The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-04-06 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1167.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
BY AUTHORITY.
AN ACT
Authorizing a detachment from the militia of the United States.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized, at such times as he shall deem necessary, to require of the executives of the several states and territories to take effectual measures to organize, arm and equip, according to law, and hold in readiness to march at a moment's warning, their respective proportions of one hundred thousand militia, officers included, to be apportioned by the President of the United States from the latest militia returns in the department of war, and in cases where such returns have not been made by such other date as he shall judge equitable.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the executives of the several states and territories may accept, as part of the said detachment, any corps of volunteers who shall engage to continue in service six months after they arrive at the place of rendezvous.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the detachment of militia and volunteers aforesaid, shall be officered out of the present militia officers, or others, at the option and discretion of the constitutional authority in the respective states and territories, the President appointing the general officers, among the respective states and territories as he may deem proper.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the said detachments shall not be compelled to serve a longer time than six months after they arrive at the place of rendezvous, and that during the time of their service, they shall be entitled to the same pay, rations, and allowance for clothing as are established by law for the army of the United States.
Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized to call into actual service any part, or the whole of said detachment, when he shall judge that the exigencies of the United States require it; and, if a part only of said detachment shall be called into actual service, they shall be taken from such part thereof as the President of the United States shall deem proper.
Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That a sum not exceeding one million of dollars be, and the same is hereby appropriated, out of any monies in the treasury, not otherwise appropriated, for the pay, subsistence, and support of such part of said detachment as may be called into actual service.
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That this act shall continue and be in force for the term of two years from the passing thereof, and no longer.
J. B. VARNUM,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
GEO: CLINTON,
Vice-President of the United States and President of the Senate.
MARCH 30, 1808.
APPROVED,
TH: JEFFERSON.
40 DOLLARS REWARD.
FOR apprehending and delivering Negro HARRY to the subscriber in the city of Washington or twenty-five dollars for securing said slave so that I get him again. Harry ran off on the 11th day of March 1808, he is about 5 feet 7 or 8 inches high, well made, thick lips, light black color, has the wool shaved off the back of the head the size of a dollar, and a scar on the same, and a small wen on the breast; had on when he went off a blue cloth coatee, drab color bear skin round jacket (as a spender) Harry was purchased of Mr. George Cole of Poplar Hill, Saint Mary's county.
N. B. Having reason to believe that he was persuaded and aided in his elopement, I offer 50 dollars reward to any person who will prove to conviction in a court of justice the person guilty of such acts.
PETER LENOX.
April 6—tawtf
THIS is to give notice that the subscribers of Washington county district of Columbia have outlined from the Orphan's court of the county and district aforesaid, letters of administration on the personal estate of Addison Murdock, deceased, late of the county aforesaid. All persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same with the vouchers thereof, to the subscribers, on or before the 2nd day of October next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate.
Given under our hands this 2nd day of April 1908.
MARIANNE C. MURDOCK, GEORGE FRENCH, Administrators.
April 6—w3t
PORTRAITS,
PAINTED IN OIL COLORS. By C. BOYLE, at the Building formerly occupied by Mr. G. Stewart, Pennsylvania avenue.
Washington, March 11—tf
TUNIS CRAVEN
HAS removed his entire stock of DRY GOODS from Alexandria to Washington, and is now opening at his new store, between the Marine Garrison and Navy Yard Gate, an assortment equal to any in the District;—among which are,
 Wood's best London cloths,  Do. double milled & plain cassimeres,  Bennett's cords and velvets,  Constitution Gerrow, hunting, Traveller, and silver cords,  Velvets,  Imperial, Brunswick waistcoating,  Silk mouselins do.  Touhins, swansdown do.  Plain and figured Marseilles do.  Bearskin coating,  Plains, kerseys, huffhicks,  Rose and daffodil blankets, flannels,  Superfine green cloth table covers,  Calicoes, colored cambrics,  Gingham, silk and cotton chamberays,  Furniture Chintz,  Cambric and jaconet muslins,  India and British book do.  India mouselins figured and plain,  Plain and figured lenoes,  Laced cambrics,  Elegant tamboured mulls,  Grecian robes and Pelisse dresses,  84 damask and raw silk shawls,  Dama kerseys,  Camel's hair and swansdown do.  Down scarfs,  Long and short lace sleeves, spider & nett sleeves,  Extra long and habit kid gloves,  Do. do. silk do.  Do. do. raw silk do.  Cross-barred and plain Mantuas and lute strings,  Persians and Medes,  Thread and cotton laces,  Lace caps and handkerchiefs,  Book muslin and leno cap patterns,  4-4-7-8 Irish linens,  Hong lawns, linen cambrics,  Irish diapers, table-cloths, napkins,  Cotton counterpanes,  Cambric Dimities,  Common do.  Furniture do.  Ladies' and gentlemen's silk, thread, cotton, worsted, lamb's wool & Angola hose,  Gentlemen's pantaloons do.  Silk cords and buttons,  Ribbons, blass threads,  Scarlet and other colored bombazets,  Heath rugs, Russia sheeting, ticklinghurg,  Osnaburgs, baftas, gurrahs, &c. &c. 
