The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1809-07-05 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER
VOL. IX.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1353
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM,
WEDNESDAY, JULY 5, 1809
PAID IN ADVANCE.
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 5.
To allow those engaged on the National Intelligencer an opportunity of joining in the celebration of yesterday, the paper is printed on a half sheet.
The National Anniversary was yesterday celebrated in this city with the highest demonstrations of joy. The day was ushered in by a grand salute at the Navy Yard, followed by several discharges of artillery during the day. The national armed vessels were in full dress. At 10 o'clock in the morning, the Declaration of Independence was read by General Mason, and an elegant and impressive oration pronounced by Mr. Barlow, in Mr. Lantier's Church, before a large and respectable audience, including the President of the U. States, the Heads of Departments, and many distinguished persons. At noon a numerous company waited on the President, among whom refreshments were liberally distributed. About 1 o'clock the military passed in review before the President. The numerous and varied companies of militia made a very respectable and martial appearance. At the ordinary dining hour several respectable parties of citizens assembled, the chief of which were those assembled at Long's Hotel, and at the Centre Market House; the former composed of the citizens of Washington generally; the latter of the Democratic citizens of the District. The latter were honored with the company of the Heads of Departments; and both with the company of several Members of Congress, and several strangers of distinction.
We shall in our next paper present a more particular account of the celebration. It is sufficient, at present, to observe, that the day was observed by all descriptions and classes of citizens with a patriotism, harmony and order becoming the occasion.
Philad. April, July 3.
THE LATEST FROM FRANCE. The Fair American arrived here on Saturday evening, in 54 days from Dunkirk, having on board Mr. Purvis, with dispatches from Gen. Armstrong, our minister at Paris.
Mr. Purvis politely loaned to the editors of the Freeman's Journal, files of the Journal du Soir, the Journal de Commerce, the Gazette Nationale, the Gazette de France, and the Journal de l'Empire, to the 5th May inclusive, from which we have made as copious translations as our time and limits would admit.
The American property in France, is in the same situation as heretofore, and no vessel can clear out from France, without giving bonds to an enormous amount not to violate Bonaparte's Milan and Berlin decrees. The French minister, it is said, in favor, as far as he dare be, of a relaxation of the decrees, but Bonaparte would not hear it mentioned.
Talleyrand is dismissed from office, and is in disgrace.
Mr. Danakoff, the Russian Chargé d'Affaires to reside in the U. States, with his family and suite, came passengers in the Fair American.
[The papers also contain the 1st and 2d bulletins of the army of Austria, which shall be given in our next.]
The first bulletin is dated Ratisbon, April 24th, and gives the details of the three successive battles of Abensberg, d'Eckmühl and Ratisbon, in which the French took 50,000 prisoners, with a loss on their part of 1200 killed & 4000 wounded. In these actions 20,000 Austrians were engaged. The Archduke Charles only saved himself by flight. Napoleon was in most of them, at the head of his troops, and pushed forward to Ratisbon with a celerity scarcely credible. On the 24th of April he issued a proclamation in which he says, "before a month hence we shall be at Vienna."
The second bulletin is dated Muhlendorf, April 27th. It describes some small affairs which had taken place between the armies, in which the French were successful. Napoleon was at Muhlendorf. The duke of Auerstadt had gone in pursuit of the Archduke Charles, whose communication with the Inn and Vienna being cut off, he had no resource but to retire into the mountains of Bohemia.
WASHINGTON THEATRE. On Thursday Evening, July 6, 1809, Will be presented A TRAGEDY, called the
ROBBERS.
To which will be added, An admired Farce, in two acts, called RAISING THE WIND. Box One Dollar—Pit Three Quarters of a Dollar.
Tickets to be had at the Office of Dinwiddie and Cooper, Eleventh-street, near Pennsylvania Avenue.
Doors will open at Six—Curtain rise Quarter before Seven o'Clock.
POSTPONEMENT OF SALES.
THE Sale of the valuable unimproved lots, that were advertised to be sold the 1st inst. at Rhodes' Hotel, is postponed until Monday the 10th, at 6 o'clock precisely, when and where they will be publicly sold, at 3 & 6 months credit for approved endorsed negotiable notes. They will be laid off to suit purchasers.
The LOTS are No. 3, 4, 6, 10 and 11— in square 219.
No. 9, 10 and 11—in sq. 168
No. 1, 2, and 3—
JULY 3—34.
CONGRESS. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DEBATE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (Continued.)
JUNE 22.
