The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1804-12-26 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER, AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. V.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. DCLIX.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 26th, 1804.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19.
Debate on the report of the committee of Elections on the petition of sundry citizens of the county of Washington, in the State of Pennsylvania, complaining of an undue election and return of John Hoge, to serve in this House as one of the representatives for said state.
The report being read as follows: "That William Hoge, member of the House of Representatives for the eighth Congress, having by letter to the governor of the state of Pennsylvania, dated the 15th of October, resigned his seat in Congress; the governor in pursuance of the provisions made in the second section of the first article of the constitution of the United States, issued a writ of election to supply the vacancy which had thus taken place; That the said writ was issued on the 22nd day of October, and the election directed to be held on the 2d day of November, eleven days after the date of the said writ; that the writ was brought by the mail to the Prothonotary's office in Washington, on the 30th of October, but not proclaimed by the sheriff till the 31st."
"It appears to the committee, that though by the second section of the first article of the constitution of the United States, it is made the duty of the executive authority of the respective states to issue writs of election to fill vacancies, yet by the fourth section of the aforesaid article, it is made the duty of the legislature of each state to prescribe the times, places and manner for holding such elections. It appears, however, that several elections to supply vacancies in Congress, have been heretofore held in Pennsylvania, yet on examining the laws of that state, it appears that no law exists prescribing the times, places and manner of holding elections to supply such vacancies as may happen in the representation in Congress, and consequently if the election of John Hoge is, on this account, set aside, no election can be held to supply the vacancy until the legislature of the state enact a law for that purpose."
"By the law for the general election of representatives to Congress for Pennsylvania, the sheriff is to give thirty days notice before the election, and to make the returns within thirty days after it. This election is held near five months before the expiration of the existing Congress. By the law of said state for supplying vacancies in the state legislature, the Speakers of the respective Houses shall issue writs to supply vacancies that may happen, giving at least ten days notice. The governor, in the case now before the committee, has directed the election to be held on the same day, &c. on which the electors for President and Vice-President were to be chosen. There is no proof before the committee of any abuse in the manner of conducting the election in obedience to the writ issued by the governor."
"While the committee are of opinion, that the legislature of Pennsylvania ought to have appointed as near as might be the times, as well as the places and manner of holding elections to supply vacancies in Congress, and that in ordinary cases a longer period ought to intervene between the time of public notice and the day of holding the election, yet considering the special circumstances connected with the election of John Hoge, and particularly that the election took place on the day fixed by the state legislature for the appointment of electors for the state of Pennsylvania, the committee are of opinion that John Hoge is entitled to a seat in this House."
MR. LEIB was opposed to the report of the Committee of elections; he thought it a duty, therefore, to assign the reasons of his opposition.—Were not the report to operate as a precedent for future decisions, he should have contented himself with a silent vote; but on this occasion, he could not forbear expressing his dissent to the doctrine advanced by the committee in support of the seat of the sitting Member.
The committee had made four points in their report.
That the constitution gives to the Executive of the state the power of issuing writs of election to supply vacancies. That if the election of Mr. Hoge be set aside no election can be held to supply the vacancy until the Legislature of Pennsylvania passes a law regulating special elections.
That there exists no law in Pennsylvania for the regulation of special elections
for members of Congress, and that the notice by the Governor was sufficient, because it directed the election to be held on the same day on which the electors of a President and Vice President of the United States were to be chosen.
He would not deny, that the constitution of the United States gave to the executive the power of issuing writs of election to supply vacancies; but he denied the power of the executive to prescribe the manner and to fix the time of holding the election. In the fourth section of the first article of the constitution it is declared, that "the time, place, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof," it is evident, therefore, that although the executive may have the power of notifying the vacancy and directing it to be supplied, yet that he cannot prescribe the time, the place, or the manner of carrying it into effect, this power being specifically delegated to the legislature. If he can prescribe the time, he certainly can prescribe the place and the manner; for the doctrine contended for implies an absolute discretion: and if the place and the manner be also placed in executive hands, he is vested with an absolute controul over all special elections.—Are the committee prepared to sanction such a doctrine? Will they admit, that elections, on which the safety and fate of the nation may sometimes depend, shall rest upon executive will?
Under the construction given to the constitution by the committee of elections, the Governor may have directed all the citizens of Washington County to hold the election at the town of Washington, or at any other town he pleased, and he may have conveyed the superintendence of it to other officers than those appointed by the people.—the power to issue writs of election to supply vacancies comprehended every incidental power, and the special election was wholly dependent upon executive discretion!
He agreed with the committee of elections in the second point, that if no law exists to regulate special elections and the election of Mr. Hoge is set aside, no election can be held to supply the vacancy, until the legislature of the state shall enact a law for that purpose; but he contended that a law did exist, and that the general rule governed the special case.—The law for the regulation of the general election for members of Congress was the rule on this subject, and this rule ought to have governed the special case in question. By this law thirty days notice is to be given; but in this instance only one day's notice was allowed. If thirty days notice were deemed not more than sufficient for a general election, surely a special election, not less important to the district, required an equal time for information to be diffused and consideration to be matured; and if this notice pointed out by the law had been given, he would dare affirm that the result would have been extremely different.
The committee of elections suppose, that because the election was notified for the day on which electors of a President and Vice President were to be chosen, therefore, it was a sufficient notice. The testimony upon the table shewed that only one day's notice had been given, that the writ had not been received until the 30th, and that the advertisement of the sheriff was not even prepared for publication until the nation of the 31st of October; the notice, therefore, could not have issued until the morning of the first of November, one day before the election was to be held.—The county of Washington comprehended not less than six election districts, and is extensive, and he would ask, how it was possible for the electors to be informed in one day? He averred that even in Philadelphia, where there were so many daily prints, and where information could travel with much rapidity, that even there, one day's notice of an election would not enable the people to be informed, and could not be done in the county of Washington where the population was diffused over an extensive surface? It certainly could not.
The notice of an election for electors was no notice of an election for a member of Congress.—The electoral election excited little attention, because it was not disputed, and as there was no opposition the people remained at home; how then did this operate as a notice? Those only who attended the election could have been informed! and was the notice to them to be taken as a notice to all? Would a notification of an election for charter officers in any of our towns be deemed a notice of an election for a legislator of the United States, and
if not, by what process could the notice in the present case be made to apply? Are the rights of the people to be held by such a tenure as is implied in this doctrine? He trusted not, and he hoped, therefore, that the committee of the whole would not affirm the report of the committee of elections.
MR. FINDLEY said, that being chairman of the committee of elections it was his duty to give information to the committee of the whole house, of the principles on which that committee made their report; that in order to do this, it was necessary to state in what manner the case was submitted to the committee of elections. This he said was the more necessary, as no election had ever heretofore been contested before Congress on the same principles. No opposing candidate claimed the seat; no unlawful vote was even suggested to have been given; no officer entrusted with conducting the election was charged with error or corruption. There were two points alone therefore on which the decision must rest. The one was the constitutional authority of the governor to issue a writ to supply the vacancy that had happened; the other was whether the governor had exercised that authority in an incorrupt or unjustifyable manner. He said that the committee of elections had not been unanimous in approving of the report, that two had voted against and four for it; that in this case, it not being necessary, he had not given his opinion, but that now when the report was brought before the committee of the whole House, and the case having originated in the state which he represented and with whose laws and practice respecting elections he ought to be acquainted, he claimed indulgence and attention in offering some further explanations on the subject. For this purpose he would examine the constitution as far as it related to the case. In the second section of the first article of the constitution it is said, "when vacancies happen in the representation of any state the executive authority thereof shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies."
In the fourth section of the same article it is said, "the times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof, but Congress may at any time, by law, make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing senators."
MR. F. said that on these constitutional provisions there was a difference of opinion; that ever since the commencement of the federal government, he had understood the general opinion to be, that the fourth section related solely to the general elections of senators and representatives, but not to supplying vacancies that might happen; that the state of Pennsylvania, and several other states, had uniformly acted agreeably to this construction of the constitution; that the state of Pennsylvania had enacted five different congressional election laws, all differing in several principles from each other, three of which he had assisted in preparing, but on all these occasions, though influenced by different parties, there had been but one opinion on this subject and but one practice. In all cases the issuing writs to fill vacancies was left to the discretion of the executive, and in, he believed, four if not five cases which had happened previous to the present, the practice had been agreeable to this opinion. He said that he did not maintain that his opinion or the opinion of the state he represented, on which it had so uniformly acted, decided the true sense of the constitution; but he was still of opinion that it seemed to be the fairest construction, at least in cases where the legislature had not interfered. The executive shall issue writs, is the language of command; it renders the issuing the writ an indispensable duty. The fourth section is equally positive in enjoining on the legislature to appoint the times, places and manner of appointing senators as of representatives; yet in the third section the executive is authorised to appoint senators to supply vacancies in the recess of the legislature, and this is done probably to every Congress; but he believed the legislature of no one state had prescribed any rules for supplying vacancies in the senate, though the constitutional injunction in that case on the executive, is certainly not so positively expressed as with respect to issuing writs to supply vacancies which may happen in the representatives. Taking the fourth section of the first article of the constitution literally as it applies to the general elections, it is impossible for the legislature to mention the day on which a vacancy may happen, or consequently to appoint the day on which an election to supply
a vacancy should be held, as it can do with the general election, therefore it appears evident that the constitution does not contemplate legislative interference in this case, though it does not restrain the legislature from establishing rules respecting it if they choose to do so.
