The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1809-01-20 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. IX.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1292.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
FRIDAY, JANUARY 20, 1809.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
The National Intelligencer will henceforth be conducted by Samuel H. Smith, and Joseph Gales, Jr., and printed at the Office of the former, to whom subscribers and correspondents are requested still to address themselves.
The annual price, payable in advance, is Five dollars. The principal compliance with this plan is at this time of the greatest importance, and is earnestly requested.
Advertisements, not exceeding one square in size, are inserted the first time at five dollars, and for every subsequent insertion at two dollars. If inserted less than three times, an addition of one fourth part is made. Other advertisements charged at the same rate.
[BY AUTHORITY.]
An act authorizing the proprietors of squares and lots in the city of Washington to have the same subdivided and adapted to record. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That whenever the proprietor of any square or lot in the city of Washington, shall deem it necessary to subdivide such square or lot into convenient building lots, pieces or portions for sale, and occupancy, and alleys for their accommodation, he may cause a plat of the same to be made, on which shall be expressed the dimensions and length of all the lines of such portions as are necessary for defining and laying off the same on the ground, and may cause such subdivision under his hand and seal, in the presence of two or more credible witnesses upon the same plat, or cause a plat thereof to be attached thereto.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That at the request of the said proprietor, the surveyor of the city shall examine whether the lots, pieces or portions into which any square or lot may be subdivided as aforesaid, agree in dimensions with the whole of the square or lot so intended to be subdivided, and whether the dimensions expressed on the plat of subdivision, be the true dimensions of the parts so expressed; and if upon such examination, he shall find the plat correct, he shall certify the same under his hand and seal, with such remarks as appear to him necessary for the further illustration thereof, and record the said plat, as examined, in a book or books to be kept by him for that purpose.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That when such subdivision of any square or lot shall be so certified, examined and recorded, the purchaser of any part thereof, or any person interested therein, may refer to the said plat and record for description, in the same manner as to squares and lots divided between the commissioners and original proprietors; and the ways, alleys or passages laid out or expressed on such plat of subdivision, shall be and remain to the public, or subject to the uses declared by the person making such subdivision, at all times under the same police regulations as the alleys laid off by the commissioners on division with the proprietors.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That whenever the surveyor of the said city shall lay off any lot therein, or any any of the parts into which a square or lot may be subdivided as aforesaid, he shall measure the whole of that part of the square on which such lot or part lies; and if, on such measurement, the whole front of the square exceeds or falls short of the aggregate of the fronts of the lots on that side of the square, as the same are recorded, he shall apportion such excess, or deficiency, among the lots or pieces on that front proportionally to their respective dimensions. Whenever any such measurement, the wall of a house previously erected by any proprietor, shall appear to stand on the adjoining lot of any other person in part less than seven inches in width thereon, such wall shall be considered as standing altogether on the land of such proprietor, who shall pay to the owner of the lot on which the wall may stand, a reasonable price for the ground so occupied, to be decided by arbitrators or a jury, as the parties interested may agree; but if the wall of any house already erected, cover seven inches or more in width of the adjoining lot, it shall be deemed a party wall, according to the regulations for building in said city, as promulgated by the President of the United States, and the ground so occupied, more than seven inches in width, shall be paid for as above. Which fact the surveyor shall ascertain and certify, and put on record at the request and expense of any person interested therein.
Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the surveyor to attend when requested, and examine the foundation or walls of any house to be erected, when the same shall be level with the street or surface of the ground, for the purpose of adjusting the line of the front of such building to the line of the street, and correctly placing the party wall on the line of division between that and the adjoining lot; and his certificate of the fact shall be admitted as evidence, and binding on the parties interested.
Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That the surveyor shall be authorized to receive from the persons for whom he shall perform the services required by this act, the fees following, that is to say: For examining the plat and calculations of any subdivision of a square or lot twelve and an half cents for each of the lots or portions into which it may be subdivided; Provided, that no more shall be paid for the lots in one square than one dollar and fifty cents; for examining any building and giving the certificate required by the fifth section of this act, and recording the same one dollar and fifty cents; for recording any division, or subdivision of any square, or lot, for transcripts from records, and for searches in his office, the same fees that have heretofore been paid to the clerk of the county; Provided, that they do not in any case exceed the fees heretofore allowed for examination.
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That all records of the division of squares and lots heretofore made between the public and original proprietors, or which are authorized by this act, shall be kept in the office of the surveyor of the city; and all transcripts thereof, certified by him, shall be evidence equal, valid with certified transcripts from the keeper of the office
for recording deeds for the conveyance of land in the county of Washington.
Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, That whenever the President of the United States shall deem it necessary to establish any square or lot belonging to the United States within the city of Washington, which may not have been reserved for public purposes, into convenient building lots, pieces or portions for sale and occupancy, and alleys for their accommodation, he may cause a plat to be made by the surveyor of the city in the manner prescribed by the first section of this act, which plat shall be recorded by the said surveyor, and the provisions of this act shall extend to the lots, pieces and parcels of ground contained in such plat as fully as to subdivisions made by individual proprietors.
Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, That the surveyor of the city of Washington, before entering upon the discharge of the duties required of him by this act, shall take an oath or affirmation before the mayor of the city of Washington, that he will faithfully and impartially perform the duties herein before required of him.
J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO. CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate. January 12, 1809.
APPROVED. TH: JEFFERSON.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DEBATE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS.
DECEMBER 7.
MR. QUINCY'S Speech Concluded.
The honorable gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Johnson) speaking of the embargo, said, that this was the kind of conflict which our fathers waged; and my hon. colleague (Mr. Bacon) made a poor attempt to confound this policy with the non-intercourse and non-importation agreement of 1774, and 1775. Sir, nothing can be more dissimilar. The non-intercourse and non-importation agreement of that period so far from destroying commerce, fostered and encouraged it. The trade with G. Britain was indeed voluntarily obstructed, but the enterprise of our merchants found a new incentive in the commerce with all the other nations of the globe, which succeeded immediately on our escape from the monopoly of the mother country. Our navigation was never suspended. The field of commerce at that period, so far from being blasted by pestiferous regulations, was extended by the effect of the restrictions adopted.