Mr. RANDOLPH said he meant to take very little part indeed in this debate, because he conceived that he labored under a very great difficulty in understanding the bill which had come from the other House, as to any practical good which could result from it. He said he saw, indeed, a great many sections of the non-intercourse act of last session retained, and a great many abolished; but when he considered the whole circumstances of the case, this bill appeared to him to be a very flimsy covering to the national nakedness. It would perhaps (said he) be arrogating too much to myself to undertake to pronounce what results would follow from the bill, should it be agreed to in its present shape. I do believe that would be a question which the best legal abilities of this country, and our courts, if it shall be brought before them, will have no small degree of difficulty in deciding. But if I understand the proposition now under consideration it is made for the purpose of avoiding any absurdity of construction of this bill, and to declare with greater precision that the armed ships of G. Britain and France shall absolutely be admitted into our waters. This is a proposition to which I do not feel at present disposed to agree—and wherefore, sir? Why, because, if I understand any thing of the nature of the measures of resistance taken during the last session of Congress to the unlawful edicts and decrees of France and G. Britain, this exclusion of the armed ships of those two nations constituted a part of that resistance. For my part I never had much opinion (nor have I any better now) of attacking seventy-four gun ships with paper; but really I cannot consent to declare that these ships shall be admitted peremptorily within our waters, when I consider what must be the inevitable consequence of such an admission—for I hope the House will understand me. I speak not in the disjunctive but in the adjunctive in relation to this proposition. It is, by the decrees of France, the right (if right can be conferred by an arbitrary pretension) and duty too of the armed ships of that country, both public and private, to capture every American vessel which shall have been spoken to or visited by any British armed ships. From this ground France has in no degree receded—and yet shall we declare that her ships of war shall come into the Chesapeake, the Hudson or into Boston harbor, as if we were afraid that their opportunities of executing their illegal decrees would not be sufficient, unless we gave them the rights of hospitality here? Whenever one of those armed ships either comes in or goes out, unquestionably she will be in the habit of taking every American vessel which has been spoken to by a British ship of war. Under these circumstances I do confess that I am not ready to say to these people "You shall come in." I had rather leave the thing in statu quo. I had rather, if they do come in, that they should come in in quality of intruders; that these captors of our property under their illegal decrees should not receive any kind of sanction whatever from the admission of their capturing vessels within our waters. At the same time I hope I may not be so much misunderstood as to be thought capable of supposing that our pen, ink and paper will keep the Patriot or any other ship of France from coming in or going out—I am fully impressed with the mortifying conviction that it will not—but at the same time I am unwilling to give them an express right and title to come; and I wait with deference and with patience too for gentlemen to show what are the relaxations on the part of France, what the concessions and modifications of her illegal decrees, in resistance to which this ground was assumed at the last session of Congress, which will countenance us in declaring by law that her armed ships shall come within the waters of the U. S.
It really is a curious situation in which you are got through the instrumentality of this bill to interdict commercial intercourse between the U. States and Great Britain and France, and their dependencies. It seems to me that the only possible object of the present session of Congress, if it once be admitted, that we are not assembled here to transact the ordinary legislative business, is that this non-intercourse law may die as soon as we adjourn, because it was to continue till the end of the next session of Congress. Therefore there was to be
and is a session of Congress, in order that it may cease and determine. Perhaps I shall be asked, on the other hand, for a project; and may also be asked if we do adjourn and the act to prohibit intercourse dies by its own limitation, what will exist in resistance to one or the other of those two countries on our part? I might say, suppose the bill to continue, what does exist of the nature of resistance? Whatever did exist like resistance?
By the 11th section of the non-intercourse law the President was authorised to suspend the law in relation to that power which should revoke or modify its edicts. Great Britain having done this, we are placed in that situation in relation to her. It is now proposed, if I understand any thing of the bill, to change that situation—how? To change it by expressly admitting the armed ships of Great Britain and France (I speak in the conjunctive) into our ports and harbors. So that whilst the President of the U. States has, in consequence of certain communications betwixt him and the British government, very wisely and patriotically changed the relations between this country and Great Britain, we are therefore, without any communications between the President of the U. S. and France, for the purpose, if I understand the argument, of keeping the balance accurately adjusted between these two powers, to admit them both into our waters. Now, sir, suppose, on the contrary, that the first overture towards concession & relaxation of their decrees, had come from the French emperor, and that consequently the President of the U. S. had, as it would have been his duty to do, suspended the act on which we are now legislating in relation to France. What would have been thought of a proposition that, because the President had such assurances as were completely satisfactory to induce him to suspend the non-intercourse law in relation to France, therefore we must make some concession to G. Britain, who had shown no disposition to relax her decrees and orders, for the purpose of keeping the balance of impartiality between two nations, one of whom had and the other had not, in a degree at least, come into our measures? If such a proposition had been made, it appears to me that it would have been scouted. I do not see the whole drift of this bill, but I want to know if the U. S. ought, without any manifestation of a friendly disposition on the part of France, to make any relaxation of that which they have chosen to call resistance to France, & more especially, if, at the very moment that they do on paper most rigorously interdict all commercial intercourse with France and exclude her merchant ships, they should by a positive legislative act such as the amendment now under consideration admit her ships of war. If we admit her ships of war, a fortiori I think we ought to admit her merchant vessels.
