The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1807-09-25 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER,
AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
No. 1084.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1807.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
TRIAL OF A. BURR.
OPINION of the Court on the motion to arrest the evidence, delivered on Monday, August 31—Continued.
In page 220, Foster repeats this declaration. It is also laid down in Hawk. B. 3, chap. 37, sect. 29, 1st Hale 121. 1st. East. 116, and by the other authorities cited, especially Vaughan's case. In corroboration of this opinion, it may be observed, that treason can only be established by the proof of overt acts, and that by the common law as well as by the statute of 7th of William 3d, those overt acts only which are charged in the indictment can be given in evidence, unless perhaps as corroborative testimony after the overt acts are proved. That clause in the constitution too which says that in all prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right "to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation" is considered as having a direct bearing on this point. It secures to him such information as will enable him to prepare for his defence.
It seems then to be perfectly clear that it would not be sufficient for an indictment to allege generally that the accused had levied war against the U. S. The charge must be more particularly specified by laying what is termed an overt act of levying war. The law relative to an appeal as cited from Stamford, is strongly corroborative of this opinion.
If it be necessary to specify the charge in the indictment, it would seem to follow irresistibly, that the charge must be proved as laid.
All the authorities which require an overt act, require also that this overt act should be proved. The decision in Vaughan's case is particularly in point. Might it be otherwise, the charge of an overt act would be a mischief instead of an advantage to the accused. It would lead him from the true cause and nature of the accusation instead of informing him respecting it.
But it is contended on the part of the prosecution that, although the accused had been never with the party which assembled at Blannerhasset's Island, and was, at the time, at a great distance, and in a different state, he was yet legally present, and therefore may properly be charged in the indictment as being present in fact.
It is therefore necessary to enquire whether in this case the doctrine of constructive presence can apply.
It is conceived by the court to be possible that a person may be concerned in a treasonable conspiracy, and yet be legally, as well as actually absent while some one act of the treason is perpetrated. If a rebellion should be so extensive as to spread through every state in the union, it will scarcely be contended that every individual concerned in it is legally present at every overt act committed in the course of that rebellion. It would be a very violent presumption indeed, too violent to be made without clear authority, to presume that even the chief of the rebel army was legally present at every such overt act. If the main rebel army with the chief at its head should be prosecuting war at one extremity of our territory, say in N. H. if this chief should be there captured and sent to the other extremity for the purpose of trial, if his indictment instead of alleging an overt act which was true in point of fact, should allege that he had assembled some small party which in truth he had not seen, and had levied war by engaging in a skirmish in Georgia, at a time when in reality he was fighting a battle in New-Hampshire—if such evidence would support such an indictment by the fiction that he was legally present though really absent, all would ask to what purpose are those provisions in the constitution which direct the place of trial, and ordain that the accused shall be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation?
But that a man may be legally absent who has counselled or procured a treasonable act, is proved by all those books which treat upon the subject, and which concur in declaring that such a person is a principal traitor, not because he was legally present, but because in treason all are principals. Yet the indictment I say upon general principles, would charge him according to the truth of the case. Lord Coke says "if many conspire to levy war, and some of them do levy the same according to the conspiracy, this is high treason in all." Why? Because all were legally present when the war was levied? No.—"For in treason, continues Lord Coke, all be principals, and war is levied." In this case the indictment, reasoning from analogy, would not charge that the absent conspirators were present, but would state the truth of the case. If the conspirator had done nothing which amounted to levying of war, and if by our constitution the doctrine that an accessory becomes a principal be not adopted, in consequence of which the conspirator could not be condemned under an indictment stating the truth of the case, it would be going very far to say that this defect, if it be termed one, may be cured by an indictment stating the case uptruly.
The doctrine of Lord Coke has been adopted by all subsequent writers; and it is generally laid down in the English books, that whatever will make a man an accessory in felony, will make him a principal in treason; but it is no where suggested that he is by construction to be considered as present when in point of fact he was absent.
Foster 3d, has been particularly quoted, and certainly he is precisely in point. "It is well known," says Foster, that in the language of the case there are no accessories in high treason, all are principals. Every instance of incitement, aid, or protection, which in the case of felony will render a man an accessory before or after the fact, in the case of high treason, whether it be treason at common law or by statute, will make him a principal in the treason." The cases of incitement and aid are cases put as examples of a man's becoming a principal in treason, not because he was legally present, but by force of that maxim in the common law that whatever will render a man an accessory at common law will render him a principal in treason. In other passages the words "command or procure" are used to indicate the same state of things, that is a treasonable assemblage produced by a man who is not himself in that assemblage.
In point of law then, the man who incites, aids, or procures a treasonable act, is not merely in consequence of that incitement, aid or procurement, legally present when that act is committed.
If it does not result from the nature of the crime that all who are concerned in it are legally present at every overt act, then each case depends upon its own circumstances, and to judge how far the circumstances of any case can make him legally present who is in fact absent, the doctrine of constructive presence must be examined.
Hale in his 1st vol. p. 615 says "regularly no man can be a principal in felony unless he be present." In the same page he says "an accessory before is he that being absent at the time of the felony committed, doth yet procure, counsel, or command another to commit a felony." The books are full of passages which state this to be the law. Foster in showing what acts of concurrence will make a man a principal, says "he must be present at the perpetration, otherwise he can be no more than an accessory before the fact."
These strong doctrines would be idle to treason, at any rate they would be inapplicable, if they were to be entirely lost in the doctrine of constructive presence.
Foster adds (p. 349) "when the law requireth the presence of the accomplice at the perpetration of the fact in order to render him a principal, it doth not require a strict actual immediate presence, such a presence as would make him an eye or ear witness of what passeth." The terms used by Foster are such as would be employed by a man intending to show the necessity that the absent person should be near at hand, although from the nature of the thing no precise distance could be marked out. An inspection of the cases from which Foster drew this general principle will serve to illustrate it. Hale 439. In all these cases, put by Hale, the whole party set out together to commit the very fact charged in the indictment, or to commit some other unlawful act, in which they are all to be personally concerned at the same time and place, and are at the very time when the criminal fact is committed, near enough to give actual personal aid and assistance to the man who perpetrated it. Hale in p. 449, giving the reason for the decision in the case of the word decree says "they all came with an intent to steal the deer, and consequently the law supposes, that they came all with the intent to oppose all that should hinder them in that design. The original case says this was their resolution. This opposition would be a personal opposition. This case even as stated by Hale would clearly not comprehend any man who entered into the combination, but who, instead of going to the park where the murder was committed, should not set out with the others, should go to a different park, or should even lose his way. Hale 534.
In both the cases here stated, the persons actually set out together and were near enough to assist in the commission of the fact. That in the case of Pudsey the felony was as stated by Hale, a different felony from that originally intended is unimportant in regard to the particular principle now under consideration, so far as respected distance, as respected capacity to assist in case of resistance, it is the same as if the robbery had been that which was originally designed. The case in the original report shows that the felony committed was in fact in pursuance of that originally designed. Foster 350, plainly supposes the same particular design, not a general design composed of many particular distinct facts. He supposes them to be co-operating with respect to that particular design. This may be illustrated by a case which is perhaps common. Suppose a band of
robbers confederated for the general purpose of robbing. They set out together, or in parties, to rob a particular individual, and each performs the part assigned to him. Some ride up to the individual and demand his purse, others watch out of sight to intercept those who might be coming to assist the man on whom the robbery is to be committed if murder or robbery actually take place, all are principals, and all in construction of law are present. But suppose they set out at the same time or at different times, by different roads, to attack and rob different individuals or different companies—to commit distinct acts of robbery. It has never been contended that those who committed one act of robbery or who failed altogether, were constructively present at the act of those who were associated with them in the common object of robbery, & who were to share the plunder, but who did not assist at the particular fact. They do indeed belong to the general party, but they are not of the particular party which committed this fact. Foster concludes this subject by observing that "in order to render a person an accomplice and a principal in felony, he must be aiding and abetting at the fact, or ready to afford assistance if necessary." That is, at the particular fact which is charged—he must be ready to render assistance to those who are committing that particular fact—he must as is stated by Hawkins be ready to give immediate and direct assistance.
All the cases to be found in the books go to the same point. Let them be applied to that under consideration.
The whole treason laid in this indictment is the levying of war in Blannerhasset's island, and the whole question to which the enquiry of the court is now directed is whether the prisoner was legally present at that fact.
I say this is the whole question because the prisoner can only be convicted on the overt act laid in the indictment. With respect to this prosecution it is as if no other overt act existed. If other overt acts can be enquired into, it is for the sole purpose of proving the particular fact charged; it is as evidence of the crime consisting of this particular fact, not as establishing the general crime by a distinct fact.
The counsel for the prosecution have charged those engaged in the defence with considering the overt as the treason, whereas it ought to be considered solely as the evidence of the treason; but the counsel for the prosecution seem themselves not to have sufficiently adverted to this clear principle, that though the overt act may not be itself the treason, it is the sole act of that treason which can produce conviction. It is the sole point in issue between the parties. And the only division of that point, if the expression be allowed, which the court is now examining, is the constructive presence of the prisoner at the fact charged.
To return then to the application of the cases.
Had the prisoner set out with the party from Beaver for Blannerhasset's island, or perhaps had he set out for that place, though not from Beaver, and had arrived in the island, he would have been present at the fact; had he not arrived in the island, but had taken a position near enough to co-operate with those on the island, to assist them in any act of hostility, or to aid them if attacked, the question whether he was constructively present would be a question compounded of law and fact, which would be decided by the jury, with the aid of the court, so far as respected the law. In this case the accused would have been of the particular party assembled on the island, and would have been associated with them in the particular act of levying war said to have been committed on the island.