MR. F. said, that from a view of the constitutional provisions respecting elections and some other objects, it had been the opinion of many that they were designedly calculated to give a latitude to the states to vary their conduct with respect to forms and circumstances, provided the essentials were preserved; on this ground only can the great variety of practice under these rules, and all admitted by Congress, be accounted for. The 1st section of the 2nd article of the constitution directs, that "each state shall appoint in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, &c." From these words Pennsylvania and several other states have always been of opinion, and practised accordingly, that it was the duty of the state legislatures to prescribe the manner or rules agreeably to which the citizens should appoint the electors; but the legislature of New York, and perhaps some other states, have always not only prescribed the rules or manner, but have themselves appointed the electors. This he said was more essential to the rights of the citizens than the case now before the committee, and yet, though universally known had been in every instance admitted by Congress. The rule for the representation in each state has been prescribed by the constitution, yet in many states the representatives are chosen at a general election, in others in single districts, in other states even in Pennsylvania some districts choose three members, some two, and some but one, but all of them may be chosen from any part of the state. Some other states have been divided indeed into single districts and obliged to vote for candidates residing within their respective districts. He said he would not detain the committee with further instances of the various and yet approved practices under the constitution, but hoped that even the members who might be of opinion that Pennsylvania had not given the constitution in the instance in question, the most correct construction, that yet they would duly consider other instances of variety of construction, which had hitherto passed not only without objection or complaint, but with approbation.
MR. F. said, that since this case was referred to the election committee, he had heard the opinion of the constitutional provisions, agreeably to which Pennsylvania had acted, called in question, but never before; that the objections were new to him, but that on examining the laws of different states, he had discovered that the legislatures of two or three states, though they had not literally prescribed the times for holding elections to supply vacancies, yet they had prescribed such rules to the executive in doing so as answered the same purpose, and though they did right, but Pennsylvania and some other states had not done so in any instance, and that in no instance before the present had an election been questioned, because the legislature had not appointed these rules. The legislature of Pennsylvania not having prescribed any rules to the executive to regulate his duty in issuing writs to supply vacancies, did not release the governor from the constitutional responsibility of performing a duty so positively and unconditionally enjoined. Hence, MR. F. concluded, that the election could not be set aside, merely on the account of the legislature not having enacted a law to prescribe the time of holding the election, the governor had acted in obedience to express word of the constitution, and violated no law of the state. Setting aside this election on this ground, would virtually annul all the elections to supply vacancies in Congress that had ever taken place in the state of Pennsylvania and in some other states. By the fourth section of the first article of the constitution, Congress is authorised by law to prescribe the time, place and manner of holding elections, but this must be done by law, not by a vote of the House, after an election was over, therefore that power cannot apply to this case; Congress has passed no such law.
MR. F. said, if the report of the committee was rejected, it must be on other ground than this.—It could not be because the Executive exercised his constitutional discretion, but because he had exercised it in a corrupt, or in such an indiscreet or improper manner as to vitiate the election. This was a fair sub-
ject of enquiry, on which there might, and probably would, be a difference of opinion, and with respect to which he admitted the propriety of several of the objections made by his colleagues, who had just sat down (Dr. Leib.) The governor, it appears, issued the writ immediately on the resignation of William Hoge coming to hand.—He directed the election to be held on the same day as the general election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President. The writ, it appears, lay one day in the prothonotary's office before it was proclaimed, the sheriff and prothonotary being from home. The notice after proclamation before the election was only a part of three days, and not sufficient time for the citizens to be informed of it at their homes, notwithstanding that it is the smallest district in the state, out of those who did attend at their respective districts to vote for electors were actually informed by persons sent for the purpose. That this was the case was proposed to the committee, to be proved by the sitting member, but that fact appearing to be admitted by the petitioners, such proof was thought unnecessary. It appeared probable to the committee that the district at the seat of justice at which the governor's writ first arrived, had the advantage of earlier information than other districts; but this was incidental, and as the prothonotary to whose office the writ came and was opened, and the sheriff, &c. were opposed to the election of the sitting member, they had at least an equal advantage of the earliest notice, and those most zealous for the electoral ticket were not supposed to be his friends. Partial or fraudulent intention is not complained of by the petitioners; they are indeed few in number, and appear to have all had the earliest notice; there is no petition from any citizens complaining that they themselves were deprived of their vote for want of notice. The election for the choice of electors was not so numerous as was reasonably expected, but if the governor had given the ten days notice directed by law, for filling vacancies in the state legislature, and claimed by the petitioners, this would have happened in about a week after the other; respecting which the probability justified by all experience in Pennsylvania is, that it would have been still less numerous. This appears to have been the governor's opinion; it was also the opinion of several of his colleagues from the eastern parts of the state, who had seen and been informed by the governor that he had issued the writ, and who had first informed himself that it had been so issued. They, and all his other colleagues with whom he had conversed on the subject, he understood approved of the governor's conduct till they heard of the result of the election, and there was no proof before the committee that the shortness of the notice operated in favour of the sitting member more than the other candidate. All the votes given for both candidates agreed in voting for the same electors, notwithstanding that there was little time for concert.—On the whole, MR. F. concluded, that as the issue of the election had occasioned exceptions to be taken to the shortness of the notice, he wished that longer notice had been given, though he had approved of issuing the writ; but as it was conducted under an authority vested by the constitution, on the same principle which had been always acted on in Pennsylvania and several other states, and never heretofore objected to by Congress, which was the only competent judge in the case, and as no corrupt intention or abuse was complained of, he thought it his duty to vote in favour of the report of the committee of elections. If the election was set aside till a law would be passed to prescribe the time, probably the district would not be represented this session, which he thought an argument of weight, but of little importance compared with deciding the principle; in doing which, if the report of the committee of elections was rejected, the decision might virtually vacate the seats of other members, and was to condemn all the elections heretofore made in Pennsylvania and some other states, to supply vacancies in the House of Representatives.
MR. J. CLAY could not agree with the Committee of Elections in the opinion that there was no law in Pennsylvania regulating the place and manner of holding special elections for members of Congress to supply any vacancy which might occur in the representation from the state; by turning to the law respecting general elections he found that members of Congress were to be chosen by the inhabitants qualified to

of the most numerous branch of the state legislature and that those elections were to be held at the same places, conducted in the same manner, and by the same officers as the elections for members of assembly. In cases of general elections therefore there could be no difference of opinion, and as these were to be governed in both cases by the same rules, it was fair to infer that special elections for representatives to Congress were to be conducted in the same manner as special elections to fill vacancies in the legislature of the state. By the laws of Pennsylvania it appears that in cases of vacancy in the representation of any county, the Speaker is to issue a writ at least fifteen days before an election can be held, and the sheriff of the county must make proclamation at least ten days notice to the people. The reason of the law was evident, it was intended to prevent the people from being surprised, and to give them time to look round for suitable persons to represent them. If the reason was good as it applied to the state representatives, who were all chosen in single counties, it was more so as it applied to representatives to Congress who are chosen in districts composed in some instances of three or more counties. He therefore was of opinion that they should be governed by the same law. The committee had however been told by his colleague (Mr. Findley) that the legislature never intended to make any law on the subject, that they conceived that they had no power, that the constitution of the United States by saying that in case of vacancy in the representation of any state, the executive thereof should issue a writ of election to fill such vacancy was imperative, and by making it the duty of the governor to issue such writ gave him the sole power of regulating the time, manner and place of holding the election and precluded all legislative interference. We were not to judge of the law by the alleged intention of the legislature, if they had mistaken their own powers or the powers of the executive, their mistake was not to govern the decisions of Congress. All we had to do was to enquire whether there was a law, whether that law applied to the case, and whether its provisions had been complied with. But he could not suppose that the assembly had so far misconceived the constitution. By the first section of the first article of that instrument the state legislatures were empowered to regulate the time, place and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives to Congress. This power was not confined to general elections, but must necessarily extend to elections to fill vacancies. It was true that in special cases they could not direct the precise time, but they might prescribe the notice which should be given, and shall we be told that because the very day cannot be named, the number of days which shall intervene between the proclamation of the sheriff and the election shall not be fixed by law? The notice is part of the manner; and the legislature though they cannot fix the time may fix, and have fixed the places and manner. It is true the executive is compelled by the second section of the first article of the constitution to issue a writ of election to supply a vacancy, but this writ he contended was merely a notification. It gave no power, no discretion. If the governor had a discretion it might extend to the place and manner. The north-west district of the state is very extensive and under this discretion the governor might so direct an election that in case of vacancy the town of Pittsburgh alone might be notified and would alone vote for the member to supply that vacancy. But the case of a choice of a Senator during the recess of the legislature had been referred to as analogous to that of representatives. If the Senators were chosen by the people the case would be in point. Senators when vacancies happen during the recess of the legislature are chosen by the executive, and therefore there was no necessity for the legislature to prescribe either the time, place or manner, as it would be absurd to suppose that the governor should notify himself, or change his residence in order to make an appointment. Would it be argued that it was therefore unnecessary to give the people due notice of an election for representatives? Surely not.