I have not much expectation of participating more in the final passage of this bill than I did in the act to which this is a supplement. I hope all the good will be received from it which is expected; but, with that amendment, I shall be compelled, however reluctantly, to vote against the bill. And that shows the propriety, in my opinion, not only of the propriety but the political necessity which exists for this House to remain in session until we can receive, and we must be in daily expectation of it, some manifestation of the disposition of the French government towards us. I do think it would be an act of political dereliction in us, situated as we are in regard to France—and I have as little disposition to go to war with France as any man; I shall shew the same disposition towards France now as I did in 1799—I think it would be highly improper in us to change our disposition in relation to France by admitting French ships of war, when, in one week after we adjourn news may arrive of the Emperor & King taking our proceedings in very high dudgeon and that he has declared war or issued letters of Marque and Reprisal against us. It seems that we are to pass this bill in our anxiety to do something, the same old prudent itching to do something which has prompted us to former measures, and in our anxiety too to get away from this place or to surrender this Hall for the celebration of the next fourth of July; for it seems by the papers that nolens volens we are to be turned out and not only that, but that the use of the room is to be vested in strangers. In my opinion this room is national property, consecrated to legislative business, and it is not competent for any person whatsoever at any time to take possession of it or put it to any use without the sanction of an order of this House. That by
the way. I shall listen with great attention to any one who will induce me to believe in the propriety of this amendment. If we forget all that we have said, I hope in God we shall not forget all we have voted and resolved. I wish any gentleman to shew me not merely the expediency but the right, without abandoning all sort of claim to legislative consistency, which we have to adopt the measure now presented. If we do, we shall have launched an anathema on the 10th Congress to which even I would be sorry to give my assent. I see them denounced publicly, but I am unwilling to give my aid and sanction, and I hope that the gentleman who composed it will be equally unwilling to give their sanction to the denunciation.
Mr. J. G. JACKSON said it would be recollected that when this subject had been under discussion some weeks since, in the course of the wide range which he had then taken and which had been so much censured, he had stated that he was of opinion that it best comported with the honor of this nation to exclude all armed vessels from our waters, subject to such regulations as should be fixed by treaty. But it seemed that gentlemen thought at this time, when a negotiation with G. Britain was upon the tapis and the intention of any act of this kind would be liable to misinterpretation, it would be assuming a hostile attitude towards that country; and that therefore it was proper to admit armed vessels. In that wide range of debate, (said he) I observed that the unatoned injuries of Great Britain had equalled if not exceeded those of France, and I therefore asked why should we make a distinction in the admission of her armed vessels. There is a doubt in my mind of the construction of the law, though some of my friends think it is perfectly plain. I would ask the gentlemen from New York and Mass. (Messrs. Gold and Livermore) if they had to choose whether they would admit or exclude both, if they would not rather admit them? But it has been said that the 11th section of the non-intercourse law did authorise the admission of armed vessels of either belligerent complying with the terms of the law. If this be the true & sound construction, why not express it, when we know very well that a different construction has been put on it? But it is not sound. The law says that commercial intercourse with the nation revoking its edicts "may be renewed." What may be renewed? The trade of the United States; and it was a liberal construction of this section to include in the arrangement the admission of vessels carrying on this trade. The law simply provided that the relations between the two nations should be placed in statu quo, which would not include the admission of her armed vessels.
But the gentleman from Virginia says that this amendment proposes a peremptory admission of the armed vessels of the belligerents. He certainly has not examined it with his accustomed penetration or he would not have hazarded the assertion. It is not an authoritative admission. It merely says that the law shall not be construed to prohibit their admission. It does not say explicitly that they shall be admitted, but removes the interdiction; and if they come here with hostile intentions or during a state of war, they are still liable to any measure of the government, for the power of excluding vessels from our waters still remains with the President and may be applied to the vessels of any nation violating our peace or sovereignty. I am unwilling now to excite a disagreeable and unprofitable discussion on our foreign relations at this time so delicately situated and therefore shall not go over the ground which gentlemen have taken on this occasion, but will leave them peaceably to occupy it.
JUNE 23.
Mr. J. G. JACKSON modified his motion so as to comprise the admission into our waters of public ships of any nation whatever.
Mr. ROSS said he would, before this question was taken, submit to the committee some of the views which had occupied his mind since this question was under consideration the other day. The importance of the subject ought to demand the attention of every member of the committee to consider himself as sitting in the great council of the nation, to conclude the great work which had been begun—he meant the restoration of commerce to its former vigorous state. I have not (said he) upon an examination of this bill, upon taking a view of the arguments offered either on one side or the other, been able to draw a conclusion favorable to the amendment which is proposed. The question propounded to the committee by the a-
mendment explanatory of the design of the bill, is, whether it be sound policy with respect to our relations with G. Britain and France, to permit the armed vessels of those nations to enter into our ports.
