The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1809-08-07 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
IX.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1377.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM,
MONDAY, AUGUST 7, 1809.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
The National Intelligencer is conducted by SAMUEL H. SMITH, and JOSEPH GALE, Jun. and printed at the office of the former, to whom subscribers and correspondents are requested to address themselves.
The annual price, payable in advance, is Five Dollars.
Advertisements, not exceeding one square in size, are inserted the first time at fifty cents, and for every subsequent insertion twenty-five cents. If inserted less than three times a dollar is charged. If inserted but once a week, an addition of one fourth part is made. Other advertisements charged in the same ratio.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DEBATE.
On the petition of Edward Livingston, praying to be restored to the possession of the Batture opposite the suburbs of St. Mary's, New Orleans.
MONDAY, JUNE 19.
MR. MACON called for the consideration of the report of a select committee on the subject of the batture recommending a reference of the subject to the Attorney General of the United States, with directions to enquire into the validity of the title of the United States.
MR. BURWELL thought that this was not the proper course to pursue; but that the course recommended at the last session was the proper one, viz. to give the petitioners the right of appeal from the decision of the Orleans court to the Supreme court, or to give the United States the same right, should the decision be against them. He could see no advantage in the procrastination now proposed, nor any injury to the United States or the city of New Orleans in the course which he advocated. He doubted, although the letter of the law of 1807* might cover this case, whether it was ever intended that that law should operate as this had done. My intention, said he, in voting for it was that it should apply exclusively to the Western lands commonly called the Yazoo lands, and such other lands as were occupied by intruders who might be formidable from their numbers. To undertake jurisdiction on questions of property is taking upon ourselves the functions of another department of the judiciary. The case involves important points of law—and let me ask, whether gentlemen in this House are so well read in law as to be able to decide such an important point as this. It does appear to me that on all questions of private property arising in the United States, where the question of right is not to be brought before this House, we ought to consult the convenience of the parties by promoting dispatch. On the question whether this property belong to the U. States or to the petitioners I am completely ignorant. Nor would I have it inferred that I believe the petitioner to have a right to the property; I take it that the claim of the United States must be good or the inhabitants of Orleans would not be so zealous in support of it. Mr. B. dwelt further on the difficulty of deciding in this House on complicated claims to property, if it were right in any case so to do.
MR. POWNALL asked for the reading of a letter which he had received from the Governor of Orleans territory, which was accordingly read. The letter states, that if it were possible that the committee to whom Mr. Livingston's claim was referred could now visit New Orleans, they would be convinced that the batture, now covered with water, was in fact the bed of the river, and therefore could not be private property. Mr. P. stated the history of this piece of alluvion at some length, and the citizens, and the circumstances under which it had always been deemed public property.
MR. SHEFFER said that before passing this resolution gentlemen ought to ascertain what the Attorney General could do in this case. He could not compel the attendance of witnesses or go himself to New Orleans to collect testimony of circumstances which occurred an hundred years ago; and unless he could do this, it was impossible he could examine the title, for testimony as to facts was essential to enable him to form a correct opinion. What influence could the opinion of the Attorney General have? Was the right of the citizen to fall prostrate before such an ex parte opinion or state-
ment as that might be? If it was not to have influence, why thus evade a decision on the prayer of the petitioner? If it was to have any influence, it must be a pernicious one, because founded on ex parte testimony. Would the House go into the merits of the case on this opinion, when obtained, without affording an opportunity to the party interested to prove that the law was not correctly expounded nor facts correctly stated? Surely not. If they did not, if they heard opinions on both sides, they converted this House into a judicial tribunal. Was this body calculated for that branch of government? No; this, Mr. S. said, is a government of departments, each of which ought to be kept separate. What, sir! is this a question of right between the United States and an individual, and we are about to take it into our own hands, to wrest it from the constitutional authority, and decide it ourselves! I hope we shall not; and therefore I am against this proposition. What does the Attorney General state in his report? Aware of the impropriety of his deciding, he tells you—what? That the usual course, where the rights of the United States have been involved, has been to appoint commissioners to hear and decide. Here the Attorney General tells you it is not proper for him to decide.—And I should never wish to see the case in which the Attorney General's opinion is to give authority for dispossessing an individual of his property; for if it can be done in one case it may in every case.—Any individual may be driven from his property by military force, and then his title be decided by an ill-shaped one-sided statement and opinion of the Attorney General. Against such a decision I do protest. Is it because you have the power on your side, sir, that you will not submit to a judicial decision of this question? If there be a controversy about a right, there ought to be a judicial decision.
I, sir, have been unable to see how an individual having property, of which he was put in possession in 1804 or 5 by a judicial decision, could be dispossessed of it by the act of 1807, the operation of which was limited to acts done hereafter, that is, after the passing of that act in 1807. That law too speaks of "lands ceded to the U. States." Was the batture ceded to the U. States? I say not, because it was private property before the U. S. possessed the sovereignty of the country. By the treaty of 1803 with the government of the U. States, the rights and property of the inhabitants of Louisiana was secured to them. What then is the inference, from this state of the case? That the U. S. got possession illegally, in defiance of judicial authority. I am sorry to see that the judicial authority has been set at defiance, and the Presidential mandate carried into effect at the point of the bayonet, right or wrong. This was the case. Those who were put in possession were ousted by military force. Let me not be understood as throwing odium on the Executive; far from it. I believe the Executive acted conscientiously, but upon an ex parte statement. The President was never told that the case had been judicially investigated. Those facts were taken for granted, on the other hand, which did not exist, and those which formed the foundation of the true merits of the case, were withheld.
MR. S. went into an examination at some length of the legal points and facts involved in this question. Was the House, when it had received the Attorney General's report, to establish itself into a judicial tribunal, send for witnesses or take an ex parte statement as respected the U. S. or the individual? Gentlemen would then ultimately be convinced, if they were not now, that a body like this was incompetent to do justice to a contested claim for property.
When the opinion of the Attorney General should come before the House, if it were the same as already given in favor of the title of the U. S. would Congress, because the U. S. had obtained a tortuous and illegal possession, deny an opportunity of investigation before a tribunal of justice? A shadow of justice might be held out, but it would be a shadow indeed. The party petitioning had already had a decision in his favor. And, after the parties had been fully heard, after the judges had pronounced their decision in favor of the petitioner, would the House pretend to say that
he had not a color of right?
MR. S. concluded his observations by expressing a hope that the reference to the Attorney General would be rejected; that a speedy mode of decision would be adopted; that the right of the claimant should be fully investigated; that it should be ascertained whether his claim was founded in justice or was a spurious one, and the case decided accordingly.
MR. POWNALL spoke at some length in reply to Mr. Sheffer and in defence of the title of the U. S. The batture had many years ago been considered as public property, and no one who examined the circumstances of the case could for a moment doubt it. He said that it had never been claimed as private property until after it came into the possession of the U. S. He hoped the rights of the public and of the people of New Orleans would not be trampled upon to grant the petitioner his prayer.
MR. MACON said that he was himself in favor of giving the right of the U. S. to the property to the people or corporation of New Orleans, and letting them and the individual contest it. There was nothing new, however, in the reference of a subject to the head of a department, whose opinion would have no more weight than reason, and so far only ought it to have weight. Mr. M. said he had no more desire to interfere with the judiciary than either of the gentlemen who had spoken. If provision was made for trying this case, must it not be extended to all others? In order to do justice, it must be done to all. Had not a special court been refused in relation to a property of much greater value than this? Before Congress made a special court for a certain case, they ought to look at the consequences. It was departing from the general system of the nation to appoint a court for a special case. Perhaps there was something in this case which differed from other cases; but he doubted whether it would warrant the appointment of a special court. Mr. M. said he saw no other way of treating this subject but letting it go before the courts already organized. If the right was in the petitioner, be the consequence what it might, the city of N. Orleans had no right to take it away from him.
MR. ROSS said that the delegate from the territory seemed to fear that the question of right would be decided now. The decision of this resolution either one way or the other would require delay. The House must first decide whether they would act on the case or not. If not, it was to no purpose to have the testimony collected. Was it the best way of collecting testimony, to refer a subject to the attorney-general who has no power to issue compulsory process? He was not of opinion that this House could exercise judicial authority. If it did, he would not have evidence collected in the mode proposed. If the right of the petitioner had been invaded, the invasion of that right was the invasion of the right of every citizen of the United States. He did not mean to express any opinion as to the right in this case, for he had not formed any. It was impossible for the House to decide fairly between the U. States and Mr. Livingston, when the evidence was collected by an officer of the United States. Whenever commissioners were to be appointed, they ought to be appointed by agreement or with the consent of both parties to the litigation. Errors often occurred even in taking depositions by the omission or misconstruction of a word, and the same might much more readily occur in this case.
What good could result from all this delay, if it was not intended to decide on this case ultimately? Let commissioners be appointed, said Mr. R. to hear and decide this point. The general position that we ought not to establish special tribunals for particular cases is correct; but like other general rules is not without an exception. If a difference arises between two states, do they not appoint commissioners to decide on the right? This course was pursued in the contest between the states of Pennsylvania and Connecticut in regard to the right to the soil of a tract of country. And why was it so decided? Because the case was one ei generis , totally distinct from all cases coming regularly before a regular judicial tribunal. Is this such a case? From every thing which I have heard of this case, it is such a one. This House is not the proper
tribunal to decide it; but, if it do decide it, the Attorney General is not the proper commissioner to take depositions.