But, said Mr. Clay, the governor has himself recognized the law in the very writ; were not the same officers appointed to conduct this election as were appointed to conduct the general election? Were not the ballots given in the same manner, counted by the same persons, and returned by the same judges? Whence did they derive their authority but from the law? and the law ought to have been complied with in every other respect. It is true an election was to be held throughout Pennsylvania for electors of President and Vice President; the governor authorized by the most laudable motives, in order to save the county of Washington the expense of a special election, directed that a member of Congress should be chosen on the same day to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Mr. Hoge. But the committee would recollect that although the people knew
did not, they could not know of the intended choice of a Representative. In Pennsylvania the people do not at in some of the southern states, all meet at one place in the county to give their votes. No, each county is divided into a number of districts in each of which an election is held, so that no person has more than a few miles to go to the poll. The county of Washington is divided into six or eight of these districts. The sheriff's proclamation was issued on the first day of November and the election was held on the second. Although the people of the town of Washington and its immediate neighbourhood might receive due notice, it was in possible that those who resided and voted in the remote parts of the county should. Indeed it was evident that they did not. An election for electors was held on the same day. It was generally known that no opposition was intended, and the people were therefore less anxious about the result. The electors were chosen by a general ticket throughout the state, the votes of any one county were therefore deemed of comparatively little importance; this was not the case however with a representative in Congress. The county of Washington forms a district for the choice of one member, the people of that county not having the co-operation of any other part of the state, necessarily depended for success upon their own vigilance and exertions. Yet what was the result? the bare majority given for electors exceeded the whole number of votes given both for the sitting member and for the rival candidate. It was therefore evident that the people had not notice sufficient of the congressional election. Mr. C. did not mean to impeach the motives of the governor; on the contrary he thought them praiseworthy; but substance ought not to be sacrificed to form; The object of elections was that the majority of the people might have an opportunity of giving their fair and unbiased suffrages, in the choice of persons to represent them, and if through any mistaken construction, however pure might be the intentions of the executive or of the legislature, this object was defeated in an election, it was a manifest violation of the rights of the people and ought not to be confirmed. This opportunity was not given in the present instance or the sitting member would not have been returned. Conceiving this to be the case and believing that the people had not that notice which by law they ought to have had, he considered the election void and should vote against the report of the committee.
Mr. Findley said, if the subject before the committee of the whole was an election law he would cheerfully subscribe to many of his colleague's (Mr. Clay's) observations. He admitted that Congress had a constitutional authority to make laws which would prescribe rules to regulate the exercise of the executive discretion in issuing writs to supply vacancies, but neither Congress nor the state legislature have made such laws, but left it in the hands of the executive who is under an unconditional constitutional obligation to issue such writs, and who in Pennsylvania and other states always has done so, and the returns of elections on these writs have in all cases passed the decision of the committees of elections, and received the approbation of Congress. Therefore, as he had said before, the question turned more properly on the discreet or proper use of the executive discretion than the right of exercising it.
In order to prove that the governor in the case before us had acted indirectly, Mr. F. said his colleague had observed how unreasonable it would have been for the governor to have issued a writ with such short notice to a district which he had named, and which consists of three counties, and sends two members. The petitioners themselves argue from the extent of the Alleghany districts which contains eight counties thinly settled, and is spread over an extent of territory larger than some whole states. He thought it unfair to argue, that because the governor gave such short notice to the least extensive and least numerous district in the state, a district consisting of one thickly settled county, and which had a representative for less than 30,000 inhabitants, to correspond with another very important general election, the day on which it was to be held had been so long proclaimed that every man knew it, to charge the governor with indiscretion equal to what it would have been had he given but the same notice to the most extensive and dispersedly settled districts at a time when no general election made it the duty of the citizens to be present on the election ground, was improper. As it was the governor's conduct, and that only, that was called in question in this case, it was proper to observe that though his colleague was justified in saying they had but one day's official notice, yet in fact they had had a part of two other days, and the writ having laid one day open in the prothonotary's office, as was understood before it was proclaimed, through the absence of the sheriff, was not the fault of the governor. If the governor had done wrong he did not wish to extenuate his offence, but he thought it improper to magnify the
charge by supposed cases so essentially different. Mr. F. observed that his colleague (Mr. Clay) had maintained that the general congressional election law of Pennsylvania applied also to the case of filling vacancies, and that it made it the duty of the governor to give 30 days notice before the election. If the gentleman would examine that law he would find his opinion incorrect, it did not make it the duty of the governor to give any notice. This duty was enjoined on the sheriff of each county. The sheriffs are enjoined to give 30 days notice, and was allowed 30 days after the election to make their returns, after the returns were lodged in the secretary's office, it was made the duty of the governor by proclamation to give public notice to the members elected, and to transmit the returns to the speaker of the house of representatives in Congress. The governor was not authorized by the constitution or the laws of Pennsylvania, to issue a writ for holding any election whatever. The authority of issuing a writ in the case in question, was solely derived from the constitution of the United States. This law could not be applied to elections to fill vacancies without absurdity. The sheriff has 60 days for giving the public notice and making the returns, adding to this a reasonable time for the governor to make proclamation, and the candidate at a distant part of the state before he could go to Congress, in most cases the session would be over before the vacancy could be filled. The petitioners themselves argue much more reasonably when they apply the law for filling vacancies in the state legislature to this case, this law makes it the duty of the sheriff to give ten days notice after he receives the writ from the speaker of the house, but commands the speaker of the respective houses in all cases, when the houses are not in session to direct the vacancy to be filled at a general election. This is a reasonable law for the purpose, but prescribes no duty to the governor, nor is binding on him, yet the executives have always acted as nearly to it in filling vacancies in Congress, as circumstances would permit, and in this case it was only varied agreeably to the spirit of that law in favor of the publicity of the day on which an important general election was to be held; but supposing the obligation of the general election law on the executive in this case, the election officers having done their duty, is urged as a proof either that the general election law applied to this case, or that the election is void, because it was not conducted by officers authorized for the purpose. A brief explanation will remove the force of this argument.
By the laws of Pennsylvania, the election officers appointed annually for the election held on the second Tuesday of October, are to discharge the duties of their respective trusts at all elections by the citizens for national purposes throughout the year. The constitution of Pennsylvania prescribes the manner, that citizens shall vote, by ballot, &c. The laws of Pennsylvania institute the election officers and prescribe their duty. The constitution of the state and of the United States, and the laws of the state declare the officer that shall be voted for, if the election officers conduct elections for officers not instituted by any of these authorities, it is void. Otherwise it is valid. It will not be said that an election to fill vacancies in Congress, is not authorized by the constitution of the United States, or that the governor's writ did not sufficiently authorize the election officers.
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28.
Debate on the bill for authorizing the erection of a Dam or Causeway from Mason's Island to the Western shore of the Potomac.
[The reporter conceiving the bill under consideration so peculiarly local to the district of Columbia as not to involve a single point of general interest in relation to the union, had left the chamber of the House of Representatives for a few minutes—when he returned he found the subject growing into importance, and as the debate advanced the interest of the adjoining states mingled with some constitutional questions and constructions, induced him to listen with attention; he however took but very brief notes. The omission is not on his part so much a matter of regret, as it would have been, had there not since arisen a very elaborate debate, reiterating not only all the ideas and arguments of this day, but much additional matter, of which he has taken copious notes for the next publication.]
Mr. MACON, (Speaker) moved to strike out the first section of the bill, with a view of trying its merits. Mr. J. RANDOLPH seconded the motion of his respectable friend (the Speaker.) The river Potomac was the joint property of the states of Maryland and Virginia under compact between those states. This property, at least on the part of Virginia, had never been relinquished. Congress, in his conception, had no right to pass the law in question. But if they had—there was another objection. The corporation of George
Town were empowered to lay a tax which would be unequal and oppressive, since the property on which it was to be levied would not be equally benefited by deepening the harbour, supposing that effect to be accomplished. He hoped a prompt rejection of the bill would serve as a general notice to the inhabitants of the district to desist from their daily and frivolous applications to Congress to the great obstruction of the public business.
Mr. SMITH understood there was a rival interest between the towns of Alexandria and George Town, and as this rivalry had been exhibited on many former occasions, he deemed it proper before they passed any bill for the encouragement of either place, that the parties should be obliged to publish their intentions some weeks before the application, that if there were any objections to the measure contemplated, they might be before the House at the same time. He stated this merely as a ground of postponement, not saying whether he was in favor or against the measure.
Mr. Gregg thought the House bound to legislate for these people, until they relinquished the claim to the jurisdiction either by authorising them to legislate for themselves, or receding them to the states to which they originally belonged. He approved of the idea of publishing as expressed by his colleague (Mr. S.) which he considered absolutely necessary. If Alexandria were opposed to the bill, it is probable they would have sent in a memorial on the subject before this time; their not having done so inclined him to believe that they were satisfied that the measure should go into operation. He did not think the bill perfect, but nevertheless he should not oppose its progress.
Mr. Lewis said the land holders of Georgetown had very generally signed the petition to Congress. And no person out of the walls of this House gave it opposition—The people of Alexandria were content, and the owner of the island and the west shore of the river was the person most likely to be affected, yet he had given it his hearty assent. He was well persuaded that no injury would be done to the navigation of the Eastern branch, or to the port of Alexandria; if therefore they could render a benefit to George-town, without injuring any other property, he trusted the House would agree to the bill.
Mr. Sloan felt interested in the result of this measure. The people here have no body to look to but Congress to make legislative provision for their well being; he therefore considered it a duty to attend to their desires; but he wished the applicants to give notice of their intentions, in order that any person conceiving himself likely to be aggrieved should have an opportunity of being heard. This was the usual course pursued in the state where he resided.
Mr. Claiborne was by no means satisfied that the removal of the mud bank would do no injury to the Eastern branch and to Alexandria.