I have heard it said that this bill contemplates nothing but justice to France and England in placing them in precisely similar situations. I have not been able to perceive that such would be the effect of the bill with the amendment proposed. At present France has no commerce; no vessel of France will, I apprehend, sail from any port of France to any port of the U. S. at this time, except an armed vessel; so that our ports will be completely open to all the vessels of France, whilst on the other hand they are only opened to England in consideration of the revocation of her orders in council, and of a promise to negotiate a commercial treaty. Therefore I apprehend that in its effects it will operate unjustly. But it will be recollected that the non-intercourse law was passed at a time when it was said that the outrageous conduct of those two nations justly called for the indignation of this government. Since that time England has made proposals and preliminary stipulations, and entered into such assurances as warranted the President in exercising the authority vested in him by the law to which this is a supplement. Has France done this? If there was just cause to enact a law to interdict the armed vessels of France, let us enquire whether there be now any just ground to relinquish it. It may be said that she has declared that if we make England respect our flag, she will relax her decrees. What does this amount to but to this: that she sets herself up as the judge whether we assert our independence or not? She says "I will undertake to decide whether you conduct yourselves in such a way as shews to our sovereign that you make the English respect your flag." This, I apprehend, is the only ground upon which gentlemen can proceed with any degree of consistency. With respect to their conduct last year, when they enacted this law prohibiting intercourse, I have nothing to say. But is this declaration, contained in the Milan decree, of such a nature, so specific in its terms, is the mode by which you have arrived at a knowledge of the disposition of France so satisfactory as to authorise this government to relax from that firm ground which they had taken? I apprehend not. It is objectionable to my mind, sir, inasmuch as it holds out the idea to the world and to ourselves, that France is to be the judge when we make England respect our flag. It is objectionable also because it does not designate the manner in which the French government would relax its decrees or restore the commerce of the U. S. to its former situation.
But, sir, I am not satisfied with merely excluding the armed vessels of France, but I am opposed to repealing the clause interdicting the vessels of G. Britain from our waters. What have we more to promise, which I hope hereafter to see fulfilled with good faith? As the repeal of the interdiction was not made a necessary part of the agreement for the renewal of intercourse, I see no cause to rescind it. It may be said that the interdiction as it respected the armed vessels of G. Britain was made in consequence of the attack on the Chesapeake; and that, as atonement has been made for the attack on the Chesapeake, therefore the act consequent thereon should be rescinded by our government. Let us have patience, and see how this case stands. Have we got atonement from G. Britain? Has it been actually given to us? Have we any knowledge that she has actually given that kind of redress which we have agreed to accept as satisfaction? If she has, we have no knowledge of it; and we can only act from what we know. All we have is a promise that it shall be done. What then would be the prudent policy to be pursued? Would it be to recede from the ground which it was deemed prudent to adopt in consequence of the acts of Great Britain, before the promise of reparation is performed? It would appear to me that the reverse would be the proper course. I would continue the interdiction until the President shall have received that atonement and be satisfied that these vessels might be admitted with safety. To the President of the United States is entrusted the power of making treaties. I have the fullest confidence that the President of the United States has a bias in favor of France, and no improper prejudices against England; that his sole object is to effect a restoration of harmony between...

two countries. Having this opinion, I would leave every thing with him to conduct on this occasion, and do no more than enable him, in the different stages of negotiation, to reach what shall interfere with it, as I shall think right; and, therefore, would authorise him to admit the armed vessels of either nation, as he was before authorised to renew intercourse. This would leave the state of things as we found it, without having altered in any manner the laws in relation to the two belligerent nations, as they stood at the end of the last session. Would not this be sound policy? If we were to admit the armed vessels of France, we might furnish Great Britain with reasons for flying from her promises and breaking stipulations. Is there any immediate necessity that we should admit the armed vessels of both nations? The President alone, who is immediately concerned and interested, who knows all the different turns and changes of the negotiations, can best tell at what time it will be proper to do this act. Is there any necessity that the Legislature should do it whilst sitting? Would it not be better to trust it into the hands of him who is to conduct the negotiation, that he may wield it as a shield during the negotiation? Certainly. I therefore submit it to the committee whether it be proper to admit the armed vessels of France in our present situation? Whether it would not be abandoning that impartial conduct which was manifested to the world in the act to which this is a supplement? Being impartial, why should you give up your impartial conduct? England has come to some terms; France to none. We have nothing from which we can say that France has not at this moment a declaration of war in force against us. We should make a ridiculous appearance, if we should repeal the interdiction before the rising of the Legislature, and before we arrive at some should hear of a declaration of war from France. Therefore I can see no reason for relinquishing that ground assumed last winter with regard to France, nor in regard to England, further than the President shall think proper. I am therefore opposed to the amendment, and am of opinion that the first and second sections of the act to which this is a supplement should be re-enacted, that a clause should be added to this bill authorising the President by his proclamation, whenever the state of affairs would justify it, to permit the armed vessels of the belligerents to enter our waters.