But let us grant all that they assert. Admit, for the sake of argument, that embargo, which restrains us now from communication with all the world, is precisely synonymous with that non-intercourse and non-importation which restrained us then from G. Britain. Suppose the war, which we now wage with that nation is in every respect the same as that which our fathers waged with her in 1774 and 1775. Have we from the effects of their trial any lively hope of success in our present attempt? Did our fathers either effect a change in her injurious policy or prevent a war by non-importation and non-intercourse. Sir, they did neither the one nor the other. Her policy was never changed until she had been beaten on our soil, in an eight year's war. Our fathers never relied upon non-intercourse and non-importation as measures of hostile coercion. They placed their dependence upon them solely as means of pacific influence among the people of that nation. The relation in which this country stood at that time with regard to G. Britain, gave a weight and a potency to those measures then, which in our present relation to her, we can neither hope nor imagine possible. At that time we were her colonies, a part of her family. Our prosperity was essentially her's. So it was avowed in this country. So it was admitted in G. Britain. Every refusal of intercourse which had a tendency to show the importance of these then colonies to the parent country, of the part to the whole, was a natural and a wise means of giving weight to our remonstrances. We pretended not to control, but to influence by making her feel our importance. In this attempt we excited no national pride, on the other side of the Atlantic. Our success was national degradation, for the more we developed our resources and relative weight, the more we discovered the strength and resources of the British power. We were then component parts of it. All the measures of the colonies, antecedent to the declaration of independence, had this principle for its basis. As such non-importation and non-intercourse were adopted, in this country. As such, they met the co-operation of the patriots of Great Britain, who deemed themselves deviating from none of their national duties, when they avowed themselves the allies of American patriots to drive through the influence of the loss of our trade, the in-
nistry from their places, or their measures. Those patriots did co-operate with our fathers, and that openly, in exciting discontent, under the effect of our non-intercourse agreements. In so doing, they failed in none of their obligations to their sovereign. In no nation, can it ever be a failure of duty to maintain, that the safety of the whole depends on preserving its due weight, to every part. Yet, notwithstanding, the natural and little suspicious use of these instruments of influence, notwithstanding the zeal of the American people coincided, with the views of the Congress, and a mighty party existed in G. Britain openly leagued, with our fathers, to give weight and effect to their measures, they did not effect the purposes, for which they were put into operation. The British policy was not abandoned. War was not prevented. How then can any encouragement be drawn from that precedent, to support us under the privations of the present system of commercial suspension? Can any nation admit that the trade of another is so important to her welfare, as that on its being withdrawn, any obnoxious policy must be abandoned, without at the same time admitting that she is no longer independent? Sir, I could indeed wish that it were in our power to regulate not only G. Britain, but the whole world, by opening or closing our ports. It would be a glorious thing for our country to possess such a mighty weapon of defence. But, acting in a public capacity, with the high responsibilities resulting from the great interest, dependent upon my decision, I cannot yield to the wishes of love-sick patriots, or the visions of teeming enthusiasts. I must see the adequacy of means to their ends. I must see, not merely that it is very desirable that G. Britain should be brought to our feet, by this embargo, but that there is some likelihood of such a consequence, to the measure, before I can concur, in that universal distress and ruin, which, if much longer continued, will inevitably result from it. Since then every dictate of sense and reflection convinces me of the utter futility of this system, as a mean of coercion, on G. Britain, I shall not hesitate to urge its abandonment. No, sir, not even although like others, I should be assailed by all the terrors of the outcry of British influence.
Really, Mr. Speaker, I know not how to express the shame and disgust, with which I am filled, when I hear language of this kind cast out upon this floor, and thrown in the faces of men, standing, justly, on no mean height in the confidence of their countrymen. Sir, I did, indeed, know that such vulgar aspersions were circulating among the lower passions of our nature. I knew that such vile substances were ever tempering betwixt the paws of some printer's devil. I knew that foul exhalations like these daily rose in our cities, and crept along the ground, just as high as the spirits of lampblack and saline oil could elevate; falling, soon, by native baseness, into oblivion, in the jokes. I knew, too, that this species of party insinuation, was a mighty engine in this quarter of the country, on an election day, played off from the top of a stump, or the top of a hog-shed while the gin circulated, while barbecue was roasting; in those happy, fraternal, associations and consultations, when those who speak, utter without responsibility, and those who listen, hear without scrutiny. But little did I think, that such odious shapes would dare to obtrude themselves, on this national floor, among honorable men; the select representatives, the confidential agents of a wise, a thoughtful and a virtuous people. I want language to express my contempt and indignation at the sight.
So far as respects the attempt which has been made to cast such aspersions on that part of the country which I have the honor to represent, I beg this honorable House to understand, that so long as they, who circulate such insinuations, deal only in generals and touch not particulars, they may gain among the ignorant and the stupid a vacant and a staring audience. But when once these suggestions are brought to bear upon those individuals, who in New England have naturally the confidence of their countrymen, there is no power in these calumnies. The men who now lead the influences of that country, and in whose councils the people on the day when the tempest shall come will seek refuge, are men whose stake is in the soil, whose interests are identified, with those of the mass of their brethren, whose private loss
and public sacrifices present a never-failing antidote to the poison of malicious inuendoes. On such men, party spirit may indeed cast an odious filth, but there is a polish in their virtues, to which no such slime can adhere. They are owners of the soil; real yeomanry; many of them men who led in the councils of our country in the dark day which preceded national independence; many of them men, who, like my honorable friend from Connecticut on my left, (Col. Talmadge) stood foremost on the perilous edge of battle; making their breasts in the day of danger a bulwark for their country. True it is, Mr. Speaker, there is another and a much more numerous class, composed of such as through defect of age can claim no share in the glories of our revolution; such as have not yet been blest with the happy opportunity of "playing the man" for their country—generous sons of illustrious sires; men, not to be deterred from fulfilling the high obligations they owe to this people by the sight of these foul and offensive weapons. Men, who with little experience of their own to boast, will fly to the tombs of their fathers, and questioning, concerning their duties, the spirit which hovers there, will no more shrink from maintaining their native rights, through fear of the sharpness of malevolent tongues, than they will put to the final shrink from defending them through fear of the sharpness of their enemies' swords.
SKETCH OF THE DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON THE NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT.
Wednesday, Jan. 11.
The House having resumed the consideration of the unfinished business—
Mr. Troup said he regretted exceedingly that he was under the necessity of again troubling the House, but he felt himself bound in some measure to state more particularly his reasons for voting for the bill, and to reply to some cogent objections made from a quarter of the House which he much respected. He stated anew the reasons which he had given why the United States should have a small naval force. He thought it indispensable at this time to man and equip our little navy, not for the one or the other general reason in its favor which he had before stated, but to protect from violence and insult the territory of the United States—that territory which gentleman in this House were so fond of calling the territory of the good old United States; he meant the marine league from the shore, as sacred and inviolable as any spot of earth within our limits. It was for the purpose of protecting this part of our territory, for removing those cruizers which are competent to blockade the mouth of our rivers, that he wished this navy to be equipped. Gentlemen said the gun boats were competent to the protection of our harbors. Mr. Troup acknowledged it; he said he did believe that the invention of man never devised a more competent system than gun-boats, co-operating with fortifications, for the protection of our ports and harbors, but they were calculated to act only on shoals and in smooth waters. They were not fit for any other species of service; they could not stand the winds and waves, the billows and the tempests. And notwithstanding our ports & harbors might be well defended by these gun-boats, they were not competent to the purpose for which these frigates were to be manned, to prevent blockades of our own waters. He said he had expected, when gentlemen had solemnly resolved not to submit, that they had a serious determination to execute their resolve; and when they solemnly and unanimously resolved to place the country in a posture of defence, that they had seriously determined to do so. For his own part he said he had been as seriously determined upon both, as he ever was upon any thing in his life. And when gentlemen said they would not submit, what did they mean by it? Merely that they would not submit to the orders and decrees of the belligerents, or that they would not submit to violence and insults in their own waters? And when they said they would place the nation in a state of defence, did they only mean to hold the militia in requisition? The militia were already in requisition, and were always subject to it. No, indeed; he had expected a very different species of defence—a defence calculated to meet a decisive
and active hostility on the part of a great foreign enemy. He had understood that an army was to be raised not only sufficient for the protection of our own territories, but sufficient to carry war into the territories of our enemy. He had expected at least that our little navy would have been equipped. For (said Mr. T.) if you determine to change your present system of measures, how would you get along? Suppose you determine to go to war; you must determine at the same time to have a war commence, to open a free trade with those nations with whom you shall be at peace—and how will you effect it? In your present situation it would be impossible; for these 20 gun frigates as completely blockade the mouths of your rivers as the most formidable navy on the face of the globe could. Your commerce cannot move, if they chuse to prevent it. Suppose you were to raise the embargo and adopt a non-intercourse with the belligerents—with what effect could you, under the present circumstances of the nation, give such liberty to commerce, when the mouths of your rivers are blockaded much more effectually than they ever were by your embargo laws? Whether then you contemplate raising the embargo, and adopting a non-intercourse, or war, a small naval force is absolutely indispensable. Mr. Troup said he had to lament what had fallen from an honorable friend of his from South Carolina (Mr. D. R. Williams.) That gentleman, not many weeks ago, with a manly and dignified eloquence, which charmed almost every man who had heard him, scouted a principle which he had yesterday adopted to all intents, and in all its bearings, viz. that interest was honor, and honor was interest; and that this country could have no provocative to war, and must at all hazards be preserved in a state of peace. [Mr. Williams said he held no such sentiments; if in his agitation at the vote which had taken place, he had expressed such, he solemnly revoked them.] Mr. T. observed, that he had understood the gentleman to declare that he was determined to adhere to the system of the embargo as a permanent measure of offence and defence, and from this expression he had drawn the deduction. [Mr. Williams disclaimed the idea of a perpetual embargo.]