ALSO, Imperial and young hyson tea of a superior quality in small boxes, to suit families, or by the pound—Also genuine Havana segars. T. C. is determined to sell on the lowest terms.
February 3—tf
LINDSAY'S HOTEL.
The Subscriber has taken that well calculated house on the Capitol Hill. Late occupied by Mr. Frost formerly by Mr. Stelle—Where he intends to open a Tavern on the 24th October. Those gentlemen who may favor him with their Custom may rely on every attention in the Power of the Public's devoted Servant.
GEO. W. LINDSAY. N. B.—EIGHT or TEN BOARDERS may be conveniently accommodated. October 19—tf
AGREEMENT.
JOSEPH WHEATON, Broker and Commission Merchant, has put into his hands for sale, at his office in T street near the Bank, a valuable property in the city of Washington, consisting of 646,453 square feet of city LOTS, advantageously situated on the most prominent and valuable streets, and near the Navy Yard and Bridge, and to be had on the most reasonable terms of payment. This great bargain is recommended to gentlemen desirous of securing an early fortune, in this truly growing and flourishing city; the permanent residence and seat of the government of the United States. Other city property to be had—Houses and Lots—Enquire as above.
All kinds of Stocks bought and sold. Wanted to Purchase a few MILITARY LAND WARRANTS. Washington city, Dec. 11—tf
ROSS AND GUTHRIE,
HAVE for sale at their store George Town, the following articles just received from Philadelphia, by the Schooner Carolina, capt. HAND, jun. viz.
 30 kegs butter,  20 barrels, New Town, Pippin Apples,  10 do. buck wheat flour,  10 do. Cranberries, and  10 do. shell bark hickory nuts.  Also a small assortment of very elegant Looking Glasses, Waiters, Trays, polished steel Shovel and Tongs, with cu and brass heads, &c. &c. January 9—tf
WOLLLEN drapers, men's mercers, and tailors, New-Jersey Avenue,
respectfully inform the public that they have commenced business in the above line, where they will endeavor to give satisfaction—they have on hand a fresh supply of the most fashionable goods, suitable for the approaching season, all fresh and of the very best quality.
N. B. Regimentals and naval uniforms made in the most elegant and fashionable stile with neatness and dispatch. October 23—tf
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Debate on the passage of the bill concerning courts martial and courts of enquiry—Continued.
FRIDAY, MARCH 11.
Mr. LOVE commenced by observing, that if the one hundredth part of the objections urged against the passage of the bill were correctly founded, he thought it would afford sufficient reason for its unanimous rejection in the house; but certainly gentlemen had calculated in making them an exceeding defect both of legal understanding on the floor of Congress, and of general information among the people of this country, if they hoped that their arguments could have the effect desired.