If I had any favorable feelings or disposition to England rather than to France, I should be disposed to adopt the amendment, because the vessels of the former are so much superior, that if the vessels of the latter should attempt to enter our waters, they will fall a sacrifice, and, therefore, though in terms the law would appear to be favorable to France, it would be giving an advantage to Great Britain so far forth as it will give her an opportunity to destroy the French vessels attempting to enter our waters.
I have given the committee my views of the subject. I have thought of it with considerable attention, and cannot bring my mind to bear so as to think it proper to adopt the amendment proposed or to recede from the interdiction already in existence, without committing my character for impartiality or consistency and good policy.
Mr. GORD moved to strike out the words "any nation whatsoever," and insert G. B. so as to admit the armed vessels of Great Britain only into our waters. If this were agreed to, he should be willing to continue the exclusion as to France, giving the President a power to suspend it, when in his opinion it may be expedient.
Whist up, he said he would make some remarks in reply to observations in support of the amendment. It has been asked (said he) with some emphasis, what has France done to exclude her from our waters? I comprehend, sir, the bearing of the question and am to understand, that France has not trespassed in our waters, as was the case of England in the attack upon the Chesapeake. But, does, sir, the honorable member suppose that a forfeiture of the rights of hospitality can be incurred only by an injury within the sea-line, the maritime leagues. The admission of armed vessels within our harbors appertains to the principle of hospitality, and the causes which will justify an exclusion are many and various; they are not confined to that part of the theatre of national intercourse. Suppose a nation, while under the obligation of a treaty of amity, denies you the rights of hospitality in her own harbors. Suppose she makes prize of an unfortunate ship-wrecked vessel on her coast, (measure becoming barbarians only) and arresting your merchants in her ports, upon the faith of treaty; makes prisoners of your seamen, and drives them like beasts from the seaboard into the interior, and there incorporates them—and suppose she fills up the measure of her injustice by burning your vessels upon the high seas—will you receive such a nation with open arms and welcome her to all
the rights of hospitality? France is the nation that has thus offended, and America is about to receive her to her embrace; and greet her with all the rites of the nation. But, in justification, it is said that a object of our government has been to restore and preserve equality with the great belligerents. For this the non-intercourse was made common to both nations, and the provision ceasing, as to the public vessels of England, ought to be discontinued as to France. Strange equality! Singular impartiality!
I do greatly fear, sir, that notwithstanding these professions of impartiality, our public councils will be exposed to well founded imputations of not holding the balance even between those nations. While, sir, I have been constrained to say, that France, pursuing an unyielding course of injustice towards this country, is not entitled to the same treatment as Great Britain; I stand free, if I know my own heart, from all impressions of favor or prejudice in relation to the belligerents. It is enough for me that a foreign nation does my country injustice, "Troiis Rutulave" is to me indifferent.
Mr. WHITMAN quoted the journal of the proceedings of the last session in relation to an amendment for issuing letters of marque and reprisal against both belligerents, offered by Mr. J. G. Jackson. He said he also found, by the yeas and nays, that the gentleman from Virginia was then in favor of excluding the armed vessels of France. He wished to know what had induced the gentleman now to change that opinion?
(To be continued.)
TAMMANY SOCIETY. A stated Meeting of the Tammany Society on Columbian Order, will be held at the Council Fire of their Great Wigwam, (Lindsey's hotel) on Friday evening, the 7th day of the present month of Horns, precisely at the going down of the Sun. The punctual attendance of Members is requested, as matters of importance will be laid before the Society. By order of the Society, WILLIAM LAMBERT, Sec'y. City of Washington, Month of Horns the 3d. year of discovery, 317. (July 5. 1809.)—2t
Washington city, July 5th 1809. IN pursuance of an act of the Corporation passed the 23d day of May 1809, entitled "An act respecting Markets," the undersigned, Commissioners, will on THURSDAY the 6th JULY, at 8 o'clock, A. M. at the Centre Market House, assign, by lot, to Butchers who have paid their Stall-Rent, Stalls in the new addition of said Market House, in lieu of those occupied by them in the old part. They will at the same time and place, proceed to designate such other parts of said Market House, for the use of country Butchers, vendors of Poultry, Vegetables, &c. as may be found to be the best adapted for the same. T. H. GILLISS, JAMES HOBAN, ANDREW WAY, JR.
July 5—2t
TO BE SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION At Rhodes's hotel, on Saturday the 8th of July instant. ONE half of LOT No. 10, square 256, with a Two Story Frame Dwelling and Kitchen on the same—Also, one half LOT No. 6, square 253, situated on East Street between the Bank and War Office. Terms to be made known on the day of sale, to commence at 5 o'clock P. M. MARY McNEMARA, Executrix of Cornelius McNemara, deceased. N. B. An indisputable title will be given by Capt. W. Brent, who is appointed trustee in this case. MARY McNEMARA.
July 5—2t
SALE AT AUCTION. ON Wednesday the 5th July, will be sold at the Subscribers Auction Room on the Navy Yard Hill, a variety of elegant Household Furniture—also, a quantity of Dry Goods and a few barrels excellent Shad and Herrings. Sale to commence at 1 o'clock P. M. N. L. & H. M. QUEEN, Aucts. P. S. The Subscribers Sell on every Wednesday. N. L. & H. M. Q. July 5—1t
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 LAND 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—1dos
William Lorman, vs. Peggy M. Langlin & others. In Chancery. ORDERED, That the sale made by Daniel Bussard, of the real estate of Charles M. Langlin, deceased, as reported by him, be ratified and confirmed unless cause to the contrary be shown before the first Monday in January next, provided a copy of this order be published in the National Intelligencer for three weeks successively before the first day of October next. The report states that the whole of the property sold for four hundred and twenty-five dollars. By ord., WM. BRENT, CLK.
June 23—3w.
Boston, June 29. By the arrival yesterday of the brig Favorite, capt. Stacey, 37 days from Lisbon, we have been favored with papers of that city to the 16th May. They speak favorably of the state of the combined English and Portuguese troops—that they had been so greatly encased and disciplined as to afford the strongest assurance of safety to the inhabitants: that business had revived; and the public houses again opened for the amusement and accommodation of the people; that the theatre was opened on the 14th May, for the first time since the departure of the Prince Regent. Of the military operations of the armies and other information, the following sketch, from the latest date, will furnish examples: Lisbon, May 16.
"Authentic letters from Lamego, of the date of the 9th current (May) affirm that the Portuguese have rendered themselves masters of the passage of Regoa, and of other strong positions on the opposite side of the Douero, and that our troops in consequence have a free passage to the other side of the river. The French have not yet given us battle."
"By a vessel, which sailed from Oporto for Brazil, and which has been obliged to enter the Tagus, we are assured, that the French have retired from Amarante, to take a position on the Douero. In a few days, we expect to give the details of an action, which cannot fail to take place."
The captain of the same ship reports, that the province of Galicia had recovered its liberty; that the French are shut up in the fort of Corunna, and that the troops of Romana surround them, and that there is no doubt that they will be obliged to surrender in a few days.
Copy of a dispatch from Gen. Beresford, to his Excellency Pereira Noronha.
"I have the honor to communicate to your Excellency, that on the 9th of May, I had caused a detachment to advance to take a favorable position between Amarante and Mezaon Frio, which are occupied by the French, having met with no other enemy than a small detachment which fled. I had an opportunity of placing four pieces cannon in a good position. I ordered a constant fire upon the division of the enemy, who at the end of two hours beat a retreat in great disorder. Major Harding, whom I had sent to observe the effect of this fire, reports to have seen the French carry off five wagons of wounded. Their force consisted of 25000 infantry and 500 cavalry, commanded by Gen. Lison. I have ordered a reinforcement, commanded by the General Francisco de Silveira to keep this position, and to cut off the commencement between Amarante and Mezaon Frio. The conduct of the enemy was horrible, having burnt all the villages and huts in his retreat. (Signed) BERESFORD.
Head Quarters at Lamago, 11th May.
"Copy of a letter, dated the 11th of May, at the advanced posts." "I have the honor to inform your excellency that the French have abandoned Mezaon Frio. I shall do my utmost to maintain the good position I have taken.—By the advices that I have received, I can say that the French have lost 30 cavalry and 30 infantry, and that they have had a great number wounded, and have abandoned one ammunition waggon and a great quantity of wagons loaded with provisions. (Signed) FRANCISCO DE SILVEIRA.
"Copy of a letter from his Excellency M. Villiers, Minister of his Britannic Majesty to his Excellency Pereira Noronha, May 11th." "I have this instant received the news that the troops commanded by Sir Arthur Wellesley have completely beaten the French to the number of 4000.—The 16th Portuguese regiment distinguished themselves. We have obliged the enemy to abandon their positions."
The following article is received in a letter from Lisbon, dated on the 17th May:—"There have been great rejoicings here to day, on account, as I understand by the guards, of the French being defeated at or near Oporto."
In confirmation of the above intelligence, captain Stacey verbally reports, that the day previous to his departure, (18th May) official accounts were received of the re-taking of Oporto by the English and Portuguese troops—that the French had retreated some miles from the city; but their communication with Spain being completely cut off, and surrounded by a superior force, news was momentarily expected of their unconditional surrender, and that great rejoicings and illuminations had taken place in consequence of this agreeable intelligence; captain Stacey also reports, that the armies were in high spirits; and that the greatest good will and unanimity exists between the English and Portuguese armies.
Extract of a letter from Lisbon, dated May 17.
"We have just received the glorious news that Oporto is re-taken by the English; the retreat of the French is cut off, and their surrender as prisoners of war inevitable."