Mr. T. explained what he had said when up before, on the subject of economy. He had spoken of war measures; which when adopted, the old peace principle that standing navies and armies and funding systems were great evils, should be discarded. He had spoken of a liberal policy as preferable to that little, petty, contemptible, narrow economy, whose means and ends were both calculated and measured by popularity; and he added that whenever this nation was driven into a war, and the great principles of its action were determined on the question of popularity or unpopularity, we should come out of the war with dishonor, disgrace and ruin.
Mr. Sawyer resumed the observations which he commenced on Monday. On the subject of the naval establishment, he said that this system had introduced into our laws a long list of capital crimes heretofore unknown to us, and perfectly incompatible with civil liberty. He dislikable absolute despotism exercised by naval commanders, who feasted in their cabins like bashaws, with their bands of music to entertain them while—twenty or thirty men employed for no other purpose than to fiddle and pipe to the crew, at a pay of 20 dollars a month each perhaps. Were these men intended to charm the enemy as Orpheus of old? [Mr. S. was here reminded by the Speaker that he was wandering from the question.] Mr. S. said he presumed that if he was at liberty to prove the system wrong in whole, he was at liberty to prove it wrong in any part. He did not believe that this naval force would add to the strength of the country, but rather weaken it. The strength of the country, he said, depended more on internal improvement and union among the people. Twenty odd millions of dollars at least had been expended on this system, and no improvement was visible from it. Suppose this money had been employed in facilitating communications through the country. This mode of expenditure would have been more conducive to the public interest, than that of supporting the requisition of the frigates in idleness. He said that Congress would be the proper body to decide on the propriety of the system.

in respect to this species of force, they would not again encourage it. Mr. S. spoke of the danger to be apprehended from such a system. Did any one ever hear of a navy taking part with the people against despotism? On the contrary they were always ready to assist it, for the spirits of the crews were always broken down by severe discipline. He had just as great objections to navies as to standing armies; and for the same reasons was against both.
A gentleman had said that we ought to avenge the violations of our jurisdiction. Mr. Sawyer said he agreed with him; he was willing to go to war for them. But because the injuries were committed on the ocean, was it any reason that we should go to war there? So far from wiping off the stain on our honor by this means, Mr. Sawyer said we should make it the more indelible. Should we, single handed, when all the world had fled before the Leviathan of the deep, sail out and defy her to combat? He was for meeting her on terra firma; for using the energies of the country, and in that manner which our situation required. Suppose France had exhausted herself in looting up a navy, what would have been her situation at this time? Would she have been mistress of the continent? No; she would have sunk into absolute insignificance. Mr. Sawyer said that he was for raising the standard of his country, for enlisting every man who would come forward, and for making an irruption into Canada. The blood of Pearce could be as well avenged and the names of the slaughtered seamen of the Chesapeake as well avenged under the walls of Quebec as on the sea coast. It had excited his astonishment, Mr. S. remarked, that G. Britain could have persevered in her unjust conduct so long when it was in our power to sweep her from the continent. If this bill were to pass, it would afford her a proof of the weakness of our policy which he hoped never to see given. Did gentlemen mean to multiply the odium of the affair of the Chesapeake by increasing the quantum of the means of national disgrace? He said he would ask gentlemen if one frigate brought so much disgrace, how much would fifteen bring? Gentlemen had said G. Britain could send but a small force on our coast. Mr. S. said she would always send enough for us. Mr. S. concluded by observing that he derived some consolation from the circumstance that the terms of this bill were not absolutely imperative; and he had too much confidence in our excellent chief magistrate to believe that he would ever carry the power into effect.
(Debate to be Continued.)
TUESDAY, JANUARY 17.
The engrossed bill for the relief of Edward Beemont, was read a third time and passed.
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
Mr. SAWYER presented a petition from 88 inhabitants of the town of Franklin—and Mr. Green a petition from 212 inhabitants of the town of Barnstable, remonstrating against the mode in which the late election of President and Vice-President, of the U. S. was conducted.—Laid on the table.
MR. CANNING'S LETTER.
The message of the President, given in the National Intelligencer of Wednesday last, having been read—
Mr. BURWELL moved, that 5000 copies of the message and documents be printed. He said, whilst up, he could not refrain from expressing his regret that the Executive had not taken a different course to counteract the effect of Mr. Canning's letter, than the one which he had chosen. It was impossible that any new evidence should have been wanting, to prove that our government had acted with justice and moderation. But it is so perfectly plain (said he) that we are waging a war of honor and candor against treachery and intrigue, that it is surprising that a stop has not been put to it. Why is it that our presses are teeming with treachery? A regular system is going on to overthrow the government. How is it that men high in the government say, that no formal offer was made to Great Britain to repeal our embargo on the revocation of her orders in council, when there are documents before us, proving directly the contrary? Yet sir, it was asserted by men high in office in this country, that our minister had acted only in his individual capacity, long before this British minister's letter was published. But what does this singular letter amount to? Mr. Canning wishes to prove that the offer to repeal the embargo was made in an unofficial manner, when there is a formal letter from himself in answer to the official note of Mr. Pinkney, making the proposition as from his government. Why did not Mr. Canning meet him? This letter of his is but a continuation of that infamous system of misleading the people of this country, so long persisted in. Recollect the speech of Mr. Canning on the floor of parliament on the 24th day of June last. Sir, I am sorry to mention this subject here, but when I see the rights of my country insulted, and public sensibility worked up-
on as it has been, I cannot restrain my feelings. It is time to put a stop to this underhanded system. Can it be forgotten what were the sentiments of the people of America, when the famous Garet commenced his appeal from the President, who properly put a stop to it? Why does Canning pretend that the orders in council were not known to us at the time that the embargo was laid? It is to meet the feelings of the country, and to support views taken in this nation. I hope that 5000 copies will be printed, and that this is the last time we shall be under the necessity of counteracting these insidious appeals to the people.
