The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1809-06-26 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. IX.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1359.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, JUNE 26, 1809.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
The National Intelligencer is conducted by Samuel H. Smith, and Joseph Gales, Jun. and printed at the office of the former, to whom subscribers and correspondents are requested to address themselves. The annual price, payable in advance, is Five Dollars.
Advertisements, not exceeding one square in breadth, are inserted the first time at fifty cents, and for every subsequent insertion at twenty-five cents. If inserted less than three times a dollar is charged. If inserted but once a week, an addition of one fourth part is made. Other advertisements charged at the same ratio.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DEBATE ON FORTIFICATIONS. [Continued.] THURSDAY, JUNE 8.
Mr. W. ALSTON said that the arguments on this subject might be reduced to a very narrow compass. The only question was, whether it was necessary to complete the fortifications commenced? If it was necessary to complete them, it would be much better always to keep a sufficient sum appropriated to employ the persons engaged in carrying on the work, than to employ a sum which would not be sufficient. The expense necessary for carrying on the work, as respects all officers and agents engaged in it would be no more if seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars were appropriated, than if but one hundred and fifty were to be expended. Besides, such was the difficulty of procuring laborers, that it would be a great inconvenience now to discharge those employed. Last session (said Mr. A.) a million was appropriated for this purpose by this House, and struck out by the Senate, because they had before them no particular estimate. Now an estimate is laid before us from the Secretary of War who tells us that in this little time nearly the whole money appropriated has been expended. The 185,000 remaining, with 150,000 proposed to be substituted for the sum proposed by the Senate, cannot last till next session. It therefore appears to me to be more wise in us to appropriate a sum which in all human probability will be sufficient to keep the work in progression, than so small a sum as would not keep the workmen together. If, however, a majority should be of opinion that it is not proper to complete the works, there is no necessity to appropriate a single cent.
Mr. NEWTON agreed with gentlemen who had preceded him, that true economy called for the largest appropriation. There was not a fortification in the United States which had received the last finishing stroke; and it was necessary at this time that the fortifications of the U. States should be put in the best possible condition. What was our situation in relation to foreign powers? Could it be said that we were at peace with all the world? It is certainly not in our power to say so (said Mr. N.) We have yet a treaty to make with Great Britain; we do not know how we stand in respect to France; and no gentleman can say how long the United States will be suffered to remain in peace. It is therefore necessary, the whole world being in confusion, to place ourselves in the most formidable state of defence. Having this belief, I shall not travel over the ground gentlemen have taken, but give my decided vote against striking out the sum. One word in relation to the gentleman from N. Carolina, (Mr. Holland)—In the course of his remarks he has distinguished me by the appellation of "the modest gentleman from Virginia." I hope I ever shall possess this quality, so amiable in private life, so essential in public bodies; and as it seems that I possess so great a portion of it, I have no objection to make a transfer of a part of it to that honorable gentleman.
Mr. DANA observed that it had been said that there was no probability of an invasion, and that therefore there was no necessity for fortifications. He said he must be permitted to observe that it was perfectly incomprehensible to him, on any principle of military or naval combat, how 100,000 militia could be employed, except in case of invasion; for very certain he was that militia could not constitutionally be required to march beyond the frontier. When therefore the President of the U. S. had detached 100,000 militia, it was sporting with the feelings and understandings of the country, if there was no possibility of invasion. He said he would leave it to gentlemen to settle the question between the practice of its late President of the U. S. and their own respect for his opinion. Mr. Dana said he would admit that fortifications would not constitute a security against invasion by a large army; but he considered them proper to guard against those collisions which might
sidered them to be such a security as would prevent insolent persons from menacing the peace of our waters. In the same manner as garrisons in the interior would discourage the savages from attempting to plunder or murder our citizens, so fortifications on the sea-board would constitute some security against maritime marauders. He would rest the security of the peace of the country on this ground: that no enemy might ever be tempted to invade by an expectation to acquire plunder without combat, or victory without effusion of blood. He objected to striking out the sum in the bill. The gun-boats had cost the U. S. at least 1,500,000 dollars. It was proposed to sell them. He was not disposed to think that the business had been so ingeniously conducted that they would sell for less than 50 per cent. of their original cost. The proceeds then of the sale of this species of defence taken away would just amount to the sum proposed to be added to another species.
The committee of the whole refused to strike out the sum, Ayes 33. The committee rose and reported the bill.
Mr. BURWELL renewed his motion for striking out the sum for the purpose of inserting a smaller. If the House should refuse to accommodate him he said he felt no hesitation in saying that he should vote against the bill. The idea of securing this country from foreign invasion or attack by a cordon of fortifications round it appeared to him to be so perfectly absurd, that he was astonished, whilst gentlemen were zealously engaged in ferreting out one species of mania, that they should introduce another. When the gentleman from New-York (said Mr. B.) tells the House that one-fifth of our revenue is derived from the city of New-York, does he mean it to be understood that the people pay this duty, or only that the merchants import articles to this amount which are consumed in other parts of the country, on which of course the duty really falls? Every man of the smallest information knows that these goods, instead of being consumed in that city, are dispersed in every part of the United States. This subject of fortifications is no new thing. We all agree that we should fortify our most exposed points from predatory incursions; but no man supposes that we can establish fortifications which will effectually repel the invasion of a large force. If we were to collect all our revenue for twenty years back, and sell all our real and personal property, and expend the proceeds of it, we should find all these sums thrown away in an attempt completely to fortify the whole coast of the United States. But I wish gentlemen to state whether the conduct of this government towards the city of New-York and every seaport town has not been such as to exhibit a disposition to defend the country. Suppose the strongest fortifications possible to be erected at New-York, would they prevent an army from landing in New-Jersey or Connecticut, and going round to the city of New-York? From whatever cause, we are in no danger now; and whatever may be said in this House, the embargo has caused a conviction in the British government of the advantage of a mutual trade between the two countries. They are convinced now, as I have always been, that we want nothing else from them. But, if this House, when danger was believed by all to exist, could not be prevailed upon to appropriate more than 450,000 dollars at the last session for fortifications, with what kind of consistency are they now called upon to appropriate 750,000 dollars to that object?
The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Ross) asks us, whether it would be prudent policy in a farmer to half-fence his fields? Certainly not. But if a farmer were to attempt to fence in a whole tract of country to secure a little lot, he would not act more ridiculously than we should do in expending extravagant sums of money on an object which can never be attained.
The gentleman from New-York (Mr. Gardener) says that he wishes to destroy geographical distinctions and to extend protection to every part. I contend, sir, that so far as a solicitude has been shown for the protection of any particular part of the country, it has been for the Eastern country exclusively. Every one at all conversant with the subject knows that very little has been done elsewhere. I admit that New-York should be fortified; but the question is, whether we shall at this particular time devote the whole revenue of the country to that object; whether it will be an inconvenience to New-York or any other town if it is not fortified by the next meet-
ing of Congress, when we are in a state of peace and there is a prospect of its continuance? I wish not by large appropriations to induce the Secretary of War to expend money too precipitately; for if we do, we shall have still more money to appropriate. We know very well that the appropriations of former years for this purpose have scarcely ever been expended; and how can it be expected that, in addition to the 185,000 dollars remaining unexpended, the Secretary of War will be able to disburse 750,000 more. I consider the great bulk of expense for this object to have been already encountered, and that almost all the materials are already prepared. The remaining part of the expense must be comparatively inconsiderable, viz. for the employment of men to make use of the materials, which in works of this kind constitute the greater part of the expense. The sum with which I propose to fill the blank will give the War Department, till the next session, 300,000 dollars, as much as can be judiciously expended, as much as we can spare, as much as the exigency of the country will require; and I hope the House will not consent to impoverish the Treasury by appropriating more, when it can answer no proper purpose.
Mr. GOLD observed that he would not detain the House long on this subject. He expressed himself happy at the demonstration already given of a disposition to go through with the fortifications begun. It was a subject in which New-York was much interested; and on which therefore the Representatives from that state were particularly anxious. Many remarks had been made as to the calculations on which so much money could be expended in a given time. He acknowledged himself to be completely ignorant of what was done, and of what might be necessary to be done in a given time. Was any gentleman prepared to say on his responsibility how far a just economy would authorise the House to go? For his part he had confidence in the estimate of our public officers, and he perceived with pleasure that many in the House had the same—from other gentlemen, however, he had expected less jealousy in relation to them than had been displayed. It must be acknowledged on all hands that the Department which had made the estimate of the appropriation, was much better apprized of the extent to which it would be necessary to go, than the members of the House. It has been remarked (said Mr. G.) that the monies heretofore appropriated to this object have not been wholly expended. What results from this fact? That economy has been observed; that the government has not been disposed to go to the utmost length when we gave them an opportunity; and shews that we have the greater reason now to give them our confidence. On the subject of fortifications, with all due deference to the gentleman from Virginia, I must be disposed to give greater attention to the report of the officer at the head of the War Department, than to the fruits of the hasty deliberations of any gentleman. There is a well-grounded expectation that New-York may be fortified. The gentleman says, however, that an army may land in Connecticut or New Jersey and proceed to New-York. I answer that they may; but before they can reach New-York they will find more blows than plunder. There is no danger of an army's being landed in the state of New-York; though there is an of attack from sea.
Some allusion has been made to an observation made by my colleague which seemed to assert too strongly the claim of New-York. Some such expression may have fallen from the gentleman in the warmth of debate; but the people of New-York do not impose claims on this subject, but appear as petitioners.
The observations in relation to our being always prepared for events are not mere observations of course. I say it is the duty of all nations; and the writers on the policy of nations have not failed to bestow on that system of policy due approbation. It is not fit that the inhabitants of the seaports, by our waiting till danger approaches, should be left in a situation to be thrown into convulsions at the capture of any foreign power. Their exposure is just ground for an apprehension which they ought not to feel, and which ought to be removed by the Legislature of the Union. It is a subject of no small consideration that the inhabitants of our seaports should be so frequently subject to alarm; I am persuaded that the gentleman from North Carolina would not like to be
placed in that situation. I hope on this subject that we have no danger to apprehend; that, the confidence heretofore placed in the Heads of Departments not having been abused, we shall now place reliance on their estimates.