Mr. Nelson said that on a question so important to the upper parts of Maryland and Virginia, he could not refrain from stating some reasons in favor of the measure, and against the motion of the Speaker, which was intended to destroy the bill. It had been urged that the sediment which now obstructed the navigation to George-town, if set afloat, by encroaching the current and the volume of water across it, would impede the navigation of the Eastern branch or fill up the harbor of Alexandria.—Those who would take a view of the Eastern branch would be convinced it could make no deposit there, it being intercepted or turned aside by the point which projected into the Potomac; and as the water of the Eastern branch was more rapid than the Potomac, the breadth of the latter being much wider than the former, there certainly was no danger to be apprehended in that quarter. As to Alexandria, it was not to be supposed that the solid mass of sediment was to be taken off the bar at once, and lodged in that harbor; the probability was it would remove gradually and deposit at the eddy on each side the river, while the union of the Eastern branch with the Potomac would encrase the celerity of the current and carry it far below Alexandria.
The compact mentioned by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) between the states of Maryland and Virginia he acknowledged to exist; but as the measure contemplated the improvement of the navigation of the Potomac, instead of obstructing it; the right of each state to the free navigation thereof remained unimpaired. He imagined that the inhabitants of Alexandria and the citizens of Virginia wished success to the measure. He knew his constituents had it much at heart, knowing that a choice of markets is a great accommodation to farmers; and if defeated it would be as much to their advantage to bring their produce to a shipping port at once by land, as to use the canal recently constructed at such prodigious expense, having afterwards to go with their produce to Alexandria by land.
Mr. Smith should not be against the bill if upon full and fair enquiry it was found proper to pass it. But he could not agree to be hurried along without allowing time to acquire information.
He therefore moved that the committee rise and report progress.
Mr. MACON (Speaker) opposed the rising of the committee, because it was leaving the business exactly where it stood, unless it was meant to recommence it to a select committee for modification. But as he was determined to vote against it in any or every shape, he was prepared to decide now. As to the mode he had taken to come at his object, he should only say it was a fair one, and such as had been the uniform practice of the house since he had a seat in it.
The gentlemen in favor of this dam or causeway, say it will do no harm; but where is the demonstration? On the other side serious apprehensions are entertained of its injurious effects upon the United States navy yard in the eastern branch, and its causing obstructions in the harbor of Alexandria. He would assure the committee he was ready to promote the welfare of any of the citizens; but it must in justice be done, without injuring any other person whatever.
At the last session an application was made for a permanent bridge across the Potomac, with a draw for the passage of vessels; the petitioners urged the general utility of the measure to all persons travelling north or south, but particularly the vast benefit according to the inhabitants of the district, by affording a solid and secure means of intercourse between its several parts. This measure was opposed by the present petitioners on the ground of the compact between Maryland and Virginia securing the right of free navigation to the river, and also alleging that their navigation to George town would be impeded. The argument which they applied then, now applies against them, and it ought in the minds of the same legislators to apply with equal success.
Mr. Findley was rather in favor of the bill, believing the mode proposed would be successful in deepening the channel, which would certainly improve the navigation to and from Georgetown, and in that of the citizens of some of the western counties of Pennsylvania were materially interested; several of their boatable creeks nearly interlocking with those of the Potomac. He would however agree to the committee rising, with a view to postpone the bill, till gentlemen acquired the information they asked for.
Mr. GODDARD hoped the committee would rise, and the subject be postponed till sufficient light was obtained to guide their votes to a proper decision. He also hoped that no member might be considered as the friend or the foe of the present bill, till he became such by an examination into its merits or demerits. He narrated the course the business had taken since its introduction into this house, and inferred that the same deliberate mode ought to be pursued to the end. Whether the measure was good or evil could only be determined in that way, and gentlemen ought not to reject doing a positive good, unless it was demonstrated that positive evil would result to counterbalance the good that was intended. He conceived the members ought to enquire for themselves on this point, and legislate accordingly. He would on all occasions endeavor to promote the interests of the district; and as it had no immediate representative on the floor he considered every representative bound to serve them, while the seat of government remained among them.
Mr. G. W. Campbell would not declare whether he should vote for the final passage of the bill or not. But he was disposed to take notice of the applications made from time to time by the inhabitants of the district; whether to redress grievances, or procure benefits. But he by no means approved of the principle of legislation without representation. He regretted that they were placed in this unfortunate situation; but he should decide on the present question according to its merits; and if it was found to be of great consequence to the petitioners, and not likely to work an injury to others, he presumed the bill would finally pass. But he wished the committee to rise, in order to give further time to obtain information. It had been alleged that the friends of the measure ought to demonstrate that the erection of a causeway would do no injury to any one. This was not a fair position; it was requiring them to prove a negative. The burden of proof should lie on those who oppose the bill, and it was for them to demonstrate that injury would result. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. J. Randolph) has stated that the boats from the western country have a choice of passing by the western or eastern channel to the market below George-Town, and this, it is presumed, he means they should be still entitled to under the compact between Maryland and Virginia. Let us hear from these persons also, and then ascertain whether they have any objection to the project on that account. This was also an argument in favour of the rising of the committee, and perhaps it may be added, that a little delay will enable the House to modify the bill as to render it less exceptionable than at present.

Mr. Southard had not considered this subject of much consequence in the outset, but he found that its importance increased as it rolled along. He thought this morning it would have occupied but a short portion of their time; in that he found himself deceived; and he believed he was not singular in these opinions. He suspected many other members were in the same predicament. He therefore would vote for the committee's rising. That navigable waters are considered as high ways, is a matter of great notoriety; but he did not know that to deepen a channel by contracting its surface, was considered as obstructing the free navigation of a river, nor could he conceive that the body of sediment meant to be removed, would descend en masse and deposit itself at the confluence of the next stream it met. On the contrary, he imagined it would be separated by the force of the current giving it action into millions of particles, some of which would settle promiscuously on either side, while a part would ultimately be deposited in the ocean.
The committee hereupon rose and reported progress, and asked leave to sit again. On the question, shall the committee have leave to sit again?
Mr. J. RANDOLPH requested that the act of cession by Virginia might be read—by which it would clearly appear that she had not ceded, or intended to cede to the United States any right acquired under her compact with Maryland. [The act was read.]
It is plain from the preamble, said Mr. R. that the intention of the state was to make a cession above tide water—that she expected the seat of government would be fixed in some place contiguous to the limits of Maryland and Pennsylvania. It is not contended that the United States are bound to select any particular spot. This circumstance is mentioned only to show what was contemplated at the time by the legislature of Virginia. Her act of cession was more broad. It extended to any tract of country not exceeding ten miles square "to be located within the limits of the state." Over this she had relinquished to Congress her jurisdiction as well of soil as of persons. But her limits did not extend beyond high water mark on the Western bank of Potomac. Her right of high way on the river was a natural right acknowledged and secured by convention with Maryland. Her civil jurisdiction over its water was a conventional right, entirely derived from compact with that state—was a jurisdiction not within her limits, and which the words of the act just read could not embrace or convey.
Mr. Dawson would vote against the committee having leave to sit again—He was convinced that the objection made by his colleague (Mr. J. Randolph) was conclusive; the fact was, that neither Maryland nor Virginia had ceded their joint rights to this river, nor could they do so, by their separate acts. The terms of the compact requiring that any thing done respecting the navigation of the Potomac should be done by their joint acts. It was worthy of remark, that the petitioners for this causeway were the identical persons who petitioned against the bridge as a violation of the compact between the two states, and denying the authority of Congress to legislate on the subject of the navigation of the Potomac. He thought them right then, and he voted against the bridge. His opinion had not changed with their opinions, and therefore he should vote against the causeway now.
Mr. R. GRISWOLD said that from the vote just taken he presumed that the question of expediency had been settled. But it is now objected that Congress have no exclusive jurisdiction over the Potomac. In reply he would submit a few observations. By the constitution, Congress were empowered to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over any place not exceeding ten miles, which might be ceded by particular states. The states of Maryland and Virginia had ceded this district to Congress, and the cession had been accepted. But the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) had said that Virginia did not cede the jurisdiction of the Potomac, because she did not own it separately. To this he would answer that the river Potomac must have been under the jurisdiction of either Maryland or Virginia or both. And as both allowed Congress to accept of any part of their territory not exceeding ten miles square; and Congress chose to accept of part from one and part from the other, he presumed the jurisdiction of the Potomac, let it have been held by either of the states, or jointly, must have passed to the United States. He was of opinion, that if Congress had no jurisdiction over the Potomac, they had none over the district. The constitution provides only for the cession of one district of county not exceeding ten miles square. The act of Congress made in pursuance of the constitution had also provided for the laying out one district. If the arguments of the gentleman from Virginia were correct, and Congress had no jurisdiction over the Potomac, the commissioners and the then President of the United States under whose direction the district was
laid out, had been mistaken, and had taken two districts of territory instead of one. This being the case, Congress had no jurisdiction in the district, because it not being laid off conformable to the constitution and the law of Congress, the acceptance by Congress was absolutely void. If this was correct, there was an absolute necessity for giving leave to the committee to sit again, for the purpose of deliberating whether Congress had jurisdiction or not. If they had not and were legislating for the people of the district without authority, the sooner they put an end to such an assumption of power the better.