MR. TROUT in the commencement of his remarks, made an observation that this case was probably one which would fall under the old maxim nullum tempus occurrit regno or republica . It appeared to him that there was a constitutional difficulty in this case, which did not appear to have suggested itself to the mind of any gentleman. First, has the United States a claim, either real or disputed, to this territory? Whether disputed or otherwise, provided the claim be asserted on its part, the question is, has the Congress of the United States a power to decide the validity of that claim? And if it has, is it proper so to decide it? What is the subject matter in dispute? Public property—and what species? Landed. Then the question results, has Congress a right, in order to determine its title, to refer it to any tribunal whatever? I contend not; the right to public property was originally in the people of this country; they could never be divested of their great public right to the landed property of the nation, but by their express consent. They did give that right to the Congress of the United States, in declaring that it should have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations concerning public territory. Would it have had that power, if this right had not been expressly delegated? I know that, under the old articles of confederation, Congress did undertake to legislate as to property; but it was always questionable whether they had a right to do so—and this was not the only point on which Congress did exercise powers which were brought into question. The right to determine claims to public property is not only guaranteed exclusively to Congress by the constitution, but the practice has been invariably pursuant to it—it was so in 1807. The government not only asserted its right in the first instance, but asserted its power to enforce the right at the point of the bayonet. If the public have always been in possession of a certain property, the man who enters on it without their consent is a trespasser on that property. Upon this view of the subject there is a constitutional difficulty on which the House should decide before it entertains a motion for delegating a power to decide this question to any tribunal or commission whatever.
MR. BOYN said, admitting all the gentlemen had said to be true, his observations did not apply to this case. He had spoken of the right to public property. The question now was whether this was public property or not; if it were certainly public property, on which ground the gentleman rested his argument, there could be no question on the subject. It was asked only before they decided, between the individual and the United States on the right to land, not confessedly public property, but claimed as such, that fair investigation should be had. Mr. B. disclaimed the power of deciding judicially upon the subject; it was a right which he had never thought of this House claiming. A delay of justice was a denial of it. The individual petitioning had been in possession of the property; it had been taken from him by force, and he now asked a trial of his title before a competent court—and this opportunity Mr. B. said he ought to have as speedily as possible.
MR. RANDOLPH said he should vote against that report. He said it was no part of his intention to deliver any opinion on the merits of the claim, although he had devoted not a little of his time to the study of that question, for two reasons: first, that it would be a prejudiced opinion, inasmuch as that was not the question which the House were called upon to decide, even if it were competent to decide it. I am extremely sorry, said he, that the law of 1807 has been brought into view of the House by my friends from North Carolina and Georgia, and for this reason; that that law has no bearing at all on the present question. Its object was wholly different from that to which it has been misapplied. What, sir, was the object of that law? To defend against a conspiracy, I may properly term it, against the lawless violence of confederated associations a vast public property. How has it been
applied? Not to a great public property but to a speck of land, to which, as I understand it, a single individual, or at most three or four put in a claim. Such an application as that of the law in question was never intended by the Legislature; and, if applied to such a property as the batture and to the case of a single individual, may be applied to the property of every man in society. What is the doctrine of my friend from Georgia? That the public are always supposed to be in possession of the national domain. True, sir; and it is also true that those who enter upon it and endeavor to appropriate it to themselves are trespassers, and as such may be resisted by force. But that is not the case in the present question—very far from it—for the public never had been in possession of the property in question.
Without attempting to enter into the merits of the real title to the land in question let us take it on the ground of the right of the citizen. A citizen comes before this House and complains that he is dispossessed of his common right by arbitrary power. If, after a cause has been heard by a court and a citizen put in possession of a property by a decree of that court, he is dispossessed of it by military violence, where if not before this House, is he to prefer his claim for redress? There is no court before which he can go; because the court which is the last resort in this case has already unavailingly given its decision. There is no court of appeal, no superior tribunal—and if there were and a decree of the supreme court obtained in his favor on the appeal, what is any decree to avail against armed men, against muskets and bayonets? But this is not the only reason why I am sorry that the act of 1807 has been brought in to apply this case. It is because, if this House can once be prevailed upon to consider this case as analogous to the Yazoo case, many most injurious consequences must follow therefrom. The first is, that that odious and supremely infamous claim will be put upon a ground which it is my no means entitled to occupy—and I intreat my friend from Georgia and those whose minds are unalterably made up on the Yazoo question, not to give their enemies such a prize as they must have on us, if we agree to confound the Yazoo claim with that before the House. There is no sort of analogy between them. On the other hand, sir, supposing the right to be in the U. S. I beg gentlemen not to create so forcible an interest against the right of the United States as will infallibly be embodied against it if we confound the two. I have no idea of giving the Yazoo men such a handle. Again, let us suppose, if we can suppose it, that the right is in the petitioner—may it not, supposing a great majority of the House to be against the Yazoo claim—we do not know how they are disposed—may it not create an unjust bias against the petitioner? So that, in whatever aspect we view it, it is not only impolitic, but, what is worse, extremely unjust to attempt to identify the two cases. And, sir, it is matter of curious speculation, that, while the act of 1807 has been brought into operation in the case of a solitary individual and a little speck of property to which it was not intended to apply, even supposing the case in question to have arisen subsequently to the passage of that act—that although it has been misapplied in this case, it has not been applied to the case to which it was intended to apply and for which it was enacted—for, if I understood my friend from Georgia a few days ago, some hundreds or thousands of intruders have set themselves down on the public lands, and the public force has never been employed against them. On the contrary, the artillery of government has been brought into play against a single individual. It was indeed said that these intruders had agreed to remain as tenants at will—but, let them remain till they are sufficiently strong, and they will give you another chapter in the history of Wyoming; for, after they are sufficiently strong to hold the territory, although the arm of government has been applied successfully to oust a single individual put in possession by a decree of a court, you will find it nerveless to expel these men.
With regard to the doctrine nullum tempus occurrit republica , is it a dangerous doctrine, if carried to the extent to which I apprehend my friend
* Giving power to the President to expel intruders from the public lands by military force
* Alluding to the law for expelling intruders from public lands.

from Georgia would carry it. I venture to say that the abuse of that doctrine in the celebrated case of Sir John Lowther and the duke of Portland, which created one general sentiment of indignation in the British nation, is an attempt under that maxim to deprive a subject hostile to the court of property of which he had been long in possession, for the purpose of transferring it to a minion of the court—that case with all its aggravated enormities, does not come up to the case before the House; and I speak without reference to the question whether the petitioner has a right or not to the property in this case. The question of right is not before the House, and that question, decide which way you will, can have no sort of weight in the vote which the House ought to give. The question is this—Having been long in possession of a piece of land, the title deeds destroyed, records burnt, and possession the only title you have to show, an attempt is made to dispossess you of the property; a decree of a court confirms your right—if the individual under these circumstances can be turned out of possession by main force & strength, and that too military force, there is an end in the right to property of every man in the country. Sir, I have been astonished, and grieved, and mortified, to see so little sensation created in this nation by the procedure in question. It strikes at the root of every thing dear to freemen. There is an end of their rights. This doctrine has been applied in the first instance in the territory of Orleans—but where is the security that it will not be applied tomorrow in the territory of Columbia, and the next day in every state in the union. And, Sir, I shall consider the acquisition of the territory of Louisiana, otherwise so valuable, as a pernicious gift, if it be the means of the introduction of this doctrine. Suppose this case—for I believe there is not a part of the union where there is greater confusion of title than in this city of Washington—suppose it to have occurred here. Suppose it to be a matter of doubt whether property belongs to one individual or another, or to the government. Suppose the question to have been settled by due course of law, and a legal decision to have been had thereupon; and then suppose that the President of the U. S. had taken this law, which my friend from North Carolina very properly calls the Yazoo law, to apply to the turning out the person put in peaceable possession of the property, and keeping him out—I do not know for my part any duties which the marine corps have to perform at the barracks to prevent them from being employed for that purpose. Suppose property of mine or any man in this House to be in dispute—there is not a man of us who may not be turned out of possession—and how? Upon the doctrine, as I understand my friend, that the government is always supposed to be in possession of property, and “nullum tempus occurrit!” So that land in possession of your ancestors since their emigration, may be taken from you because the government is always supposed to be in possession! A more flagrant abuse of power never was, never can be, committed; and the only ground on which it can be attempted to be sanctioned is that it is a small spot of land and the property of an individual—the very ground on which it becomes every individual to contest it. If the law had been applied to a country covered by vast hordes of Indians, the case would have been different; it would have been no individual claim. But when we apply it to every little farm, to every cottage, if the people are not very different from what I believe them to be, they must unite, una voce , in reprobation of the outrage. I venture to say, if you go into any state and attempt to dispossess any farmer or planter of his twenty-five acres in this way they would rise in opposition to it. Sir, the old tea and stamp tax was nothing to it. It is a principle which comes home to the bosom and fireside of every man in the country—a principle which if we sanction, there is not an individual in the United States who may not tomorrow be turned out of his right and set a drift and that after a finding in his favor by a righteous jury.