It has been observed that the state of New-York has funds and might do something to the defence of its own city. And she has done her share, sir. I am not able to state the sum already expended, not having documents which will shew it; but it has been considerable. And though they do think it somewhat unreasonable that they should have to expend the funds necessary for the support of government in the fortification of that harbor, they would rather expend the last farthing of their funds than let it be undefended.
Mr. GHOLSON said that if he had no further information on this subject than was furnished by the report of the Secretary of War, he could not be induced to vote the appropriation required. On adverting to the report (said he) it seems that 450,000 dollars, were appropriated at the last session for the present year; and that of that sum as much as could be had been expended, viz. 265,000 dollars, leaving a balance of nearly 200,000 dollars. If 265,000 dollars only could be expended in one half year, according to what sort of calculation are 900,000 dollars to be expended for the remaining half year? The Secretary himself tells you that he cannot precisely estimate the proper sum; he is new in office, & perhaps by the next session will be more conversant than he is now in the details of his office. Had he given a detailed statement of sums necessary for each place, I might have placed confidence in it; but when he thus reports in gross, I cannot place that confidence in his report. At the last session the largest sum thought of by those most sanguine in favor of fortifications was one million of dollars, in a time of impending war, which sum was struck out by the Senate; and now, in a time of peace they want 1,200,000, that is, 750,000 in addition to 450,000 before appropriated, a sum far exceeding the sum then thought of. I do not know what can have made this revolution in the minds of the Senate. I suppose that for the two last years the possibility of invasion did enter into the calculations of members of both Houses, and therefore the militia were detached, the army and marine increased, and fortifications established; and now, when there is a prospect of peace, the detachment of 100,000 militia is disbanded, the Senate have passed a bill authorising the suspension of enlistments, and whilst every preparation is relaxing, we are to persevere with increased ardor in the expenditure for fortifications, when there is not a dollar in the Treasury to spare. This is an inconsistency which I cannot reconcile to myself. I am willing to go on with fortifications; but I cannot consent, in time of peace, to borrow money, (a very unRepublican practice at any time) for the purpose of erecting fortifications, when all the rest of our conduct demonstrates to the world that we do not expect invasion.
Mr. TALLMADGE said, that the question was not now whether the city of New-York, Norfolk, Charleston, Boston, or any other place should be defended, but whether the government should have the sum contemplated to complete the fortifications already begun, or put them in such a state that they may be preserved. In discussing this question (said he) I shall not take up the great question of the embargo, which is brought in on every question, nor will I contend, because the gun-boats are about to be given up, that therefore fortifications should be increased, for, since I have been a member of this government, I feel conscious that I have never advocated them even as an aid to fortifications. I have always believed that fortifications would be necessary to protect the gun-boats. I wish to see the government grant that sum which shall be necessary to place the fortifications in such a state as, whether in peace or war, shall defend the ports and harbors of the U. S. From the remarks which some gentlemen have offered to the House on this subject, I am induced to believe that they have not a practical understanding of military tactics. Some gentlemen seem to suppose, because we have a military force, that it will be competent to do the manual labor on the fortifications. Do gentlemen, when they make these remarks, perceive the material difference between works of defence for active war and for permanent defence? I have taken but a slight view of one fortification which
is erecting at New-York, and I conceive that it exhibits but an inferior specimen of workmanship. The materials may have cost more than I hope they did; but, in the construction of the work, great errors are committed, probably from the inexperience of those employed on it. I am as willing to have the military employed as any gentleman on this floor; but I do undertake to aver, that if the work be left to the soldiery, not one port or harbor will be sufficiently defended. This is the fact. There are gentlemen on this floor who know what force ought to be given and what allowance ought to be made for the declarations which I am now submitting.
As to the question of the sum which it is proper to appropriate, it does appear that some gentlemen think we have not got an over-flowing treasury, and therefore they will not appropriate money for this species of defence. If this be true, the observation will equally apply to any other expenditure. If the erection of fortifications be necessary, whether the money comes in by imposts or loans, it shall have my support. If it be not of importance to fortify the country, and obtain money for this purpose, let the government say so, and let the fortifications go to decay. We have fortifications in an incipient state, and the question is, shall we leave them as they are, to go back to the earth whence they came, or shall we complete them? For one I am free to declare that in a time of the most profound peace which a government can see, and I hope and trust that we are on the eve of it, I would fortify and defend the nation most permanently and completely, and would grant all the means necessary to that purpose. When I say this, I do not mean that I would appropriate as large a sum of money as we have heretofore done; but when I consider that 750,000 dollars is the maximum which the Secretary of War has thought proper to offer to the consideration of the House, I do not wish to diminish it. I am willing to come precisely up to the mark; and should it not be found necessary to expend the whole, I have not the smallest doubt that it will remain in the Treasury, subject to the appropriation of government. Under all the views of the subject which I can take, I am unwilling to diminish the sum proposed by the Senate, and am therefore opposed to the motion.
Mr. QUINCY said that it appeared to him that gentlemen had not taken that point of view which ought solely to occupy this question, which was, not whether it was proper to begin the fortifications, but whether it was proper to complete them in the mode and in the various places in which they had been commenced. Upon this question he said he did not perceive that there appeared to be any difficulty. Gentlemen did not say that it would be improper to make them complete. In reply to the argument that the money would not be expended there was but one answer, and that was complete, viz. that the Secretary of War says, in his opinion, that it can be done. Mr. Q. said he wished gentlemen to remember that whenever a less sum was granted than was necessary to carry on the work, the House would thereby convey an intimation that it was not their intention to complete them. And whilst there was a scramble, amongst the advocates for different fortifications, for their share of a small appropriation, what would be the situation of the Secretary of War? He must either totally omit applying it, or divide it, according to the interests of the U. S. States, or to the contracts made, but according to the amount appropriated, in an insufficient and inevitably partial manner.
Mr. FISK said he would add but little to what had been already said in opposition to the motion for striking out; for the objections had been many and the arguments in favor of it but few, the principal argument being that the situation of the country did not require the appropriation. The Secretary of War had estimated the sum necessary for N. York at 340,000 dollars, a sum considerably larger than the whole sum proposed to be appropriated by the mover of the amendment. He said he did not know what works were carrying on, but he knew that considerable fortifications had been commenced and were in a state of forwardness in New-York and at other places. When the whole sum proposed by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Burwell) was divided between the different places to be fortified, it would be found that there was not an opportunity for the agents to make contracts, as every man of

prudence will do in a work of this kind. We are told (said Mr. F.) that we are in no danger, that we are secure. The way to be secure is to be prepared for danger. The permanent, solid, substantial defence of the sea-coast must be fortifications; and we are told that we are not to carry them on—why? Because the Treasury will not permit it. That is not a good reason against it; the spirit of the nation calls for it, and its resources are sufficient. We know that estimates have generally fallen short of the actual expenses, and that it has been necessary to appropriate money to supply the deficiency in many cases. I rather suppose that the present estimate does not exceed the amount to be applied, but probably falls short of it. What is the use of calling for information if you will not take it as a guide, especially when gentlemen are not able to show that it is incorrect? My object is not only to make New York but the whole country more secure. I never knew that any one contemplated making a cordon round us, like the wall betwixt the Tartars and Chinese, or that the nation was competent to do it—But it is the opinion of practical men that New York may be completely fortified. It is asked why New York has not contributed to her own defence. I cannot put my hands on documents on the subject, but at different times money has been appropriated by the state of New York, to a large amount. It is said that the Treasury cannot meet this expenditure unless we resort to loans, and that they are anti-republican. I do not know that they are when necessary for purposes of public utility, and I would not be inclined to hazard the assertion that in 20 hours we might borrow 50 millions on account of the United States at 5 per cent. I merely rose to call the attention of the House to the amount of appropriation. The daily appropriation for the works at New York is 1000 dollars; and there is no doubt but the share of appropriation for that city will be expended before the next meeting of Congress.
Mr. EXMOUTH observed that the sum of 450,000 dollars was appropriated only last February, of which 265,000 dollars had already been expended. If this sum had been expended in so short a time, he might say that he conceived that at least the sum in the bill would be necessary before the next meeting of Congress. A word as to the necessity of the expenditure.—Was it necessary to go on to complete the fortifications? Gentlemen had said that the nation is now in a state of peace. Was it recollected that but a day or two ago a bill had been reported by the committee of foreign relations, the purport of which was to place us in a posture of resistance towards France? If this bill were passed, was it not possible that the French Emperor might think that we had done him an injury? If it was even in his power to do any thing to injure us, would it not be by sending out a fleet of ships of war, if they could out-sail the English fleet? And were not our seaports to be put in a state of defence against such armaments? There was an absolute necessity for this appropriation. If ever there existed a necessity that the ports & harbors should be fortified, the work having been commenced, it existed peculiarly at this moment. Why would gentlemen, after appropriating so large a sum, now say that fortifications were not necessary? Why would they not complete those which had been commenced? After having given a pledge to fortify the seaports by commencing the works, he hoped the House would not withdraw it by refusing to complete them.
The motion for striking out seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars was then negatived by Yeas and Nays, as heretofore given.
TUESDAY, JUNE 20.
BRIGADIER-GENERAL'S PAY.
Mr. J. G. JACKSON observed that by the act passed in 1802, fixing the military peace establishment, among other things the pay of the Brigadier-General was fixed at 225 dollars, which was to be his full and entire compensation; and also allowed "to the commanding officer of each separate post, such additional number of rations as the President of the U. S. shall from time to time direct, having respect to the special circumstances of each post." Under this section of the act an opinion had been given by the Attorney-General, in pursuance of an application to him, that the Brigadier-General besides his fixed allowance, was entitled to extra allowances. A committee had been appointed at the last session, who had reported facts on this subject, on which report no order had been taken, except that at a late hour on the last night of the session a motion was made by a gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) declaratory of the fact that that allowance was intended for the pay of the Brigadier-General, and in opposition to it was, that this House could not speak except through legislative acts, and that it was only in the form of a law that an exposition could be made. It had been declared by gentlemen on almost every side of the House that they inclined to the opinion that the Attorney-General's opinion was not in conformity to law. But since that decision had been made by the Attorney-General, until it should be reversed by law, Mr. Jackson said it would continue to be a rule of conduct. He had felt a disposition, ever since the meeting of Congress, to have their attention drawn to this subject; and he had waited in expectation that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) would have brought forward some such proposition; but he had waited in vain. It was consistent with his sense of propriety that something should be done to correct the proceeding in future. By the act of 1802, two additional Brigadier-Generals had been authorized, whose allowance was but 104 dollars per month, besides their rations, for which admitting the highest value, the whole compensation could not amount to as much as 225 dollars per month, the pay of the first Brigadier-General. He wished that the allowance of the one should be expressly limited to its standard by law, and that of the other two brought up to it. He therefore moved the following resolution:
Resolved, That the committee of Ways and Means be instructed to bring in a bill declaring that the compensation to the Brigadier-Generals of the army of the U. States, fixed by the act of Congress, entitled "An act fixing the military peace establishment of the U. States," shall be no more than 225 dollars per month, including all rations and every other species of emolument heretofore claimed or allowed, except the usual allowance of stationery.