Mr. J. RANDOLPH declared that the opinion which he had just given was the result of his most deliberate judgment. To what it might lead he should not at that time undertake to determine; but when that question should come before the House he was not sure that he should deny the corollary of the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. R. Griswold) at least as far as related to the territory on the other side of the river. The question, however, then was whether Congress possessed exclusive jurisdiction over the Potomac. How could they acquire it? From Maryland? It was more than they had to give. A part of it they could only grant her own qualified right. Had they obtained it from Virginia? not at all. She had granted a jurisdiction exclusively her own—over a tract of country within her limits. And could any man pretend to say that this was a grant of her concurrent jurisdiction over the Potomac, confessedly without her limits? She had, to use the expression, issued her warrant to Congress, to be located somewhere within the state, and, under this pretext, her property out of the state was about to be usurped. Suppose the gentleman from Connecticut were to convey by deed his exclusive property, by certain metes and bounds, would his joint interest in other property not contained within those bounds pass by such a deed? Surely not. To a person setting up a claim to such property he would probably say, produce the evidence of your title, and in like manner Mr. R. demanded to be shown the conveyance by which Virginia had relinquished her concurrent jurisdiction over the Potomac? And in answer to this, gentlemen refer to a conveyance relinquishing something else in no wise connected with it, and tell us we always believed that we had a grant for this jurisdiction—we shall be grievously disappointed if we have not—it will be a great inconvenience to us to do without it and therefore we must have it. And Virginia is to be forcibly dispossessed of her right, to suit the convenience of Congress.
He had another objection to the bill. This might be but the commencement of a scheme which should compel all boats coming down the Potomac to un-lade their cargoes here—This would be effected by obstructions in the river above, and a canal terminating in a basin in this city. Thus diverting to the exclusive benefit of Washington, all the labour and expense which had been jointly incurred by Maryland and Virginia, for opening the navigation of the Potomac. When the constitution of the United States was under consideration, that section, which gave Congress exclusive legislation over a district not exceeding ten miles square, to be afterwards ceded to them, was viewed with a jealous eye. It was regarded by some of the best and greatest men who ever had lived, or who, he believed, ever would live, as the germ of incalculable mischief—as the ambush from which the masked monarchy of the constitution was to spring upon the people. At one time this prediction seemed to be verifying itself. Accordingly we had seen a city laid out on a gigantic scale. Edifices the most stupendous were planned. We seemed determined not only to vie with Paris or London, but to rival Thebes or Babylon of old. Happily these splendid visions had ended in a monstrous abortion. He wished to see the people of the district restored to their rights—So long as they remained in their present condition, he should be averse to promote the growth of a city which he considered to be as much the nursery of despotism as the Newcastle trade of England was of seamen.
Mr. JACKSON did not stop to enquire whether it was proper for Congress to retain the jurisdiction over this district, but he was willing to remove a grievance, which the people complained of and required to be done. He was not one of those who was disposed to guard the people against their worst enemies themselves, as he did not believe the doctrine to be true. The objection that Virginia and Maryland had only ceded their exclusive property, and not the joint property of the free navigation of the Potomac, might perhaps be extended further than gentlemen wished, or were aware of—By the treaty of Paris, France had ceded Louisiana in full sovereignty to the United States, but expressly reserved the right of free navigation of the Mississippi; if then the United States were disposed to shorten the navigation by cutting through a bend of that river, or in any other way improve the same, will it be necessary for the United States to consult and obtain the assent of France to the mea-
sure before they ventured to put it in execution?
Mr. NICHOLSON had but few observations to make upon the question before the House. His opinion was the same, as at the last session when a petition was presented for the erection of a bridge. He then thought that the erection of a bridge over the Potomac, would tend much to the improvement of the place. He thought so still. But he then thought, that Congress had no right to interfere in the least with the free navigation of the Potomac, and of course was opposed to the bridge. The same reason operated in his mind against the bill now in question. Neither of the states of Maryland or Virginia could have passed such a law previous to the cession of the district to Congress. The question to be determined then, was "whether the jurisdiction of the Potomac was ceded to Congress." If this should be answered in the negative by the committee, all questions as to the expediency of the measure would be at an end. Previous to the compact between Virginia and Maryland, the latter claimed the river Potomac as its exclusive property. By that compact it was declared that the navigation of said river should be free. Virginia therefore acquired a kind of property in the river inasmuch as she acquired the right to the free navigation thereof. The question then to be enquired into was, Had Virginia parted with this right? He conceived she had not. By the act authorising the cession of ten miles square or less to the United States, this could not have been done—Virginia had no power to make the cession of the Potomac, because she had not the jurisdiction over it; and could not grant more than she possessed. After this grant by Virginia, the state of Maryland granted to Congress a portion of territory not exceeding ten miles square for the seat of government. Had Maryland the sole property in the river, it could have passed in this grant, provided Congress accepted that part of her territory. But she had not this sole property, because the state of Virginia had a right by compact to the free navigation thereof. How then had the United States acquired the jurisdiction over the Potomac. Would it be contended that they had acquired it from Maryland? This did not appear from the act of cession. Had they acquired it from Virginia?—That could not be, because Virginia had no power to make such a grant. So long as she had the honor of a seat in the House; he would hold up his hands against any measure like the present, which would go to affect the rights of any of the states. If Congress had a right to interfere in the least with the free navigation of the Potomac, they had a right to stop it altogether. He conceived they had no right to pass any law on the subject, and believing so, he would certainly vote against the committee having leave to sit again.
Mr. Crowninshield was of opinion that due notice ought to have been given by the applicants of their intention to petition Congress on the subject that private property might not be injured without the knowledge of the owners; he believed the causeway might be of use, but he was not a competent judge; but others very probably would be benefitted, beside the inhabitants of George Town, and he thought it reasonable that such should likewise contribute to the expense. Till these circumstances should be ascertained he would vote against the committee having leave to sit again.
(To be continued.)
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 26.
The custom of our country devotes the ensuing week to enjoyment and festivity. The cares of business, the painful remembrance of past misfortunes, and the torturing apprehension of future evils, are dismissed, the social circle is formed, and that species of pleasure, which is the most satisfactory, because it springs from the heart, is indulged. At such a season, whatever may be the heedlessness of the superficial mind, it is impossible for a reflecting being to avoid analysing the sources of his happiness, and comparing his lot with that of those who surround him. This mixture of reflection with enjoyment, if the expression be admissible, so far from diluting his train of pleasurable sensations, will in reality aid it. The highest enjoyments, of which man in his most improved state is capable, are those which combine intellect and sense, and he only is a true Epicurean, who habitually mixes these two ingredients in proper proportions.
Let not then that morality be deemed severe which at this season of mirth and joy invites to reflection. Boundless is the field that lies before us, and it is our own fault if we do not properly improve it. In exploring the sources of our happiness, we are irresistibly arrested by the consideration that peace and plenty prevail throughout the whole of our land, and that these pre-eminent enjoyments are crowned by the proud, because distinctive blessings of liberty. Here, almost literally, every man sits under his own fig-tree, and there is none to make
him afraid. Is it possible for the father of a family to contemplate the little groups around him, animated by the gaities of youth, with hearts alive to pleasure, and not rejoice that he is the citizen of a nation, over whose destiny no dark clouds lower, but which, on the contrary, promises to become more and more prosperous? Can he behold the dawning independence of his son, without rejoicing in the assurance that no tyrant here reigns, or threatens to reign, possessed of an unlimited power, over mind itself? Or can the partner of his bosom behold an ingenious and blooming daughter, without exulting in the conviction that she is perhaps destined to lighten the cares of some distinguished benefactor of his country, and to sustain and animate his patriotism, or to discharge the less brilliant, though not less useful duty of rendering worthy of the rights of freedom a numerous offspring? What must be the pleasure derived from these reflections, at the thought that the whole world does not present a spot of which the like can be said? Trusting the further improvement of the subject to our readers, we sincerely with them all the innocent and rational enjoyments of the season.
Congressional Register.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, DECEMBER 24.
Leave of absence was granted to Mr. J. C. Smith, from Thursday next to the end of the session.
Mr. Holmes requested on the part of Colonel Thompson his colleague, leave of absence from this day 'till Saturday next, and leave was granted accordingly.
Mr. Lewis requested and obtained leave of absence for his colleagues Mr. Griffin, from this day 'till Saturday, and Mr. Stephen for the same term.
Mr. Leib from the committee appointed for the purpose, reported on the motion for completing the arsenal on the Schuylkill, a resolution that dollars be appropriated for the completion of the arsenal near the river Schuylkill, which being read, on motion was referred to the committee of the whole on Monday next.
Mr. Hastings moved to refer the petition of Captain Thomas Marshall Baker, of the militia, praying to be placed on the pension list, in consideration of wounds received in an engagement with the British on Rhode Island in 1778; or such other relief as Congress in their wisdom and justice shall deem meet. It was accordingly referred to the committee of claims.
On the third reading of the enrolled bill, regulating the clearance of armed merchant vessels, a debate of considerable length took place. Messrs. Dana, R. Griswold, and Dennis spoke at considerable length against the same, and were replied to by Messrs. Eppes, Smilie, Jackson and Eustis.
The Yeas and Nays on the passage of the bill were called for by Mr. J. Clay, and were Ayes 76—Nays 33—and the bill was passed accordingly.
A message was received from the Senate with a bill for dividing the Indiana territory into two territories.
The engrossed bill for amending the charter of Alexandria being on its third reading.
Mr. Lewis proposed a postponement 'till the 15th January next.
Mr. Gregg did not wish so long a delay, he proposed this day week, to which the mover consented, and on the question to postpone the bill to that time, it was lost—46 to 48.