Mr. NICHOLAS observed, that the letters which had just been read furnished another evidence of the fidelity and ability of the public servants; and another signal to warn the people of this country of the danger which hangs over them, to show that the British government is in a course of intrigue for the purpose of separating the people from their government. I want no other evidence of this (said he) than the letter of Mr. Canning, which has just been read. How did that letter get into the papers of the U. S. It must have been sent here by the British government—for what purpose? It is an appeal by the government of Great Britain to the people of America. On what ground is this appeal made? On the ground of justice, of truth or of sincerity? Neither, sir; it is for the purpose of deceiving the people of this country with the most ungentlemanly, and unmanly misrepresentations. God forbid, that I should believe that G. Britain, has many adherents in this country; but that she has some, this business is to my mind full demonstration. How is this production received? How is it ushered into the public view? Have the printers who first gave it publicity shown even a common impartiality between their own government, and that of a foreign nation? Have they shown a desire to hear what their government could say before they passed sentence of condemnation upon it? No, sir; they have taken the letter at first blush as complete evidence of the criminality of their own government. Can these men be Americans? No, sir; they are British partisans, pleading the cause of the British government against their own. Mr. N. said, he had before him a paper called the Boston Centinel, containing some comments on Mr. Canning's letter. [Mr. Nicholas here quoted some passages from these comments, stating this letter of Mr. C's, to be evidence of a partiality in the government of the U. S. to France, &c. &c.] This is an American print (said Mr. N.) and this letter is exactly given to the American people, as tending to show that their government has practised a deception upon them!
Mr. TROUP said, he believed that the publication of this letter was intended by the British government to influence the people; and in order that the whole truth might be widely disseminated, he moved that 10,000 copies be printed.
Mr. GARDENIER concurred most heartily in the motion for printing, and also in the proposition for the largest number of copies. Assuredly if there was a matter upon which it was important that the people of the U. S. should be correctly informed, it was the subject which the message of this morning placed before the house. I for one (said he) cannot help regretting deeply, that the public confidence in the administration of the government should have been so shaken, by some cause or other, as that gentlemen of the first respectability and no common influence in this House, should be driven to the necessity of combatting on this floor the calumnies of the editor of a newspaper. Are these publications of newspapers the topics fit for discussion in the House of Representatives of the U. States? Is it come to this, sir, that a Representative of the people, to protect his government from public odium, thinks it necessary to array the Representatives of the nation, against the humble editors of a newspaper? I feel humiliated that the affairs of this country should be brought into such a condition, that it should be necessary that the editor of a newspaper, for the first time, should be refuted by a member of this house in his place. I had thought that these calumnies passed by the government, as an idle wind which it heeded not. But if the government is brought, either by its own weakness or the machinations of a foreign nation, to such a situation that it cannot stand a paragraph in a newspaper, it is brought to a low pass indeed. But the remarks of this editor have been introduced into the house. I do not wish at this time to go over the ground and admit or deny, the proposition which he conceives he has established. But I regret that this humble editor should have been made the subject of such severe remark, not only because I wish that he should have been unnoticed in this house, but because I confess that in the material matter of fact, I can see nothing of harm which this poor Editor has done. He has printed the letter of Mr. Canning to Mr. Pinkney; and it appears that he has pub-
lished a document which the administration had not thought proper to communicate, but which was genuine and true. From these facts, now established beyond all controversy, this editor has undertaken, for the amusement and instruction of his readers, to make certain comments which appear to his mind proper. If the fact be as the editor has stated it, his comments are of no importance, especially at this moment, when newspapers on both sides have given themselves up to such misrepresentations. Whether his inferences be correctly drawn or not is matter for the people to decide. Those remarks are but reflections upon a document which on all hands is conceded to be matter of fact—and why should gentlemen be alarmed, if his inferences be absurd or ridiculous? If the integrity of the administration opposes that impenetrable shield to the shafts of its enemies which it always should do, whence this alarm? I am fearful that the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Nicholas) whose known prudence and good sense I cannot avoid respecting, saw something more in all this than the mere usual efforts of the editor of a newspaper; and in the same proportion as he attaches importance to them will the people do the same. It is unfortunate for the administration that this course has been pursued; it will awaken remark and mischievous curiosity among the people. Probably if mention had not been made of it, it might have passed without notice; but now I fear that suspicions will be entertained which but for this mode might never have been excited by the editor of a newspaper. After all I must confess that I do not find a great deal of fault with this editor of a newspaper for the publication of a document, and his remarks are out of the question. The people of the U. States cannot know too much. However the administration may have thought it of little importance to communicate the documents heretofore, yet it can do no harm to the good sense of the people to read all that has passed. I see no danger in it; and whether it comes from the cabinet of G. Britain or from our own, I have that confidence in the people of the U. S. that I am willing to trust them with it. If circumstances throw no blame on the administration, they need not fear it. I am for publishing the whole because I am desirous that the people should know every thing, and shall always be thankful that a necessity (for whatever reason) does exist for informing them. And if I have cause of regret on this subject, it is not from the same source as that expressed by the gentleman from Virginia. My regret is that this communication should not have been made before this time, and that the necessity of making these documents public should in this manner have been brought about. As a representative of the American people I feel humbled by this; and whatever importance may be attached to it, am sorry that the administration has not heretofore seen the necessity of laying before the public every thing relating to their proposition to repeal the embargo; for the whole argument in favor of the continuation of the embargo has turned very much on the rejection by the British government of our candid offer. It is of importance that the people should be apprised of every thing connected with that matter, because it is the pivot on which the embargo has turned; and I regret exceedingly that the President of the U. S. should not have seen the importance of making these documents public hitherto—that he should have seen it only when one of the letters was published. If I understand the message of to-day, the reason why this communication is made, is, that Mr. Canning's letter is calculated to make an impression unfavorable to the character of the government, and the answer is necessary to set them right. It would have been a much better reason for communicating it heretofore, that the people ought to be fully informed. I know not whether the strongest sensation of regret which I feel is, that it has not before been made public by the administration, or that this House should be made the organ of communication, for the purpose of preserving to the confidence of the people. Let gentlemen remember that as long as the liberty of the press exists, it will be licentious; that as long as the republic exists, there will be parties, those in power and those out . It is to be expected that they will assail each other frequently, ungenerously and with much calumny; and administrations may again fall as they have fallen. It is one of the evils attending the invaluable liberty of the press. If the printers publish untruth, I have no objection to punish them, but I do not like these denunciations of a printer who will laugh at them. He does not care; he will acquire new vigor and those who participated in his sentiments will like him much better for the publicity given to his name.
Mr. LOVE said, as he presumed from his observations that the gentleman from New York was not in the House when the message was read, he rose to state that the answer of
Mr. Pinkney was not in the possession of the government when the formal correspondence on the subject was published. Whether or not it was correct to notice newspaper effusions on the floor, it was certainly quite as correct for one gentleman to comment upon them as for another to rise in their defence. The statement which he had seen in the newspapers was not correct, and could only be intended for deception and to mislead the people at this critical moment.