What then is this case? An individual comes before us and says that after his being put in possession of a piece of land—I speak not of the validity of his title; it is not concerned in this question—he was dispossessed by military force of this property. These two facts I do not understand any member of this House to deny. And what does he claim? He claims of you, as the guardians of the rights of every man in society, justice. And where do you send him? To the attorney-general. I will suppose that in the Lowther and Portland case, the duke of Portland had been referred to the attorney-general. Would the English nation have endured it? No sir, much less would
they have endured, military as the nation is becoming; by the introduction of large standing armies, that he should have been dispossessed of his property by an armed military force at the fiat of the crown. The question is, what should be done? Sir, what should not be done is perfectly clear. It ought not to be done that the petitioner should be sent to the Attorney-General, who has already given an opinion on his claim, though that is very immaterial, which opinion it seems we cannot find. If I understand anything of this government, however, it ought to be on record, and this return of non est inventus ought not to have been received. All that we have to do, it appears to me, is to make a provision in the nature of a declaratory law, not amending the act of 1807, but declaring what the law is; and we ought to quiet the rights and the mind of every man in society by declaring that by the act of 1807 it was not intended to authorize the President of the U. States to interpose the bayonet between the courts of justice and the individual. This power never has been given, never was intended to be given. The individual has a right to a remedy somewhere against those who thus ousted him. If I were to set myself down on this heath by which we are surrounded, and take possession of a spot of earth to which I have no more title than Robinson Crusoe, it is not in the power of the President to remove me, more especially after a court has given an opinion in my favor. I must be dispossessed by due course of law, and not of gun-powder and steel. I see a battle forming before my door in George-town. It may become a question to whom that battle belongs—for the territory has been ceded by the states of Virginia and Maryland in the same manner as Louisiana was by France. That question may be brought into court. Suppose it decided that the owner of the island is entitled to the battle, & he is put in possession—I ask whether it would be competent to the Executive, under the ubiquity of the right of the United States to the soil, and the maxim of nullum tempus occurrit , to remove the party thus put in possession—to take away the property and give it to a favorite, no matter whether the corporation of George-town or an individual? It could not.
As to the sensation which this question has appeared to excite, I consider it one of the most important questions which ever arose under this constitution, and a question too the merits of which are not to be, by any possibility, affected by the question whether the claimant has a legal right to the property or not. I did expect, Sir, when the act of 1807 passed, that it would have been applied to very different purposes. I did not expect that in 1809 there would have been two thousand persons on that property permitted to hold it peaceably, when force was put in the power of the President to remove them; and that the law would have been put in force only in relation to a small spot of land, the property of an individual not only unable to resist military authority, but even to resist the Marshal. There was no cause for such interference. My colleague (Mr. Sheffey) has indeed explained the motives which may have influenced the decision. I believe that the President may be misled by evil counsellors. It is not investing a man with great Executive power or placing him in a great department of the government that divests him of the frailty of man. Whatever may be brought in palliation of this outrage, it nevertheless strikes at the root of the rights of every man in society. The motive of the action belongs to the other House to consider, when a case is brought before them, in which the question of the guilt or innocence of the party is involved.
I have said more than I intended, but I could not have said less. I could not reconcile it to myself as a free man, determined to defend as long as I can my fireside and household gods against military power, to consent that the same right of my fellow-citizens shall be violated with impunity, if I can help them.
Mr. LYON said that he was also of opinion that the President had been wrong in what he had done; but the law had compelled him to do it. Mr. L. referred to the law to show that the terms of it were imperative. The gentleman from Virginia (said Mr. L.) takes it for granted that the petitioner was in possession of the property in question, previous to the passage of the law; but I believe it was subsequent. I spoke of that law when it passed as I speak of it now; I told gentlemen that the law could take in other cases than those which they intended it to operate on; I told them that they were acting in direct opposition to the constitution. I want to know what difference there is between this case and that of a man who owned land in any other territory? The rigorous law has been but rigorously
executed in relation to this case. I would repeal the law and appoint commissioners to take cognizance of the case. Repeal your unconstitutional law, and undo what has been done under it. You may smother the law as they lately did the Olmstead business in Pennsylvania, but it will be understood to the original cause of it. I am glad to see that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) has come to the end of his tether; he has persuaded the House to pass an unconstitutional law, and now compares it with the tea and stamp tax—The Speaker said it was doubtful whether it was within the rules of order for any member to say that a gentleman had persuaded the House to pass an unconstitutional law.] Mr. LYON said, he believed he was always apt to speak the truth too bluntly. He would give his advice to undo the law, to accommodate what had been done, and bring the business to an end. This clause of the law would be found to fit a thousand other cases as well as it had done this; it was unconstitutional and improper; and the House never would do right until they wholly repealed the law.
Mr. GOLD said that this was one of the most important subjects that had ever been brought before the House. He did not mean to enter into the merits of the case. The gentleman from Virginia had very clearly expressed all those sentiments which every man must feel on hearing the history of this case; and as regarded the ground taken of nullum tempus occurrit the gentleman had repelled it very properly—and indeed in that country whence the maxim had been derived, whenever it was attempted to be put in force against ancient possessions, it had been executed with great difficulty. It is in the very teeth of magna charta , which says that a freeman shall not be dispossessed of his freehold without a better right is ascertained. There are a variety of forms by which the right is guarded. If I, said Mr. Gold, understood the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Troup) he considers it a sacrifice of the rights of the U. S. to permit a decision on its property to pass into the hands of third persons. Even in England the prerogative is not carried so far. The crown has frequently consented that the right of government should pass into the hands of third persons, viz, of commissioners for the purpose of investigation.
I will not trouble the House with lengthy remarks on this subject. I can hardly advert to it without feeling all that has been much more eloquently expressed by the gentleman from Virginia than it is in my power to express it. Let gentlemen look around and see if they can find a precedent for this transaction. And when we consider it, every man's feelings must be operated upon too strongly to permit him to argue. The course suggested by the gentleman from Virginia must prevail, or we no longer live under a government of laws, and those principles on which it is founded are destroyed. The man ousted must be put in possession, must be restored to the possession of the property which the band of violence has wrested from him; and I hope that a proposition to this effect in a proper shape will be presented.
Mr. ALSTON said, God forbid that he should be concerned in the smallest degree whatever in wresting from an individual property to which he was justly entitled. It had been stated by the gentleman from Virginia that the act of 1807 was not intended to apply to this case. From an examination of that law, said Mr. A. I verily believe that if ever there was a case on which that law could operate, this was such a case. Do you find anything in this law saying that it is to guard against associations? It speaks a language too plain to be misunderstood. The act says “if any person or persons” shall do so and so. This surely applies to individuals as well as to associations. Away then with the nice distinctions between this case and that of intruders on the lands of the United States. I shall not attempt to investigate the title of the claimant or of the United States in the present case. Why will gentlemen attempt to make a distinction between this case and that of any other individual who has intruded on the lands of the United States? If the U. States had a claim to land, was it not the duty of the President, under the law of 1807, when an individual took possession of it, to remove him from it? Surely it was. Was the claim of this petitioner laid before the commissions appointed to take cognizance of claims to land in Louisiana? I believe not. Let, then, the proper authority make a decision on it. The court of Orleans was not the proper court. The right of the United States was not defended before the court of Orleans; and the decision, before that court therefore ought to have no influence in leading the minds of gentlemen to a decision on this subject. The public have a claim; they are
now in possession; and I will never consent to establish any tribunal for this different from that which decides in similar cases.
(Debate to be Continued.)
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, AUGUST 7.
The PRESIDENT of the United States arrived yesterday from Montpelier.
The Secretary of War arrived in this city on Friday.
It will be seen, by the news in the Postscript, that Mr. JACKSON, the expected minister from England, had not sailed on the 21st of June.
LABOR-SAVING MACHINES.
There is no part of the world in which such strong inducements exist to the cultivation of the vast resources resulting from the use of labor-saving machines as in the United States. This arises from the high price of labor and the versatile talents of our inhabitants. And as these causes are like to continue for ages, in consequence of the vast extent of our Western lands, and the vigor of the American mind, arising from the freedom of our inhabitants and the great field open to it, it would seem to be the dictate of true wisdom to cherish, by all laudable means, this invaluable resource. The astonishing progress recently made in mechanics, by applying its powers to the advancement or perfection of several useful arts, should emphatically impress us with the infinite extent to which the ingenuity of the human mind, under propitious circumstances, is calculated to expand. Were we called upon to assign the principal cause of the unrivalled wealth of Great Britain, we should unhesitatingly specify this. Other causes, it is true, have concurred, but this has been the main-spring, whose powerful elasticity has borne up against an oppressive load of taxes and monopolies unknown in any other quarter of the globe. It is this that has given her a superiority in manufactures, both in the fabric and the actual cost, that has enabled her by supplying to a great extent the whole civilized world, to impose a tax upon foreign nations, that constantly tends to the increase of her wealth and relative strength. The manufactured goods annually exported from that country exceed two hundred millions of dollars in value. On this immense amount she levies a duty, graduated at pleasure, on foreign nations. Besides this, her manufactures, her factors, her merchants that import raw materials, or her growers of them at home, with the numerous classes and professions dependant upon them, receive a remuneration for their capital and labor by the sale of the manufactured goods that supply the wants of foreign nations, the price of which enables all those connected directly or indirectly with their production to pay their complicated taxes, to support themselves, and receive a handsome profit. Were this subject traced to its source, it would probably be found, that, in this way, more than half the immense amount of taxes drawn into the British exchequer, is actually derived from the tribute of foreign nations.—Here is an inexhaustible mine of wealth compared with which those of Golconda or Mexico are insignificant, and as productive of solid riches, as the latter have been fatal to them.
From the structure of our constitution, we are inhibited from laying any duty on exportation of the raw materials, which England takes in exchange for the very fabric made out of them. Our only resource then left is to manufacture for ourselves; and in the same degree in which we decline doing this shall we virtually pay a tax to England.