Mr. Stanford moved to postpone 'till Friday next, which was agreed to.
On motion of Mr. Jackson the petition of the inhabitants of Randolph county, in Virginia, praying the establishment of a post road from the town of Franklin to Clarkburg, to pass through Beverly, was referred to the committee on post offices and post roads.
And then the House adjourned 'till Wednesday next.
The legislature of Maryland have agreed to allow William Pinckney twelve thousand dollars, for his services in effecting the transfer of stock in the British funds belonging to Maryland.
The British packet brings London advices to the 20th October. They contain nothing sufficiently important to interfere with the publication of the Debates of Congress.
It is with regret, which we know not how to express, that we inform our readers that the Senate of South Carolina have rejected by a single vote the bill to prohibit the importation of slaves. Two members of the Senate being absent when this decision was made, hopes are entertained of the eventual passage of a similar bill now before the House of Representatives.
COMMUNICATION.
Vermont Election, S. E. District. In this district there are 44 towns, 32 of which are returned and give Mr. Elliot a majority of 700 over Mr. Rich-
ards, the other republican candidate. From general information, this majority will be greatly increased by the remaining towns.
It has been reported that the federalists in the district all voted for Mrs. Elliot. We are authorised to say that the report is not correct. Besides an equal number with Mr. Richards, Mr. Elliot's majority alone will exceed the whole number of votes given for the federal candidate at the former trial; and there are now about 100 scattering votes.
Erratum in Friday's proceedings—Mr. Rhea's motion is represented as requiring statements from the Secretary of War for 1804-5. It should have been for 1803-4.
At a meeting of the citizens of Washington, at the Theatre, on December the 22d, 1804, at the instance of the Mayor.
ROBERT BRENT, Esq. being called to the Chair, and WILLIAM R. COZEN appointed Secretary.
After the reading of communications from the citizens of the City and county of Alexandria, it was resolved that this meeting should be adjourned, to meet at Rhod's Tavern on Wednesday the 26th instant, at four o'clock P. M. to take into consideration the affairs of the District generally.
ROBERT BRENT, Chairman. WM. R. COZEN, Secretary.
NOTICE.
THE Legionary Court of Enquiry of the 1st Legion of the Militia of the District of Columbia, adjourned to meet at Wm. Rhodes's Tavern, in the City of Washington, the 20th instant, at 10 o'clock in the morning, is further adjourned to meet at same time and place the 19th January, 1805.
The members are earnestly requested to be punctual in their attendance. By Order.
WM. D. BEALL, Ck. IRL. M. D. C. December 26, 1804. Law 19 J.
DESERTED from on board the United States frigate United States, on Saturday December 22nd 1804, JOHN DERBY, aged about 19 years of age, 5 feet 6 or 7 inches high, marked badly with the small pox, and has a scar on each cheek and across his nose who ever will apprehend the said deserter and deliver him to the subscriber shall receive a reward of TEN DOLLARS. JOHN CASSIN. Dec. 26—3t
Twenty Dollars Reward.
RAN AWAY from the subscriber's farm at Haywood in Westmoreland county, Virginia, a negro fellow named Daniel, a blacksmith by trade, he was lately purchased of Mr. George Fitzhugh of the aforesaid county—he is a very likely dark complexioned negro, a very round face, about five feet one or two inches high and well made, he is about twenty-three or four years of age—he was lately seen in King George County, and had with him a forged pass, supposed to have been written by some negro in the neighbourhood. Whoever takes the said negro and will deliver him to Mr. Churchill Blackburn, at Haywood, or commit him to any jail so that I may get him again, shall receive ten dollars besides what the law allows, and if taken without the state twenty dollars. All masters of vessels are forewarned from carrying the said negro out of the state. WILLIAM AUGUSTUS WASHINGTON. December 26th, 1804. W. W.
FOR SALE
At Mr. Duane's Bookstore in this city a few copies of "The Temple of Truth."
In which many important passages of the holy scriptures are elucidated, and their harmony and divine sanction defended, both against Dr. Driscol, at that time editor of the "Bible of Reason," in Philadelphia, and two Theological Lectures delivered in Baltimore by Elihu PALMER.
By The revd JOHN HARGROVE, Minister of the New Jerusalem Church, In Baltimore, Dec. 24, 1804.
Public Sale.
WILL be sold at public sale, on Saturday the 22d of December instant, at the Union Tavern, George Town, the following property, to wit; one moiety of 42 acres of Land situate on Rock Creek—bounded on the North and East by Mr. Holmead; on the South by Mr. Rowles; and on the west by Rock Creek; the other moiety was lately held by the trustees of Mr. Contee.
ALSO, 15 and a half acres higher up the creek, bounded on the north by Mr. Pearce, on the east and south by Mr. Holmead, and on the west by Rock Creek.
Also, one moiety of the mill usually called Lingan's mill, situate on Rock Creek, a little below Rowles mill, and also 10 Potomac Bridge shares.
A credit of 12 months will be given, upon the purchaser's giving bond with good security—the sale to commence at 12 o'clock, meridian.
ELIAS B. CALDWELL, Trustee of Gustavus Scott's estate. Dec. 15—epf N B The above sale is postponed to Thursday the tenth day of January next, at 12 o'clock, meridian. E. B. CALDWELL, Trustee of Gustavus Scott's estate. Dec. 26th, 1804.

STATIONARY & FANCY STORE
GEORGE TOWN. THE Subscriber has just received from New York, Philadelphia and Baltimore, a large and general supply of STATIONARY &c. Amongst which are the following articles, viz. Atlases imperial, superroyal, royal, medium and demy English papers, Extra large thick folio post do. Do. do. thin do. hotpressed do. Small, plain and wove do. to post do. Plain and wove foolscap do. Hotpressed, gilt, mourning, wove and plain letter do. Folio and quarto copying do. Super Royal cartridge do. Medium, demy and foolscap French marble do. Demy blotting do. Rats and bonnet boards, Single and double ruled ledgers, journals, and waste books. Medium, demy and foolscap blank books suitable for public offices. Best Holland quills and ready made pens Black and red ink and ink powders Japan and durable ink Printing ink for book and newspaper use Red and black sealing wax Red and black wafers Large red and white wafers for office use Wax tapers and taper stands Counting house keys Pink and blue ink cakes Broad and narrow red tape Ball and bank twine Cases of mathematical instruments Reading glasses in horn and tortoise shell frames Gold leaf Parchment squared and pounced Scutic fish bone and pounces Ivory and bone pounce boxes Black lead, crayon and camel hair pencils Do. with silver cases Reeves colours in boxes Knives and paper scissors Counting house and pocket pen knives Do. with ivory scale and rule handles Ivory and bone paper folders Round and flat rulers Gum Tragacanth and Gum Arabic Slates and slate pencils Plated, glass, wedgewood, pewter, & pocket inkstands Sand boxes and sand glasses Black lead, and steel filings Message and visiting cards Geographical and genealogical pastimes and arithmetical games with totums Portable writing desks with apartments for dressing apparatus Mahogany Japaned and Morocco shaving cases Shaving boxes with soap and brushes Razors of a superior quality Ladies and gentlemen's japaned dressing case Playing cards and ivory boxes with counters Cribbage boxes and boards Backgammon tables and dice boxes Ivory chessmen and chess boards Billiard balls and dice Drum batture doors and shuttles Violins, flutes and files Violin strings and bows Fowling pieces, shot pouches, and powder Horns and pocket pistols Silver and gilt mounted small swords, dirks and daggers Gold and silver epaulettes and sword knots Do. do. shoulder straps and crecents Military hats, lace, cords, &c. Officers traveling cases with cooking utensils &c. & complete Gold and silver bullion, spangles and thread An elegant assortment of gold, silver and gilt mounted combs Gold and silver hair slides Wreaths and bunches of artificial flowers Ostrich feathers, fancy plumes, &c. Tortoise shell and superfine ivory combs Coquilles and jet necklaces Gentlemen's doe skin and dress gloves Boots, shoes and pumps Morocco skins, and bend soles Bailey's and Morley's patent blacking Hair powder and pomatum Powder bags and powder puffs Tortoise shell and horn dressing combs Curling tongs and crimping irons Wash ball and wash ball boxes Tooth powder and shaving powder Essence of musk, lavender, burgamot and ambergrease Segar boxes and snuff boxes Tooth brushes and tooth picks Clothe brushes and hat brushes Sweeping, dusting, scrubbing, shoe and furniture brushes Switch, chair and carriage whips Walking sticks and sword canes Silk and morocco elastic braces Green wire fendets with brass tops ornamented Fashionable brass an irons Coal hods, cinder sifters and pokers An elegant assortment of japaned tea trays Satin wood and mahogany knife cases Green and white ivory tables and desert knives and forks in sets Elegant plated tea and coffee urns Plated tea and coffee pots Do. bread baskets and toast stands Do. candlesticks and branches Do. snuffers and snuffer trays Do. castors, double fluted cut glasses Do. salts with do. do. Do. mugs, tumblers and bottle stands Gold, pebble and glass watch cases Do. watch chains and keys Do. rings, brooches and breast pins Plated and common coach and gig lamps Do. furniture for harness double and single horse Do. mouldings for carriages Do. gig springs, and hubb bands Do. chains, cuke and snaffle bridle bits Do. horn, bridles and curbs Do. patent and common spurs Japaned lamps and hand lanterns Lamp wick and lamp glasses Worsted Webb and faddle cloths Mill and cross cut saws Gentlemen's tool chests Travelling trunks, &c. ALSO—FOR SALE, An Invoice of Hardware Which will be sold low at a credit of six months. EDGAR PATTERSON. Nov. 12—tf
Five Dollars Reward.