Objections to the passage of the bill had been made, as well to the general principle it introduced into our code, as to its detail. The general principle he conceived was a plain and obvious one, which could admit of no doubt; indeed it might be said to exist already in the laws which had established and revised the military court system; for if the laws which authorised the different species of court martial were correct in principle, it must follow that provisions which were calculated to give the best effect to those laws, must also be correct. If there be an evil which is calculated to excite our fears, said Mr. L. we must trace its source to the former acts of Congress; but he apprehended that the institution of those courts, although a peculiar object of jealousy, had been recognised as necessary in our government, from its commencement. The bill before us has been objected to because it is said to be similar to the laws of England on the same subject. It is perhaps going too far to say, that the circumstance of its being derived from the British system affords of course an objection to it; it must be acknowledged that from that nation we have borrowed many of our regulations in jurisprudence. The introduction of courts of enquiry, and court martial, perhaps may have followed the martial system of jurisprudence, as civil courts did the civil system introduced from England; if that be the case the experience of that country as to the mere practice, may afford useful information and cannot be objected to: and although there is no gentleman in the House, said Mr. L. more averse to the introduction of the principles of government incident to the British constitution into this country, than myself, yet so far respects the present subject they having been before introduced, he should have no objection to acting on them in the same way, unless indeed gentlemen who opposed the bill, would point out some other mode better calculated to attain justice. Whether the bill under discussion therefore be a copy of the mutiny act of England, as has been suggested, or not, appeared to him to be entirely unimportant, as it respected the principle.
It has been argued, and great alarms have been attempted to be excited from an assertion, that this bill if passed into a law would have the effect of erecting the military over the civil authority. A favorite topic, certainly, said Mr. L. for the ears of those who are supposed to be so uninformed; but where are the proofs of these assertions—let gentlemen who use this clamor, point to that part of the bill, which is calculated to produce this effect—on the other hand when we view the details of every section, we find but the repetition of the constitutional maxims, that the civil shall control the conduct of the military—can gentlemen rationally believe, that the public mind can be affected in the manner they seem to desire, by assertions so palpably erroneous, to the understanding of every man who is able to read the different sections of the law? Can such arguments be relied on, to produce any effect here? Where is the coercion to which the civil authority is subjected from the military? No one has been able to point it out. It is said indeed that no discretion is vested in the civil court, in issuing the summons, but it is to be done when required by the judge advocate or the party—true sir, but what is a summons, is it a compulsory process? No, it is no more, than a bare request, which indeed the military courts now exercise the right of, and when we inspect the provisions of the bill, we find that the further process, or a fine for disobedience, is intirely discretionary with the court of civil jurisdiction.
suppose, sir, the court were to order this summons not to issue? Is there any thing in the bill which enables the military court to coerce the civil? I presume not, that indeed would be a degradation of the civil authority against which I would declaim too as loud as any one here. This assertion of gentlemen has been made and repeated, it is calculated they suppose to rouse the honest prejudices of the friends of civil liberty—but before the charge can be accredited, the temper and wisdom of this House, as well as the nation it here represents, will at least require the semblance of argument in support of it.
Many indeed have been the objections said Mr. L. to the details of this bill, some of them no less extraordinary in themselves than in the manner of expressing them. A gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) has depicted to us the horrors, which may be conceived from compelling female delicacy, to an attendance on a court martial, where he presumes neither virtue or decency can be respected; and where female modesty must encounter the rudest shocks; what further might have suggested itself, on this subject to the imagination of the gentleman it is unnecessary for me to conjecture. To a female of delicacy the introduction as a witness even into a civil court, cannot be attended with very pleasurable sensations to herself; in the crowded room of a court consisting generally of a mixed collection, she would find herself surrounded by a multitude, not very congenial to her habits; but neither there or in a military court, can we presume she would be unprotected; the human character ought not to be dishonored, by such a supposition, there is nothing in the history of military courts which warrant the charge of so much depravity; if indeed such might be contemplated, to be the character of those courts, it certainly reflects no honor on those who by a law only of the last Congress, have revised and re-enacted the military court system. I cannot consent to waste the time of this body by a reply to objections like this.