On this subject we are met at the threshold by those who are opposed to the progress of the American manufactures, with the enquiry, whether there is any thing so captivating or enviable in the state of Great Britain, as to recommend our following the course which she has pursued? It is asked, whether the happiness of our people would be promoted by their exchange of agriculture for manufactures. We say unhesitatingly no, and that the case put is in the highest degree visionary. No one in truth dreams of it. We do not desire to advance manufactures beyond agriculture; we know that the attempt would be as futile as pernicious; we know that agriculture must for ages continue the chief occupation of our citizens. So far from this inflexible habit of our citizens constituting an argument against judicious encouragement of manufactures, it is the strongest argument that can be urged in support of it. For, promote manufactures as we may, there is no danger of supplanting agriculture; they may aid, but it is impossible for them to paralyse it. The rapid growth of our numbers, the vast range of unoccupied
land, the proneness of our citizens to the cultivation of the soil, will long avert the period, if indeed it should ever come, when we shall manufacture more than we want for ourselves, or when our mechanics shall bear any considerable proportion to those employed in agriculture. It follows that encourage manufactures as we may, we cannot change the habits or character of our citizens, or produce any of those great evils which a manufacturing nation is destined to endure.
On the particular subject, too, now under consideration, it ought to be recollected that for the supply of manufactured articles, we are not now dependent for more than a sixth part on the foreign world; and that consequently the effects of improved machinery operating most extensively on the fabrication of articles already made among us would principally have the effect of reducing their price, as well as that of the products of agriculture, by diminishing the number of hands taken from it, whereby the quantity produced would be augmented without a correspondent increase in the demand. Labor-saving machinery, therefore, is equivalent to a new creation, and has the palpable effect of contributing to the comfort of man what, without it, he could not enjoy. It also elevates the laboring class of the community by making their labor more productive, and effects this without injuring in the least the other classes of which the community is composed.
However, then, we may differ about the policy of offering bounties to manufactures, either by direct rewards, or by duties on imported fabrics, there can be no difference on the expediency of introducing, by suitable encouragements, the mechanical improvements made in other countries, and of exciting, by proper rewards and honors, the improvements that may be made by our own citizens. This involves the exercise of a power, indisputably inherent in the general government, a power now and long since virtually exercised in the grant of patents. It is a power, whose exercise can excite no just alarm, either on the score of constitutionality or expediency; while, on the other hand, it is fitted to produce the greatest benefits at the least expence, and to reflect new lustre on the American name.
Let this power, then, be forthwith exercised. Instead of exacting a party sum for a patent, let the government widely open the door to the ingenuity of our citizens, and grant a patent to every meritorious applicant without any fee. Let them establish a scientific board to investigate the merits of each application before a patent is allowed; and, when allowed, let there be an official announcement of it, with the explanation necessary to recommend it to trial. Let there be a spacious suite of apartments, in which the works of genius that are offered may be conspicuously and imposingly arranged, with directors, whose duty it shall be to keep them in order and explain them to the visitor, the whole being accessible to every one. Let periodical premiums of honor or profit be distributed among those who shall make the most valuable improvements. For these purposes, to wit: the creation of proper apartments, their superintendence, the publicity given to improvements and inventions, and premiums, let the annual sum of 50,000 dollars be appropriated, a sum, which divided among the people of the United States, would not average a cent a head.
We have received a few late London papers, but their contents have mostly been anticipated in the Northern prints, and thence copied into this paper.
In these papers, however, we find one article which is deemed worthy of insertion, as relating to the late development of our situation with Great Britain. An abstract of this debate has already appeared in the United States, but we have not seen it so much at length as it now appears.
AMERICA.
Mr. MARSHALL, after some preliminary observations, said, that he was rejoiced at the intimation given by his majesty's ministers, namely that they would not withhold those papers for which he at present moved. The hon. member concluded by moving:—
“That an humble address be presented to his majesty, that he would be graciously pleased to direct that there be laid before the House copies of such notes as passed between his majesty's ministers and the U. S. of America on the repeal of the old acts of council of November and January last, and also with regard to the renewal of a commercial intercourse between the countries, together with a copy of such instructions as had been sent by his majesty's ministers at home to their resident minister in America on the subject of such negotiation.”
Mr. CANNING said, that on a former night, in answer to the question of a noble lord on this subject, he had stated, that it was not the intention of his majesty's ministers to advise his majesty on the point, not considering it necessary to call parliament to come to any opinion on the matter. There could be no objection, he said, to the laying of papers before the House which had alrea-

On Monday Evening, August 7, 1809 WILL BE PRESENTED, A Favourite Comedy in two acts, called THE MOCK DOCTOR. To which will be added, A grand Operatic Romance in 2 acts, called THE FORTY THIEVES. Founded on that celebrated Tale in the Arabian Nights Entertainments, by Richard Brinsley Sheridan, Esq. and performed at the Theatre Royal Drury-lane, upwards of two hundred nights, to the most crowded houses. The Scenery, Machinery, Dresses, and Decorations ENTIRELY NEW. The Story designed by Mr. Stuart, and executed by him, assisted by H. B. Warren. The Dresses by Mr. Macculloch—with the original Music by Kelly; the Orchestration accompanied by M. Pellesier. Dances under the direction of Mr. Francis. Battle and Marches by Mr. Harris. A particular description of this grand romance, the scenery, decorations, &c will be found in the bills. The whole to conclude with A DIVINE.
Box One Dollar—Fifteen Cents. Tickets for Children at 50 cents. Tickets to be had at the Office of Time more and Cooper, Eleventh-street, near L'Enfant's Avenue. Doors will open at Six—Curtain rise Quarter before Seven o'Clock.
C. & A. CONRAD & Co. (PHILADELPHIA) Have just Published, THE AMERICAN REGISTER, OR GENERAL REPOSITORY OF HISTORY, POLITICS & SCIENCE, Part II. for 1808—Vol. IV. Price Three Dollars, Twenty-five Cents.
THIS volume contains a general History of the State of Europe, during the interval between the peace of Tilsit, and the attack of the French Emperor on Spain. Official papers relative to the evacuation of Portugal by the French army. Foreign and American State Papers. An account of the Red River and country adjacent. An account of Louisiana at the time of its transfer to the United States. Census of Louisiana. Census of West Florida. Census of Upper Louisiana. Census of New Orleans. Catalogue of Publications, for 1808. Account of the proceedings of the Society of Friends, for promoting the improvement and gradual civilization of the Indians. Letter concerning the Fortifications, erecting at New-York, &c. &c.
THE American Artillerists Companion, or ELEMENTS OF ARTILLERY, No. VI. By Louis de Tottendorf. Price Two Dollars.
Third Supplement to the PHILADELPHIA MEDICAL AND PHYSICAL JOURNAL, BY B. S. BARTON, M.D. Price 50 Cents. C. & A. C. & Co. have also just finished the publication of the
PLAYS OF WM. SHAKESPEARE, With the corrections and illustrations of various Commentators; to which are added Notes by Saml. Johnson and George Steevens, revised and augmented by Isaac Reed, with a Glossarial Index—Seventeen Volumes crown octavo. Any of the above BOOKS may be had at the store of Daniel Rapine, Capitol Hill, Washington city. August 7—
TO RENT, The Three Story BRICK HOUSE on Pennsylvania avenue, lately occupied by Dr. Willis opposite Lindsay's hotel, with a large STORE ROOM adjoining. Apply to R. C. Weightman. August 7—3t.
PUBLIC SALE. In virtue of a Decree of the Chancery Court, the subscriber will expose to Public Sale the following property, (formerly owned by Wm. Hammond, deceased) to wit:
PARTNERSHIP, containing in the whole 934 acres of Land. This tract is situated on the head of Severn, in Anne Arundel county, adjoining Maj. Philip Hammond's mill, and will be divided into two Lots— Lot No. 1, will contain 566 acres. Lot No. 2, will contain 368 acres. The whole of the above land is in timber and about four miles from navigable water. A more particular description is thought unnecessary, as those inclined to purchase will examine and judge for themselves. On application the land will be shown by Mr. Valentine Brown, living near the premises. The sale will be made at Maj. Hammond's mill, on the 25th day of August next, if fair, if not, the next fair day, and will commence at 12 o'clock. The terms are, one fifth of the purchase money on the day of sale, or ratification thereof by the Chancellor, the residue in four equal annual instalments, with interest from the day of sale.
BASIL BROWN, Trustee. The Editors of the Federal Gazette and the American at Baltimore, Fredericktown Herald, the National Intelligencer, and Mr. Smith's paper at Easton, are requested to insert the above in their papers once a week three times, and send their accounts to the Post-master at Annapolis. August 7—w 3t.
POSTSCRIPT.
New York, August 4.
VERY LATE FROM FRANCE.
The despatch-ship Mentor, Captain Ward, arrived here yesterday afternoon, in 24 days from L'Orient, with dispatches from Mr. Armstrong to government. Mr. Gelston, who is the bearer of them, proceeds this day for the seat of government.
On the arrival of a vessel in so short a passage, much news is naturally expected; but the fact is, no change has taken place, in our affairs. Mr. Armstrong remains in Paris and the French decrees are still in force.
There had been no battles of moment since the defeat of Bonaparte near Vienna, on the 21st and 22d of May; the reason of which is, that Napoleon was waiting the arrival of a large Russian army, which was marching through Gallicia in three divisions.
We have received Paris papers to the 3d of July. They contain the bulletins to No. 22; the last is dated at Vienna, the 24th of June. The bridges on the Danube have been repaired; and Bonaparte expected to destroy the Austrian army, as that of Russia had joined him.
It appears, by the last bulletins, that Bonaparte had retrograded from Ebersdorf to Vienna, where his headquarters were on the 24th June. Bulletin No. 19, states that an action had been fought near Raab in Hungary, on the 13th June. The French army was commanded by Prince Eugene, and the Austrians by the archduke John. The latter were forced by 3 columns, of 20 or 25,000 men; the first column was attacked by the French and repulsed, but the 2d detained for a moment the impetuosity of the French first division, which was immediately reinforced, and repulsed the Austrians. Austrian loss 3000 killed, and about the same number wounded. French loss 900 killed and wounded.
The 20th bulletin states that the Russian army, under the command of Prince Gallitzan, had entered Gallicia near Hungary on the 3d of June, in three divisions, to attack the Austrians. The 22d contains an account of the capitulation of the city of Raab to the French Italian army under Prince Eugene.
Mr. Morton had arrived at Paris with despatches from London.
Col. Burr, had arrived at Stockholm, from England.
Several American vessels had arrived in the ports of Holland. Two, it is said, were from N. York.
Capt. Ward requests us to state, that during his stay at L'Orient, he received the most polite and friendly treatment from all the officers of the French government, for which he wishes thus to express his grateful acknowledgements.
LATEST FROM ENGLAND.
Yesterday arrived at this port, the brig Statira, Capt. Gee, in 40 days from London, which place she left on the 21st of June. From Captain G. and his passengers, the Editor of the Mercantile Advertiser has received a regular file of London papers to the 20th of June, inclusive, and Lloyd's List to the 16th.
By the Statira, we learn, that the British minister (Mr. Jackson) had not sailed for America; but that he was about sailing in a sloop of war for America. The Phoenix frigate was ordered for some other service.
Our commercial friends will find, by referring to our extracts from Lloyd's Lists, that a great number of American vessels have arrived in British ports.—The Statira is the bearer of dispatches from the American Minister in London to the government of the United States.
TWENTY DOLLARS REWARD.
ABSCONDED on the 21st of July last, from the subscriber, (manager at the farm of Mr. Isaac Duckett, on South river, near Annapolis) Negro TOM, a small black fellow, lost the sight of one eye. Had on when he absconded, osnaburg shirt and trousers. Any person taking up said Negro and bringing him to the subscriber, or securing him in jail, so that I get him again, shall receive the above reward.
This Negro was purchased of Capt. J. S. Brooks about five years since; it is probable he may be in the neighborhood of Upper Marlborough.
HENRY BASFORD. August 7—tf
The Subscriber will SELL at his Auction Room on Saturday 12th of August at 5 P.M. near the Centre Market, to wit:
100 Counterpanes, 1 Secretary, 1 pair Card Tables, 11 Gold Ear Rings, 6 dozen Shaving Boxes, 20 pieces Muslin, 10 dozen Muslin Handkerchiefs, 10 bundles Pins, 5 dozen Fans, 3 dozen Gold Breast Pins, 1 silver Watch.
With sundry other articles too tedious to mention. SAML. SPEAKE, Auct. August 4—1t
the repeated wounds he received whilst in the army has impaired his constitution and rendered him incapable of earning a living by hard labor.
Thus circumstanced, he thinks it a duty he owes himself, to make known his situation to his country.
For his character, as a man and as an officer, he appeals to his brother officers in this place who knew him in the army.
He wishes not to eat the bread of idleness, but, if among the appointments, which must necessarily take place, there is any one, in which integrity and the small abilities he possesses, may be made useful, he flatters himself his services—his wounds—and his peculiar situation will be considered as giving him some claim to notice.
JOSEPH WHEATON. May 10th, 1789.
The following vessels [St. Domingo traders, says the North American] have been captured by the British and sent into Jamaica:—
Schooner Ann Eliza, of Philadel. from St. Thomas. Sw. schooner Kitty, St. Thomas to Hayti. Fame, Ford, and sloop Robert, Stucking, from St. Barts. to do. Schr. Jane, Tyott, Jacquemel to Currao. Am. sch. Greyhound, Holmes, St. Jago to St. Domingo. Br. John, Wills, St. Barts. to Jacquemel. Sw. Eliza, do. do. John, Chero, do. do. Br. Phoenix, Broux, St. Barts. to Hayti. Br. Favorite, Winster, St. Thomas to do.
The schooner Nat and John, from Salem to Kingston is plundered by a French privateer off St. Jago de Cuba.
Schooner Shadow, Matthews, hence for Messina; brig Caroline, Drew, Coston to Messina; and schr. Kate, Thompson, sent into Naples; schr. Ann, from Beverly is sent into Civitavecchia.
Count RUMFORD has recently married the widow of M. Verecay, in Paris; by which nuptial experiment he obtained a fortune of 8000. per annum. This is evidently the most effective of all the Rumfordizing projects for keeping a house warm.
New York, July 31.
Health of the City.—It is said abroad that the yellow fever rages in this city, sweeping daily numbers to their graves. Passengers have arrived here in market boats, who have remained on board of the vessels, fearful of entering our streets. It is necessary that people in the country should know the truth. New-York was never more healthy than at the present moment; & every proper means has been taken to keep it so. Country people may, therefore, visit this city now with as much safety as they did in January. Should danger approach, due notice will be given by the Board of Health.
New York, August 3.
The Mayor of this city has issued a proclamation, interdicting under heavy penalties, intercourse with the inhabitants of Brooklyn, on account of the prevalence there of a pestilential or disease.
Philadelphia, Aug. 3.
Arrived this morning ship Creole, Hobkirk, from Amsterdam, with passengers, in ballast. Left the Texel the 28th May, when the ports of Holland were strictly blockaded by the British, which prevented the Creole from bringing a cargo. Mr. Chew, a passenger, is the bearer of dispatches from Mr. Armstrong for our government.
New York, Aug. 3.
Capt. Hathaway of the brig Orange, sailed from Oporto the 28th June. He informs, that it was reported at Oporto, that the British and Portuguese armies were at Branco on the 24th of June, in pursuit of a French army under the command of Gen. Victor. Soult's army was said to be in Spain. Only 600 of the rear guard of Soult, and 80 pieces of cannon, had been taken by the British army. On the 26th and 33th June, 1800 French prisoners were embarked at Oporto for England. There were no French troops in Portugal.
Boston, Aug. 1.
LATEST NEWS. Extract of a letter from Halifax, July 22.
"The Inflexible, sixty-four, has just arrived from England. She sailed from Spithead the 13th ult. The latest London papers received by her, that I have as yet seen are to the 14th. "Three Prussian gentlemen had arrived with dispatches for the British government; as also a Russian messenger.
"William, Duke of Brunswick, has issued a proclamation from headquarters at Zyttau, of the date of the 21st May declaring in favor Austria, and calling for the assistance of all classes of subjects.
often paid your tribute of respect to the revolutionary character, I ask this indulgence with the more confidence, and the Printers throughout the U. States who have published that statement as given in the National Intelligencer.
JOSEPH WHEATON.
The Honorable the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the U. States.
Sir, Permit me to ask the favor of reading the inclosed memorial for the information of the members of the House of Representatives. It will show the ground on which the House of Representatives in the 1st Congress were pleased to consider my peculiar situation. On the day of the date of that memorial I was honored with nearly an unanimous vote for the office of serjeant at arms to that honorable House, and so continued for every succeeding Congress eighteen years—when, permit me to assure you sir, that by misrepresentation of designing men and calumny the House of Representatives withheld that ample suffrage which I had been favored with from the commencement of the government, making together with my revolutionary services about thirty years of my life, in which I have rendered to the nation fidelity, zeal, and every possible exertion to promote its views and prosperity from the earliest moment of the revolution, to the commencement of the 10th Congress. I have now in my possession ample documents to refute every insinuation made then to my prejudice and to show that every dollar of public monies received by me has been applied to the objects for which it was obtained. Being thus unexpectedly dismissed from a service near the Representatives of the nation, whom it was my delight to serve and honor, and with the semblance of degradation attached—I feel that I owe it to your honorable House, to my own character, and to a very numerous connection, two of whom are members of the House of Representatives over whom you preside, to solicit your permission to make this statement to your honorable House and consequently to the world, and to intreat the consideration of the House whether I may be reinstated to the office of serjeant at arms—being with the homage of my heart faithfully, Sir,
Your obedient, Humble Servant, JOSEPH WHEATON. May 22, 1809.
To the Hon. the Speaker and House of Representatives of the U. S. The Memorial and Petition of Joseph Wheaton.
Sheweth, THAT, at a very early period of the late war, your memorialist entered into the service of his country, and served as a captain in the army of the United States, until it was finally disbanded at the conclusion of the war. That his father and four brothers were attached to the cause of Great Britain and served in her armies. And at the conclusion of the war your petitioner's whole family removed to Nova Scotia, where they were provided for by the British government.
Your petitioner being thus left without a home or friends, collected together the little residue of his hard earned wages and flattered himself that by his industry he should be able to gain a subsistence, without the painful necessity of being obligated to his family, who, for his attachment to this country, considered him as an outcast. He accordingly invested his little property in a small vessel, with which, he made two or three voyages with some little success; when the force of natural affection, and perhaps the pride of shewing his family that his attachment to this country had not left him destitute, induced him to undertake a voyage to Nova Scotia; and on the 24th of December, 1784, your memorialist, was so unfortunate as to be cast away on the shore of that inhospitable coast, whereby the vessel and all his property was totally lost.
In this situation your memorialist arrived at the residence of his brothers, and there waited the arrival of his father from England, where he was gone to recover considerable claims on government as a loyalist. Those claims he finally recovered, but dying, left the whole of his property to the other branches of his family, declaring in his will, that your memorialist had disobeyed him and become a rebel against his king, and therefore—to the rebels he might look for support.