STOLEN or taken on the 26th of October, from the subscriber, out of Mr. Goldborough's lot—a BAY COLT, about two years old last spring, 11 or 12 hands high, shod all around—Whoever will deliver the said colt to the subscriber near the President's house, shall receive Five dollars reward, ROBERT SUTTON. Washington December 19—3t
CHARLES H. GARDEN, MERCHANT TAILOR. Has received from Philadelphia a handsome assortment of FALL goods, consisting of the best London and French superfine cloths, cassimeres, patent Bennet's cord, toilettes, fancy and white Marcellas, black and figured silk, moleskins, fancy silk, Marcellas, constitution cords, velvets, Genoa cord, silk and satin Florentines, superfine coating, knapped cloths, with a variety of other articles suitable for the winter season. N. B. Ladies habits, regimentals, and navy uniforms made in the first style of fashion. New Jersey avenue near the Capitol, December 10—tf
ADAM KING, & Co. At their wine Store in High street George Town, have in addition to their stock of old wines, laid in a large and general assortment of all kinds of Liquors and Groceries suitable to the present season; where bills of any description, in their line, will constantly be filled up on the shortest notice and they flatter themselves, from the quality of their wines, &c. they will be able to give general satisfaction to all those who may think proper to favor them with a call—where all kind of commission business as usual, will be attended to with the utmost attention, George Town, November 5—tf
FALL GOODS. THOMAS CARPENTER, TAYLOR, Pennsylvania Avenue, near the President's Square, Has just received a very handsome assortment of Fall Goods. Orders executed with the greatest dispatch and fashion, and on the most moderate terms. Oct 31—tf
ROB. R. CHERRY, Has removed his store, to the house of Mr. George Bayden New Jersey avenue on the Eastern Branch, where he has just received (in addition to his former stock) by the return of a vessel from Philadelphia a general assortment of groceries and liquors of superior quality, with a few boxes India china of the best quality eighty pieces to the set; all of which he will sell wholesale and retail at the most reduced prices for cash, or in exchange for country produce—All orders in his line will be executed with punctuality and dispatch; he flatters himself from the quality of his articles he will be able to render ample satisfaction to his friends and all those who may be pleased to favor him with their custom. All kinds of commission business will be attended to with the utmost attention. Washington city Dec 12—tf
Wanted to rent or purchase a large and convenient HOUSE, with 100 or 150 acres of Land, in an healthy situation—the neighborhood of Baltimore, Elk Ridge or toward the vicinity of the city of Washington will be preferred. Letters addressed to the subscriber, particularly, mentioning the improvements, terms, &c. shall be immediately attended to. GEORGE RALPH. Charlotte Hall, St. Mary's county, November 30—
Ship Timber, Plank, &c. WANTED at the NAVY YARD, Washington, a quantity of the under mentioned materials, for which the fair market prices at New York, Philadelphia, or Baltimore, will be paid on delivery, viz. THICK STUFF and PLANK of white oak and heart yellow pine of 12 to 14 inches in breadth, 30 feet long and upwards, viz. 9 inch thick 5 inch thick 3 1 2 do. 4 1 2 do. 8 do. 4 do. 7 1 2 do. 3 1 2 do. 7 do. 3 do. 6 1 2 do. 2 1 2 do. 6 do. 2 do. 5 1 2 do. 1 1 2 do. Logs of white oak, and heart yellow pine, from 12 to 16 inches square, and 16 to 30 feet long, Do. of 16 to 18 inches square, and 30 to 40 feet long, the prices will be greater, Do. of larger sizes and lengths, still more so. Timbers of live oak, cedar and locusts, all sizes, Crooked logs, and pieces of white oak, walnut and chestnut, Knees do. do. Locust treenails, all sizes, Ash logs, and oak rafters, Handspikes and captern bars of hickory and ash, various sizes, Spruce pine spars, Do. lower yards, Do. half do. Do. topmasts. Also, leger and pipe staves and heading, of white oak. Any person desirous of supplying a quantity, and wishing to ascertain the prices, previous to delivery, will be furnished therewith on application to the subscriber, and describing the particulars THOMAS TINGEY, Superintendent. Navy Yard, Washington, Nov. 23—tf
LOTTERY TICKETS.
A FEW tickets in the Catholic Cathedral Lottery of Baltimore, WARRANTED UNDRAWN, have been deposited in the hands of the Revd. Mr. MATHEWS and WILLIAM BRENT for sale Washington, 24th Dec. 1804—epaw
ALEX. M'COMICK.
AT his store on East Capitol Street four doors from the capitol square, has received and offers for sale a general assortment of liquors and groceries which he will sell low and warrant of as good a quality as any old in the district of Columbia—He has 20 pieces fine Irish Linen, with sundry other articles in the dry good and hardware line. November 12—tf
BOARDING HOUSE.
THE Subscriber has taken the upper part of that commodious house, in which Mr. E. RIGGS keeps store, a few doors above the UNION TAVERN, where a few gentlemen may be accommodated with boarding JANE WHITE.
TO LETT
And immediate possession given—A two story FRAME HOUSE, four rooms on a floor, with a brick kitchen, and a large garden, nearly opposite Mr. Lairds, enquire as above. Georgetown, December 5—taw4w
E. OLIVER,
HAS REMOVED TO THE HOUSE IN BRIDGE STREET, Lately occupied by Mr. PATRO, and opposite Messrs. Dyer and Smith's Where the respectfully informs the Ladies of Georgetown and Washington, that she has just received, and will open on Monday next, a very large and elegant assortment of MILLINERY & FANCY ARTICLES, all of the very newest fashion, and immediately from on board the ships Pigeon and Active, just arrived at Philadelphia from London.
CONSISTING OF SUPERB lace and other shawls, Do. head handkerchiefs, Do. damask tabby do. Black and white lace veils, Black lace shades, Black and white lace edgings, Real gold spangles, Do. gold thread, Gold and silver cords and tassels, Elegant silk cords & tassels of all sorts & colors Do. cotton do. do. Real lace gloves, Do. pic nic do. English extra long silk do. Do. do. do white kid, Ladies Beaver and Venetian gloves, Ribbons of the newest fashion and of every description, Feathers, flowers, artificial wreaths and bunches, a very beautiful assortment, Do. straw wreaths and bunches. Ladies and gentlemen's white and colored silk stockings, Do. white cotton do. Fleece hosiery gloves, Woodstock, beaver, fawn skin and raw silk gloves, Murray's shoes, Gold, silver, beaded, cheniel, and bugled trimmings for ladies dresses, New fashioned gold and silver bandeaux and sprays, very beautiful, Satin for dresses, mantuas, velvets, plush gauzes, modes, farcenets, linens & dimities Dress fans—silk and Madras bandana and dress handkerchiefs, Silk elastic garters and suspenders, Tortoise shell combs for ladies and gentlemen, Muffs and tippets—Fur for trimming, Straw, chip, and Leghorn bonnets and trimmings—Litz bonnets—Furniture, fringe and tassels—Beads, bugs and spangles—Netting cotton—Hair powder and pomatum, Vellum, Prussian binding and narrow lace for officers—Sword knots—Gold and silver embroidered button holes, English Jockey caps for boys and children, Gentlemen's silk and cotton suspenders and neck pacs. With a great variety of other articles. Georgetown, Dec 4—2aw3w
THE subscribers have opened a GROCERY STORE in the house near the Capitol, lately occupied by Mr. JAMES D. BARRY—where they have for sale, low, for cash or in exchange for country produce. Genuine Cogniac brandy, Inferior French do. Old Jamaica Spirits, Madeira, Sherry, Lisbon, Claret, Brown Sugar, rft and 2d quality, Loaf and Lump, do. Molasses, Firkin Butter, Mould Candles, Sweet Oil, Spices of different kinds, Fig Blue, Starch, Almonds; Anchovies, Capers, Powder and Shot, Excellent Wine Vinegar, Gin, Whiskey, Hyslop, Imperial, Young Hyslop. Salt Herrings in Barrels. PETER HEALY, & Co. Washington October 31—tf
Wines, by the quarter cask and case, or smaller quantity. A REWARD of 5 dollars will be paid to any person who gives information to the printer, so that the owner may recover it. It was lost yesterday some where in the city, near the War-Office or in Pennsylvania Avenue. A note of the Columbia Bank for 5 dollars, and a number of receipts and memoranda were in the Pocket Book when it was lost. December 21, 3t.
A POCKET BOOK LOST.
A REWARD of 5 dollars will be paid to any person who gives information to the printer, so that the owner may recover it. It was lost yesterday some where in the city, near the War-Office or in Pennsylvania Avenue. A note of the Columbia Bank for 5 dollars, and a number of receipts and memoranda were in the Pocket Book when it was lost. December 21, 3t.
Saint John's Day.