An objection frequently made to the circumstances which have given rise to the measure now contemplated to be adopted; which the total inability of the Court of Enquiry which has been ordered, and sanctioned by the voice of this House, to compel the attendance of witnesses who are possessed as has been asserted, of evidence to do justice to the public in a prosecution (which has from many laudable motives excited the utmost anxiety in the community) is the immediate cause of the proposition before us or not, is certainly not important in the decision of the questions involved in it; and whether those occurrences, so recent in our minds, have disclosed the necessity of such a law as this will be, or not, is to me perfectly immaterial. The history, however, of the jurisprudence of this and every other country, may prove in a thousand instances, that circumstances the most trivial in themselves, have given rise to laws of the utmost importance to the welfare of the state, or the safety of individuals, and which at subsequent periods have had the most general operation. In the case alluded to the enquiry has been instituted, but it is discovered, that it must be inefficient, and fail of its effect in satisfying public justice, if the accused is guilty, or of protecting his character, if innocent, unless by the aid of the civil authority the necessary testimony can be brought forward. The defect having so obviously existed, and having occurred in the transactions of the Executive department of the government, the President has intimated in his reply to our message on the subject, the difficulty which presents itself to the discharge of the duties we had thought proper to enjoin on him; and what is now said by the gentleman from Virginia? Why, sir, the members of this House who have introduced and supported this bill, by which alone, the object of the motion for the enquiry depending can ever be rendered effectual, as well as the President of the United States, who is said to have hinted at the measure, are charged with the dishonorable motive of having intended it as a cover to infamy, and to gloss over guilt.
But, sir, the citizen is to be subjected, it is said, to military tyranny, because the evidence of his failure to attend the military court, to which he shall be summoned, is the record of that court, which is to be exhibited to the civil tribunal levying the penalty; it seems difficult to suppose how the terms of this act could have been so much misunderstood; the witness summoned to attend shall be liable to the same penalties to be inflicted in the same manner as if he had been summoned in a suit depending before a civil court; and what, let me ask of learned gentlemen, is the manner of proceeding in civil cases? Is it not that the evidence adduced against the defaulter, is in its own nature conclusive and incontrovertible, not to be re-
uted as has been said? So far from it, we all know that according to the manner of those civil courts, which are still to inflict ad datum the penalty for disobedience, they never refuse what justice to the accused requires, to give him an opportunity of defending himself. He is regularly called on for evidence to mitigate his offence, or clear his contempt, and after a full hearing his fine is levied according to the degree of the offence, in the discretion of the court; it is the certificate of the record of the court of enquiry amounting to the certificate of the service of process by an officer that is always read in evidence on such occasions; it seems to me (said Mr. L.) that it can only be used for a sum in proportion as it may be considered as competent, or not conclusive evidence in establishing a fine.
What, I repeat, (said Mr. L.) are we to think of objects like these, are they intended to inform those to whom they are here addressed, or are they intended to mislead the public mind? They certainly offer no very honorable compliment to the understanding of this House, or the information possessed by the community.
The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rowan) has been extremely minute in his objections to the details of the bill. He has also not omitted to remark in a general way on the ignominious qualities he attributes to it. It says dangers are to be apprehended from the junction of the civil and military authorities, which is contemplated by the bill. That this ought not to be the case unless we had a standing army, and that it is a measure opposed to the introduction of it. When gentlemen make these assertions, which can only be intended to enlist our prejudices against the measure, we ask them to point to that section of the bill which is to produce these effects. Let them show the argument to be correct, and I promise them that the bill shall have my most hearty negative; for while I have a voice in this body I will always oppose the introduction of a standing army; but if our situation compels us to keep in active service a regular military, for a period ever so short, necessity compels us to make rules for its government, if those rules are only to be enforced by a recourse to the civil authority, the common principles of reasoning would induce us to believe, that it would operate as a restraint on the excesses of the military; when we have it in our power to disband our army, there is nothing left for the military code to operate on; but the bill before us cannot certainly be charged with a tendency to establish a standing army merely because it provides certain regulations, which it is incident to all armies alike; it may as well be said in any case that the subordinate regulations necessary to carry a general institution into effect, are the original grounds on which the measure itself rests.