Mr. RANDOLPH said he was very glad to hear it acknowledged that the opinion of the attorney-general upon the act of 1802 was an incorrect and illegal opinion; but he was afraid that this was not the mode to correct an illegal and incorrect act, whether of the attorney-general or of any other officer of the government of the U. States. The committee of Ways and Means to be instructed to bring in a bill declaring how a law should be construed? That to him was a novelty. The committee of Ways and Means might bring in a bill declaratory and amendatory of the law; but the introduction of a bill declaring how a law shall be construed he took to be a novelty, and moreover incommensurate with the extent of the evil. If, in the present case, a manifest departure from the law had taken place with impunity, he wished to know how this proposed law for construing law was to be enforced? Recollect (said Mr. R.) that it has been agreed on all hands (we are told so at least) that the conduct of the officers in question has been incorrect and illegal. Now if it has been incorrect or illegal, that the proper remedy is not a declaratory act, is a self-evident proposition; because there will be no more sanction for securing the observance of the new law than of the old. With respect to the case occurring at the last session, and the motion made by me in relation to it, I think the House will do me the justice to say that I certainly have pointed their attention to it even during the present session; and it will be recollected that the whole of that business is now, by a resolution of this House, in possession of a committee appointed to investigate the application of public monies to the purposes for which such monies have been appropriated; and unquestionably it will be the duty of the committee to take cognizance of it. That point was agitated this morning in committee, and it was determined to take notice of that irregular and illegal expenditure of public money as of any other and report thereupon. The law itself, Mr. Randolph said was perfectly clear, and could not require any amendment, much less an act declaring how it should be construed. To prove this, he quoted the law. If a subsequent act had established other brigadier-generalships (if he might use the expression) and had given them less monthly pay, by more than an hundred dollars, than to the brigadiers under the former act, allowing them, however, rations and forage, it placed them also without the limitation of the law in relation to extra allowance of rations and forage. They were placed by the very nature of their compensation on the same footing, rank excepted, as the colonels, majors, &c. under the old law, which as the House would observe, declared that the brigadier-general should receive a certain gross sum of money in lieu of any other emolument whatever, stationary requisite for the use of his department excepted. To all officers other than the brigadier appointed under the act of 1802, that regulation of this section applied, which enabled the President of the United States to give to the commanding officer of each separate post "such additional number of rations as he shall from time to time direct, having respect to the special circumstances of each post." The brigadier-gens. lately appointed having a monthly pay inferior to the brigadier appointed under the former act, & having, as he had not, allowance for forage and rations, this section of the law, which had been improperly extended to the first brigadier, Mr. R. said did fairly attach to the brigadiers subsequently appointed, because they, instead of having a gross sum per month in full, had 104 dollars in part, and rations and forage also which the
act in 1802 positively denied to the brigadier first appointed. So that if the committee of Ways and Means or any committee were to bring in a bill declaring how that act should be construed, they would bring in a bill declaring that, because the act of 1802 had been illegally and incorrectly expounded as to the original brigadier, it should not be legally expounded in relation to the new brigadiers, but that they should be excluded from the positive benefit of a law made for their express case. Mr. R. said he should therefore vote against this resolution; and he thought he might without arrogance say that he had demonstrated to the House the inapplicability of the resolution to the case in question, and its inefficiency as to any abuse which now existed or might hereafter occur in this Department.
Mr. J. G. JACKSON observed that he had not considered it necessary to be as explicit in a resolution as in a bill. He had not said, as ascribed to him, that the conduct of the officer making the allowance was illegal. It was perfectly legal; for, if gentlemen would turn to the act establishing the office of attorney-general, they would find that he was bound to take an oath of office, and, upon the application of any officer of government, to give his opinion as a rule for their guide. That opinion had been given in the present instance, and in pursuance of it the allowances had been made. Have I (said Mr. J.) said that the conduct of the attorney-general was illegal and incorrect? I said that the opinion was deemed to be illegal and incorrect. But we are asked by the gentleman why legislate on the subject? You cannot have forgotten, sir, that the member from Virginia, when he offered the resolution at the last session, spoke of the high regard he had for the officer who had given the incorrect construction of the law. He then said that the having given an erroneous opinion was no disparagement to his talents, for that Homer himself sometimes nodded; that it was merely an error of the judgment in which the heart was not inculpated. But when laws have been construed differently from the intention of those who passed them, it is not at all unusual to pass laws giving an explanation of such laws. What would be the effect, the gentleman asks, if this officer were again to violate his duty? There has been no violation of duty; it was a mere error of opinion. But if there was a law expressly declaring that the emoluments of the brigadier-general should not exceed 225 dollars, the officer could not plead a misconstruction of the law. I ask the gentleman whether he can possibly wish that this erroneous opinion shall be practised on in future, for the purpose of excluding against the officer who is bound to act on the opinion given, so long as it is unrevoked? When the legislature is informed that the officers of government expound a law differently from its intention, they usually pass a law explanatory of it—and this is a correct mode of proceeding. In every point of view I can see no good ground for opposing the resolution, and I had hoped that it would pass unanimously. With the exception of the gentleman who declared that he would oppose it, I hope so still.
Mr. LIVERMORE observed that if the case in question had been a doubtful point or one which admitted of a doubt, it might be proper to legislate on it; but he could not conceive that a doubt existed. He did not believe it possible that a law could be made stronger in the English language—and where was the security if a law was passed confirming it, that that law too would not be violated? He did not mean to insinuate that he considered the officers of the Treasury to be corrupt; but he conceived that they had not proceeded with that correctness which ought to characterize officers in that situation. There could have been no necessity for a legal opinion in a case in which there could have been no doubt. The opinion itself was a strange one, whether considered as coming from a professional character or from a man of common intelligence. On reading the law, he was astonished that the Brigadier General could have been supposed to be entitled to a farthing more than 225 dollars per month in full. He quoted the law, observing that there was an exception of no other allowance than stationary. According to an old rule of law that an exception renders a clause stronger, this exception would clinch the meaning. Mr. L. said it would be impossible to introduce a law more explicit than this. If the attorney-general was to say black was white, were the other officers of government implicitly to believe it? If he were to say that "225 dollars" meant 225 pounds, would they believe it? Surely not. It was equally impossible that the brigadier-general should have been entitled to rations, forage or other emolument when the law said expressly that he should not have them. There ought to be some mode of deciding the case without passing a law to prevent the officers from doing wrong in future. If, notwithstanding the precedent given, they should continue to make allowances to the officer in question of ra-
tions, forage, &c. in his opinion they would be liable to punishment. There was no necessity for legislation on the subject.
Mr. EAMES said that the fact was that the Secretary of War, the Attorney-General, and the Comptroller of the Treasury had all given a construction to the law different from that for which the gentleman from Mass. contended; and although he was far from wishing to disparage either the legal or any other talent of the gentleman from Massachusetts, he should be very much inclined to conceive that either the Secretary of War or the Attorney-General was as capable of giving as legal an opinion as that gentleman. A law had been passed declaring that the compensation of the Brigadier-General should consist of a certain sum. He had no doubt that it was the intention of the legislature that it should consist of that sum. Such Mr. E. said as an individual he had always believed to be the construction. In the same law was a passage declaring the commanders of separate posts should receive such additional rations as the President shall think proper to grant, having respect to the special circumstances of each post. Under that clause the law had, as he conceived, been incorrectly construed. As a difference of opinion existed as to the construction of the law, the question was, what course should be pursued? If gentlemen believed that either the Secretary of War, the Comptroller of the Treasury or the Attorney-General had corruptly acted in the construction they had given, for any such conduct they were liable to a punishment agreeably to law. But as he imagined that there was no gentleman in the House who believed that in giving this opinion they had been actuated by corrupt motives, he could see no more regular than to declare by law that the compensation should consist of that sum and that only. It appeared to him that there could be no objection, in a case of this kind, to give a construction of the law; because it would not at all interfere with the course which gentlemen might hereafter wish to pursue, either with the officer concerned, or in placing it before the public in any manner.
Mr. NELSON said if he understood rightly the object of the resolution, that it contemplated the introduction of a bill explanatory of a law of the land, he was opposed to it; because he believed that if any gentleman chose to take the trouble to read the present law, he would be with him of opinion that no power of language could make any new law more plain than the old one. The reason why a fixed allowance had been made to the commander in chief was, that he would be always exposed to certain expenses to which other officers were not liable, and it was therefore proper that he should have a fixed and adequate compensation. Mr. N. said he had no doubt that the opinions of all the three officers concurring in construction were incorrect; and he presumed that they had fallen into the error in this way; that the law in another part of it said that every officer commanding at a separate post should be entitled to an additional number of rations—Why? For the same reason that the expenses of the commander in chief must be greater than other officers; because they have to entertain the officers and visitors at each post. Was it ever heard of before, that a commander in chief should be sent to command a separate post? How separate? From whom separate? From the main army? No; because he must be with the main body. If there was an army of an hundred thousand men, and it should be so dispersed that there should only remain with the commander in chief 500 men, that body was the main army, and could not be a separate command. How our officers have fallen into this error I cannot tell. That the attorney-general, who knows not much of military subjects, that the worthy comptroller, who I am proud to say would do honor to any country as a man of integrity, should have erred on this point, is not so surprising; but that my old friend the Secretary of War could have fallen into such an error as to suppose that the commander in chief could be placed at a separate post, is a little extraordinary. How would it be separate? Wherever he is, is the main army; from thence orders originate. Why we should pass this explanatory law is to me very strange; for if the former law is not distinct enough, we may go on and pass laws ad infinitum without making them intelligible.