THE members of Federal and Columbia Lodges are requested to meet at the Lodge room on the 27th inst. at 9 o'clock A. M. from which they will proceed to the church on New Jersey avenue, where a discourse suitable to the occasion will be delivered by the Rev. brother A. T. M'Comick and afterwards return to the Lodge room and partake of a dinner—Brethren who are not members are also requested to attend. Published by order of the Lodges. Washington, Dec. 21—2t
DISCOVERED
A few day since (in the Telegraph) a challenge by Samuel Norwood, Esq. Bonaparte against Democrat—At Annapolis this fall, I proposed running Democrat against Bonaparte, carrying from 110 lbs to 140 at the discretion of Mr. Norwood; which was rejected. As Mr. Norwood refused the proposition made by me at that time, I am now bound to run the race proposed by him in the Telegraph—Democrat will run Bonaparte over the Annapolis race course, on the third Tuesday in May next, four miles and repeat, for 1000 dollars, play or pay, carrying 126 lbs. each; which is the weight they are to carry by the rules of racing, both being seven years old last spring—Should Mr. Norwood decline this offer, Democrat will cover mares next spring at the subscribers farm, from the first day of March until the first day of April, at Sixteen dollars each and Fifty cents for the groom. Democrat's pedigree is equal to the pedigree of any horse to be produced, having in him the blood of Medley, Belispie, Figure, Dove, Godolphin, Arabian, and Mr. Taikun's Kilima. If this proposition is approved of by Mr. Norwood, notice will be given in the Maryland Gazette within forty days from the date hereof. ISAAC DUCKETT. December 21—taw4wpr. 30
By his Excellency
ROBERT BOWIE, Governor of the State of Maryland. A PROCLAMATION.
Whereas the general assembly of Maryland, did, by an act passed at November session, seventeen hundred and ninety, entitled, An act directing the time, places and manner, of holding elections for representatives of this state, in the congress of the United States, and for the regulations of the said elections; and also to repeal the act of assembly therein mentioned—direct that the governor and council, after having received the returns, papers and instruments, containing the number of votes for representatives of this state in the congress of the United States, should enumerate and ascertain the number of votes for each and every candidate and person chosen as representative—We, in pursuance of the directions of the said act, do, by this our proclamation, declare, that John Campbell, esq. was elected for the first district; Leonard Cuyngton, esq. was elected for the second district; Patrick Magruder, esq. was elected for the third district; Roger Nelson, esq. was elected for the fourth district; Nicholas Ruxton Moore and William Mac Creery, esqs. were elected for the fifth district; John Archer, esq. was elected for the sixth district; Joseph Hopper Nicholson, esq. was elected for the seventh district; and Charles Goldsborough, esq. was elected for the eighth district.
Given in council, at the city of Annapolis, under the seal of the state of Maryland, this 28th day of November, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and four. ROBERT BOWIE.
By the governor and council, Ninian Pinkney, clerk of the council.
Ordered, That the foregoing proclamation be published twice in each week, for the space of three weeks successively, in the American, Telegraph and Federal Gazette, at Baltimore; the Maryland Gazette, at Annapolis; the National Intelligencer, Mr. Smith's paper at Easton; the Republican Advocate, at Fredericktown; and Mr. Grievess paper at Hager's-town. By order, NINIAN PINKNEY, Clerk, Dec. 1, 1804. Dec. 14—3w
To be sold at Auction.
At the Court-House in Alexandria, ON Monday the 14th day of January next, at 10 o'clock in the forenoon, about 96 acres of land, lying one quarter of a mile from the built parts of that city, and a great part laid out into streets and lots corresponding with the streets and lots of it. The near vicinity of it to a city so fast increasing, of which it must soon become a part; its lying within the District of Columbia, and other advantages render it an object worthy the attention of monied men, who by retaining it some time cannot fail of making great advantages. In the mean time either the whole or one half if more convenient to a purchaser, may be had at private sale. The terms of payment are ten per cent. in cash, or a good endorsed note at 60 days, and the remainder in three equal annual instalments, on interest from the date. The security required will be a bond, with a conveyance of the land to certain trustees agreed on, who shall have authority to sell, in case of non payment of interest or principal at the time fixed. Persons wishing for information will please apply to Col. George Deneale, at Alexandria, or the subscriber in New-York. NATHANIEL PENDLETON. Dec. 24th, 1804—Jan. 14.
To be Sold.
PART of a tract of Land called Lonchead lying on the Northwest Branch in Prince George's county about 7 miles from the city of Washington, and 3 from Bladensburg; containing by survey about 78 4-3 acres, nearly one third meadow ground, mostly of prime rich bottom, there is on the Land a young thriving orchard, a dwelling house partly new, standing on a high and pleasant situation with a spring of water convenient thereto, the soil is remarkably kind to any kind of grain and grass; a further description of this valuable piece of property is unnecessary, as any person wishing to purchase may see the place and know the terms by applying to the subscriber living on the premises. WILLIAM A. SCOTT. December 10—w3t
Deneale's PATENT THRESHING MACHINE.
THE subscriber having invented a machine (for which he has obtained a patent) for threshing all kinds of grain, particularly wheat and those kinds of grain most difficult to be separated from straw, stem or chaff, takes the liberty of recommending the same to his fellow citizens as worthy their attention. The subscriber is well aware that the public attention has often been solicited to inventions for threshing wheat, and it has been lamented that those inventions have often fallen short of the desired effect, but from the actual experiment which has been made on the one now offered to the public, the inventor is emboldened to recommend it in terms of confidence and a well grounded expectation of its becoming of great profit and utility both to the farmer and manufacturer. This machine is constructed upon entire new principles, its operation is by flails, encircled by a cylinder, moved by friction wheels, and can with ease be regulated so that no straw shall pass off before the grain is entirely threshed out of it. It is worked by two horses, and so geared that their speed will not exceed the rate of three miles per hour and the draught moderate; nor does it require more than two persons to attend it. The straw is discharged at one part and the wheat at another, perfectly screened and fanned ready for market: the favellied wheat, cockles, &c. are deposited by themselves, and the chaff also, so that no mixture takes place. This machine will thresh at the rate of from fifteen to twenty bushels per hour, is not subject, if properly built, to get out of repair, and if kept under cover will last many years. The wheat prepared for market by this machine is worth to the manufacturer considerably more than that got out in the usual mode of threshing, and the cost of the machine will not exceed from one hundred and fifty to two hundred dollars. The subscriber will grant permits to use his threshing machine and furnish a drawing or written description by which it can be executed for fifty dollars each, or any person can view the one he has erected at his mills near Dumfries, Virginia, so as to enable them to erect one from it. The subjoined certificates being from gentlemen whose good understandings and steady habits entitle them to respect, and some of whom being persons of scientific knowledge, he hopes will be sufficient to recommend his machine to public use: he will also contract for the privilege of using his machine in any particular state. Letters post paid directed to him at Dumfries, Virginia, will be duly attended to. JAMES DENEALE, Jun. Dumfries, Dec 3, 1804.
Dumfries, 30 Oct. 1804. WE, the underwritten, inhabitants of the town of Dumfries and its vicinity, having frequently attended experiments made with a machine invented by Mr. James Deneale, of the Quantico Mills, near this place, for the purpose of threshing out wheat, have no hesitation in giving our united testimony in support of the usefulness which will result to the community from this excellent invention. As Mr. Deneale is about to apply to the proper authority for a patent when the constitution will be generally diffused, we deem it unnecessary to add more on the subject. Jno Macrae, David Boyle, James Read, Bernard Gallagher, Hector Alexander, William Smith, Jno. Gibson, William Farrow, George Smith, Joseph Gilbert, Alex. Henderson, Thomas Chapman, Luke Cannon, A. Sowden.
Occoquan, 30th Oct. 1804. BEING called on by James Deneale, of Dumfries, in the state of Virginia, to view a Threshing Machine of his invention, and executed by himself, for which he is about to obtain a patent, I waited on him, but went with prejudice against all threshing machines heretofore invented, having never seen or heard of one that answered a good purpose, and hardly thought it like that this should be much superior to those which had preceded it; but contrary to my expectation, it did its work perfectly, leaving not a grain of wheat in the heads, nor even any chaff on the grains, it made no difference whether the wheat (in the straw) was put into the machine in a straight or in a tangled state, it delivered the straw well, and did not appear difficult to manage, nor so complicated as to be hard to keep in repair: it threshed, while I stood by, nine dozen sheaves of wheat, (such as two dozen in common seasons would have made a bushel) in sixteen minutes, so that I have no doubt it will thresh fifteen to eighteen bushels an hour with two horses to draw it, and two hands to attend it with much ease to the hands and horses with the assistance of a common Dutch fan placed under the machine, which would be turned with and by the machine, the wheat might be rendered nearly fit for market, with only the expence of two hands and two horses working at leisure at the rate abovementioned of fifteen to eighteen bushels an hour, clear from all dirt or stalk of any kind. And as most Millers would find it their interest to give 3d to 6d per bushel more for wheat got out in this way than that got out in the ridiculous mode of threshing with horses on the dirt; I can with confidence, and on the principle of doing to others as I should wish others to do to me recommend this machine to all considerable farmers as worthy their most serious attention and adoption. Seeing the farmers generally in this state do not get for their wheat within 6d. to 1d. per bushel of what the northern farmers get at market, I attribute the cause to the difference in management only. N. ELLICOTT. December 7.—st—stw
Runaway Negro
WAS Committed to the jail of Frederick county, on the 22nd of September last, negro ELIJAH JAH, who says he is about 22 years old, very black; a bold, impudent fellow, 4 feet 10 inches high, has three suits of clothes, and says that he belongs to one James Fitzhark, living in Culpeper county, state of Virginia If his owner does not release him, he will be sold for his jail fees agreeably to law. GEORGE CREAGER, Sheriff of Frederick County. Oct. 29—12w8c