Great oppression, it is said, will be introduced, by compelling the production of public papers and records, as provided for by the first section of the bill; and much fault is found, with it that copies are not made to answer the purpose. I confess I am astonished (said Mr. L.) when I hear a gentleman who speaks in so high terms of the rights and liberties of the people of this country, express opinions so hostile to them; certainly he could not mean to tell the public, when he mentioned the introduction of copies of papers, that it could be proper to read such copies in evidence on a criminal trial; such principles of jurisprudence are new to us, and it is to be presumed the gentleman has not well considered them, for he could not certainly entertain the opinion, that a copy signed by the keeper of a record, or his clerk, of any paper which might be deposited as a public one, although a forgery original (which could not be detected in the copy) ought to have the weight of testimony when a man's life or reputation was at stake; if ever a doctrine of this kind is introduced among us, we shall soon find, that the rankest forgeries can easily be employed to convict the innocent, or screen the guilty from the punishment his crime deserves; inconveniences which may attend the execution of compulsory process to produce the original, may, it is true, be hard on the class of those officers, or the keepers of public records; but these are evils incident to justice, and what practice has already rendered familiar. The gentleman has argued on this section of the bill, as if it was really so unguarded, as to put it in the power of a military court to compel the attendance of persons with their papers, at any time or place they might appoint; but when we look at the provisions of it, it will be found that before the subpoena duces tecum can issue, the affidavit of the party must be filed, showing good cause before a civil judge, who is to decide as to the validity of such cause, in his discretion, and to certify, only if he thinks proper, to render that the process may issue. This provision is further guarded still, by requiring that the civil judge shall, when he orders such subpoena, certify his opinion that the paper required, does contain evidence proper and pertinent to the cause.
An apprehension is said to be entertained that the witness who produces his papers in obedience to the subpoena, will not be able to obtain a restoration of them; how is this done (said Mr. L.) in other courts? is there any

positive law, any legislative act special- ly providing for the restoration of origi- nal papers introduced into court? If there is, I have never heard of it; but under the practice of all courts, it has been established as a common rule of justice, that the witness introducing a paper, or a record, should have a re- turn of it; it would be hard indeed if a court could thus arbitrarily deprive another of his property, especially as the only object of introducing a paper is answered by the inspection of it.
The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rowan) has again attempted to excite our apprehensions, for the safety of the civil officer, who shall be charged with the service of the process. He has told us that if in civil cases he makes de- fault, before he is made to suffer, he is entitled to the right of trial by jury; if indeed this be the case, where is the clause of this bill, which deprives him of that right? Does it confer on a mi- litary court the right of fining or im- prisonment? If it does not, the officer is still left to the power of the civil court and in express terms the civil court is required to proceed in the usual manner to levy the fine for his mis- conduct in office. The position taken by the gentleman, that the officers of courts are entitled to a trial by jury be- fore a fine can be inflicted on them, it is not now necessary to observe on; it has however so far as my experience has enabled me to inform myself been considered as a proper and necessary incident to the honor of a civil court to fine its own officers for misconduct in the performance of official duties; it is only when the party suffering by the neglect of the officer has sought red- ress, that the officer is entitled to the trial by a jury, who are to assess the damages the injury demands.
The hardship of compelling a witness to attend a military court, where it is said he is to receive no compensation, has been elaborately dwelt on. Mr. L. said he would ask the gentleman what provision is made for payments of that sort in civil courts, is there any law which authorises by summary pro- cess a recovery? He had always con- sidered it as a matter of practice only, which would equally apply in the cases contemplated by the bill; there is no process of the court by which a witness would be enabled immediately to levy his money; but why is it said that a witness is obliged to attend in pursuance of a summons to a military court, more than to a civil court? There is no posi- tive law, it is true, which declares that a party shall be obliged to tender a wit- ness, but before he sets out to court; but the practice of court, as in the other instance, has adopted rules, which are equally calculated to ensure justice, and which are under the opera- tion of this bill, secured to the civil courts; for should a witness fail to the summons, the practice already estab- lished, would secure him against any evil consequence, if he had demanded from the party summoning, his wages, and they had not been tendered him; if on the other hand the witness does at- tend and is not paid, he can only have recourse to the common process of law, in a civil court, which still remains superior, and I trust always will to the military, in order to recover and levy by execution his money.
It is objected by the same gentleman, that the bill operates unequally on the officer and soldier; that the life of a soldier may be taken by the introduction of evidence which would not be suffi- cient to affect an officer; but this con- struction, like many others of the gentleman, is not warranted by the terms of the bill; the third section which had been alluded to, when we have recourse to it, we find in no case authorising the reading of testimony by depositions unless in cases where the punishment may extend to cashiering an officer, or flogging a soldier; but if that section had been obscure in its terms, the general provision, which is of unlimited operation in the fourth section, and declares that in no case where the punishment is capital a depo- sition shall be read in evidence, unless when the witness resides at more than one hundred miles from the court, com- pletely refutes the distinction made by the gentleman's argument.