Mr. TALLMADGE said that no man would more readily than himself adopt a resolution of this sort, if he could deem it at all necessary to obtain the object which the gentleman from Virginia very candidly had explained to the House that he had in view. When he had seen the construction which had been given to the law sanctioned by one of the highest law characters of the U. S. he had been almost led to doubt the evidence of his own senses. You, sir, (said Mr. T.) well remember the circumstances under which that law was passed. For myself, though I should most heartily wish to guard and put checks in such a way that the officers of government
could not misconstrue the law, yet I say that I can hardly conceive a world, in the English language, which could be more full and complete than those of the law fixing the military peace establishment. It does not appear to me that the opinions of all the officers of the departments were the same as that of the attorney-general; for, as far as I remember, there was a strong ground of objection to this extraordinary claim, amounting almost to rejection, and that the opinion was called for, more to help out the claim, than as the ground work of proceeding. I utterly reject the idea that the attorney-general is the sole person competent to construe a law. Here is a law, one of the most plain and conclusive, declaring that the brigadier general shall not receive one farthing more than a fixed compensation; and yet the officers of the treasury have allowed the most extraordinary claim on the authority of the opinion of the attorney-general. Could we enact a law in more explicit language? We could not. The resolution, however good its object, and I would accord most sincerely in carrying that object into effect, would certainly be useless. To pass an explanatory law would be trifling with the legislature and with the government. I am averse to sanctioning the construction given, which would be the effect of passing an explanatory bill. In my present opinion of the resolution, therefore, I am averse to its passage.
Mr. HOLLAND said he certainly could not conceive that the passage of the resolution or declaring the meaning of the law would sanction the decision of the War Department in relation to it—
Mr. J. G. JACKSON asked his friend's leave to interrupt him, and withdrew the resolution, which he said he had proposed under a belief that there would be no objection to it.
SENATE, JUNE 23.
Mr. POPE, agreeably to leave, introduced a bill freeing from postage all letters and packets from Thomas Jefferson, which was read twice.
Mr. LEIB from the committee appointed on the 20th inst. to enquire into the expediency of providing by law for the exclusion of foreign armed vessels from the ports and harbors of the United States, made the following report, which was ordered to lie for consideration.
"THAT in the opinion of the committee, such an interdiction is within the just and neutral rights of the U. States, and, under other circumstances, would be highly expedient and proper. So long as a neutral nation shall confine itself to strict measures of impartiality, allowing no benefit to one belligerent, not stipulated by treaty, which it shall refuse to another, no cause whatever is afforded for exception or complaint. The right to admit an armed force into a neutral territory, belongs exclusively to the neutral; and when not guaranteed by treaty, as is oftentimes the case, such admission compromises the neutrality of the nation, which permits to one belligerent alone such an indulgence.
As a measure of safety as well as of peace, it is incumbent upon the U. States to carry into effect such a provision. So long as we are without a competent force to protect our jurisdiction from violation, and our citizens from outrage, and our flag from insult, so long ought no asylum to be given, but in distress, to the armed vessels of any nation. The committee will not bring into view the many injuries and insults which the U. States have sustained from the hospitable grant of their ports and harbors to belligerents; nor the facility which has thereby been afforded to them to lay our commerce under contribution.—It is sufficient to remark, that great injuries have been sustained, and that imperious duty requires arrangements at our hands to guard our country in future from similar aggressions.
The U. S. are, at this moment under no obligation to withhold restraints, within their power, upon the admission of foreign armed vessels into their ports; but the committee are too strongly impressed with the propriety of avoiding any legislative interference at this time, which by any possibility, might be construed into a desire to throw difficulties in the way of promised and pending negotiations. They are desirous that a fair experiment may be made to adjust our differences with the two belligerent nations, and that no provisions be interwoven in our laws, which shall furnish a pretext for delay, or a refusal to yield to our just and honorable demands.
Calculating that the overtures which have been made by Great Britain will be executed in good faith, the committee are willing to believe, that the stipulated arrangements will be of such a character, as to guard our flag from insult, our jurisdiction from aggression, our citizens from violation & our mercantile property from spoliation. Under these impressions, which the committee have stated as briefly as possible, they beg leave to submit to the consideration of the Senate, the following resolution, viz:
Resolved, That the farther consid-

ration of the subject, be postponed until the next session of Congress. Mr. Lloyd, from the committee to whom was referred the bill from the House, entitled "An act supplementary to the act entitled 'An act making further provision for the support of public credit, and for the redemption of the public debt,'" reported the bill with amendments.
SENATE, JUNE 24.
The bill freeing from postage all packets letters from Thomas Jefferson was passed.
The bill making appropriations for the contingent expenses of the two Houses was considered, when the section appropriating 4,000 dollars, for the purchase of books, maps and charts was disagreed to—Yeas 10—Nays 17.
Mr. Pope, with leave, introduced a bill in addition to the act, to regulate the laying out and making a road from Cumberland, Maryland, to the state of Ohio, which was read twice.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, JUNE 23.
A bill from the Senate authorising the Comptroller of the Treasury to give credit to certain collectors of the customs for sums paid by them to the owners of fishing vessels, &c., and a bill for the remission of certain forfeitures and penalties, and for other purposes (inflicted on the sufferers from Havana who have unwittingly violated the law prohibiting the importation of slaves); were twice read and committed.
A communication was received from the Secretary of the Treasury, in pursuance of a resolution of this House of the 17th inst. enclosing copies of proceedings of the commissioners of the Sinking Fund and the correspondence between the Secretary of the Treasury and the Bank of the United States in relation to a loan under the act supplementary to the act for the further support of public credit and the redemption of the public debt.
The engrossed bill concerning the naval establishment was read the third time.
Mr. Macon said he would take occasion at this time to notice the difference between the several statements received at different times from the Navy Department. He compared the reports made the 10th of December, 1807, and on the 6th of June inst. the latter report stating the expenses of the gun-boats at nearly double of the estimate in the former. He presumed that when the one was made, there was a zeal for gun-boats, and when the other was made there was a fever for frigates and fast sailing vessels instead of them. It was stated also that it required 45 men to manage a gun-boat with one or two guns. He could not conceive how it would require the same number of men for a boat with one gun as for a boat with two. These things he mentioned, being an anti-navy man, to show the inconsistency which always attended statements from that department.
The bill was passed without opposition.
The engrossed bill making an appropriation to defray the contingent expenses of the two Houses of Congress, was read the third time. Mr. Root moved to recommit it with a view of striking out the appropriation for the library of Congress. This motion was opposed by Messrs. Fisk, Cloyd, Quincy and Livermore, and supported by Messrs. Smith, Rhea and Holland; and negatived 55 to 52. The bill was then passed 60 to 37.
FOREIGN RELATIONS.
The House again resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Mr. Basset in the Chair, on the bill from the Senate to amend and continue in force the non-intercourse act.
Mr. J. G. Jackson modified his motion made yesterday, explanatory of the intention to admit the public armed vessels of Great Britain and France, by making it apply to the public armed vessels of any nation whatsoever.
The motion as modified was opposed by Mr. Ross.
Mr. Gold moved to amend the amendment by substituting for the word "whatsoever" the words "belonging to Great Britain," so as to admit only the armed vessels of Great Britain.
Mr. Gold and Mr. Whitman spoke in support of his motion, and Mr. J. G. Jackson against it.
Mr. J. G. Jackson then withdrew his motion altogether.
Mr. Sheffield moved to amend the first section of the bill by adding, after the proviso, the following: "and provided also that nothing herein contained shall be construed to prevent any public vessel from entering the waters and harbors of the United States belonging to any nation with whom commercial intercourse shall have been permitted."
Mr. Sheffield spoke in support of his motion.
Mr. Elphes opposed it.
Mr. Taylor also opposed it.
Mr. Dana supported the motion.
Mr. Rhea spoke against the motion, and Mr. Cook in favor of it.
On motion of Mr. Varnum, the committee rose, 53 to 38, reported progress and obtained leave to sit again.
57 to 41, those opposed to sitting again being in favor of continuing the discussion in the House, with a view to obtain a greater attention to it than was paid in committee, many members being absent during the debate.
The House adjourned about four o'clock.
SATURDAY, JUNE 24.
Mr. Johnson stated that he had been requested by a committee of citizens to make a motion that the House should come to the following resolution, to which he hoped there would be no objection.
Resolved, That if Congress shall not be in session on the 4th of July, the citizens of the District of Columbia shall be permitted to occupy the Representatives Chamber, for the purpose of attending the delivery of any discourse prepared for the celebration of that day.
The House agreed to consider the resolution, 55 to 17.
Messrs. Lewi, Quincy and Lyon opposed the resolution on the ground that this hall should be set apart as sacred for legislative purposes; that the furniture might be injured by indiscriminate admission of persons; and that it would be improper in this House in any way to give encouragement to any party celebrations of that or any other day.
Messrs. Johnson, Burwell, Cook & Smilie, supported the motion. They observed that no building reared by mortal hands was too sacred for the celebration of that day; that there was no intention to foster party spirit; and that sufficient reliance might be placed on the good order of the citizens that they would not injure the furniture of the House.
Mr. Van Dorne rising to oppose it, Mr. Johnson withdrew it to avoid occupying the time of the House with it.
Mr. Cook renewed the motion; but the House refused to consider it.
The House refused to go into committee on the non-intercourse bill; and
On motion of Mr. Findley, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Mr. Basset in the Chair, on the report of the contested election of William Baillies, Ayes 56.
Before the report was read, Mr. Dana moved that the committee rise, under a belief that time had not been allowed for the consideration of the report; he wished not to be driven in so great a hurry to the decision of so important a question, which it was impossible to decide without mature consideration. It was observed by Mr. Burwell, that it was for the purpose of consideration alone that the house went into committee; that it could not be expected the committee could rise immediately after they agreed to go into committee; and that if a disposition was manifested to drive the house from the consideration of the subject, it might produce a counter-determination to persevere in it. Mr. Dana, observing that he had no desire but for a fair consideration, withdrew his motion.
The report was then read, concluding with a recommendation of the following resolutions:
"Resolved, That the election held in Plymouth district in November last, was legal and proper."
"Resolved, That Wm. Baylies is not entitled to his seat."
"Resolved, That Charles Turner, jun. is entitled to a seat in this house."
Mr. Findley moved that the petitioner, Charles Turner, may be admitted to a seat in the House during the discussion.—Agreed to without debate and without opposition.