Immediately on the receipt of this news your petitioner bid a final adieu to his family. And after a march of 350 miles through the country, obtained a passage to this place.
Your memorialist would have to submitted to many hardships, rather than have been in any manner a tax upon his country; but unfortunately,
as appeared in America in a printed state. He should, however remark, that it was not usual to lay before Parliament instructions given to a minister at a foreign court. With the most perfect desire that this country and America should come to an equal understanding in the entire transaction, he felt not disposed to resist the motion for the present papers. With equal desire of acting with sincerity and frankness in the course of that transaction in which the misfortune had happened, it had been part of the instructions given by ministers that communications should be made in extenso to the American government. He was, imposed to give every credit to the laudable anxiety manifested by the hon. mover, but on the subject of that information he was not now in a position to go into it. It was far from being his desire to impute to any minister employed by the government any blame in their conduct, but in the present instance, though it might be competent to the minister in question to vindicate his proceedings, yet he must say they were in direct contradiction to his instructions. Having been threatened to make certain concessions upon the grounds of certain stipulated conditions, our minister in America had gone the length of granting the concessions without obtaining the equivalent. He did not at all wish to pass on this subject any invidious comment, nor did he mean to encourage any proceeding of Parliament upon it. From the tone and temper of the notes which would come before the House, it would be seen that ministers evinced a disposition to that amicable arrangement so universally wished for. It would appear, on their part there was no intention of contravening any of the articles entered into with America, or of making a gratuitous surrender of a beneficial system, but to alter that system for one, which being equally beneficial, would not prove so disagreeable.
Mr. POXSON wished to know of the right hon. gentleman, whether our minister in America had entered into any justification of his proceedings. And if he had, whether the right hon. gentleman would object to laying such information as he possessed before the House?
Mr. CANNING replied, that he was not disposed to answer on that head. In the papers, which by the present motion would be produced, would be found a dispatch containing the instructions given to that minister, and then the right hon. gentleman, from comparison of papers, would have a full opportunity of informing himself.
Lord H. PERRY protested against this partial production of papers. It appeared to him necessary that the House should be acquainted with the motives upon which our minister in America had acted. It was possible that there may be ground of justification; for, as in the command of an army, so in diplomacy, circumstances may occur which, without reflecting on the merits of the person employed, may warrant a departure from the strict line of his orders. The noble lord would also wish that the papers would include the dispatch relating to the affair of the Chesapeake.
Mr. CANNING wished that hon. members would first read the papers to be laid before them, and then if necessary move for the production of the s.
Lord MANSFIELD wished to know of the right hon. gentleman how we stood with regard to America in a commercial view?
Mr. CANNING replied, that it required a reciprocity of ardor in America to meet the propositions of this country. The commercial situation of both countries was in a state of considerable embarrassment, and it was proposed, owing to this unauthorized act of negotiation, which induced no inconsiderable predicament on our side.
After a few words from Mr. Stephen, Mr. Whitehead, and Mr. A. Baring, the question being put was carried in the affirmative, and the Address ordered to be presented to his majesty by such members as were of his majesty's most hon. privy council.
DUELLING.—We have not lately seen any thing which tends to place this vestige of barbarism in a more ludicrous point of view than the following sentence, which concludes a very minute account of a duel which took place not an hundred miles from Piney Neck, in a neighboring state:
"During the whole of the affair, they (the combatants) conversed together with the greatest respect and politeness, nothing happening on either side to cause the least warmth or dissatisfaction."
These persons, so respectful and polite, had previously agreed to "continue the contest as long as they could stand or sit!"
The insertion of the following communication has been delayed for a few days from the press of other matter:
TO THE Editors of the National Intelligencer. GENTLEMEN,
I noticed the manner in which you stated the re-election of the officers of the House of Representatives of the U. S. at the commencement of the first session, eleventh Congress, and the votes given to each candidate, except for myself. In my case you only state, "the House after hearing a memorial from Joseph Wheaton, stating his services, and praying a re-instatement to the office of serjeant at arms, from which he had been ejected, proceeded to the choice of a serjeant at arms"—out do not state that I had a single vote. I owe it to the Members of the House who voted for me, and to myself, to ask you to state the vote, which was reported 80 for Thomas Dunn, 40 for Joseph Wheaton, and 2 for other candidates.
As my services have been of long duration, I have to ask of you to publish the memorial and the letter which accompanied it to the House. The memorial was written by one of Gen. Washigto's family, who served near him during the whole revolutionary war, and who well knew the peculiar situation under which I served the whole eight years war. You having so

FOR SALE. By virtue of a decree of the High Court of Chancery of the state of Maryland, will be exposed to public sale, in the town of Port Tobacco, Charles county, at the court house at 3 o'clock in the afternoon of the second day of the next August term of Charles county court (which commences on the third Monday of August next) a parcel of that late the property of John D. Scott, deceased, being part of a tract of land called Poynton Manor, lying upon a branch of Nanjemoy creek, on the post road leading to Nanjemoy from Port Tobacco near the "Hill Top" and about seven miles from Port Tobacco.
This land consists of about 300 acres, of which between 50 and 100 acres are well timbered, about 20 acres are in marsh, and the remainder arable and very productive. The terms of sale are that the purchaser shall give bond with sufficient security to pay the purchase money in 12 months from the sale. It will be sold entire or in parcels as may best suit the persons inclined to purchase.
F. S. KEY, Trustee. July 5—tdos
W. & C. SMITH, Have for Sale at their Warehouse near the Ferry— Loaf and Lump Sugar in bds. and barrels, Prime Muscovado do. do. do. 2d and 3d quantity do. do. do. Hyson, Young Hy. } in Chests, Boxes and and Imperial. } Camasters, Coffey, Chocolate, Pepper and Allspice, Nutmegs and Cloves, Sweet Oil in Baskets and Boxes, Indigo and Copperas, Best 4th proof Cognac Brandy, Bordeaux and Marseilles Brandy, Holland and Anchor Gin, Jamaica and Antigua Spirits, old and fit for immediate use, Old and New Whiskey, Madera, Port, Sherry, Teneriffe, Corsica, Sciilly, and Catalonia Wines, Claret in boxes 1 doz. each, Best chewing Tobacco, Demerara, Casts, &c. &c. Geo. Town July 3—ep
TO BE SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION, At Northumberland court house, in the county of Northumberland, and state of Virginia, on Tuesday the 5th of September next, at 11 o'clock in the forenoon, five contiguous plantations, amounting together to about 5,700 acres, situate on the river Potomac, and within about three miles of the court house. These estates formerly belonged to Presley Thornton, Esq. and are the same which he lived. They have never been sold by either of the subscribers, but it is understood, that about 1700 acres of them are as valuable low grounds as any in the river, and a considerable part thereof heavily timbered. The uplands consist of about 1000 acres, and the whole is well adapted for the production of corn, wheat, tobacco, tobacco and small grain of all kinds, in great abundance. The waters are said to abound with excellent fish, oysters and wild fowl. The water carriage is easy and convenient to Norfolk, Baltimore, Alexandria and the city of Washington; and as these estates possess several good mill seats, with an abundance of water and a plentiful supply of timber, they must be very valuable.
The premises will be shown to persons inclined to purchase, by col. James Moore, who lives on them, or by Samuel Blackwell, Esq. who lives near to them; and the terms of payment may be known a sufficient time before the sale, by applying to either of them, or to THOMAS ROBINSON, Near Chester, Delaware, Or to W. LEWIS, at Phila. June 7—tds.
CITY AUCTIONEERS. THE subscribers beg leave to inform their friends and the public, that having given the security required by law, they obtained a license to sell goods, wares and merchandise at vendue in this city. To accommodate those who may be pleased to employ them, they have built a commodious house adjoining the Store of the Purser of the Navy and opposite to Wm. Prout's, and from their close attention to business, they flatter themselves that they will give general satisfaction. NICHOLAS L. QUEEN, HENRY M. QUEEN. May 29—tdf.
FOR SALE. Or to be rented for a term of years, or on perpetual ground-rent. A NUMBER of well built brick houses, several of which are immediately tenable—situate on Greenleaf's point.—Also, house lots in almost every part of the city. Apply to JAMES GREENLEAF, or in his absence to SAMUEL ELLIOT, junr. July 6—sw
PROPOSALS For engraving a representation in honor of THOMAS JEFFERSON, ESQ. Late President of the U. States. THE Piece proposed to be Engraved, is a representation of THOMAS JEFFERSON under the conduct of MINERVA, in which FAME, with her Trumpet, announces to the world his retirement from office. The most correct Judges pronounce it to be an elegant production, and a striking Likeness of Mr. Jefferson himself. It was conceived and executed by Mr. Thomas Gimbrel, an artist of taste and reputation. It is confidently expected that no circumstances of political feeling will withhold public patronage from works of genius. CONDITIONS. The dimensions of this Engraving will be 8 by 6 inches. Price ONE DOLLAR to subscribers, and TWO DOLLARS to such as do not subscribe. Any person who shall procure 10 subscribers shall be entitled to one copy. * Subscriptions received by the publisher, John Hopkins, Philadelphia—Also by all the Booksellers. July 26—tawla15
PROPOSALS. For Engraving a Representation of AMERICA, Figured under the form of a GODDESS extending the hand of relief to suffering humanity. IN this piece, two unfortunate Strangers, a man with a young Babe, after having escaped from oppression and death in their native country, and more immediately from the watery element, appear in distress on our shores. The Wife, seated on a rock, with the almost expiring Infant in her lap, exhibits an image of grief and despair—the Husband, with countenance irresistibly pathetic and eloquent, implores the blessings of God, at the same time seeming to regard rather his tender companion and infant offspring than his own sufferings. At this juncture the GODDESS AMERICA, crowned with beauties and with glories, driven in a Chariot by the GODDESS or LIBERTY, the HORN OF PLENTY, pouring out its fruits, is introduced upon the scene. She is arrested in her course by the unhappy objects on her shores. Whilst her seeds are held by one of the aboriginal inhabitants, she appears descending from her chariot to their relief in an attitude of infinite dignity, and her beautiful face a picture of benignity and of pity. It is this point in the history that our author seizes upon, and every circumstance of perspective, drapery, and costume in general, are adapted to convey. A description of this kind can however convey a faint idea of such a piece; for as the parts which compose it, must be necessarily successive to each other in their operation on the mind, it cannot make that full and entire impression produced by a simultaneous view of all the parts of the picture itself. This marches directly to the heart, which recognises, by a single glance of the eye, its elegant and touching pathos. This representation serves to illustrate the agreeable truth, that while through the greater part of the Globe, the Pillars of the Temples of Liberty have been torn from their bases, in this favored land they stand in Corinthian elegance and pristine glory—that while the voice of humanity is almost drowned by the din of war, its cries are still heard in this happy clime. From the great progress of taste and refinement, it is not doubted that the American public will give that fostering encouragement to productions of this nature, without which genius must languish in inaction and obscurity. The polite nations of the world have boasted of their celebrated Galleries and collections of the works of fine art, and it is extremely probable that the frequent contemplation of their statues and paintings tended to keep alive the sentiments, ideas and objects they were made to represent. It is moreover stated that the Italians were never so incited to resistance, nor so thoroughly sensible that their political privileges were gone, as when the French Emperor violated their Galleries. The author of the piece is Mr. Thomas Gimbrel, a young gentleman of classic education and correct taste. In smaller trials of his art, he has attracted the respectful notice of the enlightened citizens of Baltimore, and it is expected that a publication of the proposed Engraving, will afford him that remuneration for his labor, in the gratitude and consideration of society, which he justly merits. CONDITIONS. The above-mentioned piece will occupy a space of 21 by 18 inches. The price, which is payable on delivery, will be THREE DOLLARS to subscribers, and five DOLLARS to such as do not subscribe. Every person who shall obtain ten subscribers will be entitled to one copy. Subscriptions received by the publisher John Hopkins, Philadelphia; also by all the Booksellers. July 12—
LANDS IN THE STATES OF OHIO AND KENTUCKY FOR SALE. By Virtue of the Last Will and Testament of Robert Means, deceased, the subscriber offers for sale, all the Lands of the testator in the states of Ohio & Kentucky. As there is a large quantity of these Lands, and the quality in general good, they are well worth the attention of all persons desirous of purchasing Lands in those parts of the country. The tracts are of various sizes, and consequently calculated to suit purchasers of all descriptions. Further information respecting the said Lands may be obtained from Mr. Walter Dun, residing in, or near the town of Chillicothe in the State of Ohio. DANIEL CALL, Executor of the last will & testament of Robert Means, dec'd. Richmond, July 19—tf
PATENT KNAPSACKS. THE Subscriber having obtained from the United States, a patent for an improved KNAPSACK, which in point of durability and convenience, has been pronounced by the best judges infinitely superior to any hitherto in use. The officers of the different volunteer companies in the United States, are respectfully solicited to adopt them. They may be had in any quantity, and will be sold on the most reasonable terms by JOHN P. LHERBETTE, 81, Maiden Lane, New-York. To whom applications addressed by post may be made, or to B. H. Latrobe, at the city of Washington. May 19—sp4m.
NOTICE. WHEREAS Horatio Moore of Charles county, has by his deed of trust, assigned to the subscriber all his property, Real & Personal, in trust to pay all such his creditors as shall sign the said deed on or before the 15th day of August next—This is therefore to notify all such persons as are interested, that they are requested to sign the said deed, or authorise their attorney so to do, otherwise they will be deprived of all advantage therefrom. And whereas the said Horatio Moore has by his power of attorney, authorised the subscriber to collect all monies due to him the said Horatio Moore; all such persons as are indebted to him are requested to make payment to the subscriber. PETER HOFFMAN, Jr. Baltimore, Baltimore street, No. 103. N. B. Attention to the above notice is respectfully requested, as it is highly probable in case the debts due to him the said Horatio Moore can be collected the assigned property will be more than sufficient to cover all his debts. P. H. July 26—tawla15
NOTICE. AND whereas the said Horatio Moore has by his power of attorney, authorised the subscriber to collect all monies due to him the said Horatio Moore; all such persons as are indebted to him are requested to make payment to the subscriber. PETER HOFFMAN, Jr. Baltimore, Baltimore street, No. 103. N. B. Attention to the above notice is respectfully requested, as it is highly probable in case the debts due to him the said Horatio Moore can be collected the assigned property will be more than sufficient to cover all his debts. P. H. July 26—tawla15
By virtue of a decree of the honorable the Circuit Court, of the District of Columbia, for the County of Washington— In the suit of SOLOMON DAVIS, complainant, against Abiel Jennings, and Deborah Jennings his wife, and Ferdinand Fairfax. WILL be sold at Public Auction to the highest bidder on Monday the 7th day of August next at Long's hotel, Thirty-Nine LOTS of ground situated in the city of Washington, numbered as follows: Lots No. 1, 2, 3, 22, 23, and 24 in Sq. No. 1061. Lots No. 4, 5, 9, 10, in Sq. No. 1070—Lots No. 1, 2 and 3 in Sq. No. 1091—Lots No. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, in Sq. No. 1098—Lot No. 11 in Sq. No. 1105—Lots No. 3, 11, 12, 18 in Sq. No. 1106—Lots No. 4, 5, 6 in Sq. No. 1112—Lots No. 1, 2, and 3 in Sq. No. 1114—Lot No. 4 in Sq. No. 1149—Lot No. 5 in 1117—Lots No. 9, 10, 11, 12 in Sq. No. 1130. The Sale to commence at 12 o'clock precisely. Terms six months credit with interest from the day of Sale. Bond or bonds with good and sufficient security will be required. SAM. ELLIOT, Jr. Trustee. July 14—tdos.
ROMULUS RIGGS, Has just received and opening at his New Cash Store, a complete and well selected assortment of REASONABLE AND FANCY GOODS, Which being purchased for money, gives him the opportunity of offering the same at Baltimore and Philadelphia Prices. As he is determined to sell for very small profits. He intends keeping on hand a good assortment of Goods, to be sold by the piece; and those who purchase to sell again, will be furnished at as low rates as they can purchase in any market in the United States, being determined to sell. CASH GIVEN FOR TOBACCO Inspected at the George-town Warehouse. June 9—tf.
FOR RENT. THE upper part of the House I now occupy, which has six well finished Rooms, and every necessary back building, all newly furnished and in complete order—The rent will be low to a genteel family, if application is immediately made. June 9—tf.
A VALUABLE FARM FOR SALE. WILL be sold in pursuance of the last Will and Testament of Samuel Turner, Esq. deceased, at Public Sale on the premises on the 15th day of November next (if not previously disposed of, and in case of sale notice will be given) that very valuable Farm in Montgomery county late the residence of the said deceased; containing about Seven Hundred Acres of Land, Three Hundred Acres at least in wood and fine timber; the residue under good enclosures and every acre arable; lays level and remarkably well for cultivation and may be made very rich in a few years by the use of plaster and clover; in fact, it is as desirable a farm as any in the county of its size and may be very conveniently divided to accommodate purchasers; it lies about 18 miles from Georgetown and the city of Washington, five from Montgomery court house and within three miles of the Potomac River. A further description is deemed unnecessary, as it is presumed that those inclined to purchase will view the property. The terms of sale, which will be accommodating, may be known by applying to the subscribers living in Georgetown, district of Columbia, or will be made known on the day of sale. THO: TURNER, SAM. L. TURNER, Executors. July 28—tdos
PROPOSALS For re-publishing by Subscription, THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THE LATE PRESIDENT ADAMS. ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE BOSTON PATRIOT. THE publication to be continued in Numbers, containing about 40 pages octavo, each, on good paper, and type. The pages will continue in succession, so that the series of numbers, when completed, may be bound in a volume. The work will be put to press as soon as 500 copies are subscribed for. Price 25 Cents a number, to be paid on delivery of each number—one gratis to those who subscribe, or become accountable for four copies. Subscriptions received at the Office of the National Intelligencer and in every principal town on the continent. July 28—
NOTICE. ALL Citizens, Native or Naturalized of the United States, having occasion to pass into Foreign Countries under the protection of passports from the Department of State, are notified that, it being found necessary to change the form heretofore in use, all applications for passports must be accompanied by a Notarial Certificate of the height, complexion, color of the hair and eyes, as well as such marks natural or artificial as may serve to identify the applicant, beside which proof of citizenship will be required. Department of State, August 1, 1809.
M. R. THOMAS CARPENTER having been appointed by the Directors of the Manufacturing Company of this city, to collect from the Stockholders the amount of their several subscriptions as they become due; and having given bond for the faithful execution of his duty—It is hoped that the subscribers will pay their subscriptions to him punctually, so as to enable the Company to extend the useful work which has been commenced. ROBERT FRENT, President of the Washington Manufacturing Company. August 2—
MECHANIC DINNER. A GREEN TURTLE will be served up at Sebastian Spring on Friday 11th inst. Dinner and pint of Madeira Wine, $2. None but subscribers admitted. Subscription papers are and will remain at Messrs. Charles Jones' Tavern, near the Centre Market, and Davy Dobbins' near the Navy Yard, until the 9th inst. and no longer. N. B. The Mechanics of Washington, Georgetown and Alexandria are invited to subscribe. August 2—3t.
THOMAS CARPENTER. August 2—3t.
Calvert county court, May Term, 1809. WHEREAS upon the application of William Spencer and Wife two of the representatives of a certain John M c Dowell, deceased, certain commissioners were appointed to ascertain whether the estate of the said John M c Dowell would admit of division agreeably to the act of Assembly, entitled "An act to direct descents," which said commissioners have made a return to Calvert county court—And whereas it has been stated that some of the representatives of the said John M c Dowell, deceased, to wit: Ann Blackburn, James Ellis and Dolly his wife and Alice Blackburn, living out of the state of Maryland: It is thereupon adjudged and ordered, that notice be given by publication of this order in the Maryland Gazette and National Intelligencer, at least three weeks successively before the last day of August next to the absent Representatives to appear in Calvert county court on the second Monday of October next, to shew cause if any they have why the return of the said commissioners should be ratified. Signed by order of the court, WILLIAM S. MORSELL, Ck Cy. Ct. August 2—3w
CHARLES J. NOURSE Offers for sale—Chateaux Margaux Claret in boxes of 1 dozen. Genuine Old London Particular wine in half pints and quarter casks. Best Sallad Oil in baskets of 6 bottles each, &c. &c. &c. George Town, May 24—tf
TO BE SOLD AT PRIVATE SALE, several good Feather Beds, and sundry other Furniture. Enquire of the Printers. July 31—6t
BY HIS EXCELLENCY, EDWARD LLOYD, ESQ. GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND, A PROCLAMATION. WHEREAS it has been officially represented to me that a certain Thomas Burk, who has lately been sentenced by the judges of Washington county court, to suffer death, for a Rape committed on the body of Catharine Maria Brawner, an infant under the age of 12 years, made his escape from Washington county jail, on the evening of the 4th July inst. And whereas it is obviously the duty of the Executive, in the execution of the laws, to bring all malefactors to justice—I have therefore thought proper to issue this my proclamation, and do by and with the advice and consent of the Council, offer Three hundred Dollars Reward to any person or persons who shall apprehend and bring to justice the said Thomas Burk. Given under my hand and the seal of the state of Maryland, this 15th day of July, in the year of our Lord 1809, and the independence of the United States of America, the thirty fourth. EDWARD LLOYD. By his excellency's command, NIANIAN PINKNEY, Clerk of the Council. Ordered that the foregoing proclamation be published twice in each week for the space of six weeks, in the American and Federal Gazette at Baltimore, the Maryland Gazette and Maryland Republican at Annapolis, the National Intelligencer, the Maryland Herald at Hagerstown, Bartgis's paper at Fredericktown, and in the Star at Easton. By order, NIANIAN PINKNEY. July 31—taw6w
IN COUNCIL. Annapolis, June 26, 1809 ORDERED, that the act, entitled, An act to alter the thirty-second and thirty-seventh Articles of the constitution and Form of Government, be published twice in each week, for the space of three months, in the American and Federal Gazette, at Baltimore, the Maryland Gazette, and Maryland Republican, at Annapolis, the National Intelligencer, the Easton Star, Mr. Grieves's paper at Hagerstown, and Mr. Bartgis's paper at Fredericktown. By order, NIANIAN PINKNEY, Clerk of the Council. AN ACT To alter the thirty-second and thirty-seventh Articles of the Constitution and Form of Government. BE it enacted, That hereafter, upon the death, resignation or removal out of this state, of the governor, it shall not be necessary to call a meeting of the legislature to fill the vacancy occasioned thereby, but the first named of the Council for the time being shall qualify and act as governor until the next meeting of the general assembly, at which meeting a governor shall be chosen in the manner heretofore appointed and directed. And be it enacted, That hereafter no governor shall be capable of holding any other office of profit during the time for which he shall be elected. And be it enacted, That so much of the thirty-second and thirty-seventh articles of the constitution and form of government as is repugnant to, or inconsistent with, the provisions of this act, be and the same is hereby abrogated and abolished. And be it enacted, That if this act shall be confirmed by the general assembly, after the next election of delegates, in the first session after such new election as the constitution and form of government directs, that in such case this act, and the alteration and amendment of the constitution and form of government therein contained, shall be taken and considered, and shall constitute and be valid, as a part of the said constitution and form of government any thing therein contained to the contrary notwithstanding. July 3—taw3m.
EIGHTY DOLLARS REWARD. RUNAWAY from the subscriber on the 5th inst. a mulatto lad—JIM—who is about seventeen years of age, he has straight black hair, lately cut, and black eyes. He had on when he absconded from me, a short blue kersey jacket and blue pantalettes patched with white, a large pair of laced shoes, an old hat, osnaburg shirt, with an old handkerchief round his neck—he has a father living in the city of Washington, near the navy yard, by the name of George, or George Beall, who served his time with Mr. John Addison, Jun. and a mother by the name of Sophy, who I sold to her husband a few years past, and expect he will make to them or probably to Baltimore as he has some friends and relations there also. I will give forty dollars for securing said lad in jail so that I get him again, or the above reward if taken out of the district of Columbia or state of Maryland. RACHEL PRATT, Prince George's County, June 18th, 1809. June 19—3t&wtf
THE STORES FOR SALE. FOR SALE a number of LOTS in Squares No. 119, 222, 378, 1020 and 1045—Also the TWO BRICK STORES, adjoining the Seven Buildings, which have for several years been occupied in the Dry Good and Grocery line. For terms apply to W. P. Gardner, No. 6, of the Seven Buildings or Mr. Pairo on the premises. July 14—3t&w1m
PATENT WASHING MACHINE. A Newly Invented Patent Washing Machine, far superior to any heretofore in use, may be had of the subscriber, who has the Patent Right for the district of Columbia. I am so well satisfied of the inestimable value of this machine from a trial of one of them more than two months, that I purpose to have one made, that any family wishing to purchase can first make a trial of JNO. THOMAS, 3rd. May 24—3t&wtf
War Department, July 8, 1809. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: THAT Separate proposals will be received at the Office of the Secretary for the Department of War, until 12 o'clock, at noon of Wednesday the 25th of October next, for the supply of all rations that may be required for the use of the United States, from the 1st day of June 1810 inclusive, to the 1st day of June 1811, within the states, territories and districts following, viz: 1st, At Niagara, Detroit, Michimilimackinac, Fort Wayne, Chicago and in their immediate vicinities, and at any place or places, where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited, within the territory of Michigan. 2nd, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the states of Kentucky and Tennessee. 3rd, At Belle Fontaine, Fort Osage and Belle Vue and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of Ohio and the Illinois and Louisiana territories, except Fort Wayne and Chicago and their immediate vicinities. 4th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the Mississippi and Orleans territories. 5th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the district of Maine, and state of New Hampshire. 6th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of Vermont. 7th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of Massachusetts, the town of Springfield excepted. 8th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island. 9th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of New York, Niagara & its dependencies excepted. 10th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of New Jersey. 11th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of Pennsylvania. 12th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the states of Maryland & Delaware. 13th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of Virginia. 14th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of North Carolina. 15th, At any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the state of South Carolina. 16th, At Ocmulgee Old Fields, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the limits of the state of Georgia. 17th, Proposals will also be received as aforesaid, for the supply of all rations which may be required by the United States, for the troops which are or may be stationed, marched, or recruited within the town of Springfield in the state of Massachusetts; and for the armorers and other persons employed in the United States' Armory at that place, from the 1st day of June 1810 inclusive, to the 1st day of June 1811.
A ration to consist of one pound and one quarter of beef, or three quarters of a pound of pork, eighteen ounces of bread or flour, one gill of rum, whiskey or brandy, and at the rate of two quarts of salt, four quarts of vinegar, four pounds of soap, and one pound and a half of candles, to every hundred rations. The prices of the several component parts of the ration shall be specified; but the United States reserve the right of making such alterations in the price of the component parts of the ration aforesaid, as shall make the price of each part thereof bear a just proportion to the proposed price of the whole ration. The rations are to be furnished in such quantities, that there shall at all times, during the term of the proposed contract, be sufficient for the consumption of the troops at Michimilimackinac, Detroit and Chicago, for six months in advance; and at each of the other posts on the western waters, for at least three months in advance, of good and wholesome provisions, if the same shall be required. It is also to be permitted to all and every of the commandants of fortified places or posts, to call for, at sea as when the same can be transported, or at any time in case of urgency, such supplies of like provisions in advance, as in the discretion of the commandant shall be deemed proper. It is understood that the contractor is to be at the expense and risk of issuing the supplies to the troops, and that all losses sustained by the depredations of an enemy, or by means of the troops of the United States shall be paid by the United States at the price of the articles captured or destroyed as aforesaid, on the deposition of two or more persons of creditable characters, and the certificate of a commissioned officer, stating the circumstances of the loss, and the amount of the articles for which compensation shall be claimed. The privilege is understood to be reserved to the United States, of requiring that none of the supplies, which may be furnished under any of the proposed contracts, shall be issued, until the supplies which have been or may be furnished under contracts now in force, have been consumed; and that a supply in advance may be always required at any of the fixed posts on the sea-board, or Indian frontier, not exceeding three months. W. EUSTIS, Secretary for the Department of War. July 10—taw