A general objection has been made against summoning a witness before a military court, because it is said that kind of court is not required in the times or places of its sitting, and the gentle- man from Kentucky has intimated that in this respect the civil courts are differ- ently organised. These, it is said, are objections to the constitution of the military court itself, and not to the provisions of this act, which are intend- ed to enable it to effect the purposes for which it was intended; from the very nature of a military court it was impos- sible, such court could by law be fixed as to the time and place of its sessions. The gentleman is mistaken too, when he supposes that the civil courts are limited in the duration of their sessions, and in this respect different from the military court. The Supreme court of the U. S. is unlimited in this respect, and the inferior courts all have the power to adjourn as may suit their con- venience, and to sit as long as the busi- ness before them may require. The dangers then which have been appre- hended to exist in a greater degree in a military court, from their power to continue longer in session than a civil one, and thus harass a witness unne- cessarily, are also found to be untrue.
Mr. L. said he was willing to admit, that if an objection did exist to any part of the bill, it was to the fourth section— it is certainly jeopardizing in a very dangerous degree the life of a fellow being, to permit testimony taken by depo- sition to be read in evidence on his trial; it is not objectionable in this view however on constitutional grounds, as a gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Elliott) has supposed, because by the letter of the constitution the right of being con- fronted with the accuser, and the wit- ness at the time of trial is in express terms confined to civil cases, in exclu- sion of military trials. This civil right is as expressly excluded from the mili- tary as the right of trial by jury; and it
is easy to see the necessity which ex- ists for this distinction which our con- stitution has made. That necessity was no doubt lamented by the humane and wise framers of our constitution. The section in question however, al- though it ought to be acted on with great caution, affords perhaps the best mode which can be adopted consider- ing the convenience and rights of the citizen, to obtain testimony so situated; to make no provision for obtaining testimony, which might happen to be at the distance of an hundred and one, or a thousand miles from the seat of the court, might, particularly in courts of enquiry, be productive of evils in the investigation of charges, which the public interests required to be supported; if true, or which the accused if false might thus disprove.
Too much of the time of the House has already been taken up in replying to objections to the bill, which have been urged in many instances without even the shew of plausibility, and could only have been intended to mis- lead the public mind.
Mr. L. said he would only beg leave to remark before he concluded, that the bill in his opinion had been un- fairly opposed; a military court, altho' admitted to be a necessary institution for the trial of offences, has been men- tioned as if it was now intended to form an usurpation over the civil authorities, altho' the bill itself has in the closest manner pursued from the beginning to the end, the principle of subordina- tion which is acknowledged to be due from the military to the civil. The courts themselves have been represent- ed as formed of men already deter- mined on the most violent abuses of the rights of society, and as wholly uninflu- enced by the usual restraints of pru- dence & discretion which actuate judici- al tribunals; if indeed this be the case, abolish these courts as useless and dan- gerous; but who in the candor of his mind, and when the effervescence of the occasion shall have subsided will say so? Has any part of the conduct of those courts heretofore published war- ranted the stigma? The late instances have been honorable ones to the charac- ter of its members. The judge advo- cate has been selected from the civil orders of society; gentlemen have been appointed who stand first in the line of their professional pursuits, distinguish- ed no less for legal ability than moral integrity; men whom no one dare sus- pect of a disposition to harass the citi- zen or trample on his rights; it is most probable that examples so satisfactory might in future be followed, but if the law as it at present stands does not give that assurance, let it be altered, and make it necessary uniformly hereafter to select from civil life the judge advo- cate of the court, whose details of the testimony reliance may be placed on.
In all the objections which have been made, Mr. L. said he could see no- thing, unless indeed it was such clam- or as ingenuity may at all times give birth to, against the most unexceptionable laws, and which the time and circum- stances under which this bill has been necessarily introduced, are particularly calculated to bring forth. For his own part he was willing to risk its passage, for he could see nothing like danger in any of its parts, to the civil liberties of the people of the U. S.
JOURNAL OF SECRET PROCEEDINGS, FROM WHICH THE INJUNCTION OF CONFIDENCE HAS BEEN REMOVED.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30.