Mr. MACON said, notwithstanding the licentiousness of newspaper editors, he was against any law for curbing them. Let them run their whole length, said he; I only ask the liberty of buying such of their papers as I like. As long as the press is free, newspapers will make their own comments; and a great many will make those which I do not approve; but it is really to be regretted that I do not know a paper in the United States that takes up both sides. I wish there was such a one. On the subject of this message, to be serious, it strikes me in a different point of view from that in which it has appeared to any other gentleman. Compare the fact of the extraordinary mode of publication of Mr. Canning's letter in New York, (some say first in Boston) with several late transactions, as, the invitations to our citizens, to violate our laws, the vessels on our coast, forcing a trade, &c. and I can consider them in no other light than as appeals to the people of this country by the British ministry. Instead of alienating the affections of this people from their government, it will more strongly attach them to it. That Great Britain should address this runaway proclamation to our people, is not surprising. We are a people made up of emigrants and descendants from different nations, and there are some men amongst us who are not as virtuous as a Cato or Aristides. This circumstance will induce European governments always to make attempts of this sort. Mr. Canning's letter has struck me in a curious point of view, compared with the documents heretofore communicated. At one time he wants conversations and at another time written communications. The letter read to day completely satisfies my mind on this subject. At the very time that this letter of the British minister is published at Boston, a public armed ship appears on the coast of Georgia, cruising after cotton. Sir, nothing can be stronger evidence to me of the efficiency of the measures which this nation has taken in relation to Europe, that a fair examination of the conduct of Great Britain towards us since. Why the proclamation encouraging evasions of our laws? Why these publications? Why the ship or ships on the coast of Georgia, sir? Facts speak, stronger than words, the efficacy of our measures. Can it be possible that a proclamation inviting violations of our laws, would be issued, that armed ships would be sent on smuggling expeditions on our coast by any civilized nation which did not feel our measures? The worst government that ever existed, as well as the worst man that ever existed, is desirous of maintaining a good character with the world. This proclamation was not issued whilst we had any thing left afloat. When they cannot plunder you, they will harbor your runaways. That is the plain English of it, sir. On the subject of the embargo, as it has become fashionable, I will state my impressions of circumstances as they existed at the time of its passage. As well as I recollect, there were reports in circulation, that the British orders in council had issued. I cared not for it. I was satisfied that they would be if they were not issued, and under that impression I voted for the embargo. I am glad, sir, that we had sagacity sufficient to be so quick upon their heels that they caught no plunder by their orders. I must here say, because it is my opinion, that the administration have not acted in respect to the embargo, as they should have done, because they offered that to Great Britain, which they did not offer to France. Instead of partiality to France, sir, the documents prove that they have displayed a partiality to Great Britain. I would have offered the same to both, although Great Britain is our greatest tormentor, because she has a navy, whilst the other has not. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Gardenier) seems to think that it is necessary to publish these documents in order to strengthen the administration. I much doubt, sir, (and it is well known that on a difference of opinion with the administration I have come out and opposed them with as much zeal as any man in this House) if you ever have another administration in these times of confusion, which will go out as popular as this. Every new administration will naturally carry with it some men who are willing to sing Hozannas to the powers that be, to pay their devotions to the rising sun. This will always happen; but no administration going out will be as popular as the present.
Sir, I care not with what view these documents were sent to us—I am
glad they are come. But I fear that the gentleman from New York is mistaken in one statement he made—that this was the first time that a newspaper had ever been communicated in the House of Representatives. I have seen a paper called the Aurora , repeatedly brought into this House, and commented on to prove the necessity of passing a sedition law. Perhaps there are some gentlemen in the House who may recollect the circumstance. [Mr. Gardenier said that this was before his time.] With the gentleman from New York, sir, I am willing to trust the people; and I believe truth wants but half fair play to prevail, for I have seen her prevail when she could not speak—when she had a petticoat over her mouth. Truth will prevail, and it is the interest of every administration that acts honestly to publish all. I should wish to see the administration of this government lay aside the practice of giving a little at a time, and come out at once and say, I wish to do this; and then, if we will not consent to do it, there is an end of it. With respect to our government playing cunning against any other government, it is idle; it can never do good whilst they have untold millions of secret service money against our single cent. I should therefore wish that foreign nations had no ministers here, nor we any there. Instead of giving ministers 2,000 dollars to go there, I would rather give them 50,000 to come home. I wish the whole proceedings of our administration to be at the door of every man in the nation; that every man should have a copy, for himself, for his wife, for each of his children, and indeed for all his household. Had this been done heretofore, the present crisis would have been nothing like what it is. They would have seen truth, and facts precisely as they exist, neither curtailed or exaggerated by this or that party paper.
Mr. BACON said, that he rose merely to correct an error of statement into which the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Macon) had fallen, as to the source from which the first publication of the exparte letter of the British minister had originated. The gentleman had attributed it to a New York paper. This Mr. B. believed was incorrect. Being desirous, if either honor or censure could be attached to any American press, from the circumstance of its being considered as the official organ of a foreign government, that it should lie at the right door, he thought it proper to state, that the first appearance of that letter was, as he understood, in a paper called "The New England Palladium" printed in Boston. There was one other fact which he mentioned with some regret, it was this: that by some unfortunate concurrence of circumstances, assuredly without any improper intention, the printers of this paper had been by the legislature of Massachusetts in the course of the present year, designated as the printers of their publications, and their paper was a sort of state Gazette. On this unlucky coincidence, it would be as painful to him, as it might be indecorous to indulge in any comments. From the known patriotism of that honorable legislature, however there could be no doubt that if they should perceive any sort of incorrectness in the conduct of their subordinate agents, if it should strike them as an incongruity, that their servants should appear to be acting in a double capacity; they would so manifest their sense on the subject as should best accord with their views of propriety, and their feelings of national honor.
Mr. FISK thanked the gentleman from New York for his compliment to the people of New England on their "mischievous curiosity." The gentleman seems to suppose (said Mr. Fisk) that it would have been more proper for the President of the United States to have communicated these documents for the purpose of giving a correct view of our affairs, than for any other reason. I would ask the gentleman to point out what different view the present letter of Mr. Canning, published first at Boston, has given, from the documents which have heretofore been published? Certainly none, sir. The only inference to be drawn from it, is the insincerity or lying of the British government; for if the fact was, that Mr. Canning did not accept the offer of Mr. Pinkney, because it appeared to be unauthorised, how happened it that Mr. Canning forgot to state it in his official formal letter, instead of those reasons which he has given for the rejection of the proposal? The gentleman regrets that newspaper or their editors should be noticed here. It is not from a disposition to give them importance beyond their merit, but we discover something from their publications, and it is for that that they are noticed; to show that there is an intrigue carrying on in this country; that the British government is endeavoring to divide the people, to separate them from their government through the means of the press. In the course of this session, sir, many insinuations against our own government have been thrown out on this floor. My

League (Mr. L.) made one the other night in the course of a long speech, which I cannot now notice. [Mr. Gadenier called Mr. F. to order, for alluding to an argument which the gentleman (Mr. Elliot) was prevented from making by a decision of the Speaker that it was out of order.] Mr. Fisk said he alluded not to what his colleague had meant to say, but to what he did say. Mr. F. said he had merely wished to ask, if the gentleman from New York considered his insinuations to be true, that he would draw to the House how or wherein they were true. He hoped the documents would be printed, and since he joined with the gentleman from North Carolina in wishing an universal diffusion of information.
Mr. Taylor observed, that although not opposed to printing a very considerable number of the documents sent to the House, yet in themselves he did not give them that importance which some gentlemen were pleased to give them; and he confessed that when a gentleman had handed him a paper containing the famous letter of Mr. Canning, he had concluded from the paper itself, and the pitiful and pompous manner in which it was uttered into view, that it was a forgery. What is it? said Mr. Taylor; a relation of conversations on particular topics, in which the writer himself assisted—not with a view it seems of bringing them to an issue by conversation, for he required that these conversations should be considered as nothing, by demanding that his propositions should be made in writing. They were brought forward in writing by one minister; the authority of his government for them was vouched to the British minister; and of that proposition a rejection in the most insulting terms was returned by Mr. Canning to our minister. And now, sir, the public mind here is to be misled by a relation of a conversation which took place at several meetings by this very polite gentleman, who has been convicted, by a whole nation, of falsehood, by asserting in June that no remonstrance had been made by this government against the orders in council. The fact is that the orders in council will not bear examination. For the honor of the House I assert it, no gentleman has come forward on this floor and vindicated the orders in council; and yet the public mind, it is supposed, can be led from this great subject, in which the honor and independence of the nation is concerned; that the people are to be deceived by a tea-table talk of Mr. Canning. I could not have supposed that a man of his wit could have been concerned in so weak a project—he could not have been concerned in it. Since the effort has been made by some incendiary, let us pour upon this pitiful scintilla, this small spark of wickedness, the overwhelming torrent of conviction to the public mind which is contained in Mr. Pinkney's answer to that letter. But we read eternally in the newspapers of a partiality to France in this government. Why, sir, the very circumstance of this letter being withheld from Congress by the administration is a proof of a disposition in the government not to put at hazard our present relations (precarious as they are) with G. Britain. The letter of Mr. Canning ought to have been, as it was, withheld till the answer was received—and why? Because the broad calumny which is uttered against this nation in this cowardly manner, when the whole truth in Mr. Pinkney's letter comes out, is found to allude to newspapers, the very things we have been talking of. Taken unexplained, I ask whether it would not have set in flames the people of this nation? Read this clause:
"You gave me, on that account, the most satisfactory proof that such misrepresentation did not originate with you, by communicating to me that part of your dispatch, in which the conferences particularly referred to, were related correctly; but this very circumstance which establishes your personal claim to entire confidence, proves, at the same time, that a faithful report of a conference on your part is not a security against its misrepresentation."
As the thing stands unexplained, who are the persons supposed to be capable of making misrepresentations? The government, sir. The administration has had in this instance to suppress feelings in which, had the letter been published, all the honest part of the community would have participated till the explanation came. As this explanation has come, it does show that the persons alluded to as capable of making misrepresentations are the editors of newspapers. I do not, with the gentleman from New York, regret the particular notice taken of the editor of a newspaper on this subject, because the article alluded to bears a peculiar character. It does not proceed from the fumes of the cauldron or the paws of little devils, alluded to the other day (by Mr. Quincy). No, sir; an arch-fiend had a hand in it; who her on this or the other side the Atlantic I care not. It is an appeal to the people of this
country, made in favor of the British government against our own.
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18. Mr. Lewis reported a bill to authorize the making a turnpike road from Mason's causeway to Alexandria. Mr. Kelly reported a bill for the relief of Jacob Barnitz. These bills were severally read and referred.
FORTIFICATIONS. Mr. Blount reported a bill making appropriations to complete the fortifications commenced for the security of the seaport towns and harbors of the United States; and to delay the expense of deepening and extending to the river Mississippi the canal of Carondelet. [The bill is blank as to the amount to be appropriated.] Twice read and referred to a committee of the whole.
DIVISION OF INDIANA. This bill, read a third time yesterday, and under consideration when the House then adjourned, was taken up. Those who yesterday and to-day supported the bill, were Messrs. Thomas, Sloan, Lyon, and W. Alison. Those who opposed it were Messrs. Macon, Eppes and J. G. Jackson.
The arguments in favor of the bill, generally, were—that the line of demarcation which the Wabash affords between the Eastern and Western portions of said territory, added to the wide extent of wilderness country which separates the population in each, constitute reasons in favor of a division founded on the soundest policy and conformable with the natural situation of the country; that the vast distance from the settlements west of the Wabash to the present territorial government, renders the administration of justice burthensome and expensive in the highest degree; amounting almost to a denial of justice; that the scattered situation of the settlements over this extensive country, enervates the power of the Executive, and renders it almost impossible to keep that part of the government in order; that the division of the territory is a matter of right under the ordinance, and the inconveniences to be removed by an immediate separation, would encourage the speedy population of the territory; that there are about 28,000 inhabitants in the territory of Indiana, and 2700 souls betwixt the ages of 16 and 21, in that part proposed to be constituted a new territory; that there can be no objection to the proposition, but the expense, which it was expected would be fully compensated to the U. S. by the increased value of public lands in each district.
The arguments against the bill, generally, were, that this bill proposed to multiply officers without any advantage proposed from it, which was contrary to Republican principles; that the expense to the U. S. for this new government would be 6,950 dollars annually, when the people to be governed amounted to but 2700 betwixt the age of 16 and 21, the whole population of the territory proposed to be divided containing but 28,000 souls; that the city of Washington contained at least as many as the portion proposed to be erected into a new territory, and the district of Columbia as many as the whole territory, and it would certainly excite some surprise, if Congress were to erect two territorial governments in the district, one on one side the Potomac, and one on the other; that this proceeding might be very convenient to the men who should be appointed governors and judges, but for no other good purpose; that there was no other part of the U. S. in which the same inconvenience was not felt as that complained of by the inhabitants of Indiana territory, whose situation was very different from that of the Michigan territory; that there were many places in different states whence the people had to go 2 or 300 miles to the courts; that a compliance with this petition would but serve to foster their factions, & produce more petitions.
On the passage of the above bill there were, for it 69, against it 37—Majority 32.
NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT. The message from the Senate, informing the House that they insisted on their amendments to the bill authorizing the President of the United States to employ an additional number of navy officers, seamen and marines, and that they had appointed Messrs. Bradley, Giles and Hillhouse, as a committee of conference on their part, was taken up. After a long and desultory discussion as to the mode of procedure, the House agreed to insist on their disagreement to the amendments, 67 to 53; and Messrs. Macon, Smilie and Upham were appointed a committee of conference on the part of this House.
Mr. Story obtained leave of absence for the remainder of the session. THURSDAY, JAN. 19. Mr. Morrow reported a bill to alter the terms of sale of the public lands. Mr. Motion reported a bill giving
additional jurisdiction to the territorial courts. These bills were each twice read and referred.
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. Mr. Staver presented two petitions signed by 272 inhabitants of Norfolk county, and the Speaker a petition from the town of Roxborough, against the late election of electors for President and Vice-President of the U. States by the Legislature of Massachusetts—Laid on the table. EXTRA SESSION. On motion of Mr. Smilie, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Mr. Picken in the chair, on the bill to alter the time of the next meeting of Congress.
Mr. J. G. Jackson moved to strike out the "fourth" Monday in May and insert the "last," stating as a reason that the Virginia elections taking place in April, the Representatives could not arrive here in time. Mr. Macon wished a division of the question so as first to strike out, with a view to insert September instead of May. Motion to strike out negatived 62 to 35. It was supposed that this question tried the principle of the bill. The committee rose and reported the bill.
Mr. D. R. Williams moved to strike out May for the purpose of inserting Sept. On this motion a warm debate ensued, which continued till half past five o'clock, when the House adjourned, without a decision.
Messrs. Smilie, J. G. Jackson, Batson, Bibb, Rhea, Gardner, Nicholas, Milnor, Burwell, G. W. Campbell, and Eppes appeared to support the bill, and Messrs. Macon, Sloan, Upham, D. R. Williams, Durell and Quincy oppose to it.
SENATE, January 16. The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill making further provision for the corps of Engineers.
Mr. Mitchell moved to strike out the following section: "And thereafter the said corps of engineers, constituting the military academy, shall be removed under the direction of the President of the U. States from West Point, and stationed at Washington, in the district of Columbia."
The Yeas and Nays were taken as follows, and the motion rejected.
YEAS—Messrs. Gilman, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Howland, Kitchell, Matthews, Mitchell, Parker, Robinson, Smith of Md. Smith of N. Y. Turner—12.
NAYS—Messrs. Anderson, Bayard, Bradley, Coudit, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard, Gregg, Meigs, Milledge, Moore, Pope, Smith of Tenn. Sumner, Thruston, White—16.
Mr. Smith of Md. submitted the following motion for consideration:
Resolved, That the President be requested to direct the proper officers to report to this House, the measures which have been adopted to carry into execution the act of Congress of 21st Feb. 1806, appropriating two millions of dollars for defraying any extraordinary expenses attending the intercourse between the U. S. and foreign nations; particularly whether the said two millions of dollars, or any portion thereof, was sent in specie or by bills of exchange, to either France, Spain, Holland or any other country, for the purpose of carrying into execution the said act, and also to what object the sums so remitted have been applied, or were authorized or intended to be applied.
SENATE, January 17. The resolution, offered yesterday, by Mr. Smith of Maryland, calling for information relative to appropriation under the act of 21 Feb. 1806, was agreed to.
The Senate then took up the message from the House of Representatives, stating their disagreement to the amendments of the Senate to the bill authorizing the appointment and employment of an additional number of officers, seamen & marines, & resolved to insist upon them—Yeas 23, Nays 7, asked a conference, and appointed Messrs. Bradley, Giles and Hillhouse, managers on their part.
NOTICE. The Taxable Inhabitants of Washington city, and all others concerned, are hereby informed that the Tax for the year 1808, on Real and Personal Property, also the Tax on Slaves and Dogs, became due on the 1st inst. and must be paid immediately at the City Treasurer's Office.
The Treasurer returns his thanks to those who have usually called at his Office and settled their accounts, and will still be thankful to those who may make it convenient to settle in that way. He also informs those who are in arrears that no further indulgence can be given, and that they must pay the amount due immediately, or their property must be seized and sold to satisfy the same.
HENRY WHETCROFT, Treasurer of Washington City. January 20—2w
COAL FOR SALE. A Cargo of RICHMOND COAL, on board the sloop Rebecca, lying at Leav's Wharf. Apply to the subscriber, back of the Seven Buildings.
JOSEPH MIDDLETON. January 20—3t
LUKE KENT, CLOCK & WATCH-MAKER. (FROM PHILADELPHIA)
F. Street between the Brandy & Treasurers. Informs his friends and the public, that he continues to repair Clocks and Watches of every description in the best manner with his own hand punctiliously. Washington Jan. 20—
WASHINGTON CITY. FRIDAY, JANUARY 20.
The following article is from the Statesman of Massachusetts. Let faction, on viewing herself in the mirror it presents, estimate her real strength, and remember the fate of Sisiphus.
"As the opposition party, since the embargo was laid, have considered the policy or impolicy of that measure as the test of principle, I am willing to put it on the same footing. Here follows the majorities in the several states in the Union (the most of which were given on general tickets) which are, or are supposed to be, for or against that measure. This will show nearly the state of parties in the U. States."
Table with 2 columns: State, Majority. Rows include New Hampshire (1,000), Massachusetts (2,000), Connecticut (8,000), Rhode Island (400), Vermont (432), New York (10,000), New Jersey (3,500), Pennsylvania (40,000), Delaware (400), Maryland (5,000), Virginia (46,000), North Carolina (8,000), South Carolina (6,000), Georgia (8,000), Ohio (5,000), Kentucky (12,000), Tennessee (10,000). Totals: 165,500, 10,732.
* Virginia permits only her freeholders to vote, and does not take more than thirty thousand votes at every general election. She has about eighty thousand persons who ought to vote; of them there is a majority of forty-six thousand."
SAMUEL WHITE is re-elected Senator of the U. S. for the state of Delaware for six years ensuing the 3d of March next.
The following is from Coleman's Evening Post—most excellent English authority! "A contradiction—Some of the papers having stated that Mr. Erskine has demanded from our government permission for an English expedition under gen. Prevost, to sail up the Mississippi, means have been taken to ascertain whether there was any foundation for the rumor or not.—There is not a syllable of truth in it."
The following address to the king of England, by the city of Westminster, has been unanimously adopted, and ordered to be presented by the High Bailiff, sir Francis Burdett and Mr. Sheridan. The demand for a call of Parliament is its strongest feature, and manifests a thorough want of confidence in the ministry. We regret the want of room to insert the speeches of Mr. Wishart, Mr. Finerty and Mr. Sheridan, on the occasion. The following sarcasms of Mr. Finerty, are, however, too pungent, to be omitted.
He said, "he thought it was probable that an address, conceived in more manly terms, might produce a better effect and that the inhabitants of Westminster, might not be treated by ministers with the same affected contempt, which the corporation of London had met with from them. He had no very great respect for the corporation of London, as he thought, that by former servility, they had exposed themselves to the contempt which they had met from ministers; but at the same time he could not think so very poorly of the corporation, as to suppose that the present cabinet had any right to treat them with contempt. Although he did not think highly of the corporation, he thought there were several persons in it that might fairly be matched against any of the ministers. He thought that his friend Mr. Quin could talk as well as Mr. Canning; that in judgment and political knowledge, Mr. Waithman was at least upon an equality with lord Hawkesbury; that in supporting all parties and all doctrines, lord Castlereagh could claim no superiority over alderman Shaw; that the duke of Portland was not superior in solidity to Mr. Deputy Kemble or alderman Curtis. If there was any quibbling, pettifogging attorney in the corporation, he would pair him off against Mr. Percival; and for talking much and thinking little, he conceived Mr. Dixon was on an equality with lord Mulgrave."
ADDRESS To the King's most excellent Majesty.
"May it please your majesty, "We, your majesty's loyal subjects, the inhabitants of the city and liberty of Westminster, beg leave to approach your majesty, and to express our firm persuasion, that the late convention, agreed to by your majesty's commanders in Portugal, no less afflicted your majesty than it disappointed the hopes and expectations of your majesty's faithful people."
"That your petitioners were filled with admiration, and joy at the valor and success of your majesty's forces in Portugal, as detailed in the extraordinary gazette, published on the 2d day of September last."
"That your petitioners are concerned to observe that at that time your majesty's commanders had signed preliminaries for a convention, by which the British nation engaged to carry to France, the whole of the French army, with their baggage, artillery and ammunition; that they were not to be considered prisoners of war, but were allowed to act, immediately on their return to France, in any place where their services should be required by your majesty's implacable enemy."
"We therefore humbly beseech your majesty to direct a full and effective inquiry, to be made into all the circumstances which led to the conclusion of a convention so inconsistent with the brilliant achievements of your armies, on the 17th and 21st of August, that the true causes thereof may be made manifest to your majesty's faithful and affectionate people; and that your majesty will be graciously pleased forthwith to assemble your parliament, that such inquiry may be instituted, as to them in their wisdom shall seem expedient."
A number of vessels, laden with cotton, to a large amount, have cleared out from Paulus Hook for Boston. Not a doubt is entertained of the intention to carry the vessels to Europe.
EVASION OF LAW.—Eight ships and two brigs sailed from the Jersey shore on Wednesday for Boston, (in England I have no doubt) with cargoes of cotton, tobacco, &c. &c. So it goes, the honest trader suffers, while the "worthless part of community" are making fortunes.
N. Y. Daily Adv. From the Philadelphia Democratic Press. of Saturday Evening, Jan. 14. ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS REWARD.
Will be paid by the Editor of this paper to any person or persons who will prove who was the TRAITORUS INCELIARY, who at the Mr. Mants' Coffee House, in this City did, this day, post up a paper on which was written the words following, to wit:
"THE POTOMAC THE BOUNDARY, THE NEGRO STATES BY THEMSELVES."
New-York, Jan. 16. Yesterday arrived the packet sloop Abby Inn, Hommencieu, in 24 hours from New London. Captain L. and his passengers, inform us, that Mr. M. Lawrence arrived there in a Spanish brig on Thursday last from Cadiz, which place he left on the 17th of November—that Mr. Lawrence and the captain of the brig informed them, that no recent battle had taken place in Spain, and that they did not bring any news.
Mr. L. was the bearer of dispatches for government which we understand have been forwarded.
Extract of a letter, dated Cadiz, November 7.
[Communicated for the Federal Gazette.]
I have just received a letter from Mr. Erving, an extract from which follows under date the 25th ult.
"I received the most prompt and satisfactory assurances when at Aranjuez, both from Mr. Cevallos the minister of state & the President of the junta, that the ship at Algeciras should be liberated without any difficulty or delay. I shall return to Aranjuez on Friday or Saturday, and may perhaps then write to you more particularly on this subject."
We have just received an express from Gibraltar, giving information that the port of Trieste is open for all vessels. This circumstance augurs favorably for colonial produce, which rises in consequence. Already up to:—
Table with 2 columns: Item, Price. Rows include Sugar, white (16 dolls.), brown (13), Flour (8 a 10), Tobacco (25).
Extract of a letter from a gentleman at St. Louis, dated 25th Nov. 1808.
"Mr. Pierre Chouteau, returned yesterday with a treaty made by him (with what authority however I do not know) on behalf of the United States, with the Osage Indians—it is reported to contain every thing that could be desired on behalf of the United States—should this rumor be correct, my fear is, the contract is too good on our side, to be kept long with good faith on theirs."
JUST RECEIVED
And for Sale by R. C. WEIGHTMAN Pennsylvania avenue, Sketch of a Plan and Method of Education founded on an analysis of the human faculties, and natural reason, suitable for the dispersing of a free people and for all rational beings. By JOSEPH NEED, formerly a coadjutor of Pestalozzi, at his school near Berne in Switzerland—Price 75 cents.
This book may also be had of D. Rotine, Capitol Hill, and Jos. Maitlan, Georgetown.
Crabb's Poems, Elizabeth, or the Exiles of Siberia, Sword Exercise for the Cavalry, Pocket Almanac, 12 1-2 cents each, Ennui's Map of Europe, Portable Mahogany Desks, from 11 to 18 dollars.
A variety of new Music, German Flutes, plain and ditto, Visiting Cards, plain, gilt, and embossed, &c. &c. January 20—2t
JUST RECEIVED
And now for Sale at D. MARTIN'S Bookstore Capital Hill. Memoirs of the Philadelphia Society for promoting Agriculture. Containing communications on various subjects in husbandry and rural affairs. To which is added, a Statistical account of the Schuylkill Permanent Bridge, as communicated to the said Society, Vol. I. Price $2. 50. D. B. It is always for sale an extensive assortment and large supply of Books and Stationery. January 20—2t

UNITED STATES COURT, 5TH CIRCUIT AND VIRGINIA DISTRICT, NOVEMBER TERM, 1808.
UNITED STATES against JOHN MOSS. On the motion of the defendant by his attorney, It is ordered, That the Bank Notes...
A Copy, True, WILLIAM MARSHALL, CLERK. PER. ONT. Identifying and claiming notes under the foregoing order must have their proofs...
December 28, 1808. A List of Bank Notes found on JOHN MOSS lately convicted of having stolen Bank Notes out of letters in the Post Office in Petersburg...
Table with 6 columns: No., Date, Amount, By whom drawn, To whom payable, Bank. It lists various bank notes and their details.
ON 13th June 15th, 1808, D. Lenox. This note was not found on MOSS at the time he was arrested...
THE COMMERCIAL COMPANY OF WASHINGTON. Have received from the schooner Citizen, capt. Sharkey, from New York, in addition to their supply of GOODS...
THE STOCKHOLDERS of the Washington and Alexandria Turnpike Company are hereby notified that the Fifth List Assessment of TEN Dollars on each share is called for...
THE SALE of the Valuable PROPERTY advertised to be sold at the Union Tavern, Georgetown, at 12 o'clock THIS DAY, is postponed till MONDAY the 23rd inst.
ROMULUS RIGGS, intending to close and settle up his business in George town, and being determined to SELL off his entire stock of GOODS, only to cover Cost for CASH.
Cloths, Cassimeres, Plannels, Coatings, Kerseys, Plains, Blankets, Nant Frizes, Manchester, Waistcoatings, Police Cloths and Velvets, Spotted Serges for children...
ATTENTION. All those indebted to me will please to make immediate payment as indulgences must not be expected and cannot be given.
THE Secretary of the Navy will receive PROPOSALS until the first day of February next, for furnishing all or any of the following articles of Domestic Manufacture.
FOR SALE. A valuable Family of Negroes, consisting of a Man, who is a carpenter, his wife and seven children; all young and healthy.
FRESH GARDEN SEEDS. THE Subscriber has an assortment of Garden Seeds, and mostly of his own saving last summer, for Sale at his Nursery Garden.
FOR SALE. A Most valuable MULATTO LAD, about 22 years of age, has served five years under two good Scotch gardeners, well accustomed to all sorts of plantation work...
PLANTING INK. SUMMER, WINTER, and First Quality of Book Printing Ink, for sale at the store of Mr. Thomas W. PATON, adjoining the Seven Buildings...
NEW BOOKS. JOSEPH MILLIGAN (OF GEORGETOWN) Has Just Received, and is now opening, a choice collection of New Books, amongst which he notes the following List.
Account of Ja. Naismith, 1 vol. 8 mo. Ash's Travels, 1 vol. 8 mo. Aitken's Eulogy, 2 vols. Adams on Electricity, 1 vol. 8 mo.
Georgetown, December 22—1m. 3000 yards of 6-4 coarse Blue Cloth, or 6000 yards of 3-4. 240 yards of 6-4 scarlet do. or 480 3-4. 1500 yards of 6-4 Blue for lining, 3-4 color except red, or 3000 yards of 3-4 flannel.
THE STOCKHOLDERS of the Commercial Company of Washington are hereby notified that an instalment of Two Dollars & Fifty Cents on each share is required to be paid at the office of the Company, on Monday the 20th of March next.
THE STOCKHOLDERS of the Commercial Company of Washington are hereby notified that an instalment of Two Dollars & Fifty Cents on each share is required to be paid at the office of the Company, on Monday the 20th of March next.
THE STOCKHOLDERS of the Commercial Company of Washington are hereby notified that an instalment of Two Dollars & Fifty Cents on each share is required to be paid at the office of the Company, on Monday the 20th of March next.
NOVELS. Aubrey, by Dallas, 4 vols. Artless Tales, 3 vols. Alvar & Seraphina, 2 vols. Alfred of Normandy, 2 vols. Athlon & Dunbayne, 2 vols.
THOMAS W. PATON HAS removed next door to his former store, where he has received from Philadelphia and Baltimore a new supply of goods, which make his assortment very considerable.
BY HIS EXCELLENCY ROBERT WRIGHT, ESQUIRE, GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND. A PROCLAMATION. WHEREAS the Executive of the state of Virginia hath lately demanded of the Executive of the state of Maryland, a certain GEORGE GORDON, of Virginia, a fugitive from justice, alleged to be guilty of a murder in the state of Virginia.