Extract of a letter. From St. Domingo City.—"We still remain besieged by the Spaniards, and blockaded by the British, though not very strictly by the latter. At this moment there is scarcely an ounce of bread, beef, pork, butter, &c. to be had, excepting on some days a piece of horse meat, and others, a little fish and a few vegetables. Government has a small quantity of provisions in store, but it is exclusively appropriated for the army. Since Ferrand's affair, the French have been victorious in every engagement with the Spaniards; have taken several of their works and cannon, and extended their lines to a considerable distance in the country. We are in good spirits at present, believing the embargo was raised the 4th of March, and looking out for American vessels daily. A small parcel of provisions which arrived since the siege, has sold at enormous prices, viz. butter, lard and cheese, at 2 dols. per pound; beef 75 cents, pork 150 cents, potatoes and corn 25 cents per pound. Flour would sell for 50 dols."—Boston Cen.
District of Columbia, Washington County, Orphan's Court, June term, 1807. ON the application of James Clagett for letters of administration on the personal estate of Thomas Shelton, late of the state of Virginia, deceased—claiming the same as a Creditor. Ordered that he give notice of his said application by inserting a copy of this order three times in the National Intelligencer. TEST, JOHN HEWITT, Reg. July 3—3t.
HAVE for Sale at their Warehouse near the Ferry— Loaf and Lump Sugar in hds and barrels, Prime Muscovado do. do. do. 2d and 3d quantity do. do. do. Hyson, Young Hy. } TEAS son, Hyson skin } in Chests, Boxes and and Imperial, } Cannisters, Coffee, Chocolate, Pepper and Allspice, Nutmegs and Cloves, Sweet Oil in Baskets and Boxes, Indigo and Copperas, Best 4th proof Cognac Brandy, Bourdeaux and Marseilles Brandy, Holland and Anchor Gin, Jamaica and Antigua Spirits, old and fit for immediate use. Old and New Whiskey, Madeira, Port, Sherry, Teneriffe, Corsica, Sicily, and Catalonia Wines, Claret in boxes 1 doz. each, Best chewing Tobacco, Demijohns, Casks, &c. &c. George Town, July 3—
THE Subscriber offers for Sale Bristol Porter Bottles in hampers containing one Gross each. Upwards of fifty thousand pounds wt. Brown Soap, chiefly put up in Boxes of 50 or 60 lbs. wt. old and in nice order for shipping. Mould and Dipt Candles in boxes—from 30 to 40 lbs. wt. each. Suffolk Rosin, transparent and free of dross, Porter and Pale Ale in Casks and Bottles, which on trial will be found of very superior quality. WM. DUNLAP. Alexandria, July 3—5t.
Just arrived from St. Bartholomews on board the brig Betsey, Capt. Nelson, and for sale at my Warehouse— 30 puncheons 3d proof rum, 40 hds. molasses, 7 do. Sugar, 12000 lb. green Coffee, Apply to CH: HERSTON'S, or the Subscriber, Who has for Sale, Best qualified Port Wine, Old Madeira do. Claret by the box, Old Jamaica and Antigua Rum, Cognac Brandy, Holland and Country Gin, Loaf and Lump Sugars, Coffee in Bgs and Bancils. Imperial, Hyson, Young Hyson, Hyson Skin, Souchong, Bohea } TEAS. Pork, Beef, Herrings, Rice, Cheese, Bacon, Flour, Meal, Corn, Ground Plaster, Soap, Dipt, Mould, and Spermaceti Candles. 20 or 30 tons Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia Bar Iron well assorted, together with many articles of Ship Chandlery. RICHARD PARROTT, George Town, June 26—4t
ROMULUS RIGGS, Has just received and opening at his New Cash Store, a complete and well selected assortment of SEASONABLE AND FANCY GOODS, Which being purchased for money, gives him the opportunity of offering the same at Baltimore and Philadelphia Prices. As he is determined to sell for very small profits. He intends keeping on hand a good assortment of Goods, to be sold by the piece; and those who purchase to sell again, will be furnished at as low rates as they can purchase in any market in the United States, being determined to sell. CASH GIVEN FOR TOBACCO Inspected at the Georgetown Warehouse. 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—4t.
CITY AUCTIONEERS. THE subscribers beg leave to inform their friends and the public, that having given the security required by law, they obtained a license to sell goods, wares and merchandise at vendue in this city. To accommodate those who may be pleased to employ them, they have taken a commodious house in the street directly opposite the Marine Barracks, and from their close attention to business, they flatter themselves that they will give general satisfaction. NICHOLAS L. QUEEN, HENRY M. QUEEN. May 29—4t
Circuit Court, District of Columbia. County of Washington—June Term, 1809. Richard Soderstrom, vs. Samuel Goodman, George Little and Josiah Quincy. In Chancery.