A message in writing was received from the President of the U. S. On motion of Mr. Randolph, and se- conded, that the House do come to the following resolution:
Resolved , That the President of the U. S. be and he hereby is request- ed to cause to be laid before the House of Representatives information of the dates of the extract and copy of two letters respectively from the French minister to our minister at Paris, re- ferred to in his letter to the Secretary of State of the 22d of January, 1808; and also of the date of the receipt of the said communications and of the let- ter of M. Champagny of the 15th January, 1808, by our said minister at Paris.
The House proceeded to consider the said proposed resolution at the Clerk's table.
And on the question that the House do agree to the same, it was resolved in the affirmative, Yeas 93, Nays 24.
The Yeas and Nays being demanded by one fifth of the members present,
Those who voted in the affirmative are—
Messrs. Alexander, L. J. Alston, Bas- sett, Bibb, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, Champagny, Chittenden, Claiborne, M. Clay, Clinton, Clopton, Cobb, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Dawson, Desha, Durell, Elliot, Ely, Eppes, Franklin, Gardenier, Gardner, Garnett, Goodwyn, Gray, Harris, Helms, Hoge, Holland, Holmes, How- ard, Humphreys, Jenkins, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Key, Love, Lyon, Macon, Marion, Masters, Milner, D. Mont- gomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, John Morrow, Mosely, Mumford, Newton, Pitkin, Porter, Quincy, Randolph, J. Richards, Riker, Rowan, Russell, Smelt, Smilie, J. Smith, J. Smith, Stanford, Stedman, Storer, Taggart, Tallmadge, Taylor, Thomp- son, Trigg, Troup, Upham, Van Al- len, Van Cortlandt, Van Dyke, Van Horne, Van Rensselaer, Verplanck, Wharton, D. R. Williams, M. Wil- iams, and Wilson.
Those who voted in the negative are, Messrs. W. Alston, Bard, Green, Heister, Isley, Lambert, M'Creery, J. Montgomery, Newbold, Nicholas, Pugh, Rhea (Ten.) M. Richards, Seaver, Sloan, J. K. Smith, Southard, White- hill, Wilbour, Winn, and Witherell.
Ordered, That Mr. John Randolph and Mr. G. W. Campbell be appointed a committee to wait on the President of the U. S. pursuant to the said reso- lution.
The several orders of the day were farther postponed until to-morrow; and then the House adjourned until to-mor- row morning, 11 o'clock.
THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 1808.
The House being cleared of all persons except the members and the clerk.
Mr. Randolph, from the commit- tee appointed to wait on the Pres- ident of the U. S. pursuant to a resolution of the 30th instant, report- ed that the committee had, according to order, performed the service as- signed to them and received an inti- mation that the President was indis- posed, and could not give them a per- sonal interview; and that at his re- quest they had left the extract en- trusted to them with his private Se- cretary.
On motion of Mr. Randolph,
The House resumed the reading of such documents accompanying the message from the President of the U. S. of the 22d instant, as in his judg- ment require secrecy, and were com- municated by him, in confidence, and went through them.
A motion was made by Mr. Ran- dolph and seconded, that the House do come to the following resolution:
Resolved , That the injunction of secrecy imposed on the message of the President of the U. S. of the 30th inst. be taken off, so far as respects the documents accompanying the same with the exception of the letter from our minister at Paris to the Se- cretary of State of the 27th Decem- ber 1807.
On the question that the House do now proceed to take the said proposed resolution, into consideration.
It passed in the negative, Yeas 42, Nays 77.
The Yeas and Nays being demand- ed by one fifth of the members present,
Those who voted in the affirmative, are—Messrs. Bibb, Champion, Chit- tenden, Clinton, junr. Cobb, Cul- pepper, Dana, Davenport, Durell, Elliot, Ely, Gardenier, Gardner, Garnett, Gray, Harris, Hoge, Jenkins, Key, Lewis, Lyon, Macon, Masters, Milner, Mosely, Mumford, Pitkin, Quincy, Randolph, J. Richards, Row- an, Russell, Stanford, Stedman, Tall- madge, Trigg, Upham, Van Cort- landt, Vandyke, Van Horne, Van Rensselaer, D. R. Williams—42.
Those who voted in the negative, are—Messrs. Alexander, L. J. Al- ston, W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Bassett, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, But- ler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, M. Clay, Clopton, