The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-12-02 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. IX.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1271.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DEBATE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS CONTINUED.
MONDAY, Nov. 28.
The first resolution reported by the committee on foreign relations being under consideration in the following words:
Resolved, That the United States cannot, without a sacrifice of their rights, honor and independence, submit to the late edicts of Great Britain and France.
Mr. QUINCY said that he was not much in favor of abstract legislation; it was so often the resort of weakness or the refuge of ignorance, so often the subterfuge of those who were willing to amuse or delude the people, that it was with great reluctance that he expressed his opinions on any such proposition; and yet he was willing to admit that if in any case this mode of legislation could be properly resorted to, this might be such a case. But in what he should offer in support of the resolution alluded to, he should take ground altogether different from that contained in the report of the committee introducing this resolution. The principles contained in the report Mr. Quincy considered as loathsome and disgraceful to the nation; to the resolution under discussion, however, he certainly did not attribute the character which he attached to the report itself. It was a rule of the House that any resolution reported by a committee was to be taken altogether independent of the reasoning of the committee on which the resolution was predicated. Every gentleman in the House then had a right to support the resolution on his own ground, and abandon altogether that which the organ of the House had presented to him. He thought that the principle on which this resolution should be adopted was, that it was a solemn pledge to the nation, not to be redeemed in any other way than by a total abandonment of the system of measures now pursued by the administration. Adopt this resolution, said he, and the submission which has disgraced this country for eleven months and brought it to the brink of destruction, will be done away. He asked the attention of the committee to the terms of the resolution, which contained two things—an assertion and a pledge. The assertion was, that the orders and edicts of Great Britain were contrary to the rights of the American nation. The pledge was, that the nation would not submit to them. With respect to the assertion, could there be any question on this floor that those edicts were contrary to the rights of America, when even the powers who had issued them did not pretend to vindicate them, on the ground of right? They had never pretended that they were not contrary to the rights of the American people. These powers reciprocally placed their justification on the great principle of necessity; and their ministers in this city would countersign this declaration. The pledge was, that the United States would not submit to them. Mr. Quincy asked what was meant by submission, and what by the pledge not to submit? One man submits to the order, decree or edict of another, when he does that which the decree or edict commands, and when he omits to do that which the order, decree or edict prohibits. He begged gentlemen particularly to attend to this leading principle. The pledge not to submit then was, that we would not do that which such order commanded, or that we would do that act which the order prohibited. The principle was clear and intelligible, not to be mistaken on this floor, and could not be mistaken in the nation. What are the orders and decrees of the British and French governments? One said we should not trade with the other: the United States replied that they would not trade there or any where else. This was not only a submission to the orders of those governments, but he said it was an act of slavish subjection. It was doing what they required and more than they required; it was not only refusing to exercise that right which they commanded us to resign, but it was abandoning all our rights at their order. Did we exercise our rights, under the embargo, notwithstanding the orders and decrees of France and Great Britain? No; we co-operated with them, and because they said we should not trade with each other, we said we would not trade at all. This was submission, not only kissing the hand which strove to injure us, but putting their feet on our neck. The object of France was to oppress Great Britain, to deprive her of all commerce, to destroy her
resources, if possible—and what did we do? France not being able to do it, we co-operated with her, and did all we could to unite ourselves with the continental powers. He took the administration now on their own ground; he did not mean to consider them as having a partiality either on one side or the other. Take the question now as it related to Great Britain. She attempted to prohibit all commerce with France, in doing which she had two objects in view; the one was to take away the commerce of France and thus produce discontent amongst the subjects of Bonaparte; the other, and principal object was, to injure the commerce of neutral nations by excluding them from the continent. She wished to destroy competition and take commerce to herself. Now, said Mr. Quincy, your embargo law co-operates directly with her; you abandon your rights on the ocean altogether, and the consequence is, that Great Britain takes that very commerce which you have deserted, which you will not support your citizens in carrying on. What, Mr. Quincy asked, was the language of Bonaparte in relation to the embargo? Why, he had applauded it; said that we had done more than he had expected; that it had not been in his power to suppress the commerce of Britain, and we had assisted him. What was the language of Great Britain? It was also a language of approbation. She told us that we could not do more for her; that we were her only rival, and she wished the command of the commerce of the universe; we had withdrawn ourselves from the ocean, and what we lost she gained. This was the language, as our embargo favored the true interests of that nation. On this principle he conceived the present course of policy to be a disgraceful submission to the orders and decrees of the belligerent powers; on this principle he thought the embargo an abandonment of our rights under pretence of resisting them. He rejoiced therefore in the introduction of this resolution as the harbinger of a new day, as the precursor of wiser measures.
Mr. Quincy said he would here close the observations which he had to offer on this resolution, were it not that the principle of the report and of the resolution were totally at variance, were it not that the continuance of the measure of the embargo was specifically recommended in the report. It would be necessary to say something on this subject, so all-important to the nation. When he came upon this subject of the embargo, Mr. Q. said, it seemed to him as if he trod on magic ground. He knew not how to express his wonder nor how to shew his sorrow. When he had come from Massachusetts, the idea that this embargo was to be removed had been universal. It had not been the opinion so much that the embargo would be removed, as that it had been at that moment actually removed. He had thought that there was an universal sentiment that the embargo could not be continued; and he had drawn that opinion from no narrow sources, but from the conversation of men of various political opinions. Under this impression (said he) I came to the city. I now hear the incantations of the great enchanter, I feel his terrors, and am called upon to deny the evidence of my senses, to contradict what I have seen and heard and felt. I am told that the embargo cannot only be continued as relates to New-England, but that it may be continued for an unlimited time; some say for six months; some for a year, and one gentleman from North Carolina says he would rather have a three years embargo than war: another gentleman from Virginia told us he hoped that the embargo would never be taken off till the orders in council are repealed. Good Heavens! Are the members of this House mad? Are they touched with that insanity which the Almighty never fails to send as the precursor of destruction? The people of Massachusetts, of New England, a people from the earliest period of their existence connected with the ocean, a people to whom commerce was the dearest inheritance from their ancestors and the choicest promise to their posterity, to be prohibited from the use of the ocean, not for a time limited and certain, but for a time unlimited and uncertain, until our enemies recede from their position! I have not language to express my utter astonishment at this proceeding, at the madness of the attempt, and at the dreadful consequences which will follow such an attempt if persisted in. My honorable colleague (Mr. Bacon) told us the other day that he had travelled in Massachusetts and seen
no such strange effects as I had the honor to suggest very humbly that there were. My hon. colleague has travelled, really from Hudson to Stockbridge, from Berkshire to Boston perhaps, from inn to inn, from county court to county court, and such species of information as he has collected on his passage he gives to the House. I suppose he found that salt, sugars and West India rum were dearer, and beef, pork, butter and cheese cheaper than usual, which produced the result in his mind that the effects of the embargo were much misrepresented. Has my colleague travelled through the cities on our coast? Has he seen our ships rotting in the wharves? Has he seen our streets, once thronged, abandoned? Has he heard the merchant tell of his embarrassments? Has he heard the merchant whose capital is in stock, say, that he is compelled to depend on the clemency of monied institutions whether he should or should not stop payment? Has he enquired of those industrious individuals who the day before the embargo had more calls for business than they had hands or time to employ on it, and who are now condemned to submissive employ from rich men? Mr. Quincy enumerated other species of distress which were not distinctly heard by the reporter. He said there was nothing highly colored in this picture; every feature of it was taken from the life; and when it was shewn to the people of Massachusetts, there were ten thousand men who would truly say that he had rather kept back a portion than surcharged the picture. Other gentlemen might take their ground; he would take his—that the embargo law must be repealed; that they could not enforce it. He repeated that the embargo must be repealed; it could not be enforced for any material period of time longer. When he talked thus, let not gentlemen mistake him; he alluded not to violations of the law, but he spoke of a different mode—a very different state of things. The hon. gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Macon) with great zeal had exclaimed that he was for enforcing this law at all hazards. But (said Mr. Quincy) let me tell that gentleman, with great deference to him and to all this House, that I believe that there exists a control upon this body, even upon this national legislature—a control of nature and of the constitution. He said he did suppose that if this House, the Senate, and all the other branches of the government, were to decide that the atmosphere around us did not exist, that water should not flow, that heavy bodies should not fall—he spoke with great deference, however, because he knew the high opinion which some gentlemen entertained of their own authority—he should suppose that, nevertheless, air would still circulate; that the Hudson, Delaware or Potomac would flow to the sea; and gravity still maintain its attraction to the centre. It would be just as absurd and utterly foolish and impracticable for this House to attempt to prevent the people of New England from descending on the ocean. All their habits, hopes, and interests were there. The very situation of the country prohibited this measure. They had 500 miles of sea coast, indented and intersected with creeks, bays, and rivers, every one of which offered inducements to commerce. Talk of twelve additional revenue cutters, said he; multiply it by ten, twelve, by twenty, or an hundred; and it will not be possible with that number to prevent them from going on the ocean, when the popular sentiment is against you, and I tell you it will be against you soon, if it be not at this moment. Ask your officers of the revenue if in some of our seaport towns property seized by them has not been sold for three or four per cent. only of its value? I state this as a fact.
But, Mr. Quincy said he should be asked where was that love of order and observance of law which were said to characterize the New England states? He said they must take care and not trust to that. It was not sufficient for gentlemen on this floor to represent those individuals who broke through such a law as this as the most worthless or profligate part of the community; they could not for any great length of time identify these individuals with common smugglers. He doubted whether gentlemen here, when they understood what were the temptations which existed, strong as were their predilection for this system, would think it possible to persist in it. On the margin of the ocean were ships lying loaded with produce; and when the question was between the total destruction of
their owners and the violation of a law which contravened all the natural rights and interests of these people, they would very soon, from the very temptations offered be obliged to break through it. You cannot expect (said he) that patriotism will carry into force such a law as this. It induces men to make any common sacrifice, but it never requires a man to extend himself on the rack, and allow himself to be systematically tortured by your law. It is very well in the interior to talk of the patriotism with which the measure is borne, where a man's lumber or produce but accumulates on his hands, for though he cannot sell them, he can retain them for sale hereafter; but where there is nothing but your law to stand between a man and bankruptcy or rapid fortune the temptation is too great to be resisted. And when individuals are placed in this situation, when they see opportunity offered them, they will be pressing to the water; and it is not too much to say that you cannot enforce your law against them.