THE object of the bill filed in this case, is to compel Samuel Goodman to pay to the complainant the sum of money alleged by the bill to be due to the complainant for a judgment obtained against the said Goodman in the island of St. Thomas, and the amount of commissions and expenses due to said Soderstrom from said Goodman, and for monies disbursed by said Soderstrom for and on account of said Goodman. The bill states, that a decree in the supreme court of the United States was rendered in favor of said Goodman against said Little for a large sum of money on account of the capture of the brig Flying Fish and her cargo, the property of the said Goodman, a Danish merchant of the island of St. Thomas, by the said Little, commander of the United States ship of war, the Boston. That the said Little, after the decree was pronounced, petitioned and obtained from the United States a sum of money to cover said decree, and to be specifically applied to the payment thereof. That the said money was received by Josiah Quincy, the attorney of said Little, and sufficient to satisfy the complainant's demands, has been stopped and enjoined in the hands of said Quincy, out of which the complainant demands to be satisfied his claims, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court, that the said Little and Goodman respectively reside out of the district of Columbia and jurisdiction of this court. It is therefore ordered by this court, that the said Little and Goodman respectively be and appear in this court in person or by solicitor, on or before the fourth Monday of December next, to show cause why a decree should not be passed as prayed, and that this order be published for four successive weeks in the National Intelligencer and United States Gazette before the first day of August next. By order, June 16—cp4w. WM. BRENT, CLK.
CHARLES J. NOURSE Offers for sale—Chateaux Margaux Claret in boxes of 1 dozen. Genuine Old London Particular wine in half pipes and quarter casks. Best Salado Oil in baskets of 6 bottles each, &c. &c. &c. George Town, May 24—4t.
Saint Mary's county, Orphan's Court, June 13th, 1809. ON application of Decandria S. Smith, executrix of Henry A. Smith, late of Charles county deceased; ordered that she give the notice required by law for creditors to exhibit their claims against the said deceased, and that the same be published once in each week for the space of six successive weeks in the National Intelligencer and American and Commercial Daily Advertiser. JAMES FORREST, Reg. Wills for Saint Mary's county.
THIS is to give notice that the subscriber hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of Saint Mary's county, letters testamentary on the personal estate of Henry A. Smith, late of Charles county deceased—all persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same with the vouchers thereof to the subscriber at or before the 25th day of December next, they may otherwise be excluded from all benefit of said estate. Given under my hand this 20th day of June eighteen hundred and nine. DECANDRIA S. SMITH, Ex ra June 23—w6t
PUBLIC SALE. PURSUANT to a decree of the Chancery Court of Maryland, appointing the subscriber trustee, for the sale of the Real Estate of the late Mr. John Brown, of Prince George's county, for the payment of his debts, will be offered at Public Sale, on Monday the 17th July next on the premises, that valuable Farm, the late residence of the deceased, called Mount Calvert or Mount Calvert Manor, containing about 525 acres. This land is situated on Patuxent river, in the vicinity of Upper Marlinton and Nottingham, and distant about 4 miles from each of these places. It is bounded on one side by the river Patuxent, for more than a mile, where it is navigable for vessels of any burden, with the advantages of an excellent fishing landing—This land is well adapted to the production of tobacco, corn and all kinds of grain; has a quantity of good meadow land, some of which is now in high cultivation and abounds with wood and timber. The improvements are a good brick Dwelling House, two stories high, nearly new, a good Kitchen; several good Tobacco Houses and Barns, with every other necessary building, all in good repair. A further description of this valuable and well known Farm is deemed unnecessary as those inclined to purchase will no doubt view the premises before the day of sale. The terms of sale are, eighteen months credit, the purchaser giving bond with security to be approved of by the trustee, bearing interest from the day of sale, & on the ratification of the sale by the Chancellor and the payment of the whole purchase money, the trustee will by a good and sufficient deed, convey to the purchaser and his heirs, all the right, title and interest of the said John Brown to the said lands. TRUMAN TYLER, Trustee. N. B. The creditors of the said John Brown are hereby requested to lodge their claims, with the vouchers thereof, in the Chancery office within two months from the day of sale. T. TYLER, Tr. June 26—w3t
St. Mary's county court, March term 1809. WHEREAS the Commissioners appointed on the petition of EDWARD T. CARPENTER, praying that a commission might issue to divide the Real Estate of John Carpenter, late of St. Mary's county deceased, if the same would admit thereof without injury to his representatives, having made a report to the county court at St. Mary's stating that said estate would not admit of division without injury to the said representatives, which said report was by the said court ratified. And whereas it is stated to the court here, that James Carpenter and John H. Carpenter two of the said representatives reside out of the state. It is thereupon adjudged and ordered that the said representatives by cause a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer once a week for four weeks successively three months before the 7th day of August next, they give notice to the said James Carpenter and John H. Carpenter to be and appear before this court on the 7th day of August next, to make their election to take said Estate admeasured or to have it sold and the proceeds therefrom divided equally between them in such case made and
Test 30 June 28—w4w