A motion was made, by Mr. Taylor, that the committee rise and report progress. His object was to move a resolution for a postponement of the further consideration of the subject till next session.
This motion was supported by Messrs. Taylor, Troup, Pitken, Sheffield, Livermore, Baillies, Whitman, Ross, and Lyon; and opposed by Messrs. Rhea, J. G. Jackson, Boyd, Holland, Turner, (the petitioner) Varnum, and Love.
The arguments which appeared to be most relied on by the mover of the postponement, and those who spoke on the same side of the question, was, that the depositions and testimony taken in this case, although it was admitted that reasonable notice was given to the sitting member, who did not attend, were taken under the authority of no existing law, and were not such as would govern a court of justice; that, the sitting member not having attended at the time of taking the depositions, from the belief that they were illegal, the testimony was wholly ex parte , and however decisive it was admitted by some gentlemen to be, was not such as, in candor or justice, the House would decide on without permitting the sitting member to bring testimony to rebut it.
To this it was replied, that for several years there had been no law prescribing the mode of taking testimony in cases of contested elections, in the course of which time several contested elections had been decided by the House on testimony taken under no law, but under the guidance of common reason; that during the first session of the last Congress the sen-
of Mr. Calpepper was vacated on testimony undoubtedly taken in this manner, and under no express law; and that the House having heretofore, in various cases, decided in this way, it was not to be expected that they would in this instance desert the principles on which they had acted.
Other arguments however, founded on facts stated by the sitting member and the petitioner, were introduced into the debate, by gentlemen speaking on both sides of the question, to support their respective opinions.
The question on the committee's rising was taken about 5 o'clock and carried, 58 to 33.
The committee were refused leave to sit again, ayes 33.
And the House adjourned.
Philadelphia, June 21.
A letter from St. Bartholomews, June 3, says—We have most dreadful accounts of an insurrection of the blacks at Jamaica, two thirds of which island are said to be in their possession. The troops are going down from Martinique to assist in suppressing the insurgents.
[This news is contradicted in another print.]
STATE OF HAYTI.
GENERAL ORDER OF THE ARMY. Thursday 18th May, 1809, year 6th. (There has been no general order of the army since the 4th April.)
The fort of the rebel, Jean Dugotier, and the four camps which surrounded it, and which were situated on the plantation Sabouin au Boucassin, have just been carried by a coup de main, by maj. general Peter Toussaint. The rebels have been routed, and owed their escape only to the quickness of flight over the precipices, abandoning their arms, artillery, ammunition, effects, &c. The papers containing the correspondence of John Dugotier with the chiefs of the rebels, and his register book of letters, have been taken.
Two pieces of iron cannon, one a twelve pounder, the other a four, a large quantity of ammunition, cartridges, and implements of artillery, together with a number of prisoners, both men and women, are the fruits of this brilliant expedition.
The troops employed did not all participate in the action; the 3d regiment only was engaged.
These happy effects are due to the wise dispositions of gen. Peter Toussaint, who praises very much the intrepidity of the commander Francisco Victor, and the third regiment, who so well seconded him.
This expedition being so well terminated, the troops have returned to their respective cantonments.
Done at head quarters, at the Cape, the 18th May, 1809, sixth year of the independence.
Chief of the Staff, P. ROMAIN.
Examined and approved of by HENRY CHRIST PHE.
Baltimore, June 22.
Letters are in town from Madeira, received via Philadelphia. They mention that a letter had been received there from the house of Gould and Co. Lisbon, dated early in May, which mention that the French in Portugal offered to capitulate for an unmolested retreat from the kingdom, which was refused them. Should this be accurate, we may calculate upon Soult and Ney falling into the hands of General Romana and Marshal Beresford.
THE AUSTRIANS DEFEATED.
Capt. Crocker, of the ship Virginia, left Amsterdam on the 5th May, and arrived here this morning. He informs us, that towards the last of April, several skirmishes took place between the armies of Bonaparte and the arch-duke Charles—that the petty engagements continued two days, the French gradually retreating, until the Austrians were decoyed into a station between two rivers, when a French army, in reserve poured upon their rear, and a severe conflict ensued, which terminated in the defeat of the Austrian army. It is said that the loss of the arch-duke, including killed, wounded and prisoners, amounted to 50,000 men, and 20 or 30 general officers, together with all their ordnance, baggage, &c. The arch-duke ordered several of his general officers to be shot, whom he suspected of treachery.
The arch-duke John was approaching by rapid marches, at the head of 80,000 men.—A second battle was daily expected.
Com. Ad.
New York, June 22.
Yesterday the ship Virginia, captain Crocker, arrived here in ballast, from Amsterdam. It will be seen by our translations from an Amsterdam paper of the 1st of May, that there has been a severe battle between the Archduke Charles and the French Emperor. The various accounts of this battle disagree in particulars. One account states, that Bonaparte took 30,000 prisoners, 20 generals, &c.—another that he took 20,000 prisoners. But the most improbable story is, (& to us they all carry improbability with them) that which we have from Captain Crocker, who, no doubt heard such a report on the eve of his sailing. It was, that, on the first day of the battle, Bonaparte intended to be defeated, and retreated merely to gain a more advantageous position—having obtained this position he turned upon the Archduke Charles and after a bloody battle, literally took and destroyed the whole of the Austrian army—60,000 prisoners, twenty-
six generals, all their cannon, colors, ammunition, &c. fell into his hands. The number of Austrians left dead on the field, was not exactly known; the loss of the French as usual, was very trifling. It was, however, confessed by the French themselves, that this victory had not decided the fate of Austria. The Arch-duke John was at the head of 80,000 troops, advancing to cooperate with his brother Charles.
The Emperor of Austria, it was reported, had returned to Vienna, from the army.
The dispatch ship Mentor, captain Ward, had been in France 3 or 4 weeks, and it was stated in a letter from France, received at Amsterdam, that Mr. Armstrong, our minister at Paris, was to return to America in the Mentor.
No further relaxation had taken place in the French decrees. The ship Virginia brings out dispatches for government, supposed to be in reply to those which went out in the Mentor, to Mr. Armstrong at Paris.
A letter from Amsterdam of the 29th of April, to a respectable house in this city, says—
"I have just time to inform you, that official accounts are just received of the defeat of the Austrians on the Danube—25,000 killed, 10,000 prisoners, and 100 pieces of cannon taken by the French."
The President's proclamation, announcing the restoration of intercourse between this country and Great Britain was received at Fayal previous to the sailing of the Eagle. It was received most welcomingly.
TRANSLATIONS.
DRESDEN, April 19.—We have for the present no other news from the armies, than that the French army is concentrating on the Danube.
DONAWERTH, April 18.—It is majestic the emperor, at the moment of his arrival here, issued to his army the following proclamation:—
"Soldiers!—The victory of the confederacy is decided! The Austrian general seems to think, that on the sight of his army, we shall precipitately retreat, and leave our allies to his mercy—An Eagle surrounds me—Soldiers! You surround me! When the sovereign of Austria came to our shrine, you have seen him discharging vows of everlasting friendship. In three wars we have conquered. Austria is indebted to our noble condescension, and she has three times failed in her promises, and in the conquest which awaits us, let us march, that the enemy, at the approach of our army, may acknowledge its conqueror."
(Signed) NAPOLEON.
BAHR, April 20.—I have the honor to inform your majesty, that during three days we have repulsed the enemy; your troops have distinguished themselves upon these occasions.
On the 21st of April, the French Envoy at the court of Sillingen, made the following public:
"This moment, the adjutant gen. of Nafuchatel reports, that a great battle had been obtained yesterday by the Bavarian army, headed by his majesty and king, Napoleon having made from 10 to 12,000 prisoners, and the Austrian army is retrograding. The fruits of this battle are many standards and cannon. A general bloody battle is soon expected."
Ludwigsburg, April 23. His majesty received yesterday by a Courier from the army, the confirmation of the victory obtained on the 20th inst.
P. S. This moment we have received the following intelligence:
Official Bulletin.
"The Austrian army, by the fire of Heaven, struck for its ungrateful and faithless guilt—all their ordnance are destroyed—more than twenty generals are either killed or wounded—one Arch duke is killed and two wounded. We have more than 50,000 prisoners; we have taken many standards, cannon, ammunition, and provisions. We are of opinion that the lot of war is decided, as it was at Jena. The Prince of Lichtenstein is mortally wounded."
BY order of the Orphans Court of Prince George's county, Maryland, will be offered at Public sale, in Piscataway, on Monday the 17th day of July next, a part of the personal estate of Nathaniel Clagett, late of said county, deceased, consisting of sundry articles, too tedious to enumerate. The terms will be made known the day of sale.
WILLIAM MARSHALL, NICHOLAS YOUNG, WM. K. CLAGETT, HANNIBAL CLAGETT.
June 26—31.
Saint Mary's county, Orphan's Court, June 18th, 1809.
ON application of Decanda S. Smith, executrix of Henry A. Smith, late of Charles county deceased; ordered that she give the notice required by law for creditors to exhibit their claims against the said deceased, and that the same be published once in each week for the space of six successive weeks in the National Intelligencer and American and Commercial Daily Advertiser.
JAMES FORRESTER, Reg. Wills for Saint Mary's county.
THIS is to give notice that the subscriber hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of Saint Mary's county, letters testamentary on the personal estate of Henry A. Smith, late of Charles county deceased—all persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same with the vouchers thereof to the subscriber at or before the 25th day of December next, they may otherwise be excluded from all benefit of said estate. Given under my hand this 20th day of June eighteen hundred and nine.
DECANDA S. SMITH, Exec.
June 23—81.
DEMOCRATIC DINNER.
The Subscriber, having been appointed by the committee on the part of the Democratic Citizens of Washington, Alexandria and Georgetown, to provide the dinner to be served at the Centre Market-house in this city on the 4th of July, hereby gives notice that subscription papers and tickets of admission are lodged with Dr. Ott, in Georgetown, Mr. Carr Wickens in Alexandria, and at my house in Washington, for the accommodation of those gentlemen who are disposed to partake. They may be assured of every exertion on my part to give satisfaction. As it will be necessary that it should be known nearly how many persons shall be provided for, the subscription papers and tickets will be withdrawn on the morning of the 3d of July. GEO. W. LINNAY.
THE INFANT ROSCIUS.
That Amazing Child of Nature, Will have the honor of giving his celebrated Public Recitations at Georgetown, Mr. Adam King's Long Room, this Evening, Monday, June 26th.
WASHINGTON THEATRE.
On Monday Evening, June 26, 1809, Will be performed a celebrated Comedy, called
SPEED THE PLOUGH.
To which will be added, A Musical Entertainment, called THE PADLOCK.
** Box One Dollar—Pitt Three Quarters of a Dollar.
** Tickets to be had at the Office of Dinmore and Cooper, Eleventh-street, near Pennsylvania Avenue.
Doors will open at Six—Curtain rise a Quarter before Seven o'Clock.
FOR SALE.
A HANDSOME SADDLE HORSE with or without a SADDLE and BRIDLE. He is standing at Mr. William Rhodes's stable, City Hotel.
June 26—41.
PUBLIC SALE.
PURSUANT to a decree of the Chancery Court of Maryland, appointing the subscriber trustee, for the sale of the Real Estate of the late Mr. John Brown, of Prince George's county, for the payment of his debts, will be offered at Public Sale, on Monday the 17th July next on the premises, that valuable Farm, the late residence of the deceased, called Mount Calvert or Mount Calvert Manor, containing about 525 acres. This land is situated on Patuxent river, in the vicinity of Upper Marlinton and Nottingham, and distant about 4 miles from each of these places. It is bounded on one side by the river Patuxent, for more than a mile, where it is navigable for vessels of any burthen, with the advantages of an excellent fishing landing. This land is well adapted to the production of tobacco, corn and all kinds of grain; it is a quantity of good meadow land, some of which is now in high cultivation and abounds with wood and timber. The improvements are a good brick Dwelling House, two stories high, nearly new; a good Kitchen; several good Tobacco Houses and Barns, with every other necessary building, all in good repair. A further description of this valuable and well known Farm is deemed unnecessary as those inclined to purchase will no doubt view the premises before the day of sale. The terms of sale are, eighteen months credit, the purchaser giving bond with security to be approved of by the trustee, bearing interest from the day of sale, & on the ratification of the sale by the Chancellor and the payment of the whole purchase money, the trustee will by a good and sufficient deed, convey to the purchaser and his heirs, all the right, title and interest of the said John Brown to the said lands.
THOMAS TYLER, Trustee.
N. B. The creditors of the said John Brown are hereby requested to lodge their claims, with the vouchers thereof, in the Chancery office within two months from the day of sale.
T. TYLER, Tr.
June 26—w31.
BE IT REMEMBERED.
That on this second day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and nine, and in the thirty third year of American Independence, DONALD MILLIGAN, of the said district, had deposited in this office, the title of a book, the right whereof he claims as proprietor, in the words following, to wit:
"The Child of Feeling, A comedy, in five acts. By George Patterson, Esq."
In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, "An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies during the times therein mentioned."
G. DENBALY, Clerk
of the District Court of Columbia. June 26—cop1m.
GEO. W. RIGGS.
His just received coat for Sale, Gold and silver velvets &c. Do. do. do. cords, &c. &c. Plated and gift lace. Gold and silver epaulets. Gold watches, plain and repeating. Silver do. warranted. Jewelry of the newest fashion. A considerable choice of silver and plated ware. With a variety of fancy goods too tedious to mention.
ALSO
2900 RACCOON SKINS, Of the best quality, assorted to suit the business. George-town, June 21—w37.
RUNAWAY.
WAS committed to the Goal of Washington county, in the District of Columbia, as a runaway on the 14th inst. a black boy who calls himself SAM JONES, and says he belongs to Thomas Clarke of Prince George's County, Maryland, and says he is about 19 years of age, 5 ft. 6 inches high, had on when committed, an old blue cloth jacket and trousers, coarse linen shirt, old hat and no other clothes with him. If the owner is desired to come and prove him and take him away, or he will be sold for his jail fees and other expenses as the law directs. C. TIPPETT, Keeper of the Goal for W. Boyd, Marshal. June 19—w31.
SILVER STERLING.
THE Subscriber has been at great expense and trouble to render this most desirable place comfortable and pleasant for the present session. Gentlemen and ladies who are desirous of visiting these waters, may depend upon every attention on the part of the subscriber to make their time agreeable. O. TOWNES, Jr. June 21—23.

EIGHTY DOLLARS REWARD. RUNAWAY from the subscriber on the 15th inst. a mulatto lad—JIM—who is about seventeen years of age, has straight black hair, lately cut, and black eyes. He had on when he absconded from me, a short blue kersey jacket, and blue pantaloons patched with white, a large pair of hood shoes, an old hat, osnaburg shirt, with an old handkerchief round his neck—he has a father living in the city of Washington, near the navy yard, by the name of George, or George Beall, who served his time with Mr. John Addison, Jun. and a mother by the name of Sophy, who I sold to her husband a few years past, and expect he will make to them or probably to Baltimore as he has some friends and relations there also. I will give forty dollars for securing said lad in jail so that I get him again, or the above reward if taken out of the district of Columbia or state of Maryland. RACHAL PRATT, Prince George's County, June 18th, 1809. June 19—32-wt.
THIS is to give notice that the subscribers of Prince George's County have obtained from the Orphans Court of said county, in Maryland, letters testamentary on the personal estate of Nathaniel Clagett, late of said county, deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased, are hereby warned to exhibit the same with the vouchers thereof to the subscribers at or before the 19th day of Nov. next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of said estate. All persons indebted to the estate are requested to make immediate payment to HANNIBAL CLAGETT, who is hereby authorised to receive the same. Given under our hands this 19th day of May, eighteen hundred and nine. WILLIAM MARSHALL, NICHOLAS YOUNG, WM. R. CLAGETT, HANNIBAL CLAGETT. May 19—5w.
FORTY DOLLARS REWARD. RUNAWAY from the subscriber in February last, a handsome bright Mulatto Woman, named HELEN, twenty years old, of the middling size, her marks as far as recollected, are large breasts, thin visage, a scar, I think, on the left side of her neck, occasioned by a cut; has a flat nose, I think, in her left hand, one on her forehead, and one between her breasts; sprightly spoken, quick turn of mind, and very capable of deception—it is useless to describe her dress, no doubt she will be well supplied with clothes and will try to pass for a free woman. Thirty dollars will be given if taken up in the district of Columbia, if further, the above reward will be given if brought home to the subscriber, living in the city of Washington, west of the President's house, all reasonable expenses allowed. All persons are forewarned from harboring her. WILLIAM HOLMES. June 14—7b.
By virtue of a decree of the honorable the Chancellor of Maryland, will be exposed to public sale on Monday the 17th day of July next, if fair, if not on the next day, on the premises, all the estate, rights, title, claim and interest of Nathaniel Washington of St. Mary's county, in and to a tract or parcel of land lying and being in St. Mary's county, on the Patuxent river, being part of a tract of land called Trent Neck, to which the said Nathaniel Washington is entitled in right of his wife Margaret Washington. This land is of a superior quality. Also— All the estate of the said Nathaniel Washington and Margaret his wife, in and to one other tract or parcel of land, lying in St. Mary's county aforesaid, being another part of the aforesaid-mentioned tract, called Trent Neck, situated in the forest, at the distance of three or four miles from the tract before mentioned. A more particular description of these tracts of land is deemed unnecessary. And there will be offered for sale at the same time and place, a variety of personal property of the said Nathaniel Washington, consisting of Negroes, Horses, Stock, Utensils and Household Furniture. The above property will be sold in such lots or parts to accommodate purchasers as shall be judged most advantageous. Terms of sale—A credit of twelve months, purchasers giving bond with sufficient security, and to be on interest from the day of sale. JOHN RALPH, Trustee. Charlotte Hall, St. Mary's County, June 13—4w.
ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS REWARD. FOR apprehending the following NEGRO MAN, the property of the subscriber, residing at Washington City, and who runs away on the night of the 14th inst. DAVID is of a dark color, about 25 years of age, and has lost a joint off one finger of his right hand. The other by the name of JIM, about 35 years of age, also stout made, has been sickly, and is of a jet black. David was bought of Major Calvert, Mount Airy, and it is expected will be about there. Jim was bought of Mr. Samuel G. Griffith, of Baltimore, and will no doubt make for that city. They are both old runaways, and will try to pass for free men. The above reward will be given for both, or half the sum for either, with reasonable charges. June 16—8t. JAMES CASSIN.
ROMULUS RIGGS, Has just received and opening at his New Cash Store, a complete and well selected assortment of SEASONABLE AND FANCY GOODS, which being purchased for money, gives him the opportunity of offering the same at Baltimore and Philadelphia Prices, As he is determined to sell for very small profits. He intends keeping on hand a good assortment of Goods, to be sold by the piece, and those who purchase to sell again, will be furnished at as low rates as they can purchase in any market in the United States, being determined to sell. CASH GIVER FOR TOBACCO Inspected at the Georgetown Warehouse. ROMULUS RIGGS.
THE upper part of the House I now occupy, which has just been finished. Rooms, and every necessary back building, all newly furnished and in complete order. The rent will be low to a prudent family, if application is immediately made. June 9—4t.
CITY AUCTIONEERS. THE subscribers beg leave to inform their friends and the public, that having given the security required by law, they obtained a license to sell goods, wares and merchandise at vendue in this city. To accommodate those who may be pleased to consign them, they have taken a commodious house in the street directly opposite the Marine Barracks, and from their close attention to business, they flatter themselves that they will give general satisfaction. MICHAEL S. QUEEN, HENRY M. QUEEN. May 29—4t.
TO BE SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION, At Northumberland court house, in the county of Northumberland, and state of Virginia, on Tuesday the 5th of September next, at 11 o'clock in the forenoon, five contiguous plantations, amounting together to about 2,700 acres, situate on the river Potomac, and within about three miles of the court house. These estates formerly belonged to Presley Thornton, Esq. and are the same on which he lived. They have never been seen by either of the subscribers but it is understood, that about 1700 acres of them are as valuable low grounds as any on the river, and a considerable part thereof is heavily timbered. The uplands consist of about 1000 acres, and the whole is well calculated for the production of corn, wheat, tobacco, timothy and small grain of all kinds, in great abundance. The waters are said to abound with excellent fish, oysters and wild fowl. The water carriage is easy and convenient to Norfolk, Baltimore, Alexandria and the city of Washington; and as these estates possess several good mill seats, with an abundance of water and a plentiful supply of timber, they must be very valuable. The premises will be shown to persons inclining to purchase, by col. James Moore, who lives on them, or by Samuel Blackwell, Esq., who lives near to them; and the terms of payment may be known a sufficient time before the sale, by applying to either of them, or to THOMAS ROBINSON, Near Chester, Delaware, Or to W. LEWIS, at Phila. June 7—4ds.
PATENT KNAPSACKS. THE Subscriber having obtained from the United States, a patent for an improved KNAPSACK, which in point of durability and convenience, has been pronounced by the best judges infinitely superior to any hitherto in use. The offers of the different volunteer companies in the United States, are respectfully solicited to adopt them. They may be had in any quantity, and will be sold on the most reasonable terms by JOHN P. LIEBERTE, 31, Market Street, New-York. To whom applications addressed by post may be made, or to B. H. Latrobe, at the city of Washington. May 19—eplm. Circuit Court, District of Columbia, County of Washington—June Term, 1809. Richard Soderstrom, vs. Samuel Goodman, George Little and Josiah Quincy. In Chancery. THE object of the bill filed in this case, is to compel Samuel Goodman to pay to the complainant the sum of money alleged by the bill to be due to the complainant for a judgment obtained against the said Goodman in the island of St. Thomas, and the amount of commissions and expenses due to said Soderstrom from said Goodman, and for monies disbursed by said Soderstrom for and on account of said Goodman. The bill states, that a decree in the supreme court of the United States was rendered in favor of said Goodman against said Little for a large sum of money on account of the capture of the brig Flying Fish and her cargo, the property of the said Goodman, a Danish Burgher of the island of St. Thomas, by the said Little, commander of the United States ship of war, the Boston. That the said Little, after the decree was pronounced, petitioned and obtained from the United States a sum of money to cover said decree, and to be specifically applied to the payment thereof. That the said money was received by Josiah Quincy, the attorney of said Little, and sufficient to satisfy the complainants demands, has been stopped and enjoined in the hands of said Quincy, out of which the complainant demands to be satisfied his claims, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court, that the said Little and Goodman respectively reside out of the district of Columbia and jurisdiction of this court. It is therefore ordered by this court, that the said Little and Goodman respectively be and appear in this court in person or by solicitor, on or before the fourth Monday of December next, to show cause why a decree should not be passed as prayed, and that this order be published for four successive weeks in the National Intelligencer and United States Gazette before the first day of August next. By order, June 16—cp4w. WM. BRENT, CLK.
RAZOR SOAP, And Water rendered unnecessary— By the incomparably newly invented shaving composition Cake, by a gentleman lately arrived in New-York from the Continent of Europe—by applying them with gentle friction to the beard they have the complete effect of shaving—And the public are assured that they do not contain a single article that can have the smallest tendency to injure the skin, but on the contrary after the removal of the beard they leave an agreeable smoothness and softness on the skin and entirely destroys cutaneous eruptions etc. which frequently occasion very disagreeable & distressing pain in shaving with a razor—They are now for sale at the house of Dr. Ott, Georgetown, at one and two dollars each, the one dollar cake will be sufficient for six months and two dollars for twelve. N. B. They are particularly useful for Military Gentlemen or Gentlemen travelling as they by sea or land. June 21—4t. MERCANT TAYLOR, RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia and Public in general, that he has received by a late arrival from Philadelphia, a Choice Assortment of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, simple and double milled, superfine Coatings, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment sponcelts & rich silk Molekins for Waistcoats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season. Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform style of fashion. Richard Norwell's celebrated PATENT PARALLEL SUSPENDERS far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms retail, as at his Manufactory. November 27—4t.
ORDERED, That the sale made by Solomon Holland, of the real estate of JAMES BEALL, as reported by him be ratified and confirmed unless cause to the contrary be shown before the 20th day of August next—provided, a copy of this order be published once in each of three successive weeks in the National Intelligencer before the 20th day of July next. The report states, that several tracts of land containing in the whole 270 1-2 acres were sold for $246 dollars. True copy—Test, NICHOLAS BREWER, June 16—w3t. Reg. Cur. Can.
TO BUTCHERS. THE subscriber has upwards of thirty head of very fat BEEF, cattle that he has been feeding some time. He wishes to dispose of them before harvest, but has not time to drive them to market. Butchers may have in them a good bargain, by calling at my farm, near Hagers Town, Washington county, Maryland. JOHN T. MASON. June 21—2w. THIRTY DOLLARS REWARD. ABSCONDED on Friday last from the subscriber's farm (near Queen Anne, Prince George's county, in the state of Maryland), Negro AARON, about thirty years old, short fellow, bow-legged, short fat nose, the end of his great toes turning to the second toe, so that there is a large bulge at the joint between the toe and foot. Had on when absconded, ticklenburgh shirt, short brown coarse roundabout and pantaloons; any person taking up said negro and bringing him home, or securing him in jail so that I get him again, shall receive the above reward, if taken thirty miles from home, or twenty dollars if taken nearer home than thirty miles. ISAAC DUCKETT. June 21—4t. LAND TO SELL OR EXCHANGE. I AM desirous to sell or exchange for lands lying below the Blue ridge, about 4000 acres of old Military land, situated in the county of Mason, state of Virginia, on the river Ohio, about 8 miles from the mouth of the Great Kanawha. Half of the above quantity is rich river bottom unsubject to fresher, and on which from 60 to 100 bushels of Indian corn has often been made to the acre. On a part of this land, intended to form a farm of 700 acres, and near the bank of the river, has lately been erected a single story framed dwelling, 40 feet by 20, with a stone walled cellar under the whole, rising 4 feet above the surface, which with little alteration might be made agreeable summer rooms. I will take for this land, as well as for a third part of 2000 acres on Kentucky river, and a third part of a military survey, in the forks of the Ohio and Tennessee, both valuable tracts all kinds of public securities or exchange as above. JOHN FENTON MERCER. Fredericksburg, June 9. Letters directed to me, Gallipolis, Ohio, after the 15th of July, will be attended to. June 21—3w.
St. Mary's county Court, March term, 1809. ON application to St. Mary's county Court, by petition in writing of FRANCIS HOWARD of St. Mary's county for the relief of the set of Assembly for the relief of sundry insolvent debtors passed at November session eighteen hundred and five and the several supplements thereto on the terms mentioned therein, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath, as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his petition, and the court being satisfied by competent testimony that the said Francis Howard has resided two years immediately preceding the time of his application, in the state of Maryland. It is thereupon ordered and adjudged that the said Francis Howard by causing a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer, once a week for three months before the 7th day of August next, give notice to his creditors to a pear before this court at the court house in Leonardtown in St. Mary's county, on the said 7th day of August next, for the purpose of recommending a trustee for their benefit, and to show cause if any they have, why the said Francis Howard should not have the benefit of the acts of Assembly aforesaid as prayed. Test JO. HARRIS, CLK. April 28—w3m Eleanor Hungerford, vs. Elizabeth Bourne, Doreas Bourne, Thomas Reynolds, Joseph Blake, James Heigh, and William B. Hungerford and Samuel Chew. In Chancery, May 13, 1809. The object of the bill is to make the real estate of Thomas Bourne liable for the payment of his debts, in lieu of the personal property, or if the personal property is applied to discharge the debts, the complainant, to whom said Thomas Bourne bequeathed the whole of the personal estate, may by substitution, stand in the place of the deceased's creditors, and to the extent of the personal property applied to the discharge of the debts, be reimbursed out of the real estate, also to recover a sum of money due from Samuel Chew for land in Kentucky sold him by the deceased. The bill states, Thomas Bourne bequeathed the whole of his personal property to the complainant, and made no disposition of the real, which on his death descended to the complainant, his sister, and Elizabeth and Doreas Bourne, his nieces. That the deceased sold to Samuel Chew, land in Kentucky for $2,000 dollars, the money to be paid out of Chew's proportion of Walter Smith's estate, sold under the act to regulate descents—that he gave orders to his agents, Blake, Reynolds, and Heigh, to pay the money out of the said fund, and hath since countermanded their orders. The bill also states, the deceased in all things complied with the contract made with Chew, and that he now has the land sold, and resides on it. It is thereupon, on motion of the complainant, ordered, that she cause a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer, once in each of three successive weeks before the first day of July next, to the end that the said Samuel Chew may have notice of this application, and may be warned to appear in court on or before the first day of November next, to show cause, if any there be, wherefore a decree should not pass as prayed. True copy—Test, NICHOLAS BREWER, Reg. Cur. Can June 7—w3t.
A CARD. DANCING. MR. FRANCIS, (assisted by Mr. Harris) of the Philadelphia Theatre, respectfully informs the citizens of Washington, that he will, during the stay of the company in this place, attend and instruct in private families. For particulars apply to Mr. F. at Lindsay's Hotel, Pennsylvania Avenue. June 21—3t. William Lorman, vs. Peggy M'Laughlin & others. In Chancery. ORDERED, That the sale made by Daniel Bussard, of the real estate of Charles M'Laughlin, deceased, as reported by him, be ratified and confirmed unless cause to the contrary be shown before the first Monday in January next, provided a copy of this order be published in the National Intelligencer for three weeks successively before the first day of October next. The report states that the whole of the property sold for four hundred and twenty-five dollars. By order, WM. BRENT, CLK. June 23—3w.
CHARLES J. NOURSE Offers for sale—Chateaux Margaux Claret in boxes of 1 dozen. Genuine Old London Particular wine in half pipes and quarter casks. Best Salad Oil in baskets of 6 bottles each, etc. etc. etc. George Town, May 24—4t.
