, Edmund Scannell, Felixide St. Hilaire, William Summers, James Stevens, Michael Shanks, James Smith, A. Sinda, Mrs. Spiers, John L. Sullivan, John Witherspoon Smith, Andrew Somebody, Mrs. Delilah Stewart, 2. T. John Turner, Peggy Taylor, Capt. Thomas Tingey, Mrs. Emily Thompson, Doctor William Thornton. V. Nicholas Vols, Andrew Vanbiber. W. Major John W. Willis, Peter Williams, William Wells, 2, Lieut. John Wilson, 3, Jonah Watlon, Matthew Welch, John Lambert Wilson, James Wilson, Thomas Wite, Mary Wilson, Doctor Alexander M'Williams, Brigadier General James Wilkinson. Z. Noah Zane.
For Sale, OR TO BE RENTED. THE Subscriber will sell or rent, his buildings on F street, Lot No. 2, square 289; and give possession on the first day of May. Any person desirous of purchasing or renting the same, may know the terms, on application to Mr. Bondy, adjoining the premises, or to the subscriber in Colchester, Virginia. JAMES H. BLAKE. April 19, 1802. 3t
By order of the Orphan's Court in and for the county of Washington, district of Columbia. Notice is hereby given. THAT all persons having claims against Guthaus Scott, late of said county deceased, are hereby warned and required to exhibit the same, with the vouchers thereof, to the subscriber at or before the first day of June next, they may otherwise by law, be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. ELIAS B. CALDWELL Adm'r. Georgetown, March 29, 1802. 1aw2m
For Sale, A Quantity of SHELL LIME, on the most reduced Terms—Apply to Brohawn & Byus, Young's wharf. April 16, 1802. ep3w
Looking Glasses. J. COOK Wishes to inform his friends and the public that he has a large and elegant assortment of Looking Glasses and Prints, FOR SALE, At J. March's Store, High-street, Georgetown. THE subjects of the Prints are very interesting, and in superb gilt frames; and the glasses are of the first qualities, in the most modern and elegant frames, and of any sizes. They are marked at the lowest cash Prices. March 17, 1802. epif
THOMAS CARPENTER, TAYLOR, SOLICITS a continuation of that generous encouragement which he has experienced from the Ladies and Gentlemen of this City and its vicinity. Having procured an elegant assortment of cloths, cashmeres, twanflowns, &c. and engaged workmen of superior talents. His unremitted attention shall be given to merit patronage. Capitol Hill, next house east of Mrs. Finch's boarding house, and Pennsylvania Avenue between the President's square and Seven Buildings. Dec. 7, 1801. epif
Farming Lands for Sale. THE Subscriber would sell about 1000 acres of the tract of Land whereon Dr. John D. Orr at present resides, in the county of Prince William, situated a few miles from the seat of the district Court, and within convenient marketable distance of the Occoquan Mills and Dumfries. It is of the first rate quality of soil, is abundantly supplied with wood and water, and has a large proportion of ground which is in a peculiar manner adapted to the growth of timothy grass. Also the tract of land adjacent to the above, late the property of Mr. Thomas Swann of Alexandria, together with about 100 acres of woodland, of the above described tract, making about 1550 acres; the quality and advantages being similar to that. The first-mentioned tract will be conveyed to the purchaser free from every encumbrance, a considerable payment in hand will be expected, and the lowest price per acre twenty dollars. Possession to be given the ensuing spring, with a reservation of the growing crop of small grain, but the last-mentioned tract will be sold subject to existing Leases for short terms of years, under strict covenants guarding against waste and injury of the property, &c. and subject to the purchase money which will be due for the same to Mr. Swann, with interest, in about 9 years. The payment required in hand is the remainder of the amount, about two thousand pounds; and the price per acre is eighteen dollars. Also the reversionary interest in the Piedmont tract, situated below the mountain called the Short Hill, in Loudoun county, consisting of several thousand acres, chiefly under Leases to the occupants, and forming perhaps the best settlement in Virginia, of the same extent, extremely well watered; improved with the best meadows and orchards, and peculiarly adapted to the use of the Planter of Paris. This land will be sold in Lots consisting of one or more tenements, as may best suit purchasers, together with one or more Lots of woodland to be laid off on the S. E. side of the Short Hill for the convenience of any of said tenements that may be scarce of wood. There are several good mill seats upon this tract, which is not more than 55 miles from Alexandria and the City of Washington, and no part of it more than 15 miles from Leesburg. The price per acre will be various, according to the quality and advantages of the Land, and circumstances of the Leases, but an extensive credit will be given by installments, upon receiving what it may be convenient for the purchasers to pay in hands. It is desired that persons wishing to purchase this property, will signify their intentions before the wood land is laid off. Also two or three small Farms with every requisite convenience for immediate operation, in the counties of Jefferson and Frederick, and at various prices. And several valuable building Lots, situated upon the Pennsylvania Avenue, in the City of Washington; some upon square 74, near the Six Buildings, and some upon square 38; besides other very valuable Lots in that City. Application to be made in person, or by Letter, (post paid) directed to Charlottesville, Virginia, to FERDINANDO FAIRFAX. Shan. Hill, March 5, 1802. ep8w
FOR SALE. A TRACT of land containing 2500 acres lying immediately on the river Potomac, in the county of Northumberland, Virginia, late the residence of PRESLEY THORNTON, Esq. Seventeen hundred acres of which are of the most valuable kind of low grounds on the river; between three and four hundred acres heavily timbered, the remainder is wavy high land extremely productive. The soil of this tract is equal to any in the state for cultivation of corn, wheat, tobacco, timothy, and small grain of all kinds. On this tract are a large commodious two story brick mansion house and two offices, a large brick stable, a valuable barn, cow house and piggery other out houses, all in good repair. The orchard and garden contain a variety of valuable fruit trees, and the waters abound with excellent fish and oysters. It is situated about a day's sail from Alexandria, Baltimore or Norfollk. There are two good mill seats for grist, or saw-mills on this estate, and plenty of cedar and chestnut timber, exclusive of the heavy timber, which is sawed up into scantling will command a price in the City of Washington, nearly equal to the value of the land. The terms will be made easy to the purchaser or purchasers, and the tract will be divided into two or more plantations if necessary—Apply to RICHARD PETERS, Junr. No. 85, Walnut Street Philadelphia. Philadelphia, Nov. 11. epif