But if he was not with the party at any time before they reached the island; if he did not join them there, or intend to join them there; if his personal co-operation in the general plan was to be afforded elsewhere, at a great distance, in a different state; if the overt acts of treason to be performed by him were to be distinct overt acts; then he was not of the particular party assembled at Blannerhasset's island, and was not constructively present, aiding and assisting in the particular act which was there committed.
The testimony on this point, so far as it has been delivered, is not equivocal. There is not only no evidence that the accused was of the particular party which assembled on Blannerhasset's island, but the whole evidence shows he was not of that party.
In felony then, admitting the crime to have been completed on the island, and to have been advised, procured, or commanded by the accused, he would have been incontestibly an accessory and not a principal.
But in treason, it is said, the law is otherwise, because the theatre of action is more extensive.
The reasoning applies in England as strongly as in the U. S. While in '15 and '45 the family of Stuart fought to regain the crown they had forfeited, the struggle was for the whole kingdom; yet no man was ever considered as legally present at one place, when actually at
another; or as aiding in one transaction while actually employed in another.
With the perfect knowledge that the whole nation may be the theatre of action, the English books unite in declaring, that he who counsels, procures or aids treason, is guilty accessorially and solely in virtue of the common law principle, that what will make a man an accessory in felony makes him a principal in treason. So far from considering a man as constructively present at every overt act of the general treason in which he may have been concerned, the whole doctrine of the books limits the proof against him to those particular overt acts of levying war with which he is charged.
What would be the effect of a different doctrine? Clearly that which has been stated. If a person levying war in Kentucky, may be said to be constructively present and assembled with a party carrying on war in Virginia, at a great distance from him; then he is present at every overt act performed any where; he may be tried in any state on the continent, where any overt act has been committed; he may be proved to be guilty of an overt act laid in the indictment in which he had no personal participation, by proving that he advised it, or that he committed other acts.
This is, perhaps, too extravagant to be in terms maintained. Certainly it cannot be supported by the doctrines of the English law.
The opinion of judge Patterson in Mitchell's case has been cited on this point. 2 Dall. 348.
The indictment is not specially stated; but from the case as reported, it must have been either general for levying war in the county of Alleghany, and the overt act laid must have been the assemblage of men and levying of war in that county; or it must have given a particular detail of the treasonable transactions in that county. The first supposition is the most probable; but let the indictment be in the one form or the other, and the result is the same. The facts of the case are, that a large body of men, of whom Mitchell was one, assembled at Braddock's field, in the county of Alleghany, for the purpose of committing acts of violence at Pittsburgh. That there was also an assemblage at a different time at Couches fort, at which the prisoner also attended. The general and avowed object of that meeting was to concert measures for resisting the execution of a public law. At Couches fort, the resolution was taken to attack the house of the inspector, and the body there assembled marched to that house and attacked it. It was proved by the competent number of witnesses, that he was at Couches fort armed, that he offered to reconnoitre the house to be attacked, that he marched with the insurgents towards the house, that he was with them after the action attending the body of one of his comrades who was killed in it; one witness swore positively that he was present at the burning of the house, and a second witness said that "it ran in his head that he had seen him there." That a doubt should exist in such a case as this, is strong evidence of the necessity that the overt act should be unequivocally proved by two witnesses.
But what was the opinion of the judge in this case? Couches fort and Neville's house being in the same county, the assemblage having been at Couches fort and the resolution to attack the house having been there taken, the body having for the avowed purposes moved in execution of that resolution towards the house to be attacked, he inclined to think that the act of marching was in itself levying war. If it was, then the overt act laid in the indictment was consummated by the assemblage at Couches and the marching from thence, and Mitchell was proved to be guilty by more than two positive witnesses. But without deciding this to be the law, he proceeded to consider the meeting at Couches, the immediate marching to Neville's house, and the attack and burning of the house, as one transaction. Mitchell was proved by more than two positive witnesses to have been in that transaction, to have taken an active part in it, and the judge declared it to be unnecessary that all should have seen him at the same time and place.
But suppose not a single witness had proved Mitchell to have been at Couches, or on the march, or at Neville's. Suppose he had been at the time notoriously absent in a different state. Can it be believed by any person who observes the caution with which judge Patterson required the constitutional proof of two witnesses to the same overt act, that he would have said Mitchell was constructively present, and might on that straining of a legal fiction, be found guilty of treason? Had he delivered such an opinion what would have been the language of this country respecting it? Had he given this opinion, it would have required all the correctness of his life to strike his name from that bloody list in which the name of Jeffries is enrolled.
But to estimate the opinion in Mitchell's case, let its circumstances be transferred to Burr's case. Suppose the body of men assembled in Blanner-
hasset's island had previously met at some other place in the same county, and that Burr had been proved to be with them by four witnesses: That the resolution to march to Blannerhasset's island for a treasonable purpose had been there taken; that he had been seen on the march with them; that one witness had seen him on the island, that another thought he had seen him there; that he had been seen with the party directly after leaving the island; that this indictment had charged the levying of war in Wood county generally; the cases would then have been precisely parallel, and the decisions would have been the same.
In conformity with principle and with authority then, the prisoner at the bar was neither legally nor actually present at Blannerhasset's island; and the court is strongly inclined to the opinion that without proving an actual or legal presence by two witnesses, the overt act laid in this indictment cannot be proved.
But this opinion is controverted on two grounds.
The first is, that the indictment does not charge the prisoner to have been present.
The second, that although he was absent, yet, if he caused the assemblage, he may be indicted as being present, and convicted on evidence that he caused the treasonable act.
The first position is to be decided by the indictment itself. The court understands the allegation differently from the attorney for the U. S. The court understands it to be directly charged, that the prisoner did assemble with the multitude and did march with them. Nothing will more clearly test this construction than putting the case into a shape which it may possibly take. Suppose the law to be, that the indictment would be defective unless it alleged the presence of the person indicted at the act of treason. If upon a special verdict facts should be found which amounted to a levying of war by the accused, and his counsel should insist that he could not be condemned because the indictment was defective in not charging that he was himself one of the assemblage which constituted the treason, or because it alleged the procurement defectively, would the attorney admit this construction of his indictment to be correct? I am persuaded that he would not, and that he ought not to make such a concession. If, after a verdict, the indictment ought to be construed to allege that the prisoner was one of the assemblage at Blannerhasset's island, it ought to be so construed now. But this is unimportant, for if the indictment alleges that the prisoner procured the assemblage, that procurement becomes part of the overt act and must be proved as will be shown hereafter.
The 2d position is founded on 1 Hale 214, 233 and 1. East 127.
While I declare that this doctrine contradicts every idea I had ever entertained on the subject of indictments, since it admits that one case may be stated, and a very different case may be proved, I will acknowledge that it is countenanced by the authorities aduced in its support. To counsel or advise a treasonable assemblage, and to be one of that assemblage, are certainly distinct acts, and therefore ought not to be charged as the same act. The great objection to this mode of proceeding is, that the proof essentially varies from the charge in the character and essence of the offence, and in the testimony by which the accused is to defend himself. These dicta of Lord Hale, therefore, taken in the extent in which they are understood by the counsel for the U. S. seem to be repugnant to the declarations we find every where, that an overt act must be laid, and must be proved. No case is cited by Hale in support of them, and I am strongly inclined to the opinion that, had the public received his corrected, instead of his original manuscript, they would, if not expunged, have been restrained in their application to cases of a particular description. Laid down generally, and applied universally to all cases of treason, they are repugnant to the principles for which Hale contends, for which all the elementary writers contend, and from which courts have in no case, either directly reported or referred to in the books, ever departed. These principles are, that the indictment must give notice of the offence, that the accused is only bound to answer the particular charge which the indictment contains, and that the overt act laid is that particular charge. Under such circumstances, it is only doing justice to Hale to examine his dicta, and if they will admit of being understood in a limited sense, not repugnant to his own doctrines, nor to the general principles of law, to understand them in that sense.
"If many conspire to counterfeit, or counsel or abet it, and one of them doth the fact upon that counselling or conspiring, it is treason. In all, and they may be all indicted for counterfeiting generally within this statute, for in such case, in treason, all are principals."
This is laid down as applicable solely to the treason of counterfeiting the coin, and is not applied by Hale to other trea-

sons. Had he designed to apply the principle universally, he would have stated it as a general proposition—he would have laid it down in treating on other branches of the statute, as well as in the chapter respecting the coin, he would have laid it down when treating on indictments generally. But he has done neither. Every sentiment bearing in any manner upon this point, which is to be found in Lord Hale, while on the doctrine of levying war, or on the general doctrine of indictments, militates against the opinion that he considered the proposition as more extensive than he has declared it to be. No court could be justified in extending the dictum of a judge beyond its terms, to cases in which he has not expressly applied it, and on which he as well as others, has delivered opinions which that dictum would over-rule. This would be the less justifiable if there should be a clear legal distinction indicated by the very terms in which the judge has expressed himself between the particular case, to which alone he has applied the dictum, and other cases to which the court is required to extend it.
There is this clear legal distinction, "They may, says Judge Hale, be indicted for counterfeiting generally." But if many conspire to levy war, and some actually levy it, they may not be indicted for levying war generally. The court concurs in declaring that they cannot be so indicted. A special overt act of levying war must be laid. This distinction between counterfeiting the coins, and that class of treasons, among which levying war is placed, is taken in the statute of Edward 3rd. That statute requires an overt act of levying war to be laid in the indictment, and does not require an overt act of counterfeiting the coin to be laid. It is a particular case where a general indictment is sufficient, it be stated that the crime may be charged generally according to the legal effect of the act it does not follow, that in other cases where general indictment would be insufficient, where an overt act must be laid, that this overt act need not be laid according to the real fact. Hale then is to be reconciled with himself, and with the general principles of law, only by permuting the limits which he has himself given to his own dictum, to remain where he has placed them.
In page 233, Hale is speaking generally of the receiver of a traitor, and is stating in what such receiver partakes of an accessory. 1st. "His indictment must be special of the receipt, and not generally that he did the thing, which may be otherwise in case of one that is procurer, counsellor or abettor."
The words "may be otherwise" do not clearly convey the idea that it is universally otherwise. In all cases of a receiver the indictment must be special on the receipt, and not general. The words "may be otherwise in case of a procurer," &c. signify that it may be otherwise in all treasons, or that it may be otherwise in some treasons. It may be otherwise in some treasons without contradicting the doctrines of Hale himself, as well as of other writers, but cannot be otherwise in all treasons without such contradiction, the fair construction is, that Hale used these words in their restricted sense; that he used them in reference to treasons, in which a general indictment would lie, not to treasons where a general indictment would not lie, but an overt act of the treason must be charged. The two passages of Hale thus construed, may perhaps be law, and may leave him consistent with himself. It appears to the court to be the fair way of construing them.
These observations relative to the passages quoted from Hale, apply to that quoted from East, who obviously copies from Hale, and relies upon his authority.
Upon this point Keeling 26, and 1st Hale 626, have also been relied upon. It is stated in both, that if a man be indicted as a principal and acquitted, he cannot afterwards be indicted as accessory before the fact. Whence it is inferred, not without reason, that evidence of accessorial guilt may be received on such an indictment. Yet no case is found in which the question has been made and decided. The objection has never been taken at a trial and over-ruled, nor do the books say it would be over-ruled. Were such a case produced its application would be questionable. Keeling says, an accessory before the fact is quodam modo , in some manner guilty of the fact. The law may not require that the manner should be stated, for in felony it does not require that an overt act should be laid. The indictment therefore may be general. But an overt act of levying war must be laid. These cases then prove in their utmost extent no more than the cases previously cited from Hale and East. This distinction between indictments which may state the fact generally, and those which must lay specially, bear some analogy to a general and a special action on the case. In a general action, the declaration may lay the assumpsit according to the legal effect of the transaction, but in a special action on the case, the declaration must state the material circumstances truly, and they must be proved as stated. This distinction also derives some aid from a passage in Hale, 625, immediately preceding that which has been cited at the bar. He says "If A. be indicted as principal and B. as accessory before or after, and both be acquitted, yet B. may be indicted as principal, and the former acquittal as accessory is no bar."
(TO BE CONTINUED)
ON THE INDICTMENT FOR A MISDEMEANOR. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16.
Mr. Burr observed that he should waive the right to which he was entitled of putting an end to this enquiry at the present time; but that as much had been said boldly about his levying war in certain places, he was willing to indulge the gentlemen in the production of relevant testimony. If they, however, wandered from that line, he should immediately bring the investigation of the law before the court. He also demanded a specification of the charge made against him.—The Chief Justice observed, that the specific charge was levying war at the mouth of Cumberland river.— Mr. Martin denied that this specific charge had been yesterday made.
Mr. Hay stated that this difficulty had occurred respecting the jurisdiction of the island at the mouth of Cumberland river, that he had been informed, that this island had never been ceded to Kentucky, and that it still belongs to Virginia; that if Mr. Burr then was sent to Kentucky, he might be sent back again; and that even if he was wrong in locating the offence, it was in the power of the court to send him to another district: the only arrangement however that was now to be made, was whether Blannerhasset and Smith should be included in the same motion. Mr. Wickham objected to this arrangement; because their counsel was different; and because the testimony applicable to each might be different.— Chief Justice . Let the examination proceed: and if any confusion should occur, the division may then be made.
Mr. Martin insisted on the specification of the charge.
Mr. Hay then produced and read the following paper: The attorney of the U.S. for the Virginia district, charges A. Burr, Herman Blannerhasset and Israel Smith, with treason, in levying war against the U.S. and charges that an overt act of levying war was committed on an island whose name is not known at the mouth of Cumberland river, in the state of Kentucky, and that other overt acts of levying war, were committed at Bayou Pierre, in the Mississippi territory, and on the Mississippi river, between the places above named.
The attorney for the U.S. then called James W. Dowell, who gave the following evidence:
In December I was at Wheeling, and engaged with one William Dean to go down the river, to New Orleans, to take down a boat loaded with flour and whiskey. We went down the river with the boat from Wheeling to Shawnee town; and here I saw Mr. Blannerhasset, Smith, Tyler, and many others. From that place we went down to the mouth of Cumberland river, in company with these gentlemen.—( Mr. Hay . Where is Shawnee town? A. It is below Blannerhasset's Island.) It was at the mouth of Cumberland that I saw Colonel Burr for the first time. We all went up to the beach where he was introduced to us all, and there we formed a ring or circle, where he told us it was not a proper time to divulge his secrets; there were too many by-standers.
Col. Tyler and Mr. Smith , and Mr. Dean , and Blannerhasset stood together, and he told Col. Tyler he might tell the gentlemen engaged, what he thought proper, and Col. T. said he would inform the captains of the boats; for each boat had a captain. Col. T. said, he would let them know where they were going, when they got to Nantz de Grace, (New Madrid, as some call it.)— Mr. Dean sold the boat we went down in, to Comfort Tyler and Israel Smith —Then we proceeded in going down, till we got to New Madrid, where we expected to hear some encouragement for going down; and there we were told by Comfort Tyler , that when we got lower down, they would tell us. They appointed two or three places, but they never saw one fit for it. We went on down to Bayou Pierre.
Mr. Burr . Gentlemen have set out to prove an act of war at the mouth of Cumberland river. We shall presently object to that kind of testimony, they are now bringing forward.— Mr. Wickham . It is understood that these exceptions are all before the court. Mr. Hay . We are not now before the court. Mr. Wickham . I understand the gentleman. We are not before the court to determine objections to evidence. Mr. Hay . All that I say is, we are not before the court to hear a regular motion, but to determine a motion for commitment. Let all the evidence be produced—and the bench will then determine upon any objections that may be urged. Mr. Wickham . If we start objections, I presume that it is right to hear them. The court will not surely hear irrelevant and illegal testimony. There are surely manifest reasons why this kind of evidence shall not be introduced. Every atom of it is taken down; published in the newspapers, and circulated throughout the world. As there is no reason to expect, that this prosecution will be dropped; as a motion has been made to try him in Kentucky; it is improper to publish this evidence, and to prejudice the public mind against Col. Burr ?
Mr. McRae . The evidence that we offer relates to one of the very charges urged against him; for it embraces his conduct at Bayou Pierre.— Mr. Burr . It will be saving time, if the gentlemen will confine themselves to Kentucky. I shall not interrupt them: but if they go into the Mississippi territory, I shall certainly state objections, which the court will suffer to be heard.
Mr. Martin . Let them prove an o-
TRIAL OF AARON BURR.
vert act first; and then there will be a sufficient foundation for the introduction of this testimony.— Chief Justice . That suggestion is for the consideration of the counsel for the U.S. But if the accused is prepared to state any objections, to going into the Mississippi territory, I must hear them.
Mr. Hay . I will submit this idea to the consideration of the court. Ought the witnesses to be detained here day after day? Let the evidence be first heard, and the court may then determine which part of it is to be laid out of view. Mr. Wirt suggested that to avoid the expense of detaining the witnesses, their evidence might be reduced to depositions. Mr. Burr . I presume the gentlemen will first ask my consent. Chief Justice . If the witnesses are absent, their affidavits can be heard.—But if they are here, they must be produced.
Mr. Burr . Do I understand gentlemen as insisting on going below the line into the Mississippi territory?
Mr. Hay . I see no objection to going through the whole line of march.
Mr. Batts objected to the production of such evidence on three grounds:
1. That no evidence of acts in the Mississippi Territory was admissible, by the 33d sect. of the judicial act. Mr. Batts contended that according to this act of Congress, a person arrested is to be bailed or imprisoned for trial, before such courts of the U.S. as "by this court" had cognizance of the offence: that the Mississippi court was not a court of the United States within the meaning of its 32d sect.; that by this act that court has no cognizance; that the word "district" which is so frequently used in that act applies entirely to the states and not to the Territories; and that this court cannot judicially hear what it has no cognizance of.
2. That the verdict of acquittal operated as a bar to any trial for this charge now laid by the attorney; that this charge was in effect the same offence for which he had been already tried & acquitted, and that by the constitution and by common sense, no man could be twice put in jeopardy for the same offence; that treason was one continued and indivisible act; and if it was infinitely divisible, that a man might be subject to infinite persecutions; that the United States had the evidence before them: they had then the selection of place to try Col. B. ; and if they had made a wrong selection, it was their own fault: that no instance had occurred in the English rebellions of '15 or '45, wherein a rebel had two trials; and that if such had been the usage in England, Lord George Gordon might have been tried in St. George's fields and be acquitted there, at Moorfields ; at Lincoln's Inn Field's ; at G. Queens Street &c.
3. That Col. B. had been already acquitted by an enquiry of a grand jury in the Mississippi Territory; that upon such a report here, a person in custody would be discharged; and after this discharge, could the court recommit him for the same offence?
The latter point is in effect abandoned by the accused, during the course of the argument. Col. B. however observed, it might address itself to the sound discretion of the court.
Mr. McRae , replied to Mr. Batts ; and expatiated over a wide field of argument & statement.
On Thursday, Mr. Hay resumed the argument—He was followed by Messrs. Martin & Wickham , who were answered by Mr. Wirt . Mr. Batts replied to Mr. Wirt .
On Friday Mr. Randolph closed the argument; after which the Chief Justice delivered the opinion of the court; that he had no power to commit for trial in the court for the Mississippi territory, and of consequence that it would be improper in him to go into any enquiry on a subject on which he cannot act; that as to the operation of the autre fois acquit his judgment was not decidedly formed; and that he should therefore hear the testimony relative to the conduct of the accused within the U.S. and should in the mean time reflect farther on this subject.
The attorney for the U.S. then proceeded with the examination of James M'Dowel , William Love , and Thomas Hartley , who were called in to prove the military assemblage at the mouth of Cumberland river. The testimony was not suffered to extend below the Chickasaw Bluffs; the south western frontier of Tennessee. Mr. Burr even objected to the admission of any evidence on the Mississippi; because the boundary of Tennessee did not extend beyond the margin of the river. This point was not definitely settled.
Mr. Hay observed, that he had one other witness to produce ( Jacob Dunbaugh ) relative to the assemblage at Cumberland river, who would prove a quantity of arms there collected; that he would then refer to the court, how far the evidence produced proved an overt act of treason; and if it did, that then he understood he was at liberty to proceed to produce his other testimony (within the U.S.) in the nature of collateral or auxiliary testimony.
Mr. Wickham proposed to introduce at the same time the witnesses of the accused relative to this same point.— Agreed .
WASHINGTON CITY, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 25.
NOTICE of the observations of Pacifcus and other writers.
(CONCLUDED.)
Pacifcus next charges the National Intelligencer with admitting that 250,000 merchants would be ruined and beggared by a war with Britain. Nothing can more completely prove the unfairness of this and other anonymous writers. No such admission has been made. No such intimation has been given. It is too absurd for any rational being to have conceived. For the whole number of merchants in the U.S. does not amount to one tenth part of the number. The view taken was this. It was admitted that a war would immediately derange the affairs of our mercantile citizens; that it might entirely interrupt their regular business; and that they would consequently be the first to feel its pressure. But it was not said they would be ruined, or ultimately be more injured than the other classes of society. On the contrary, the very hypothesis that converted our merchantmen into privateers and calculated on their making numerous captures, equivalent to our loss of regular trade, implied the continuance of much mercantile business, however the ordinary course of that business might be changed.
It was contended in this paper as far from improbable that the value of our domestic productions would not greatly sink in case of a war with Britain. This is disputed by Pacifcus . It will be admitted to be a disputable point, as the value of our produce will depend upon the nature of the war, and of the provisions that shall be adopted by our government.
It is most certain that G. Britain will, if she can, obtain from us those supplies of articles of subsistence and raw materials either essential to her existence or power, and for this purpose be ready, if other modes are not adopted, to open neutral channels for her supply. It is equally certain that she will be solicitous for us to continue the consumers of her manufactures, and will adopt the same mode of supplying them, if we permit her. In this case there would be no great fall in the price of produce, after the first shock occasioned by the war. In this event the loss of trade to each nation would be the same. But there would be this difference in the effect produced. In this country, such is the immensity of the field for capital, that the merchant would without any great injury employ his capital in internal occupations; while in England, where every thing is overdone, this could not be effected without great loss. Let us, likewise, take this consideration along with us, that the very circumstances, which in this country offered new and additional inducements to manufactures, would in that country even diminish the ordinary inducements to carry on those already in existence.
In the next place, should our privateers be as successful as they might be, it will not be denied that either no reduction, or a very small one would take place.
But supposing neither of these results, it is probable that the government would adopt measures whose tendency would be to establish a large body of manufacturers in addition to those in existence. Now, supposing the production of the laboring class to be equal to their consumption, and it does not greatly exceed it, and estimating our surplus produce at fifty millions, 60,000 adult males, with a proportionate number of women and children, at present engaged in agricultural pursuits, withdrawn from the plough and engaged in manufactures, would have the two fold effect of lessening the quality of our surplus produce, and increasing manufactures among ourselves to such a degree as to render us entirely independent of foreign trade, on the supposition that we could supply among ourselves all our wants. This is not, however, precisely the case. But a full exertion of all our faculties towards the supply of our own wants among ourselves would leave but a small balance of wants to be provided for in foreign commerce. On this point there is one most important consideration, and it is here stated, principally for the purpose of repelling the insinuation that the New England states would be the victims of a war with Britain. That very section of the union, at present eminently the seat of trade and navigation, would, should our foreign trade be cut off, become the seat of manufactures. If this should not prove a full equivalent for the loss of her trade, it would undoubtedly lessen it in a high degree. Indeed, if the opinions of intelligent men be consulted, it does admit of question, whether the profits of manufactures in the U.S. do not exceed those of trade.
But it seems the revenue of the government would be greatly diminished by a war, and the means of carrying it on be correspondently impaired. Indeed, in case of a war we are threatened with a total destruction of the whole revenues of the U.S. which are said to be exclusively derived from commerce. Our commerce, it is alleged, would be totally destroyed, and the duties would fall with it.
In what degree our imports and exports would be diminished is extremely problematical, or whether they would be diminished at all. Our regular trade would unquestionably be decreased; but it does not follow that we should not be supplied as fully with goods either taken by our privateers or received through neutral channels, in which
case the revenue would remain unimpaired.
But admitting, for the sake of argument, that our importations would be considerably diminished, does it follow that the ability to obtain revenue would be proportionably diminished, much less that the whole revenues would be annihilated?
Even supposing a total cessation of imports—a supposition too Quixotic to be entertained by any rational being—have we no other sources of revenue, either actually opened, or capable of being opened? Where is the great resource of Western lands, and the great sum due in the shape of custom house bonds? Wild these too be annihilated? These are sources of revenue actually opened. Where too is the immense mass of real and personal estate equally subject to taxation, and the extensive list of articles of consumption, all of which are the subjects of federal taxation. But, says Pacifcus , the government dare not resort to these revenues—direct taxes and excises are odious—they would not be submitted to; they would destroy the popularity of those who imposed them.
Miserable sophistry! Because the imposition of these taxes, backed by an alien and sedition act, and various other abuses of power, humbled a former administration, is it to be inferred that it would destroy the present administration? It is never once beamed on the mind of Pacifcus , that it was not so much the nature of those taxes that rendered them odious, as the manner of their imposition, and still more, the alleged objects for which they were imposed. It was because the measures of the government were odious which produced a necessity for their imposition that principally made them unpopular; it was because the people had no confidence in those who imposed them; it was because a general alarm had gone forth that they would be the means of enslaving the nation. These are the principal reasons why they were odious. They were not deemed necessary for subserving the general interests. This impression was of itself sufficient to damp them. For it has been almost universally admitted that nothing short of necessity can justify their imposition. At the adoption of the constitution such was the declaration and pledge of its greatest advocates.
But let this necessity once exist—let an occasion present itself that requires an exertion of all our resources—let a war with Britain for the maintenance of our essential rights be once begun, and it will be found, we boldly say it, that the people of America will unhesitatingly carry into effect every measure that an honest and beloved government shall propose, which they possess the power of doing. A direct tax and an excise will, under such circumstances, have no terrors. The people will be satisfied that these taxes are only imposed from necessity; and that they will be relieved from their pressure the moment such necessity ceases to exist. They will see that they are required by the public good, and directed to its advancement.
It is not, however, probable that a resort to these taxes will, in case of a war, become necessary.
For we shall have—
In the first place, a sum of eight millions of dollars in the treasury;
Secondly, We shall have about twenty millions in custom house bonds, payable within two years.
And thirdly, We shall have a vast resource in public lands, which already yield above a million of dollars every year; and which might, by a reduction of the price, yield at least three millions.
Supposing then we should not receive a dollar for imports, we might, notwithstanding, from these resources command the following revenue.
The first year.
   DOLLARS.     From money in the treasury 8,000,000   From custom-house bonds, say one half 10,000,000   From sale of public lands, 3,000,000  
Making altogether twenty-one millions, which exceeds the ordinary annual receipts by above seven millions.
The second year.
   From balance of custom-house bonds, 10,000,000   From sale of public lands, 3,000,000   13,000,000  
Which is about equal to the present revenue of the U.S. States.
Of the revenues of the government, about five millions is devoted to the gradual extinguishment of the principal of the debt. This might, during a period of war, be suspended with the consent of the public creditors, which would be given with cheerfulness, and would leave for objects connected with the prosecution of the war, thirteen millions of dollars the first year & five millions the second year.
Supposing that only half the ordinary importations should continue during a period of war, without any augmentation of duties, there would be a revenue, applicable to these objects, of eighteen millions the first, and eleven millions the second year.
Is there any reason for despondency at this picture, the fidelity of which cannot be impeached? Let not then this view of the subject instil fear into our minds, or confidence into that of our enemies, internal or external. Should the contest in a just cause prove ever so expensive, we should teach our enemies that taxes equally laid, and impartially applied to the public good, may be collected, under a free government to almost any amount. Such is the declaration of Montesquieu himself, a splendid authority on subjects of political economy, and the more to be depended upon in this just eulogium on republican go-

vernments, as he was no enthusiastic admirer of them.
There is still one view to be taken on this point, that is all important. The advancing population of the U. S. is rapid without parallel, and its wealth has been found to grow with still greater rapidity. The revenue derived from imports alone has for a number of years past increased at the rate of half a million a year. With this advance would rise the ability of the U. S. in case of urgency to increase her expenditures. It is true that during the continuance of hostilities this resource could not implicitly be relied on. But, there can be no doubt but that on their discontinuance we should immediately, or very soon after, return to the situation in which we were antecedently to them, with augmented numbers and wealth. The progressive increase of our ordinary revenues at the rate of half a million a year would, calculating the interest of money at 6 per cent, enable us to borrow about eight millions a year, without the least sensible increase of the public burthens, in consequence of which no man would pay more taxes than he previously did to the government. Let it not be inferred from this that we are the friends of increasing the public debt. No such thing. We hope that no necessity will exist for such a measure. But in case it should, it is important to prove that such a step may be taken without increasing the quota paid by each individual.
From this statement it follows, that in case of a war, we should be able, without the imposition of a single new tax, or making any new loan, to command the first year a revenue applicable to carrying on the war of eighteen millions, in addition to the sum of three millions at present applicable to the national defence, making in the whole twenty-one millions; and the second year sixteen millions.
It is extremely probable that Britain would before the end of this period recover her senses, and permit the amicable relations of the two countries to be renewed. Indeed there is every reason to calculate on the demise of her present monarch before that time, and on a consequent total change in her conduct towards us.
Suppose, however, that we should be mistaken in this opinion, as well as in the nature of the war waged with Britain—suppose it should be of such a character as to call for much greater expenditures on our part, and that it should extend even to a period of seven years. Let us enquire into the means we should possess of carrying it on.
In such a contest it is assumed as certain that there would be no deficiency of national spirit, that the voice of disaffection would be compelled by the force of public sentiment to be silent as the grave; and that the only thing called for would be a full development of our resources. The question then presents itself, what these resources would be without exhausting our strength or drying up the sources of our permanent prosperity.
  In the first year of the war we should be able to command, as we have seen, independently of new taxes or loans, 21,000,000   Secondly, we should be able to raise by way of loan, 8,000,000   Thirdly, we could easily raise by direct taxes and excises, 3,000,000   Making altogether 32,000,000   In the second year, we should be able to command, without new taxes, By loan and new taxes, 16,000,000 11,000,000   Making 27,000,000   In the third year, without new taxes, From loan and new taxes, 4,000,000 11,000,000   15,000,000 
At which sum the revenues of the remaining four years would continue to stand.
These, let it be remembered, are the amounts applicable to the national defence, independently of the support of the civil list.
Further, should we be driven to that kind of exertion, which was displayed during the revolutionary war, we should be able, instead of bearing the imposition of new taxes to the amount of three millions a year, to bear their imposition to the amount of at least ten millions, and still be less oppressed by taxation than any nation in Europe.
Who is there, who, after this view of the subject, can question the ability of the U. S. to meet a contest with any power whatever that may infringe our rights, to carry it on with vigor, and to conduct it to a successful issue.
But, it ought not to be forgotten that all these views originated in a comparison of the effects of a war on the U. S. and Great Britain. This is the true point of light. War will unquestionably bring with it great evils to us; but the point is whether it will not bring with it still greater to Britain.
This enquiry has been already abundantly made. We shall not, therefore, fatigue the reader by going over it again. A few considerations are sufficient to convince any sound mind that deep injuries would ensue to her, that a mortal blow might be given to her power, perhaps to her existence.
War would impair her existing means—while it increased the necessity for their augmentation.
She has already exhausted her resources. National bankruptcy stares her in the face. The day of this dreadful calamity must soon arrive, and with it her political establishments will be sunk to their centre. Her credit will be gone, and with it the sinews of her power.
A war with us would drive her manufacturers to the United States; and it would likewise give us a large portion of the wealth of her subjects.
What would she get in return? Our commerce? No—she would be driven, from the necessity of the case, to save her own manufacturers from starving, to build up a neutral commercial power, that would interchange her manufactures for our raw materials. For it would be equally ruinous to her to withhold the former, or be unsupplied with the latter.
We shall here close these remarks, already, perhaps, in the opinion of the reader, protracted to an unnecessary length. Desultory they are admitted to be; but this has arisen principally from pursuing the track of a writer, who certainly does not add to his other high qualifications the lucidus ordo , deemed so essential by the ancients to good writing. The plain truth is that the apologists of Britain have neither argument or fact on their side in the present instance. Impelled by two motives—personal hostility to the existing administration, and predilection for the British system of government,—they are constantly precipitated by feeling or folly into the ravings of morbid ambition or the eulogies of perverted understandings. The storm of their own passions renders them insensible either to the still voice of conscience, or to the general and commanding confidence with which those at the head of the government are surrounded. Thus they continue vainly to beat their heads against a rock, without being conscious that they only are the sufferers.
Joseph Calhoun is elected a member of the House of Representatives of the U. S. for the state of South Carolina, in the room of Levi Casey, deceased.
Flour, inspected in the town of Alexandria, for the quarter, ending the 11th of September, 1807— 35,252 barrels flour, 1,854 half barrels flour. AMOS ALEXANDER, Flour Inspector.
We understand that the venerable John Dickinson has consented to stand a poll as a member of the House of Representatives of the U. S. from the state of Delaware. Respected for his talents, revered for his virtues, venerated for his experience, and grown old in the practice of republican efforts and principles, this sacrifice of public wishes for the general good must receive the plaudits of his countrymen.
Balt. E. Post.
Alexandria, September 22. Thomas Stockdale, a citizen of the U. S. and born in Harford county, Maryland, arrived at this place on Sunday morning last by land, from Lynn Haven Bay, having about 8 or 9 days since made his escape from the British ship Tamar, captain Robison—he states that they sent him together with two officers and five seamen on shore in disguise, to procure fresh provisions—that while the officers were at a farmer's house procuring them, he, the said Stockdale, with two other seamen (Englishmen) made their escape through the country, the two Englishmen went to Norfolk, and he having been registered as a seaman in the collector's office of Alexandria, made his way here, after having been on board said vessel for 3 years—he never accepted any of his majesty's bounty.
The farmers at Lynn Haven Bay are in the practice of furnishing the officers of the British ships with fresh provisions, in consequence of their going on shore and calling themselves Americans, being in disguise as such.
We learn from private letters received from Malta, that a strong suspicion existed of Sir Thomas Louis having been poisoned at Alexandria. He had dined ashore, attended by his servant, and soon after their return on board the Canopus, both were taken ill about the same time, and died in a few hours after.
Lon. pap.
Lexington, September 1. By a gentleman from the state of Ohio we learn, that a number of the neighboring Indians have come into our settlements, and claim the protection of the U. S.—having been threatened by the Northern Indians on the lakes, that if they did not unite with them in a war against the U. S. they should be attacked by the said Northern Indians.
FROM THE AURORA. Extract from an officer of the U. S. dated at cantonments, on the Missouri near S. Louis, August 15, 1807. "I have this day seen T. Bates, Esq. the acting governor of this territory.—He appears to be very apprehensive of some hostile intentions of the Indians on the Mississippi above this. He thinks the detachment of the U. S. troops arrived here in very good time to check or damp them. The British agents & traders on the Mississippi and the Missouri rivers are I am certain doing every thing in their power to make the Indians unfriendly to the U. S."
Extract of a letter from a gentleman in the western country, to his friend in this city, dated August 31, 1807.
"Nothing material has transpired since I wrote you last, except much alarm has been excited in the back settlements, from disaffected Indians of several nations, and it appears to increase with some foundation. Last night arrived here, an express from Urbana, stating the apprehensions of the people in general, and the move-
ments and positions of the Indians in various quarters, which appear not very pacific; there are upwards of 11 or 1200 embodied and armed, within the vicinity of Fort Wayne, & several other tribes in different parts of the country, which are chiefly composed of the Chippewas, Pottawatomies and Shawanese Indians—they have been encouraged & allured, of late, to come into the settlements to see a Prophet, as he is termed, who boasts of supernatural power, and pretends great friendship in advocating their cause, and tells them they have an equal right to all the country round—but the chiefs give no credit to the stories propagated of his miracles and powers."
Extract of a letter to the editor, dated Providence, R. I. September 15. "The satisfaction generally derived from the frequent notices in the Aurora of the manufactures daily introduced & improved in our country, is so great, at the present moment especially, that I cannot resist my inclination to inform you of the flourishing state of the cotton manufactory in this quarter of the union; that is, to furnish you with the number merely of the buildings erected, and of the spindles now completed and in motion, and of those about to be finished and set in motion in the same buildings."
"There are 17 buildings erected upon the streams in this neighborhood, in which are, already, 6000 spindles in operation, and in which there will shortly be an addition of 14,026, making in the whole 20,116 spindles. These manufactories are all within 30 miles of this town, and seven-eighths the property of citizens of this state."
PHILO MUSSEAN SOCIETY. Omnia debentur morti: paulumque morati, Serius aut citius sedem proferamus ad unum.
On Thursday the 3rd of September inst. Mr. JAMES TOOMY, late teacher of the Latin language, at Charlotte-Hall School, after a short illness, departed this life; leaving a disconsolate widow to lament the loss of an affectionate husband. From a due respect to the memory of a faithful instructor, and as a testimony of attachment to a valuable associate, Resolved, that every member of this society wear a black crape around the left arm for one month.
Signed by order, FERDINAND S. CAMPBELL, Ck. Charlotte-Hall, St. Mary's county, Sept. 20, 1807.
New York, Sept. 21. Captain Jenkins, of the ship Ann, informs us that the city of Bordeaux was illuminated on the 1st of August, for three days, in consequence of the peace on the Continent; and that Bonaparte arrived in Paris from the Grand Army, on the 27th of July.
(By Authority.)
AN ACT, Making an appropriation for sinking and repairing wells, and the erection and repair of pumps.
BE it enacted by the First and Second Chambers of the City Council of Washington, That for the purpose of sinking and repairing of wells, and of erecting and repairing of pumps in the avenues and streets of the city of Washington from the first Monday in June 1807, and to make good the deficiencies in the appropriations of the last year for similar objects, the sum of eight hundred dollars be, and the same is hereby appropriated and shall be expended under the direction of the Mayor of the city, provided, that in all such repairs hereafter to be made the individual contribution shall be equal to the amount expended by the public in all cases when the expenditure shall exceed five dollars.
APPROVED, SEPTEMBER 22, 1807.
WRIGHT or BREAD, Agreeable to an Act of the Corporation passed the 17th April, 1806. Single loaf, 23 ounces. Double loaf, 46 ounces.
Price of Flour, 5 dollars 50 cents per barrel.
ROBERT BRENT, Mayor of Washington. September 23, 1807.
At a Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Institution for the education of Youth in the city of Washington, It was resolved that the Election of PRINCIPAL TEACHER for the Western School, be postponed until the 2nd Monday in October next, and that applications for the said place be received by the Secretary until that day.
WASHINGTON BOYD, Secretary to the Board of Trustees. September 23—31
NOTICE, Several persons having trespassed upon my farm by pulling down my fences and riding through it, I take this method to caution and forewarn all persons against committing trespasses on it in future; and I will adopt legal measures to obtain redress in case they shall be repeated.
ANNE SOPER, Prince George's County, S. p. 25—3.
DRY GOODS. Just received and for sale at prime cost,
A Consignment of fresh imported Fall goods—consisting of superfine Broad Cloths—black and violet colored silk velvets—J. Nerson's cord—Gloves, &c. Apply to H. ABORN, 14th Street.
Sept. 26—3.
INDEPENDENT WASHINGTON VOLUNTEERS.
THE Members of the Independent Washington Volunteers, are requested to muster on the Parade Ground near the Centre Market, on SUNDAY morning the 27th inst. at Sun rise. CHARLES JONES, Captain. September 23—
TENNESSEE COMPANY.
A MEETING of the Stockholders is requested on the first day of November next, at MECHANIC'S HALL in the city of New York. A punctual attendance is requested by all the Stockholders in person, or by attorney, on business of the first importance to the Company. B. JACKSON, Surviving Trustee. September 23 1806
PROSPECTUS.
THE Subscriber has long been impressed with an opinion, that a newspaper which should concentrate important factual facts, daily or national improvements, (particularly those arising from canals and turnpikes) exhibit the advantages of labor saving machinery, and careful agriculture, in short that a paper which should regularly have a specific portion of its columns devoted to political economy, would be useful to his country, as tending to convince his fellow citizens of truths, of which all may not be sufficiently aware are essential to render the United States independent, respectable and happy.
Such an idea has frequently been canvassed among the friends of the Subscriber, and as they agreed with him as to the advantages which might be diffused thereby, they have often urged him to commence such an establishment. Many difficulties originating in his ignorance of the mechanics part of the business and other causes, long rendered such an attempt however desirable impossible yet he never ceased anxiously to hope, the day would come when he might be enabled to undertake it—this anxiety has been tenfold increased by the late daring and profligate attack on the Chesapeake whilst the necessity of disseminating by means of a newspaper (the most popular of all modes) such information, as might tend to free us from the shackles of foreign nations and promote within our own territory the consumption of our own wheat, barley, hops, cotton, flax, hemp, iron, pitch, tar, turpentine, beef, pork, as well as a number of other raw and manufactured articles, thereby securing to our own agriculturalists (the best support of our country) a sure stimulus and efficient reward for their labor, has been felt and acknowledged by every true friend to the United States. Under these impressions, the subscriber proposes to commence such an establishment, and then don't a constant view of the importance of agriculture and the arts, induce one individual in addition to our Franklins, Rittenhoules and Fulton's, to emulate the perseverance and talents of a Brindley—a Bolton, a Bakewell, an Arkwright or a Parker, or lead one of our wealthiest countrymen to extend to the most important objects of political economy, the useful liberality of a Russel, a Coke or a Burdett, it will be attended with infinite advantages to the U. States and richly repay the labors of the Editor.
On these accounts the subscriber has determined to move his establishment to Washington city, emphatically denominated the Heart of the Union, as likely soon to become the seat of science and the nursery of the arts.
Some time then in September next will be published the 1st number of a weekly newspaper, entitled,
The Washington Expositor,
or
WEEKLY REGISTER.
Having it believed, surmounted the difficulties hitherto experienced by the subscriber he has completed such arrangements, as will enable him, to present to his patrons a correct fleet in a handsome dress, which will contain.
1st. Statistical facts, particularly such as relate to national improvements, navigable canals, and turnpike roads.
2d. Facts respecting the practice of husbandry, including reviews of, and extracts from the best books, which can be procured on that important subject.
3d. Views of the various mechanic improvements by which labor has been economized.
4th A constant tendency to support the great distinguishing principles of federal America, viz. The right of every man who pays a tax or carries a gun in defence of his country, to the enjoyment of an equal suffrage, the right of every man to the free exercise of his own religious opinion, as well as, that the vessel of every citizen of the United States like his house should be his castle, free from obstruction of search.
With such views the Expositor will be printed on a good white paper, of a royal size, with handsome type.
The price to subscribers will be 3 dollars per annum.
As considerable labor and expence will be connected with this establishment, no paper will be forwarded to any subscriber without an advance of the subscription money.
In order to afford room for as much information and amusement as possible, after the first insertion, every advertisement will be published in a supplemental sheet.
All subscribers to the Alexandria Expositor who have hitherto paid with regularity, will be supplied with the contemplated paper, except special orders are received to the contrary.
Articles of intelligence, essays on general policy and the various circumstances connected with political economy, advertisements, &c. will be thankfully received at the office.
Letters relative to the business of the paper must be addressed Post Paid to the Expositor Office Washington city, otherwise they will not be taken up.
Subscriptions will be received at the Office in Washington city, and Mr. Mulligan's Georgetown.
The scheme of the paper, being detailed, it is only necessary to add, that when it receives adequate patronage, it will be rendered a semi-weekly paper, and to request of such Editors, as approve the plan, to give this Prospectus a few insertions and thereby oblige their fellow-citizen,
RICHARD DINMORE. August 27, 1807.
PROPOSALS, By CONRAD, LUCAS & Co. (late M. and F. Co.) No. 138, Market street, FOR PUBLISHING LEWIS AND CLARK'S TOUR TO THE PACIFIC OCEAN, THROUGH THE INTERIOR OF THE CONTINENT OF NORTH AMERICA, Performed by order of the government of the United States, during the years 1804, 1805, and 1806.
THIS work will be prepared by captain MERIWETHER LEWIS, and will be divided into two parts, the whole comprising in three volumes 2700, the first containing at least 700 pages, the second and third from four to five hundred each, printed on good paper, and a fair Pica type. The several volumes in succession will be put to press as early periods as the avocations of the author will permit him to prepare them for publication.
PART THE FIRST—IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOLUME FIRST. Will contain a narrative of the voyage, with a description of some of the most remarkable places in those hitherto unknown wilds of America, accompanied by a map of good size, a large chart of the entrance of the Columbia river embracing the adjacent country, coast and harbors, and embellished with views of two beautiful cascades of the Missouri; the plan, on a large scale, of the connected falls of that river, as also, of those of the falls, narrows and great rapids of the Columbia, with their several portages. For the information of future voyagers, there will be added in the sequel of this volume, some observations and remarks on the navigation of the Missouri and Columbia rivers, pointing out the precautions which must necessarily be taken, in order to ensure success, together with an itinerary of the most direct and practicable route across the continent of North America, from the confluence of the Missouri and the Mississippi rivers to the discharge of the Columbia into the Pacific Ocean.
VOLUME SECOND.
Whatever properly appertains to geography, embracing a description of the rivers, mountains, climate, soil and face of the country; a view of the Indian nations distributed over that vast region, showing their traditions, habits, manners, customs, national characters, stature, complexions, dress, dwellings, arms, and domestic utensils, with many others interesting particulars in relation to them; also, observations and reflections on the subjects of civilization, governing and maintaining a friendly intercourse with those nations. A view of the fur trade of North America, setting forth a plan for its extension, and showing the immense advantages which would accrue to the mercantile interests of the United States, by combining the same with a direct trade to the East Indies, through the continent of North America. This volume will be embellished with twenty plates illustrative of the dress and general appearance of such Indian nations as differ materially from each other; of their habitations; their weapons and habiliments used in war; their hunting and fishing apparatus; domestic utensils, &c. In an appendix there will also be given a diary of the weather kept with great attention throughout the whole of the voyage, showing also the daily rise and fall of the principal water courses which were navigated in the course of the same.
PART THE SECOND—IN ONE VOLUME.
This part of the work will be confined exclusively to scientific research, and principally to the natural history of those hitherto unknown regions. It will contain a full description on such subjects as may have fallen within the notice of the author and which may properly be distributed under the heads of Botany, Mineralogy, and Zoology, together with some notices on the origin of Prairies, the cause of the mudflats of the Missouri, of volcanic appearances, and other natural phenomena which were met with in the course of this interesting tour. This volume will also contain a comparative view of twenty three vocabularies of distinct Indian languages, procured by captains Lewis and Clark, on the voyage, and will be ornamented and embellished with a much greater number of plates than will be bestowed on the first part of the work as is intended that every subject of natural history which is entirely new, and of which there are a considerable number, shall be accompanied by an appropriate engraving illustrative of it.
This distribution of the work has been made with a view to the accommodation of every description of readers, and is here offered to the patronage of the public in such shape, that all persons wishing to become subscribers, may accommodate themselves with either of the parts, or the entire work, as it shall be most convenient to themselves.
Detached from this work, there will be published
LEWIS & CLARK'S
MAP OF NORTH AMERICA,
From Lon. 0 deg. west, to the Pacific Ocean, and between 36 deg. and 52 deg. north Lat. with extensive marginal notes—dimensions 5 feet 8 inches by 3 feet 10 inches.
Embracing all their late discoveries, and that part of the continent heretofore the least known. This map will be compiled from the best maps now extant, as well published as in manuscript, from the collective information of the best informed travellers through the various portions of that region, and corrected by a series of several hundred celestial observations, made by captain Lewis during his late tour.
For the convenience of subscribers, these several works will be delivered at the most respectable commercial towns and at the seats of government of the respective states and territories within the Union; no advance is required, nor will payment be demanded until such delivery is made.
The price of part the first in two vols. will be Ten DOLLARS, and that of part the second in one volume, Eleven DOLLARS, delivered in boards. Price of the Map Ten DOLLARS.
Any persons who may have fabricated for these works, to lists which contain no stipulated prices for the same, and who may be dissatisfied with the terms now proposed, are at liberty to withdraw their names from such lists, at any time prior to the 1st day of December next.
M. LEWIS. July 27.

New & Valuable BOOKS.
JUST received, and now opening, at D. RAPIN'S Book Store on Capitol Hill, a Choice and Valuable Collection of BOOKS and STATIONERY, which he will be happy to dispose of to his friends and customers on the most reasonable terms...
Dr. Rees' Cyclopaedia, Vol. 21. Part 1st, or the 9th half volume, is just received and ready for delivery...
BANK OF COLUMBIA, Sept. 17th, 1807. The President and Directors having this day declared a Dividend on the Capital Stock of the Bank for the half-year ending the 20th inst. at the rate of Eight per cent. per annum.
WILLIAM WHANN, Cashier. Sept. 18—5w. Charlotte Hall School. The Trustees of said School will receive applications for an appointment of an Assistant Master in the Latin language, on Thursday the 1st of October next.
CAPITOL of the UNITED STATES. NO Person whatever can be admitted into the South Wing of the Capitol, excepting those actually engaged in the work. It is hoped that the citizens will see the necessity of this restriction being general.
CHARLES H. VARDEN, Merchant Taylor, New Jersey Avenue, near the Capitol. RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia, he has imported by ship Eliza ANN lately arrived at Philad.
A choice assortment Of Extra Superfine cloths, Bennets, Velvets, and Cords, Cassimeres, single and double milled Satin cloths, fashionable Spanish Orleans and Toilets, rich silk Mouselin velvets, silk and satin Florentines, with a variety of other articles suitable for the season.
District of Columbia, to wit: BE it remembered that on the 15th day of August in the thirty second year of the Independence of the United States of America, WILLIAM CRANCH of the said district hath deposited in this office the title of a book the right whereof he claims as author, in the words following, to wit: "Reports of Cases argued and adjudged in the Supreme Court of the United States, in the years 1805 and 1806, Vol. III.—By WILLIAM CRANCH, Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of the district of Columbia."
SEAL of the district court of the district of Columbia. August 21—4w. G. DENEALE, Clerk of the district of Columbia.
PUBLIC NOTICE.
PURSUANT to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the United States, of the 3rd day of March last, directing the clerk of the said House to advertise for and receive separate proposals for supplying the said House during the next Congress, with the necessary Stationery, Printing, and Fuel wanted; separate contracts have been duly made and entered into, to wit: With Edgar Patterson, of Georgetown, in the District of Columbia, for the supply of Stationery—with Andrew and George Way, of the city of Washington in the said district of Columbia, for the Printing—and with George Gill, of the city and district aforesaid, for the Fuel, at the following prices, to wit:
FOR THE STATIONERY. Table with 3 columns: Item, D., C. Items include: Very best superfine English letter paper, per, hot pressed vellum; Best plain letter paper, not hot pressed; Best wove do. do.; Best plain folio paper, cut complete; Best wove do. do.; Best medium for engraving; Best superfine foolscap; Best ready made pens; Quills, from; Best superfine red wax; Best superfine black do.; Best quality red wafers, from; Best quality black do.; Common black sand in papers; Tin water boxes per dozen; Pouch box, from; Ink and sand glasses to suit tables, from; Half pint phials with corks; Low priced folders, 2 Ds. per dozen; Best polished ivory folders, 6 Ds. per dozen; Black lead pencils, from; Red tape in pieces, from; Best quality black ink per gallon; India rubbers; Best quality English parchment in skins; Best quality American do.; Office pens/knives, from each; Braiding knives.
FOR THE PRINTING. Table with 3 columns: Item, D., C. Items include: For plain work, octavo per sheet of 300 impressions; figure work, do. do. do.; rule and figure work do. do.; table work, medium, broad side do.; plain work, foolscap folio, per sheet of 300 impressions; figure work, do. do. do.; rule and figure work do. do.; table work, do. broad side do.; bills per sheet, foolscap, 300 impressions; folding each half sheet, octavo or folio per hundred; stitching per hundred, not exceeding 3 half sheets; do. do. from 3 half sheets to 6; do. do. from 6 do. to 10; do. do. from 10 do. to 20; folding whole sheet medium tables into octavo per 100; half binding and lettering an octavo volume from 300 to 500 pages; do. do. do. above 500 pages; full binding do. do. in sheep from 300 to 500 pages; do. do. do. in sheep above 500 pages; do. do. do. in calf from 300 to 500 pages; do. do. do. in calf above 500 pages; half binding and lettering foolscap folio per volume; full binding do. do. in sheep per volume; do. do. do. in calf do.
FOR THE FUEL. Good found Hickory Wood, delivered in the cellar at the Capitol at Nine Dollars and Seventy-five Cents per cord. Published by order of the House of Representatives of the United States. N. B. VAN ZANDT, P. Ck. H. R. U. S. September 1, 1807—3w.
Fifty Dollars Reward. RUNAWAY from the subscriber residing in the District of Columbia, on the first of August, 1807, a black man Named MOSER, about five feet 8 or 9 inches high, 25 years of age, has been a carpenter and is an excellent workman, he has a remarkable scar on the top of one of his feet something like the scar from a burn, believed to be on his right foot—he was dressed in an ozanburgh jacket and pantalettes, but may change both his name and dress. Ten dollars will be paid if found in this District, and the above Reward if out of the District and confined in any Jail so that I get him again. ROBERT ALEXANDER. Washington, August 19, 1807. tf.
LITERARY NOTICE.
WM. DUANE, of Philadelphia, will thank such Book-sellers, Printers, and others, as may have had the goodness to collect subscribers, for the LIFE & WORKS OF DR. FRANKLIN, about to be published by Wm. Duane, to forward to him lists of the subscribers, obtained, with particular directions relative to their residence, &c. Printers of newspapers, who have published the proposals for this extensive work, will add to the favors already conferred, by publishing the above in their respective papers, as often as convenient. WM. DUANE will also thank those, who have collected subscribers, for "POLITICS FOR FARMERS and MECHANICS," to inform him of their names and places of residence, without delay. July 13—
PROPOSALS
For carrying mails of the United States on the following routes will be received at the General Post Office until the 15th of October next. 1st. From Petersburg by Harrisville, Goldsboro, Drummondburg, Warrenton, Lewiston, Raleigh, and Averysboro, to Fayetteville, three times a week. Leave Petersburg every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 2 a.m., arrive at Warrenton, same days by 8 p.m. Leave Warrenton every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday at 3 a.m., arrive at Raleigh same days by 6 p.m. Leave Raleigh, Wednesday, Friday and Monday at 3 a.m., arrive at Fayetteville same days by 5 p.m. Returning—Leave Fayetteville every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday at 4 a.m., arrive at Raleigh same days by 6 p.m. Leave Raleigh every Wednesday, Friday, and Monday at 3 a.m., arrive at Warrenton same days by 6 p.m. Leave Warrenton, every Thursday, Saturday and Tuesday at 3 a.m., arrive at Petersburg same days by 8 p.m. 2nd. From Fayetteville by Lumberton, Barfield's Mill, Potts ferry, Ozauque and Georgetown to Charleston three times a week. Leave Fayetteville every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, at 4 a.m., arrive at Port-ferrey on, arrive at Georgetown, on Wednesday, Friday and Monday by 6 p.m. Leave Georgetown every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday at 2 a.m., arrive at Charleston same days by 4 p.m. Returning—Leave Charleston every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 5 a.m., arrive at Georgetown same days by 6 p.m. Leave Georgetown every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday at 2 a.m., arrive at Port-ferrey on, arrive at Fayetteville on Wednesday, Friday and Monday by 6 p.m.
NOTES. 1. The Post master general may expedite the mails, & alter the times of arrival and departure at any time during the continuance of the contracts, he stipulating an adequate compensation for any extra expense that may be occasioned thereby. 2. Fifteen minutes shall be allowed for opening and closing the mail 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 mail is delayed for each succeeding mail, one dollar, an additional forfeiture of five dollars shall be incurred. 4. Newspapers, as well as letters, 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 rate 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 proper 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 any 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 January next, & to continue in force until the 31st day of March 1810. GIDEON GEANGER, Post master general. General Post-Office Washington city, July 31—tOct 15
20 DOLLARS REWARD.
RUNAWAY from the subscriber in August last, Negro CHARLES—he is a straight well made black man, about 26 years of age, 5 feet 9 or 10 inches high; has lost some of his fore teeth; is remarkably polite and much of a gallant. The above reward will be paid to any person who will bring him again or lodge him any jail so that I get him again. WM. B. BEANES. Upper Marlinton, Jan 9—tawtf
FOR SALE OR RENT.
THE subscriber will SELL or RENT the HOTEL, situated on the Capitol Hill and near to the Capitol, at present occupied by Mr. P. D. SPILLE. As this house is well known, it is useless to say more than that it is calculated for a large establishment, and is the first situation as a hotel on a large scale in this city. Possession can be had the first day of October next. Some other houses for Sale or Rent on the Hill near the Capitol. For terms, apply to DANL. CARROLL of Dudn. Washington, August 5—2awtf
FOR SALE.
A valuable tract of land called Westbury, containing 1464 acres, situated in Anne Arundel County, state of Maryland, at the head of West river 12 miles from Annapolis, and 42 from Baltimore. This land is well calculated to produce wheat, tobacco and corn, has a large quantity of timber suitable for ship building, and most excellent meadow. The timber lies near the river which is navigable for large vessels into the Chesapeake, six miles from the landing. It is divided into two handsome farms, the one containing 746 acres, and the other 718 acres, each having a good landing on the river, and will be sold together or separately. A further description is deemed unnecessary, as it is presumed no person will purchase without first viewing the property which will be shown by Mr. John Shew, residing thereon. For terms apply to William Cooke, Esq. Baltimore, or John Galloway, Esq. West river, or to Henry K. Wadde, Esq. Philadelphia. B. It is not said at what price it will be sold at the end of November next, it will then be sold at auction on the premises, either separately or together to the highest bidder. Sep. 12—2awtf.
EDITORIAL ADDRESS.
In the early part of June the Editor intimated his purpose to retire from the establishment of the National Intelligencer, and invited the offers of individuals disposed to enter on its superintendence. His principal inducement, for taking this step, was a regard to the general state of his health, which had been, in no small degree, affected by the incessant occupation required by his situation. At the time this purpose was avowed, it was accompanied by a determination not to suffer the establishment, on any account whatever, to pass into hands, either unfriendly to the great political principles uniformly advocated by the National Intelligencer, or incompetent to its management. For although the period was, almost without a precedent, peaceful and prosperous, it was obvious that, as all nations are exposed to vicissitudes, a profound calm might be succeeded in the political world, by a storm that would call for the exercise of all the talents and virtues of the friends of principles, which seem to be exclusively confided to the safe keeping of the United States. In advocating these principles, and defending those who have been the most distinguished in supporting them, the Editor lays no claim to merit on the score of talent. He does, however, lay claim to the virtue of fidelity; to a sincere belief both in the superiority and feasibility of republican government, and in a firm determination to contribute whatever is in his power towards its maintenance. However weakly, therefore, he may defend, it is impossible for him to betray this great cause. But a short time elapsed, from the time of his making known his purpose, before a totally unlooked for aggression on the national rights occurred, which threatened to disturb the peace of the country, and seemed not unlikely to be the prelude of times in which the sincerity of principle would be exposed to an unusually severe ordeal, and which would claim from every citizen the best exertion of his faculties. This invigorated the resolution, originally formed, not to surrender the establishment into hands on whom the fullest reliance could not be placed. A considerable time has since passed without any offer being made, which has been considered satisfactory on this ground. The Editor, has, therefore, determined to continue to superintend the National Intelligencer. In communicating this intention to the public, he has only to observe that the same principles, which have hitherto guided the discharge of his Editorial duties, remain unshaken, and from which it is his pride never to have swerved. Every conviction of his understanding has increased his attachment to them; and his purpose to defend those measures which are the best calculated to preserve them inviolate. He conscientiously believes the existing administration have uprightly and wisely discharged their duties. He is, therefore, the friend of that administration, and whatever new dangers may environ them, from the injustice of foreign powers, or from internal machinations, he shall view in the light of new motives to exertion. Looking forward to the ensuing session of Congress as probably one of the most interesting since the era of the present government, he has exerted himself in making arrangements, which he trusts will render the National Intelligencer the full and faithful organ, as well of the proceedings of the government as of the public sentiment. With this view, and to relieve himself from a burthen peculiarly oppressive when united with other duties, he has engaged the services of Mr. JOSEPH GALES, Jun. an able Stenographer, who, with the additional aid contemplated to be furnished by one of the first Stenographers in America, will, it is expected, be fully competent to presenting a comprehensive and faithful statement of the Debates. This arrangement will leave the Editor more time, than would otherwise be at his disposition, for conducting the other departments of the paper, and particularly for the notice of such points as may during the session require elucidation or comment. More regard will likewise be paid to the mechanical management of the paper. For some time past, the Editor has had to regret the necessary use of an inferior paper, and of a press somewhat out of repair, from his inability immediately to retrieve at the City of Washington the disappointment experienced in these respects. He has, however, entered into a new contract for the supply of a better paper, and there are already on the water on their way from Philadelphia, a New Press and fount of letter. He thus flatters himself with being able to make the National Intelligencer before the sitting of Congress, not only worthy of the patronage which it now enjoys, but likewise of an extended subscription. The great additional expenses which will be incurred render it indispensable that Subscribers should be punctual in their payments. It is, therefore, expected that every new Subscriber advance five dollars, the price for a year, at the period of subscription, and that the existing subscribers pay off their arrears and make the necessary advance before the opening of the session. Should this circumstance not be attended to, the transmission of the papers must be discontinued. Subscribers will recollect that subscriptions cannot be received for less than a year, and that the postage of letters must be paid.
GENERAL NOTICE.
THE BOARD of CITY COMMISSIONERS, appointed in pursuance of an act of the City Council passed the 30th of May last, having entered on the duties of their office, hereby inform all whom it may concern, that as the superintendence of the execution of all the laws of the council has been assigned to them, they are determined to obtain from every source of information a knowledge of every instance of a non-compliance thereof, and infractions of them; and where a strict compliance is not made, or infractions discontinued, after this notice to prosecute for the same. The Commissioners recommend an attentive perusal of the following laws of the City Council.
First Council. "An act to establish and regulate markets," passed October 6th, 1802. "An act for laying a tax on hackney carriages, theatrical and other public amusements," passed 28th October, 1802. "An act to regulate weights and measures," passed 19th November, 1802. "An act to provide for the prevention and extinction of fires," passed 10th January, 1803. "An act for the preservation of foot ways and trees on the streets and avenues in the city," passed March 25th, 1803. "An act requiring annual licences to be taken out by pedlars and ordinary keepers, and for the keeping of carriages and billiard tables," passed the 25th May, 1803.
Second Council. "An act supplementary to the act to establish and regulate markets," passed 12th September, 1803. "An act concerning nuisances, and creating a superintendent of police," passed 20th September, 1803. "Section 9 of "An act, imposing certain taxes and providing for their collection," passed 12th September, 1803. "An act supplementary to an act for laying a tax on hackney carriages, theatrical and other public amusements," passed 26th November, 1803. Third Council. "An act requiring annual licences to be taken out by ordinary or tavern keepers, retailers and hawkers or pedlars," passed 19th July, 1804. The 3 and 4 sections of "An act making an appropriation for sinking wells, the erection and repair of pumps, and for the preservation thereof," passed 13th May, 1805. "An act for the better collection of the tax on private and hackney carriages," passed 10th December, 1804. "An act amendatory to an act concerning nuisances, and creating a superintendent of police," passed 23 May, 1805.
Fourth Council. "An act for licensing and regulating auctions in the city of Washington," passed 10th February, 1806. "An act concerning markets," passed March 29th, 1805. "An act supplementary to the acts licensing hackney carriages within the city of Washington," passed April 17, 1806. "An act regulating the weight and quality of bread," passed the 17th April, 1806.
Fifth Council. "An act supplementary to the act, to regulate weights and measures," passed 2d November, 1806. "An act to establish a market at the market house on the market square at the Eastern Branch, and for other purposes," passed 28th November, 1806. "An act to establish the size of brick moulds in the city of Washington," passed 19th March, 1807. MICHAEL MOURSE } City THOS. H. GILLISS } Commis- DANL. RAPINE, } sioners. GEORGE COLLAND, }
This is to give notice, That the subscriber of Georgetown in the district of Columbia, hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of Washington county, and district aforesaid, letters of administration on the personal estate of Christopher Richmond, late of the said county, deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased, are hereby warned and required to exhibit the same with the vouchers thereof to the subscriber on or before the 20th day of March next, or the same otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Those claiming indebted to the deceased are requested to make immediate payment. All claims forwarded by mail must be post paid. JOSEPH CARLETON. Georgetown, September 18—taw4w
By the Orphans Court of Saint Mary's county—June Term, 1807. ORDERED That Joseph Edwards, administrator of Stourton Edwards, late of St. Mary's county, deceased, give the notice required by law for creditors to exhibit their claims against the estate of the said deceased, and that the same be published once a week for six weeks, in the Washington Federalist and National Intelligencer. In testimony whereof I have set my hand this 9th day of June, A. D 1807. JAMES FORREST, Reg. Willa for Saint Mary's county.
This is to give notice, that the subscriber of St. Mary's county, hath obtained from the Orphan's court of St. Mary's County in Maryland letters of administration on the personal estate of Stourton Edwards, late of the county aforesaid, deceased—all persons having claims against the said deceased, are hereby warned to exhibit the same, with the vouchers thereof, to the subscriber, at or before the 9th day of December next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Given under my hand, this 9th day of June, 1807. JOSEPH EDWARDS, Adm. Sept. 18—w6t.