UNITED STATES—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, TO WIT: In Chancery, December Term 1808. Benjamin Stoddert and John Mason, versus Thomas Waters Griffith, John R. Livingston, Jonathan Burrell, Gobaut and Doydry, James C. Montflorece, I. I. Picaud, James Davidson, Robert R. Livingston and Daniel Parker. THE bill states that the defendant Thomas Waters Griffith was the agent of the house of Taney and Simmond for the delivery of a cargo of flour belonging to the said Taney and Simmond to the French government—that the French government not being able to pay ready money for the said cargo the balance due thereon from the said government was placed to the credit of the said Griffith the agent, instead of being placed to the credit of the real owners Taney and Simmond; that the debt so due had been liquidated under the Louisiana Convention in the said Griffith's name, for the sum of one hundred and ninety thousand two hundred and seventy francs French money of the value of $5,675 dollars; that the said Thomas Waters Griffith, now residing and for several years past having resided in Baltimore city in the state of Maryland well knowing all the circumstances mentioned in the complaints said bill, and that the debt aforesaid was liquidated in his name in Paris, under the Louisiana Convention, was in truth and in fact a debt due to the said complainants, as the trustees of Francis Lewis Taney, and Taney and Simmond, did execute a writing transferring all the interest of said Griffith in the said debt due to the complainants as trustees aforesaid; that notwithstanding the above circumstances the said Griffith did employ James C. Montflorece of Paris to receive for his own account and use the aforesaid debt which actually belongs to the said complainants as trustees aforesaid; & the said Montflorece did actually receive the bills of the Minister of the United States on the Treasury of the United States in part payment of the said debt in four sets of bills drawn in favor of said Thomas Waters Griffith, and which bills have been fraudulently endorsed by the said Montflorece with a view as the said complainants believe to defraud them the said complainants, and under a real or pretended power from the said Griffith, & as his attorney to the said I. I. Picaud, who endorsed the same over to John R. Livingston who has endorsed the same over to Jonathan Burrell, cashier of the Bank of Discount and Deposit at New York, who has endorsed them over to James Davidson, cashier of the Branch Bank of the United States in the city of Washington, who now holds the same for collection. The complainants further state that four other bills, or the balance of the aforesaid claim on the French Government liquidated in the name of the said Griffith, but actually belonging to said complainants as trustees as aforesaid, have been drawn in favor of Gobaut and Doydry as transferees of Thomas Waters Griffith for thirty thousand francs, French Money of the value of $5,625 dollars, which said four bills have also been sent to the aforesaid James Davidson and endorsed over to him for collection, in the same manner as in the case of the four other bills first herein recited. That all the aforesaid eight bills of exchange drawn by the American Minister at Paris on the Treasury of the United States under the Louisiana Convention for the debt liquidated in the name of Thomas Waters Griffith, are actually the property of said complainants as trustees aforesaid. The object of the bill is to save and protect the said complainants from the fraud projected against them on the part of the said Thomas Waters Griffith, and his coadjutors, and to obtain a writ of injunction, directed to all the before-mentioned defendants, &c. and particularly to the said James Davidson enjoining him & commanding him, from paying over to any person besides the said complainants, the money that may be paid by the Treasury of the United States, in virtue of the said bills of exchange, and particularly enjoining the said James Davidson from paying the said money arising from the said bills or parting with the said bills, until the further order of this Court in the premises. It is represented by the complainants that the said Thomas W. Griffith, John R. Livingston, Jonathan Burrell, Gobaut and Doydry, James C. Montflorece and I. I. Picaud, defendants in this cause, all reside out of the District of Columbia, and are not within the reach of the process of this Court. And whereas further, in the supplemental bill filed in this cause, in which bill the said Robert R. Livingston and Daniel Parker are made defendants, reciting the substance of the said original bill, further states that Daniel Parker, a non-resident of the District of Columbia who resides in Paris in France was concerned in the fraudulent assignment of the bills of exchange mentioned in the said original bill, that the said Parker at the time he procured the assignment of said bills knew that the claim for which the same were drawn as liquidated in the name of Thomas W. Griffith was the bona fide property of the complainants, and had been properly before transferred and assigned to them, and also that the said Robert R. Livingston is not a resident of the said District of Columbia, but resides in the state of New York, and is the person really claiming the proceeds of the said bills, and prays that he may be made a party to said bill and compelled to answer to the facts stated in the original bill—Also that said Parker may state the circumstances, attending the pretended transaction between Picaud and Montflorece the defendants, whether he paid any consideration and what to Picaud & Montflorece, and whether he did not know, or whether he had not received notice of the complainants claim and right at the time of or before the said transfer. The object of the bill is to obtain a decree in favor of the complainants, ordering and decreeing the monies for which said bills are drawn, now in the hands of James Davidson, to be paid over to the said complainants as the assignees of Taney and Simmond, and to enjoin the defendants and each of them from paying over or receiving the same until the decision of the court in the premises. It is therefore ordered that the complainants cause a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer, printed in the city of Washington, six weeks successively previous to the fourth Monday in December next, to the intent that the said defendants may have notice of this application, and of the object of this bill and to be warned to appear in this court in person or by solicitor on or before the said fourth Monday of December next, to show cause, if any, why a decree should not pass as prayed. By order, WM. BRENT, CLK. May 3—17
Washington, June 22. AT a general meeting of the citizens of Washington, without distinction of party, at Long's Hotel, for making arrangements to celebrate the 4th of July next, pursuant to public notice previously given. ROBERT BRENT was appointed Chairman, JOHN LAW Secretary. It was unanimously resolved that a committee of thirteen be appointed to make arrangements for a public dinner on the 4th of July next, and the following gentlemen were appointed to compose the committee. Robert Brent, Daniel Carroll of D. Franklin, Wharton, John Cassin, Richard Forrest, John Graham, Samuel H. Smith, John P. Van Ness, Elias B. Caldwell, George Blagden, Thomas Munroe, William Cranch, John Davidson. ROBERT BRENT, Chairman. JOHN LAW, Secretary. The gentlemen composing the committee are requested to meet at Long's Hotel this evening (the 23d inst.) at 7 o'clock. THE JOINT COMMITTEE from the Democratic Citizens of the District of Columbia, for making Arrangements for the Celebration of the ensuing Anniversary of our NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE, is composed of the following persons: FOR WASHINGTON CITY. Joel Barlow, Walter Jones, James H. Blake, Corns. Cunningham. FOR GEORGE TOWN. John Mason, Charles A. Beatty, Thos. Corcoran, John Ott. FOR ALEXANDRIA. Alexander Smith, Joseph Dean, John Longden, Cave Withers. June 23—
POSTPONEMENT OF SALES. THE sales of Lots No. 16 and 17, in sq. No. 101, with the buildings thereon, formerly the property of Mr. Samuel Wilson, dec. and Lot No. 3, in sq. No. 161, with the dwelling house and slaughter house thereon, formerly the property of Daniel Guyen, which was advertised for public sale on the 15th of this month, are postponed until the 29th of the same month, on which day the sales will take place on the respective premises: for the former property at ten o'clock in the forenoon, and for the latter, Slaughter House, etc. at five o'clock in the afternoon. Terms of payment for the property the same as per former advertisements. The above property will be sold at private sale previous to the day, if application be made to the subscriber. S. SPEARE. June 16—429th.
In Chancery, June 16, 1809. Wm. Tunnicliff vs. The heirs at law of Basil Warring, and Jasper Wirt. The object of the bill filed in this cause is to obtain a decree for recording a deed executed by Basil Warring and Jasper Wirt to Erasmus Gantt, on the 19th day of May, 1794, for conveying to the said Erasmus Gantt, a tract or parcel of land, lying in Prince George's county, called Scotland, and also a tract or part of the tract of land called Scotland aforesaid, conveyed to the said Jasper Wirt, by a certain Jacob Wirt, also a small parcel of land heretofore bought by said Jasper Wirt, of a person by the name of Conn, for which said Jasper has made payment and obtained receipt, but no conveyance yet made by said Conn, or his heirs, adjoining or contiguous to the aforesaid tract of land called Scotland. The bill states, that the said Basil Warring hath departed this life, leaving Thomas W. Warring, Basil Warring, Edward Warring, Eleanor Warring, Jane Beall, wife of Walter B. Beall, Mary Mitchell, wife of Doctor Spencer Mitchell, Sally Warring, Priscilla Gantt, wife of John Gantt, and Ann Warring, his heirs at law. That the said Jasper Wirt hath also departed this life, leaving Henry Wirt, Barbara Tilley, Eliza Farrai, wife of Thomas Farrai, a grand daughter, Barbara Beckett, wife of Beckett, William Crown, Elisha Wood and Susannah Wood, Mummer, wife of Christian Mummer, his heirs at law. That the said Henry Wirt, Mary Mitchell, wife of Doctor Spencer Mitchell, and Priscilla Gantt, wife of John Gantt, reside out of the state. That the said Erasmus Gantt also resides out of the state. The bill also states that the omission to record the said deed was without any fraudulent design or intention in any person whatever. It is thereupon adjudged and ordered, that the complainant by causing a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer once in each of three successive weeks before the 20th day of July next, give notice to the said absent defendants, or such other person or persons as may conceivably be interested to appear in person or by a solicitor of this court, on or before the 20th day of November next, to show cause, if any they have, wherefore a decree should not be passed as prayed. True Copy—Test, NICHOLAS BREWER, Reg. Cur. Can. June 23—w3t.
PUBLIC SALE. Valuable unimproved LOTS in the city of Washington, for sale at Auction on Saturday the 1st of July, 1809, at Belade's hotel, at 3 o'clock. FIVE LOTS in Square 219, Nos. 3, 4, 6, 10, and 11; the two first are situated on an eminence in direct view of the President's House, with a beautiful prospect of the river Potomac; they are in a very salubrious situation, and excellent water can be procured at a small expense. For a gentleman's dwelling house, there is not a superior spot in the whole city. Three Lots in Square 168, Nos. 9, 10 & 11; the situation of these Lots is valuable for business. They lie in the neighborhood of Dr. Dacey, Caleb Syvum, John Taylor and many others; No. 9 is a corner Lot, well situated for a store, it being in the thickest settled part of the city and near to the War Office; the adjoining Lots are built on. Three Lots in square 458, Nos. 1, 2, 3; these Lots are situated back of Mr. Weightman's book-store and Lindsay's hotel and are contiguous to the public market. The plat of the foregoing squares and lots can be seen by applying to the subscriber, who will show the premises. Title indisputable. SAMUEL SPEARE, Auc. N. B. The above property will be shown to persons inclined to purchase, on application to said speaker, previous to the day of sale. June 23—3t.
PATENT WASHING MACHINE. A Newly Invented Patent Washing Machine, far superior to any heretofore in use, may be had, of the subscriber, who has the Patent Right for the district of Columbia. I am so well satisfied of the inestimable value of this machine from a trial of one of them more than two months, that I purpose to have one made, that any family wishing to purchase can first make actual trial. JNO. THOMAS, Auc. May 24—3&wtf