There was another difficulty, Mr. Quincy observed, in relation to this law—the constitutional difficulty. He said he knew that he should be told that the courts of justice had added their sanction to it. Certainly no man respected more than he did the opinion of a court of justice, or of the individual who in this case had delivered that opinion. But it was one thing to decide a question before a court of law and another thing to decide it before the people. He appealed to gentlemen as statesmen, whether what contravened the rights of the great mass of the citizens, infringed their interests and took away from them their natural privileges, ought not to have an unquestionable constitutional authority, and not to rest upon construction, unless that construction were so indubitable that it could not admit of dispute. What was the construction in this case? Why, by construction (said he) you derive from the constitution a power such as never was exercised in any country, which is unequalled in the annals of legislation. By construction under a grant of power to regulate commerce you take a power not only to prohibit it indefinitely, but you put the power of regulating commerce into the hands of twelve men not of this House. The precedents shown are against you; for the precedent on a former occasion is in strict conformity with the usage of other nations. It was a limited embargo and came again within 60 days under the control of Congress. They would not even trust it to a Washington.
There was another principle, he said, which ought to be considered at this time, comprehending a view still higher and more important than that just taken. He asked the committee if in the year 1788, when the federal constitution was under debate in the state of Massachusetts, any individual had risen on that floor, if some hoary seer who could look deep into futurity, had risen on the floor of that convention and stated to the body that, within twenty years of that debate, in consequence of a secret construction not then anticipated, the whole commerce of the U. States would be abandoned, annihilated, that it would be made dependent not on the will of the House of Representatives, but upon the decision of twelve or fifteen other men—if this could have been conceived, whether the constitution would have permitted even a doubt to exist on the subject? The gentlemen of the Southern states had a species of property of which they were extremely jealous, and justly, because they knew that the people of the Northern states could not realise the importance of it. And so with the people of the Eastern states in relation to commerce. He said there was nothing which was so dear to them, which had been from the earliest periods so essential to their support, & in which the popular feeling was so much interested.
There was, Mr. Quincy remarked, another reason which had great effect in relation to this subject, in the part of the country in which he lived; and that was, the total imbecility of this measure as a measure of coercion. No man in that part of the country believed that it had produced any effect. Those individuals who had been in the West Indies and Europe, who knew their resources, had not any conception that it could have produced any effect. He said he would not have touched on this subject, if he had not heard of the seaminess of the harvest in G. Britain, & a hope that we could coerce G. Britain in consequence of it. Did gentlemen understand that the consump-
tion of wheat in Great Britain and her dependencies was not less than one hundred and fifty millions of bushels, whilst we exported but 7,300,000 bushels to all the world? Did gentlemen really think that a country in which an annual consumption of 150 millions of bushels of wheat was necessary, could be coerced by withholding from her such portion of our seven millions of bushels as was sent to that country, when the commerce of the Barbary states and the Black Sea were open to her?
But, Mr. Quincy observed, it had been said of this measure, that it "saved our resources." He begged gentlemen to recollect what we lost by it. We had lost already ten per cent on our whole capital—the interest and profit on our imports and exports.
[Mr. Quincy here made a statement going to show that, in addition to the profit lost on our imports and exports, a sum was also lost by the inactivity of our shipping, equal to twenty dollars for every ton; and also the loss of one-twelfth part of our whole shipping, a ship ordinarily lasting twelve years, and one year having already nearly expired under the embargo. The amount of these three items Mr. Quincy estimated at about $30,000,000.]
Not less than near 30 millions absolutely gone to destruction. He would say nothing of the loss of property going out in all directions; but there was an irretrievable loss of 30 millions of dollars. When the House were told that our resources were saved, he wished the House to consider if there was not some deception in this. He supposed that by our resources being saved it was meant that something was saved, to which we could have recourse. All the product of the country, he said, was raised for consumption or for exportation. The people produced annually sufficient for their consumption. The surplus was of no value unless it could be exported or exchanged for other commodities. Suppose this embargo was continued for two years or four years. Did not gentlemen believe that the annual produce would be lost? They could not manufacture all their surplus cotton, or chew or smoke all their surplus tobacco. It was intended for a foreign market, and if it could not go there, was worth nothing. You are, (said he) weaker now than you were prior to the embargo, from the depression of agriculture, the reduction of the price of labor, and the want of inducement to enterprise or industry. It can never be worth while to keep what is of no worth, or to labor for that which profits not.
There was another reason, Mr. Quincy observed, which must create a great and continued discontent at the embargo in the part of the country in which he lived, and that was, the peculiar hardship with which the measure bore upon them. There was not a gentleman who had spoken on this subject who had not said that this measure was felt as much in his part of the country as in any other. He said he would make a single comparative statement of the situation of the two largest states in each portion of the union—Massachusetts and Virginia, and he did it only to shew the difference of embarrassment in the one and in the other.
Mr. Quincy here made a comparative statement which was not heard with sufficient accuracy to enable us to present it, going to show that Massachusetts, with a much smaller population than Virginia, possessed a capital, rendered inactive by the embargo, of more than six times the amount of that of Virginia. Did gentlemen really think that in this case there was no difference in their respective embarrassments? Was it possible that they should not conceive that the suffering was infinitely greater with his constituents than with those of the gentlemen from the Southern country?
Mr. Quincy remarked that there was a middling class of citizens in New England whose whole was vested in commerce, and over whom ruin was suspended; and they did not believe that, in the wisdom of Congress, they understood the interest of the merchant better than he does himself; and who believe that, so far as this measure had been intended as a service to commerce, it had not had the intended effect.
But it was asked would not the people of Massachusetts, the cradle of Liberty, submit to the privations caused by the embargo. Massachusetts the cradle of liberty! This is not the liberty rocked in the cradle of Massachusetts; not an embargo liberty, but a liberty cradled on the ocean; more of a sea than a mountain nymph; not a liberty in letters; not a liberty of walking within the four walls of a prison and dashing out your brains against the wall. We could then, we

could walk, and swim. We abjure this embargo liberty.
Where is the spirit of '76, the gentleman from North Carolina asked the other day, where is it? It was a glorious spirit—a spirit which I wish to see introduced at this time; it is a spirit which I wish to be made popular on this floor. But let gentlemen recollect that the spirit of '76 was not a spirit of mere indignation; it was a spirit of decided energy; a spirit which called all the resources of the nation into operation. There was no such sentiment recognised in all the era of '76 as that expressed now. You will not find in the annals of that period such a sentiment as this: "There is no alternative but war with both nations or a continuance of the present system." You will find in '76 no such alternative presented to the minds of the people; no proposition for abandoning your rights under pretence of maintaining them. The language then was, "You have endeavored to reduce us to base and abject submission; therefore we will not submit." That spirit of '76 was not an attempt to fright the people to an abandonment of their rights. In the whole year '76 no such words were heard as "embargo," "as dignified retirement," and "receding which could do one another the most harm." In '76 we had a navy; yes, as little as gentlemen relish the name, we had a navy which lined our coasts and protected our commerce. We had an army too and a noble army. It was an army of the best blood of the country; the citizens composing it sprung up from their ploughs to meet the enemy, and straightened their pruning hooks into spears. Yes, we had an army in '76, and Washington at the head of it. I warn gentlemen not to talk about the spirit of '76; it may learn them some lessons that they may not perhaps be willing to hear. I will read out of the list of causes which produced the revolution, and the declaration and confirmation of our independence, some of the complaints. Mr. Quincy quoted the sentences from the declaration of independence, which state the imposing unnecessary restrictions on trade, cutting off commerce, embarrassing our fisheries, invasion of private property, increasing the authority of the commander in chief and making him co-commander of a colony, and transporting citizens from their homes for trial for imaginary offences, as reasons for throwing off the allegiance of Great Britain. He advised gentlemen not to call to their aid the spirit of '76. It would not come to them; or if it did come, it would be with the aspect of an indignant tormentor. He advised them to take care, lest where they looked for encouragement they should meet with an awful repulse.
But it was said that to oppose the embargo is a submission to tribute. This word tribute Mr. Quincy said was a walking horse for the popular argument. It was said to pretend that those who advocated the rights of their fellow citizens, who were in favor of going on the ocean and defending them against the world, were in favor of paying an export duty to the British government. He begged gentlemen to put out of the debate this word TRIBUTE; there was no man in the country who would advocate the payment of a tribute. In the first place it ought to be observed that it was very doubtful that this celebrated tribute, which was running so much in the popular ear, could in any instance be paid; and if it could be paid, Mr. Quincy said it was completely in the power of the House to prohibit it. France said that we should not go to Great Britain; that any neutral vessel having been even spoken by a British cruiser should be liable to condemnation. Great Britain says you shall come to our harbors and pay us an export duty for going to France; and if we go there we go to certain confiscation. This was the "tribute" of which a national council like this was to make a bugbear. If American vessels were to go on the ocean to-morrow they might be prevented from doing this. Declare your rights, said he, and there is no man on this floor or in the nation who will not second you. But suppose this tribute inevitable—what of it? Great Britain smiles you on one cheek; you turn the other. She takes away your cloak; you strip yourself naked. She requires us to abstain from a certain trade; we say we will not only abstain from that, but from all trade. This may be a resistance; but it is a mode of maintaining our honor and liberties in which I will not acquiesce. We find gentlemen wringing their hands, and asking if we take off the embargo what shall we do? It is not for me, a minority-man, a humble and unpretentious individual on this floor, to propose a plan, but to my humble conception our path is as clear as the milky way, all splendid with stars. It is the path of our duty, of the exercise of our rights, a path not of submitting to the decrees and giving up our commerce, but the path of defending our rights on the ocean. But this may be war eventually. Well—are we now at peace? What is our situation? We are bandaged up. Gentlemen must remember that the way to prevent war is not to tell the
people that there is no other alternative but the embargo. There is an honorable mode without an abandonment of our rights.
These Mr. Quincy said were the several facts which he offered to the House on this subject. He considered this resolution as a pledge not to be mistaken of a new system of measures, of a system of permitting our citizens to go on the ocean—of permitting a portion of our citizens whose only hopes were centered in it, to go there.
Mr. Bacon.—In all the various discussions which have arisen in the House on the great subject of our foreign relations, and on the general course of measures which were adopted in reference to them, in the course of the last session, I do not at present recollect having occupied the time of the House in listening to any observations of mine on those general subjects. I have heretofore foreborne from trespassing upon their patience on two considerations; because I had been persuaded that the discussion was already in much abler hands than my own, and because I was strongly impressed with a conviction, that in the perilous and momentous crisis to which the affairs of this country had been for the year past verging, both the house and the nation required from their Representatives on this floor, less argument, and more action, less declamation, and more decision. I am now fully sensible, that both these considerations continue to exist in their full force, and that the interests of the people will not always be best subserved by him, who occupies their time by the most elaborate speeches, or amuses them with the best chosen rhetorical figures.
Impressed with the full force of these reflections, I should still have continued to listen to others in silence, had I not have conceived myself pretty loudly called upon by the observations of my colleague yesterday, and did I not think it a duty at this early period to resume the report of the select committee, one of whom I had the honor to be, from those imputations which have been improperly heaped upon it by him; as also to meet some of those remarks which he seemed to direct particularly to myself.
That gentleman opened his address, by expressing his entire and unqualified concurrence in the broad position which is set up in that general resolution reported by the select committee which is now before us. And what was his reason? Because, said he, that resolution if adopted, must be considered as a specific pledge on the part of this House, for an entire departure from that general system of restrictive policy which has been pursued during the past year. If the gentleman indeed viewed the resolution in this light, why would he not suffer it to glide through with that silent and general acquiescence which on all hands seemed to be promised to it? Why step aside with so much zeal to attack that system which, upon his supposition, no one was about any more to defend? Why make it the great laboring point of his very labored and systematic argument, to discredit that odious embargo system which he affected to think every one now was about to give up? Was it because his hostility to it was so deep, that he could not bear to see it die, unless he had a hand in contributing to its exit, and was determined to shew his constituents that in the language of sportsmen he also was in "at the death." The only reason, which I recollect to have been given by him for this unusual course was, that the future adherence to this embargo system was specifically recommended by the report of the committee. Whatever may be the future judgement of this House on the policy of continuing this measure for a longer period, or assuming a different position, I assert that no such recommendation is contained in that report, and it is inconceivable to me on what part of it the gentleman will support his assertion; so far from this, that the decision of that great question, and the expediency of electing either that or another alternative, is expressly left open to the House by the committee themselves.—(Mr. B. here read the following paragraph from the report in justification of his construction of it.)
"On a question of such difficulty, involving the most important interests of the union, and which has not perhaps, until lately, been sufficiently considered, your committee think the House alone competent to pronounce a decisive opinion; and they have, in this report confined themselves to an exposition of the subject, and to such introductory resolutions, as will be equally applicable to either alternative."
The gentleman therefore is evidently utterly unsupported in imputing to the report what it expressly disavows; & cannot certainly justify the course which he took by any apology of this sort. But even if the question of the embargo was one which could properly arise out of any part of the system recommended by the committee, it certainly was in no de-
gree connected with the general declaratory resolution now under consideration; and the gentleman's observations, if applicable to any stage of the discussions, were obviously premature, and "a leaping before he came to the style." The same remark would apply to the observations which we heard from the friend (political friend I mean) of my colleague from Kentucky; but which it is impossible I should think of answering on this floor. That the last mentioned gentleman should have suffered himself to wander into so irregular a course, is not at all surprising; he is not a standing professor of method. But my honorable colleague is a man who in the course of his every day discussions in this House, entrenched himself in all the niceties of a special pleader; he is a man of fine distinctions, of divisions and subdivisions, & who will generally war upon a single word which he finds out of the ranks, and wage hostility upon a straggling adverb; much more then should I have expected, that he would not have allowed himself to stray into an argument so wholly irrelevant to the subject immediately before the committee, and into observations so entirely premature. The gentleman, to use the language of the day, raised the embargo upon his and embargo speech before the time; whether it was because it has been so long on hand, that like some other articles it might have spoiled by longer keeping, I will not undertake to say.
But although the course which the gentleman took in his view of the subject before us, might not itself be correct, yet I feel myself now in some measure justified, if not strongly called upon, to follow him in some of those remarks upon our past measures and present state, which he has handed to the committee.
The first remark of his which demands notice at present was, that the principles which he found avowed in the report of the select committee, were loathsome in his view, and disgraceful to the nation. As the gentleman has seen fit on this point to deal only in general allegations, it is impossible for me to vindicate from his reproaches any of those particular positions which are so much the object of his abhorrence. Is it that concluding paragraph which is so offensive to the gentleman?
"And it may not be useless that every foreign nation should understand, that its aggressions never will be justified or encouraged by any description of American citizens. For the question for every citizen now is, whether he will rally round the government of his choice, or inlist under foreign banners? Whether he will be for his country or against his country?"
I hope it was not this sentiment which bore with it so loathsome a relish; but it is not for me to select those parts of it which he is offended with, and which he has denounced only by general allegations. The gentleman had before, in commenting on the general resolution reported by the committee, remarked that he was opposed usually to abstract legislation and general declaratory resolutions, viewing it as he did to be usually the resort of weakness or of ignorance; and yet he can himself thus deal in general and sweeping denunciations of that report. It is not for me to make the application of his former maxim.
But, says the gentleman, of what use can be the declaration which is set up in this resolution, that the rights, honor and independence of our country were violated by the edicts of G. Britain and France; for who questions it? I am glad, sir, to hear at last, from so high authority, that there can be no question raised on this point. Accustomed as I have been for a long time past to be told, through the medium of too many of those prostituted gazettes which live upon the perverted passions of the day, and disgrace the nation which supports them, that this government and not Great Britain were the real aggressors in the present controversy; that she, instead of being the injured, was in truth the injured party, and had therefore the best right to complain, I rejoice to see these calumnies at last put down by so commanding an authority, and hope that from this time the public are to be imposed upon by them no longer. To those unquestionable invasions of our national rights, the gentleman further agrees, in general terms, that this nation ought not to submit. But what, says he, do your past measures amount to but submission? I well know that this language has been the catch-word of newspaper argument during the summer past, and am not altogether surprised at hearing the sophism renewed at this time; and how does the gentleman proceed to prove it? Submission (says he) is the agreeing to a thing ordered by another in the manner that he prescribes, or refraining to do a thing that he prohibits you from doing. England says that we shall not trade with France and her allies, and they in their turn say that we shall not trade with England—We prohibit altogether the trade with both. His conclusion is, that we submit to the course prescribed
by both. But, sir, is the refraining from our trade with both those powers pursuing that course of conduct which the interest of either of them demands, or the policy and spirit of their edicts against us evidently holds forth? It is as much the interest and the wish of G. Britain that we should continue our trade with her, as that we should forbear it with France and her allies—What have we said by the embargo? that we will forbear the latter and continue the former? No: but unless you take off your interdictions against that trade which you wish to deprive us of, you shall not have the benefits of that other trade which it is your interest and your wish to have us pursue. The policy of the French edicts and their effect upon our interests and rights being precisely similar, the measure which we mete to them is also the same. Again, says the gentleman, the embargo is not only submission to both, but it is aiding directly the policy of both against each other; for, says he, the object of France is to compress the commerce of Great Britain. The withdrawing of our trade aids that policy. The policy of G. Britain is to cut up neutral trade to France, and thereby excite discontent and revolt amongst her subjects, and the withdrawing of our trade aids that policy. By the gentleman's own argument then, it is proved that the embargo has operated as a measure of compression, of inconvenience, or in other words of coercion against both powers; upon G. Britain by compressing and narrowing her trade, and upon France by withholding her customary supplies; and the very same argument by which he attempts to prove that it is in accordance with the policy of the one, proves also that it is in hostility with that of the other, that it is, so far as it goes, resistance; and this is all that was ever contended for by its advocates. I take the gentleman now solely upon his own argument, without drawing to my aid other considerations which strengthen and explain this conclusion.
But the gentleman will allow nothing to be considered as resistance, which is not bottomed on powder and ball; every other measure, as one of coercion, must be submission. In the natural world every order of animals is endowed with its own peculiar weapons of annoying its antagonist, and waging war in its defence; and most of them are different from each other. Would it be strange if there was a similar variety in the organization of nations. Because G. Britain wages hostility only by ships of war and great guns, does it follow that this country cannot and must not attempt to do it in any other mode, at least for a temporary period? or because Napoleon attacks his enemies with muskets and bayonets, must the U. States be allowed to use only those weapons? Even in open and actual war, fortresses are not always taken by open and direct assault; it is frequently found most practicable to reduce them by the slower operations of a siege, and the holding of supplies. This may at times be the policy of a nation, and before other means are resorted to, may be a prudent and a wise policy. Those means failing, they must, to be sure, in the last resort, rely upon that which is emphatically called the last appeal of nations, and rest their vindication upon the sword; and upon that I trust we shall, if necessary, not be backward to rest ours.
Proceeding as he has heretofore done to represent to this House the interests and the sentiments, not only of all his own constituents, but those of the whole body of Massachusetts, the gentleman declares—that in that state, the opinion that the embargo must at all events be removed is not only general, but universal with every man of every party. Sir, I protest against the right or authority of my colleague to bring before this House the unanimous sentiments of Massachusetts, or to undertake to intimate alone to represent their united interests. That the people of that state have suffered, and are now suffering much from the present pressure of our national concerns, is not denied, that they all ardently wish that our commerce should be opened so soon as is compatible with the great interests of the nation, cannot be doubted; in this wish, the interest and the most sincere desires of all here as well as there must unite. They have ardently hoped that such a repeal might take place, consistent with the policy on which these laws were originally founded, at the opening of Congress; and they as well as the government itself had the best reason to suppose at a particular period that this might have been done. But that the undivided voice of the people of Massachusetts has ever been expressed unequivocally, that the embargo ought at all events, and without any regard to the existing or future state of things, to be forthwith removed, is a position of which that gentleman has no evidence. On this subject, the opinions of a large portion of the citizens of Massachusetts, like those of their brethren elsewhere, have been formed upon no decisive system of measures; they repose with as much confidence as they
ought to do, in the wisdom and information of the government, for the adoption of that course which under all circumstances shall be thought the most prudent and eligible, and in that course, whatever it shall be, they will, I trust, acquiesce as good citizens, and carry it into effect with an undivided will. But coming here, says the gentleman, under the impression of this universal sentiment that the embargo must be removed, and meeting with men who, after hearing the incantations of the great enchanter, intimate that it may be best longer to continue it, I feel utterly astonished, seem to have got into the regions of magic, and ask whether this House is mad! Sir, it would not be the first instance wherein the madman himself has fancied that his own insanity was imputable to others. There is an eminent instance in sacred writ, wherein madness was unjustly charged upon one, who spoke to his accuser only the words of truth and soberness. But if the gentleman means to intimate, that by the incantations of any man or men, the members of this House are operated upon by any undue influence, independent of their own judgment and views of propriety; in behalf of myself and those with whom I am generally happy in acting, I repel the charge, and pronounce it altogether unwarranted. We know of no such enchantment and we act under none. The insinuation, if so intended, is altogether unwarranted.
We are asked by the gentleman in the common language of the day, whether any man thinks that the people of New-England are to be indefinitely prohibited from the use of the ocean, and commerce perpetually abandoned? The very words of the report which he so much reprobates furnish the best answer to this suggestion. It is there stated—
"The aggressions of England and France collectively, affecting almost the whole of our commerce, and persisted in, notwithstanding repeated remonstrances, explanations and propositions the most candid and unexceptionable, are to all intents and purposes, a maritime war waged by both nations against the U. States. It cannot be denied that the ultimate and only effectual mode of resisting that warfare if persisted in, is war. A permanent suspension of commerce, after repeated and unavailing efforts to obtain peace, would not properly be resistance; it would be withdrawing from the contest and abandoning our indisputable right freely to navigate the ocean. The present unsettled state of the world, the extraordinary situation in which the United States are placed, and the necessity, if war be resorted to, of making it at the same time against both nations, and these the two most powerful of the world are the principal causes of hesitation. There would be none in resorting to that remedy, however calamitous, if a selection could be made on any principle of justice, or without a sacrifice of national independence."
The idea of this perpetual abandonment of the ocean, so often held up as the catch word of party, is expressly negatived by the report, and exists no where but in the imagination of those who sound it. If we can ultimately make our way upon the ocean by no other means, we must fight it there, the only question is when is the proper period to adopt it.
In his remarks upon some observations which fell from me in the course of our secret session, my colleague asks triumphantly, what are the means which I possess of knowing the actual situation of the various classes of people in Massachusetts, under the operation of the embargo? I have travelled more than once during the summer past from the sea board to the Western frontiers of that state. Has the gentleman himself done as much? But have I been in the cities, seen the general desertion of their streets, and the ships rotting at the wharves? Yes, sir, I have been more than once in more than one of our principal cities, but have not seen that total desertion of the streets which is spoken of; I have seen indeed a great contrast to the picture exhibited in those times of profound peace and unparalleled prosperity which immediately preceded the present stagnation of business. But I have still seen much occupation and pretty general employment of some sort or other, for most classes of the citizens, but have seen or heard of no one starving in those streets. But have I conversed with merchants? Yes, sir, I have even conversed with merchants, have been to this oracle of all wisdom, as the gentleman seems to look upon them. I have conversed freely with more than one merchant, who had himself as many of his ships rotting at his wharves, as most merchants of our country, and have found many of them, though suffering their full proportion of the general pressure of the times, satisfied, that nothing better could have been done, convinced that by the adoption of any other alternative they could not have expected immediate relief, and willing to forego their immediate interest for the general good

of our country; with a full confidence that government had done the best that was in their power for their relief. It is far from my intention to be understood that the state of our national affairs has not been sensibly felt, and the industry of our citizens much paralyzed in that part of our country, by the operation of these measures. It certainly has. But my object has been both now and the other day, only to express my opinion, that the tragic picture of general ruin and universal suffering, drawn by my colleague, a man so wise that every eye could see it, and a suffering so deep that every man must feel it beyond endurance, was altogether overcharged and exaggerated, and this so far as any information extends, I feel no hesitation in asserting.
It is pronounced in an emphatic and commanding style by the gentleman, that these laws must be repealed; and for this imperative reason, that the public mind is against us, that we cannot expect to be able to enforce them much longer by any means, and that there exists a con- viction in the mind of every man, that this question had once been submitted, as it has been, to the decision of that tribunal whose judgments are final and irrevocable, and that gentleman and his friends had been accustomed to hear the doctrine that the judicial power was supreme, controlling not only the exercise of individual rights, but also the power of every other branch of the government. But we are told that a judicial decision is one thing, a popular decision may be another. Indeed, sir, has it come to this, that having appealed from the opinions of your legislative department in all its branches, to that oracle of the constitution, the judiciary, and finding even that against them, we are now to be threatened by an appeal to the people, over the heads of the whole government? It is now some years since the country was put into fermentation by the irregular conduct of a foreign incendiary, in affecting to appeal from the decision of your Executive branch alone, and I did not expect to have seen this course of conduct so soon revived in a more exceptional manner by my honorable colleague. But when he speaks of a control over our proceedings existing in nature, what can he mean? He says not by open insurrection. Sir, I trust that considerations of a control existing over the acts of this government in any source except the limitations of our constitution will not be suffered to influence our judgments in the exercise of our representative functions; they ought not to do it, and I trust they will not. But the public sentiment we are told is setting strongly against us, and it is in vain to think of executing our laws in defiance of public opinion. It would be in vain, sir, to conceal that the public prejudice in the eastern section of the union has been too successfully operated upon by designing men, and a spirit of opposition to and evasion of these laws most shamefully excited. And how has this nefarious object been effected? By the grossest misrepresentations and most palpable perversions of the objects, the causes, and the policy of this abused measure. By calumnies and mis-statements emanating too often apparently from the seat of this government. I have now in my hands a sample of one of them which amongst a thousand others of the same sort has accidentally fallen under my notice. [Mr. B. here read the following extract of a letter in the Boston Repository of the 22d inst. purporting to be written from Washington and dated Nov. 15, 1808.] "It is said (and there can be no doubt of the fact) that Mr. Armstrong has written a letter in which he has this observation, "we have greatly over-rated our means of coercion, the embargo is not felt here, and in England it is forgotten. I wish it was raised." Notwithstanding this, these stupid politicians are determined to keep it on until they altogether destroy your commerce; and I believe it would give them not the least uneasiness to see a light torch put to your shipping at the wharves—indeed I have heard some of them say as much."
Sir, I hope misrepresentations of this sort do not come directly from this House, and yet the sentiment which has just been read is too much in accordance with the representation which in the course of the last spring were given in broad bills, circulated in a certain part of Massachusetts, purporting to be an address made to a public meeting of his constituents by an honorable member of this House
who had just come from the seat of our deliberations.—We were there told of confidential and undisguised disclosures made to that gentleman by members of this House from the Southern section of the union, that in their opinion our national commerce was rather an injury than a benefit, and that its advantages were not worth its protection. I do not know whether the gentleman to whom the propagation of such information was thus publicly imputed, is willing to be responsible for that which was attributed to him in the publication last alluded to; nor have I heard that he has contradicted it, and the declaration has been left to work its effect upon public prejudice. Sir, it is by calumnies of this sort that the feelings and jealousies of our citizens have been played upon, and this hostility against your laws excited. And after all these operations have been brought into action, gentlemen come and tell us that the public opinion in Massachusetts is setting against us, and that so repugnant are our laws to the feelings and habits of our people that they cannot be executed. Sir, the people of that state and of all New-England, are a people vigilant of their true interests, jealous, and very properly jealous, of their personal and commercial rights, and resolved to vindicate them against wanton aggression from any quarter. Goaded as they have been by artifices like these, and operated upon by misrepresentation of the views of their Southern brethren, and of the object and policy of our laws, is it strange that they have been wrought up to feverish habits, and that the execution of those laws is evaded and in some few instances resisted? I trust that the means of true information which we have lately diffused amongst them, will in a good measure correct those misconceptions, and allay those prejudices which have been thus artfully and wickedly excited.
We are next told by the gentleman, that you cannot identify the violator of these laws, with the common uncaptured smuggler, that those who break them will not be considered as "the most worthless part of society," and therefore disreputable amongst their fellow citizens. And why, sir, can you not? Because, says he, the temptation to violate is so strong that human nature cannot be expected to resist it—that the patriotism of your merchants, though it may induce them to shed their blood for the good of their country, cannot be expected to lead them to sacrifices which this system calls for. It is, sir, a rule in morals and ethics, that virtue is not virtue until it is put to the test, by the ordeal of temptation; so in politics, that sort of patriotism which cannot withstand a pecuniary temptation for the good of our country, is not to be counted upon. But can it be that the gentleman has given us a correct character of the sort of patriotism of his mercantile friends; that they will consent to almost any sacrifices for their country's cause, even to the spilling of their blood, but touch their property and you touch them to the quick, and they shrink? Sir, I trust he has not done justice to the character of our merchants, and I cannot suffer his views of them to prejudice them in my esteem. They will, I trust, if our country calls, offer up not only their bodies and their blood in her cause, but will even consent to part with a little of their property, if necessary. I know that many of them would part with their all, rather than they would brook dishonor.
No man, it is said, now believes, that the professed objects of laying the embargo, have been or can be at all answered by its continuance. The question of its continuance not being now before the House, I shall notice only some observations of my colleague, as to its past effects; he says that as a saving of resources, the loss sustained by the country has already been greater than the saving. And how does he draw his comparison? By resorting to an estimate of our revenues, of the amount of our freightage, and the value of our shipping taken in a year of profound peace, and at a period of prosperity unexampled, not only in the history of this nation, but of the world. He then compares the aggregate of these with an estimate of the present probable amount of revenue accruing, and the value of our freightage and shipping. But is this comparison a fair one? Will it be pretended, that under any measure which could have been adopted to meet the unprecedented state of things, in which, by the violence of other nations, we have been placed during the past year, that state of prosperity, which we had before enjoyed, would not have experienced a great and a sensible change; that the amount of our revenues would not have suffered a serious diminution, and the freightage and vessels of our merchants have sunk to a very disproportionate value compared with former times? Sir, it cannot be pretended, but that such under whatever measures had been pursued, must have been the result. The contrast, presented to us by the gentleman, is therefore utterly fallacious. But it may, with propriety,
be considered that all that portion of our resources, which, by being kept at home, has not fallen into the hands of our enemies, may be said to be saved to ourselves, even though their value in our hands should be greatly diminished or even annihilated. It has not been suffered to increase their resources, and multiply their means of annoyance against us. This consideration is certainly not without its weight.
The gentleman dwells much upon the unequal pressure of this measure, and its unfair operation upon the different sections of the country. The inequality is in my view by no means so great as he supposes; it affects most classes of our country who have any thing to affect, and those who have not, are frequently as loud against it as any part—but the same argument would probably apply with nearly equal force against any other measure which in any event might be necessary to assert the rights, and vindicate our commercial interests; in the event of war, which the gentleman allows must sometimes be resorted to, the sea board and frontier settlements being most exposed, must be subject to the greatest depredations, and experience the severest pressure; the great towns may be bombarded, their property ravaged, and their habitations levelled with the ground. Would our cities therefore say, that we never must have war, even to save the country? Those partial and unequal sacrifices for the general good, always have been, and always must be submitted to; it arises from the nature of things, is inevitable from the situation of the country, and does not grow out of this or any other particular course of measures, and especially ought any little inequalities to be submitted to, when the great object of the measure is to assert that particular interest in which the inhabitants of our cities are supposed by the gentleman to have a paramount interest.
We are warned by the gentleman not to appeal to the Spirit of 1776, in aid of the general course of measures which have been taken in vindication of our rights. He tells us that the spirit of that day was one entirely different from that which governs the policy of these times; that it was a spirit of action and not of passive submission; not of restrictions upon our commercial enterprise, but of active exertion. [Mr. Quincy here said that he had not used the words now imputed to him, he said the word embargo was not to be found in the proceedings of that day.]—Mr. Bacon. I will show the gentleman how much he will gain by his play upon words—[he then proceeded to read from the Journals of the Old Congress, the following paragraph from the non-importation and non-exportation association of the Colonies, entered into by Congress, and recommended to the Colonies.]—Mr. Quincy asked what was the date of those proceedings—[Mr. Bacon answered Oct. 20, 1774.] Mr. Quincy said his expression was that no such measure was taken in '76.]
Mr. B. The gentleman is welcome to his hair breadth escapes, and his repeated explanations; I will soon bring him down to 1775, a period not very unlike '76 in its principles and objects; nor is a non-exportation measure altogether different from an embargo! The following are the paragraphs referred to:
"To obtain redress of these grievances which threatened destruction to the lives, liberty, and property of his majesty's subjects, in North America, we are of opinion, that a non-importation, non-consumption, and non-exportation agreement, faithfully adhered to, will prove the most speedy, effectual and peaceable measures. And, therefore, we do, for ourselves, and the inhabitants of the several colonies, whom we represent, firmly agree and associate, under the sacred ties of virtue, honor and love of our country as follows:
"First, That from and after the first day of December next, we will not import into British America, from Great Britain or Ireland, any goods, wares, or merchandise whatsoever, or from any other place, any such goods, wares, or merchandise, as shall have been exported from Great Britain or Ireland; nor will we, after that day, import any East India tea from any part of the world; nor any molasses, syrups, panchees, coffee, or pimento, from the British plantations or from Dominica; nor wines from Madeira, or the Western Islands; nor foreign indigo."
"Fourth, The earnest desire we have not to injure our fellow-subjects in Great Britain, Ireland, or the West-Indies, induce us to suspend a non-exportation, until the tenth day of September, 1775; at which time, if the said acts and parts of acts of the British Parliament, hereinafter mentioned, are not repealed, we will not directly or indirectly, export any merchandise or commodity whatsoever to Great Britain, Ireland, or the West-Indies, except rice to Europe."
"This was in 1774—again, on the first of August 1775, I find this further resolution:
"Resolved, That under the prohibition, in the said association contained, to export to, or import from, the islands of Great Britain and Ire-
land, this Congress intends to comprise all exportation to, or importation from, the islands of Jersey, Guernsey, Sark, Alderney, and Man, and every European island and settlement within the British dominions; and that under the denomination of the West-Indies, this Congress means to comprehend all the W. I. Islands British and foreign, to whatever state, power, or prince belonging, or by whomsoever governed, and also the Summer islands, Bahama islands, Barbary and Surinam on the Main, and every island and settlement within the latitude of the southern line of Georgia and the equator."
Thus far, sir, did the patriots of '76 commence their resistance to foreign subjugation by an embargo, and I was indeed surprised to hear my colleague endeavoring in this point of view to contrast the policy of that period and the present one, and now shewing himself from his error under a mere play upon the words by which at the different periods the same measure happened to be called. I repeat it then, that the spirit of the revolution is not inaptly invoked at this crisis, nor are the measures of 1808 dishonored by a comparison with those of '76,—the objects of that day and of this are substantially the same, and I trust that the same ulterior measures and the same spirit will be found, if necessary, to carry us through the struggle.
But the gentleman protests against the suggestion of our having to pay tribute under the British orders, being brought into the debate to influence our prejudices, or alarm our apprehensions; he calls it the mere stalking horse of party, and begs that it may be put out of the debate. He will excuse us if we cannot consent to lay aside in complaisance to him, a consideration which this House and this nation never can and never ought to overlook. He does not deny that such is the requirement of the British government; that our exports before they can go from this country to the continent of Europe shall first enter at a British custom-house & pay a duty to be fixed by that government; but says he, there is no danger that our merchants will ever pay it, because by the French decrees, the very circumstance of their coming from England and paying the duty, subjects them to confiscation as soon as they shall arrive at a continental port. But the gentleman well knows, that such of our merchants as have been allured by an improper thirst for gain, have long been in the habit of going with their cargoes from England to the continent notwithstanding the decrees; contriving by false and forged papers, purporting to be made out from American custom-houses, to conceal the fact of their having actually sailed from England. This is a thing now of public notoriety. There is, I am told, more than one instance of the official evidence of it in this city, and it is proved by British publications of the highest authority, to have for some time been a course of business extensively pursued, and it is even said that there are in London offices where all the necessary papers for a vessel sailing from all the principal ports in the U. S. are to be purchased by the ream. What then has the commander of an American vessel, anxious to make a profitable voyage to the continent of Europe, and unable to get there directly on the account of the British orders, to do, but what it is proved too many of them have been in the habit of doing for a long time; visit G. Britain, pay the duty required upon his cargo by the acts of Parliament, purchase his forged papers giving him the appearance of coming directly from an American Port, and thus complete his fraudulent voyage. But, says the gentleman, we can by our laws prohibit this procedure and effectually punish and prevent those who would otherwise be base enough to attempt it—is this to be believed, sir? He had but a little before told us, that the temptations of profit to evade our embargo laws were so great, that our merchants could not be expected to resist them; that it was too much to require of human nature, and we could not therefore execute these laws on our own soil. I ask whether the temptations of a profitable voyage to the continent, and vastly profitable they are when they can be got through with, will not render it quite as difficult for those upon whom they operate to resist them, & whether we can expect to repress this spirit of cupidity in our citizens three thousand miles off more easily than when they are upon our own shores?—certainly not—his disgraceful tribute therefore will be paid, and the consideration of it is a just and serious subject for our attention.
In answer to the enquiry which the gentleman very properly anticipated would be pressed upon him in relation to the course which in his judgment ought originally to have been pursued, instead of the one which he so much reprobrates, he very modestly tells us, that it is not for him a solitary individual to offer his projects for the government, though our course he adds is as clear as the milky way, if we would but see it. Sir, the honorable gentleman is not generally so over modest that he dare not even hint his projects to the House;
nor indeed ought he to be, his talents & information well entitle him to assume a very different attitude, and he is generally not very backward in assuming it. If he or his friends have in truth some grand specific which would at once cure all the diseases of the nation, surely it is but a duty of patriotism in them to bring it forward, and let the nation see it. When they are in the habit of reprobating every other measure that can be proposed or adopted, we have a clear right to demand of them their project, we have a right to ferret them out of their lurking holes, and in the name of the nation, to demand a disclosure; but there is no danger of their disclosing that which they have not to disclose. They know full well that in the peculiar state of this country and of the world, it is out of human power to point out any course which shall at once assert our rights, and not press upon the popular pulse and the general interest. It is safest therefore to deal in general assertions. The gentleman is willing generally not to submit—he would resist—but how? why possibly it may be war. The gentleman condemns general abstract forms of legislation, as the general resort of weakness and folly. I do not think so of his general unspecified professions in relation to this subject; on the other hand they are in my view the expedient of art, of address, and of cunning, for the purpose of avoiding responsibility and commitment, and so must be received by the nation.
In conclusion I will only add, that I am rejoiced that we are likely to unite in one position, that the evils which have been levelled at us are an unquestionable violation of the rights, honor and independence of our country and that they are not to be submitted to. I trust that the Nation will follow us in this determination, and that like them, after having exhausted every other means of conciliation and tried every other alternative, if they shall continue still to be drove from one stage of oppression to another, until having retreated to the very wall, they can consistently submit to aggression no longer; that they will then like their fathers of 1776, without waiting to estimate the exact amount of their means, resolve at all events to vindicate their unquestionable rights, and trust to the sword for their defence.
Mr. Bacon concluded by saying, that as the question of the future continuance of the embargo had been expressly left open by the committee, so he did not wish to be understood as expressing any opinion on that point. His motive in rising had been principally to vindicate the report of the select committee from the attacks of his colleague; to repel his insinuations upon its past policy and operation, and to notice some of the particular allusions to himself.
SENATE.—Nothing done. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. THURSDAY, DEC. 1. FOREIGN RELATIONS.
The House again in committee of the whole; the first resolution under consideration in the following words.
Resolved, That the United States cannot, without a sacrifice of their rights, honor and independence, submit to the late edicts of Great Britain and France.
The question was taken on the resolution, and CARRIED nem. con.
The second resolution having been read in the following words:
Resolved, That it is expedient to prohibit, by law, the admission in or the ports of the U. States of all public or private, armed or unarmed ships or vessels belonging to Great Britain or France, or to any of her belligerent powers having in force orders or decrees violating the lawful commerce and neutral rights of the United States; and also the importation of any goods, wares or merchandise, the growth, produce or manufacture of the dominions of any of the said powers, or imported from any place in the possession of either.
Mr. Randolph called for a division of the resolution, taking the question on each clause of it separately.
The question was taken on the first clause, ending with the words "U. S."—CARRIED without opposition.
The second clause was AGREED TO by the committee, eighty-four to twenty-one.
The third resolution, in the following words, having been read:
Resolved, That measures ought to be immediately taken for placing the country in a more complete state of defence.
The resolution was AGREED TO without opposition.
The committee then rose and reported the resolutions to the house.
The first resolution was read. Mr. Dima moved to insert between the words to and the in the third line of the resolution the words "abandon the navigation of the ocean in consequence of the"—Negatived, by Yeas and Nays, 96 to 26. A discussion arose on a point of order, which occupied the house till 4 o'clock, when they adjourned. [Details hereafter.]
ERRATA.—In Monday's proceedings, in our last, in Mr. G. W. Campbell's observations, instead of "Those reasons had been deemed sufficient by the committee to justify them in recommending a continuance of the embargo, &c."—read "Those reasons had been deemed sufficient by the committee to justify them in presenting these resolutions to the house, &c."
In Tuesday's proceedings, it is stated that Mr. Randolph had said that some gentlemen who might wish to deliver their sentiments on the subject had already left the house, &c. We have been informed that Mr. R. did not make use of the words in italics , nor any to that effect.
MARRIED on Tuesday last by the Rev Mr. McCormick, Joseph Edmund Phipps, Esq. to Miss Margaret Gay Phipps, daughter of Thomas Phipps, Esq. commandant of the Navy Yard.
Will Parade at the Bank on Saturday next at Half past 3 o'clock, P. M.
By order JOHN SMITH, 1st Sergeant.
For conclusion of Proposals see the last page.

PROPOSALS for Carrying the MAIL— (Concluded.)
79. From Newbern, by Trenton, North West Landing, and Richmond, to Wilmington, once a week. Leave Newbern every Tuesday at 5 a m and arrive at Wilmington on Thursday by 10 a m. Leave Wilmington every Thursday at 2 p m and arrive at Newbern on Saturday by 7 p m.  80. From Newbern to Beaufort once in two weeks. Leave Newbern every other Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Beaufort on Saturday by 10 a m. Leave Beaufort the same day at 2 p m and arrive at Newbern on Sunday by 6 p m.  81. From Warrenton, by Ransom's Bridge, Jonesville, Halifax, Scotland Neck, Hogton, Williamson, Daily's, Plymouth, and Lee's mills, to Scuppernong, once a week. Leave Warrenton every Tuesday at 4 a m, arrive at Ransom's bridge by noon. Leave Ransom's bridge at 1 p m and arrive at Halifax by 6 p m. Leave Halifax at 7 p m and arrive at Scuppernong on Friday by 11 a m. Returning. Leave Scuppernong every Friday at 1 p m, arrive at Scotland Neck at 4 p m, and arrive at Warrenton on Monday by 8 p m.  82. From Halifax, by Northampton c h, Princeton, Murfreesboro', Winton, Coleburn, Pitch Landing, and Windsor, to Edenton, once a week. Leave Halifax every Wednesday at 4 a m and arrive at Murfreesboro' by 4 p m. Leave Murfreesboro' on Friday by 10 a m and arrive at Edenton on Friday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Edenton every Friday at 2 p m, arrive at Murfreesboro' on Sunday by 7 a m and at Halifax by 8 p m.  83. From Warrenton by Ransom's bridge and Jonesboro' to Tarboro', thence by Nash c h, and Still's store to Warrenton, once a week. Leave Warrenton every Friday at 8 a m and arrive at Tarboro' on Saturday by 1 p m. Leave Tarboro' at 2 p m and arrive at Warrenton on Monday by 8 p m.  84. From Halifax, by Tate's store, Enfield, Tarboro', Greenville and Washington to Newbern, twice a week. Leave Halifax every Wednesday and Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Newbern on Saturday and Wednesday at 10 a m. Returning. Leave Newbern every Wednesday and Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Halifax on Saturday and Tuesday by 6 p m.  85. From Scotland Neck, by Norfleet's ferry, Granberry's cross roads and Clarksville to Windsor once a week. Leave Scotland Neck every Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Windsor by 4 p m. Leave Windsor every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Scotland Neck by 6 p m.  86. From Raleigh, by Chapel hill to Hillsboro', once a week. Leave Raleigh every Friday at 8 a m and arrive at Hillsboro' on Saturday by 8 a m. Leave Hillsboro' every Wednesday at 5 p m, and arrive at Raleigh on Thursday by 5 p m.  87. From Hillsboro' by Mount Pisgah, Parson's c h, Lewisburg, Crivell c h, Lenox Castle, Biltmore's and R. King's to Germanton, once a week. Leave Hillsboro' every Saturday at 10 a m, arrive at Crivell c h on Sunday noon, and arrive at Germanton the next Tuesday by 8 p m. Leave Germanton every Wednesday at 6 a m, and arrive at Hillsboro' the next Saturday by 8 a m.  88. From Averyboro' by Haywood, Pittsburg and Jones's ferry to Hillsboro', once a week. Leave Averyboro' every Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Hillsboro' on Saturday by 8 a m. Leave Hillsboro' every Saturday at 10 a m and arrive at Averyboro' on Sunday by 6 p m.  89. From Raleigh, by Nuttall's to Oxford or Merritville, once a week. Leave Raleigh every Friday at 4 a m and arrive at Oxford by 6 p m. Leave Oxford every Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Raleigh by 6 p m.  90. From Raleigh, by Paul's ferry, Watson's cross roads, Richardson's, Wedderburn, Donifon's, or Tolsunt, to Tarboro' once in two weeks. Leave Raleigh every Friday at 6 a m, arrive at Tarboro' on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Tarboro' every other Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Raleigh on Monday by 6 p m.  91. From Williamsboro' by Bullock's store, Brown's store, Williamsville, Sterlingville & Red House, to Caswell c h once a week. Leave Williamsboro' every Saturday at 4 a m, arrive at Caswell c h on Sunday by noon. Leave Caswell c h every Sunday by 2 p m and arrive at Williamsboro' on Friday by 4 p m.  92. From Warrenton, by Williamsboro', Oxford, Hillsboro', Altavista, Martinsville, New Garden, Salem and Lexington, to Salisbury, once a week. Leave Warrenton every Friday at 2 a m and arrive at Hillsboro' on Saturday by 8 a m. Leave Hillsboro' at 9 a m, and arrive at Salem on Sunday by 3 p m. Leave Salem at 4 p m and arrive at Salisbury on Monday by 11 a m. Returning. Leave Salisbury every Monday at 1 p m, and arrive at Salem on Tuesday by 8 a m. Leave Salem at 9 a m, and arrive at Hillsboro' on Wednesday by 3 p m. Leave Hillsboro' at 5 p m and arrive at Warrenton on Thursday by 5 p m.  93. From Salem by Bethania, Huntville, Rockford and Wilkes to Morganton, and thence by Island Ford, Stateville, Houghtonville and Huntville to Salem once a week. Leave Salem every Tuesday at 10 a m, and arrive at Morganton the next Thursday by 5 p m. Leave Morganton every Friday at 8 a m, and arrive at Salem the next Monday by 8 a m.  94. From Salisbury, by Concord, Alexander, Charlotte, Huntersville, Lincolnton & Morganton, to Asheville, return by Morganton, Lincolnton, Catawba Springs & Mount Morne to Salisbury, once a week. Leave Salisbury every Monday at 2 p m, and arrive at Charlotte on Tuesday by 8 p m and arrive at Asheville on Wednesday by 6 p m. Leave Asheville on Thursday by 6 p m and arrive at Charlotte on Friday by 6 p m. Leave Charlotte on Saturday by 6 p m and arrive at Salisbury on Sunday by 6 p m.  95. From Asheville, by the Warm Springs, Newport T. & Sevierville to Knoxville T. once a week. Leave Asheville every Friday at 6 a m, and arrive at Knoxville on Monday by 10 a m. Leave Knoxville every Monday at 2 p m, and arrive at Asheville the next Thursday by 6 p m.  96. From Morganton, by Rutherford and Gowen's to Greenville c h S. C. once a week. Leave Morganton every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Greenville c h on Sunday by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Greenville c h every Monday at 6 a m, and arrive at Morganton on Wednesday by 6 p m.  97. From Charlotte, by Bagg's ferry, and Hilt's Iron works, to York c h S. C. once a week. Leave Charlotte every Wednesday at 9 a m and arrive at York c h by 3 p m. Returning. Leave York c h every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Charlotte by 6 p m.  98. From Raleigh, by Smithfield, Waynesboro', Green c h and Kingston, to Newbern once a week. Leave Raleigh every Friday at 9 a m and arrive at Newbern the next Monday by 10 a m. Leave Newbern every Monday at 2 p m and arrive at Raleigh the next Thursday by 4 p m.  99. From Charlotte, by Lancaster, Caro, and Providence, to Camden, once a week. Leave Charlotte every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Camden on Thursday by 5 p m. Leave Camden on Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Charlotte on Saturday by 6 p m.  100. From Fayetteville by Elizabethton to Wilmington, and thence by South Washington and Sampson c h to Fayetteville once a week. Leave Fayetteville every Monday at 4 a m, and arrive at Wilmington on Thursday by 10 a m. Leave Wilmington every Thursday at 2 p m and arrive at Fayetteville on Sunday by 6 p m.  101. From Fayetteville, by Ansonville to Wilmington, once a week. Leave Fayetteville every Saturday at 6 a m and arrive at Wilmington on Sunday by 9 p m. Leave Wilmington every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Fayetteville on Thursday by 7 p m.  102. From Fayetteville, by Laurel Hill, Winfieldville, & Chavis c h to Camden S.C. once a week. Leave Fayetteville every Tuesday at 5 a m and arrive at Camden on Thursday by 8 p m. Leave Camden every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Fayetteville on Sunday by 6 p m.  103. From Fayetteville by Moore c h, Cartwright & Randolph c h to Salisbury, and thence by Tindallville, Henderson, Wadeboro', Springville, Socastee, and Richmond c h to Fayetteville, once a week. Leave Fayetteville every Friday at 8 a m and arrive at Salisbury the next Monday by 10 a m. Leave Salisbury at 2 p m and arrive at Richmond c h on Wednesday by 4 p m and at Fayetteville on Thursday by 5 p m.  104. From Wilkes c h to Ashe c h once in two weeks. Leave Wilkes c h every other Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Ashe c h the same day by 7 p m. Leave Ashe c h every other Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Wilkes c h the same day by 7 p m.  105. From Newbern to Swansboro' once a week. Leave Newbern every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Swansboro' same day by 11 a m. Leave Swansboro' every Tuesday at 1 p m and arrive at Newbern on same day by 7 p m.  IN SOUTH CAROLINA.  106. From Sneedboro' by Parker's ferry, Chatham, Cheraw c h, Batesville, Darlington c h, Pawleyville, Jaffrey's and the Clay House, to Port's ferry once a week. Leave Sneedboro' every Thursday at 4 a m and arrive at Port's ferry on Friday by 6 p m. Leave Port's ferry on Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Sneedboro' on Sunday by 8 p m.  107. From Camden, by Stateburg and Jamesville, to Nelson's ferry and Monk's Corner, to Charleston, twice a week. Leave Camden every Thursday and Saturday at 4 a m and arrive at Stateburg by 10 a m and at Charleston on Tuesday & Saturday by 10 a m. Leave Charleston on Tuesday & Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Camden on Thursday and Monday by 8 p m.  108. From Columbia by Orangeburg and St. George to Charleston, twice a week. Leave Columbia every Sunday and Wednesday at 4 a m and arrive at Charleston on Tuesday and Friday by 10 a m. Returning. Leave Charleston every Tuesday and Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Columbia on Thursday and Sunday by 6 p m.  109. From Columbia by Winnsboro', Chester c h, York c h, Pinckneyville, Union, Meaiville c h and Spartanburg, to Greenville c h once a week. And return by Stoneville, Shackelford's store, Cross Anchor, the Keys, O'Neal's, Henderson's and Hampton's to Columbia. Leave Columbia every Monday at 8 a m, and arrive at York c h on Tuesday by 7 p m. Leave it at 7 1/2 p m and arrive at Greenville c h on Friday by 8 a m. Leave Greenville c h at 10 a m and arrive at Columbia on Sunday by 6 p m.  110. From Columbia by Newbury c h, Laurens c h, Belfast, Fork Shoal, Greenville c h, Reedville, Claytonville, to Asheville. Return by Murrayville, Greenville, Tumbling Shoal, Laurens c h, Belfast, Newberry c h to Columbia once a week. Leave Columbia every
Monday at 2 p m and arrive at Asheville on Thursday by 8 p m. Leave Asheville every Friday at 4 a m, and arrive at Columbia the next Monday by 10 a m.  111. From Columbia by Mierfville, Stateburg, Sumterville, Salem, and Kingstree, to Wilton, once a week. Leave Columbia every Monday at 2 p m and arrive at Wilton on Wednesday by 6 p m. Leave Wilton every Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Columbia on Saturday by 6 p m.  112. From Monks Corner, or the Black Oak on Santee Canal, Pineville and Murray's ferry to Kingstree, once a week. Leave Monks Corner every Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Kingstree by 6 p m. Leave Kingstree every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Monks Corner by 6 p m.  113. From Orangeburg by Johnston's bridge, Barnwell c h, Roberts, Tredways and Town Creek to Campbeltown, once a week. Leave Orangeburg every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Campbeltown on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Campbeltown every Monday at 6 a m and arrive at Orangeburg on Wednesday by 6 p m.  114. From Camden, by Columbia, Edgfield c h and Campbeltown, to Augusta, once a week. Leave Camden every Friday at 5 a m and arrive at Columbia by 4 p m. Leave it at 5 p m, and arrive at Edgfield c h on Saturday by 10 a m. Leave there at 11 a m and arrive at Augusta by 6 p m. Returning. Leave Augusta every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Edgfield by 1 p m. Leave there at 2 p m, arrive at Columbia on Thursday by 8 a m. Leave there at 9 a m and arrive at Camden by 3 p m.  115. From Edgfield c h by Amos Richardsons, Cambidge, Southampton, Stoney Point, Abbeville c h and Rocky river to Pendleton c h, once a week. Leave Edgfield c h every Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Pendleton c h on Tuesday by 6 p m. Leave Pendleton c h every Wednesday by 6 a m and arrive at Edgfield c h the next Saturday by 10 a m.  116. From Goosewatchie, by Black Swamp, Lower three runs, and upper three runs, to Augusta once a week. Leave Augusta every Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Goosewatchie on Tuesday by 4 p m. Leave Goosewatchie every Thursday at 4 a m and arrive at Augusta on Saturday by 4 p m.  117. From Pocotaligo to Beaufort twice a week. Leave Pocotaligo every Tuesday and Saturday at 1 p m and arrive at Beaufort by 7 p m. Leave Beaufort every Tuesday and Saturday at 5 a m and arrive at Pocotaligo by 10 a m.  118. From Wilmington, by Canwayboro', to George Town S.C. once a week. Leave Wilmington every Thursday at 2 p m, and arrive at Georgetown on Sunday by 6 p m. Leave Georgetown every Monday at 6 a m, arrive at Wilmington on Thursday by 10 a m.  119. From Port's ferry, by Marian c h or Moore's, and Buck Swamp, or Bythewill to Harleyville once a week. Leave Port's ferry every Wednesday at 6 a m, and arrive at Harleyville the next day 10 a m. Leave Harleyville same day by 2 p m and return to Port's ferry on the next day by 6 p m.  120. From Port's ferry to Canwayboro', once a week. Leave Canwayboro' every Saturday at 4 a m, and arrive at Port's ferry on same day by 1 p m. Leave Port's ferry same day by 2 p m and return to Canwayboro' same day by 9 p m.  IN GEORGIA.  121. From Augusta, by Little river, Lincoln c h, Petersburg and Elberton, to Carnesville once a week. Leave Augusta every Thursday noon, and arrive at Augusta on Saturday by 5 p m. Leave Augusta every Sunday at 8 a m and arrive at Carnesville on Tuesday by noon.  122. From Augusta, by Columbia c h, Rayville, & Wrightsboro' to Washington once a week. Leave Augusta every Sunday at 6 p m and arrive at Washington on Monday by 4 p m. Leave Washington every Tuesday at 4 a m and arrive at Augusta on Wednesday by 10 a m.  123. From Washington, by Burriss's, Strong's store, Lexington, Athens, Watkinsville, and Clarkboro' to Jackson c h once a week. Leave Washington every Tuesday at 8 a m and arrive at Jackson c h on Wednesday by 6 p m. Leave Jackson c h every Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Washington on Monday by 4 p m.  124. From Washington, by Greenboro', Powelton, Richardonville, Spartan, Georgetown, and Warrenton, to Louisville once a week. Leave Washington every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Louisville on Friday by 11 a m. Leave Louisville every Friday at 3 p m and arrive at Washington on Monday by 5 p m.  125. From Louisville, by Saundersville, and Fort Wilkinson, to Milledgeville once a week. Leave Louisville every Friday at 4 p m and arrive at Milledgeville on Saturday by 4 p m. Leave Milledgeville every Thursday at 6 a m and arrive at Louisville on Friday by 10 a m.  126. From Riceboro' by Fort James, to Tattnall c h, and from Riceboro' to Sunbury once a week. Leave Riceboro' every Wednesday at 11 a m and arrive at Sunbury by 1 p m. Leave Sunbury every Wednesday at 4 p m and arrive at Tattnall c h on Friday by 6 p m. Leave Tattnall c h every Saturday at 6 a m, and arrive at Riceboro' on Sunday by 6 p m.  127. From Petersburg to Washington once a week. Leave Petersburg every Wednesday at 4 a m and arrive at Washington same day by 6 p m. Leave Washington every Thursday at 6 a m, and arrive at Petersburg same day by 8 p m.  128. From Milledgeville by Woods, Montgomery c h, Watrous, Tattnall c h and Beard's Bluff, to Darien once in two weeks. Leave Milledgeville every other Saturday at 8 p m and arrive at Darien the next Thursday by 6 p m. Leave Darien every other Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Milledgeville on the next Thursday by 6 p m.  IN TENNESSEE.  129. From Beene's Station, by Powell's Valley, Cumberland Gap, Barkersville and Raccoon Spring, to Rice's or Hazlepatch in Kentucky, once a week. Leave Beene's Station every Tuesday at 1 p m, and arrive at Hazlepatch on Thursday by 9 p m. Leave Hazlepatch every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Beene's Station on Sunday by noon.  130. From Blountville, by Massingale, Elizabethton, Jonesboro', Greeneville, Chask's Cross Roads, and Dandridge to Knoxville, once a week. Leave Blountville every Saturday at 6 a m, and arrive at Knoxville on Monday, by 11 a m. Leave Knoxville every Monday at 1 p m and arrive at Blountville on Wednesday by 6 p m.  131. From Beene's Station by Chask's Cross Roads to Newport once a week. Leave Beene's Station every Sunday at 2 p m and arrive at Newport on Monday by 10 a m. Leave Newport every Monday at 2 p m and arrive at Beene's Station on Tuesday by 11 a m.  132. From Knoxville, by Tellico, to Athens Ga. once in two weeks. Leave Knoxville every other Monday at 1 p m, and arrive at Athens on Saturday by 2 p m. Leave Athens every other Sunday at 6 a m, and arrive at Knoxville the next Saturday by 6 p m.  133. From Knoxville to Marysville once a week. Leave Knoxville every Monday at 2 p m, and arrive at Marysville by 7 p m. Leave Marysville every Monday at 7 a m, and arrive at Knoxville by 11 a m.  134. From Knoxville, by Campbell, Gardner, Kingstree, Mount Granger, Cartago, Dixons Springs, Craigfort, Gallatin and Hendersonville, to Nashville twice a week. Leave Knoxville every Monday and Thursday at 1 p m and arrive at Nashville on Thursday & Sunday by 3 p m. Leave Nashville every Monday and Friday at 8 a m, and arrive at Knoxville on Thursday and Monday by 11 a m.  135. From Knoxville to Fort Stoddert once in four weeks. Leave Knoxville the first Monday of April and every fourth Monday thereafter at 1 p m, and arrive at Fort Stoddert on Sunday week by noon. Leave Fort Stoddert on the next Sunday at 6 a m, and arrive at Knoxville on Sunday week by 6 p m.  136. From Springfield, by Port Royal and Clarksville to Palmyra, once a week. Leave Springfield every Tuesday at 5 a m, and arrive at Palmyra by 4 p m. Leave Palmyra every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Springfield by 5 p m.  137. From Nashville by Jefferson, Lebanon, Kavannah, and Cartago, to Mount Granger, once a week. Leave Nashville every Monday at 6 a m, and arrive at Mount Granger on Tuesday by 6 p m. Leave Mount Granger every Wednesday at 5 a m and arrive at Nashville on Thursday by 6 p m.  138. From Nashville to Charlotte, once a week. Leave Charlotte every Sunday at 4 a m and arrive at Nashville by 7 p m. Leave Nashville every Monday by 4 a m, and arrive at Charlotte by 8 p m.  139. From Palmyra by Stuart c h, to Eddysville once in two weeks. Leave Palmyra every other Wednesday at 6 a m, and arrive at Eddysville on Thursday by 6 p m. Leave Eddysville every other Friday at 6 a m, and arrive at Palmyra on Saturday by 6 p m.  140. From Knoxville by Burville, Walnut Cove, Chitwood, and Wayne c h to Pels c h, once in two weeks. Leave Knoxville every other Monday at 2 p m, and arrive at Pels c h on Thursday by 6 p m. Leave Pels c h every other Friday at 6 a m, and arrive at Knoxville on the next Monday by 10 a m.  IN MISSISSIPPI TERRITORY.  141. From Nashville, by Franklin, Bear creek, to McIntoshville or Wright's, once a week. Leave Nashville every Friday at 4 a m, and arrive at Wright's on the next Monday by 10 a m. Leave Wright's or McIntoshville every Monday at 1 p m and arrive at Nashville on the next Thursday by 8 p m.  142. From McIntoshville to Smith's Old Stand once a week. Leave McIntoshville every Monday at 1 p m, and arrive at Smith's Old Stand on Thursday by 8 p m. Leave Smith's Old Stand every Friday at 4 a m and arrive at McIntoshville the next Monday by 11 a m.  143. From Smith's Old Stand, by Grindstone Ford, Port Gibson, Greenville, Hattiesburg, Union, Washington, Natchez, Appleton, Bayliss, Fort Adams, Pinkneyville, and Baton Rouge to La Fourche, or Donaldson's, once a week. Leave Smith's Old Stand every Friday at 4 a m, and arrive at Donaldson's on the next Monday by 10 a m. Leave La Fourche or Donaldson's every Monday at 1 p m and arrive at Smith's Old Stand on the next Thursday by 8 p m.
Old Stand on the next Thursday by 8 p m.  144. From La Fourche or Donaldson's, by Canal's, German and Red church to New Orleans, once a week. Leave La Fourche every Monday at 1 p m, and arrive at New Orleans on Tuesday by 5 p m. Leave New Orleans every Sunday at 8 a m, and arrive at La Fourche or Donaldson's on Monday by 11 a m.  145. From New Orleans to Balize, once a week. Leave New Orleans every Tuesday at 4 a m, and arrive at Balize on Thursday by 10 a m. Leave Balize every Thursday at 2 p m, and arrive at New Orleans on the next Saturday by 6 p m.  146. From Donaldsonville, by Attacapas, River Teche, St. Martin's church, Opelousas Rapid, to Natchitoches, once in two weeks. Leave La Fourche every other Monday at 1 p m and arrive at Natchitoches on the next Sunday by 6 p m. Leave Natchitoches every other Monday at 6 a m, and arrive at La Fourche on the next Monday by 8 a m.  147. From Natchez, by Fort St. Stephens, to Fort Stoddert once in four weeks. Leave Fort Stoddert on the first Sunday of April, and every fourth Sunday thereafter at 1 p m, and arrive at Natchez on Monday week by 4 p m. Leave Natchez the next day at 8 a m and arrive at Fort Stoddert on Wednesday week by 4 p m.  IN KENTUCKY.  148. From Lexington, by Nicholasville, Richmond, Woods, and Metcalfe, to Hazle Patch, once a week. Leave Lexington every Wednesday at 6 a m, and arrive at Hazle Patch on Thursday by 6 p m. Leave Hazle Patch every Friday at 6 a m, and arrive at Lexington on Saturday by 6 p m.  149. From Danville, by Lancaster, Staughton and Crab Orchard, to Hazle Patch, once a week. Leave Danville every Wednesday noon, and arrive at Hazle Patch on Thursday by 6 p m. Leave Hazle Patch every Friday at 6 a m, and arrive at Danville on Saturday by noon.  NOTES.  1. The Post Master General may expedite the mails and alter the times of arrival and departure at any time during the continuance of the contracts, he stipulating what he conceives to be an adequate compensation for any extra expense that may be occasioned thereby.  2. Fifteen minutes shall be allowed for opening & closing the mails at all offices where no particular time is specified.  3. For every thirty minutes delay, (unavoidable accidents excepted) in arriving after the time prescribed in any contract, the contractor shall forfeit one dollar: and if the delay continues until the departure of any succeeding mail, whereby the mails destined for such destination are lost or delayed, an additional forfeiture of five dollars shall be incurred. And whenever a lost trip ensues, from whatever circumstance, the amount to be paid to the contractor for a regular trip is to be deducted from his pay.  4. Newspapers, as well as letters are to be sent in the mail; and if any person making proposals, desires to carry newspapers, other than those conveyed in the mail, for his own emolument, he must state in his proposals for what sum he will carry with the emolument, and for what sum without that emolument.  5. Should any person making proposals desire an alteration of the times of arrival and departure above specified, he must state in his proposals the alteration desired and the difference they will make in the terms of the contract.  6. Persons making proposals are desired to state their prices by the year. Those who contract will receive their pay quarterly, in the months of August, November, February and May, in one month after the expiration of each quarter.  7. No other than a free white person shall be employed to convey the mail.  8. Where the proposer intends to convey the mail in the body of a stage carriage, he is desired to state it in his proposals.  9. The Post Master General reserves to himself the right of declaring any contract at an end whenever one failure happens which amounts to the loss of a trip.  10. The contracts for the above routes are to be in operation on the first day of April next, and are to continue in force for two years.
GIDEON GRANGER. Post Master General. GENERAL POST OFFICE, Washington City, October 31. 1808. Dec 8  NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,  THAT application will be made, at the Treasury of the United States, for the renewal of Certificate No. 12,329, issued by Joseph Nourse, Esq. Register, on the 16th June, 1798, in favor of William Holland, of London, for five thousand dollars, three per cent. stock.  JOHN DAVIDSON. Nov. 25—6w.  TURKISH GOODS.  ON MONDAY next the 5th December at 12 o'clock will be SOLD at John Travers' Auction Room, Sundry TURKISH GOODS, on Public account. They may be seen at my store any day previous to the day of sale.  JOHN COX. Georgetown, November 30—3t  I hereby forewarn all store and shopkeepers against delivering any thing to any person or persons in my name, unless by my written order: for David Dobbins's clerk has presented an account to me which is unjust, and I positively declare I will not pay it; for the goods were taken up by an unknown person to me.  JOHN ANDERSON. Navy-Yard, November 30—3t  THE Subscriber begs leave to inform his friends and the public, that he has on hand ALBANY ALE, Philadelphia PORTER and ALE by the Hogshead or Dozen, Philadelphia BEER by the barrel of a superior quality, being supplied from the first breweries on the continent, he hopes to give general satisfaction.  N. B. A constant supply of GROCERIES. JOHN DOBBYN. Washington city, near the Navy Yard, Nov. 16—7t5
THE Subscriber begs leave to inform his friends and the public, that he has on hand ALBANY ALE, Philadelphia PORTER and ALE by the Hogshead or Dozen, Philadelphia BEER by the barrel of a superior quality, being supplied from the first breweries on the continent, he hopes to give general satisfaction.  N. B. A constant supply of GROCERIES. JOHN DOBBYN. Washington city, near the Navy Yard, Nov. 16—7t5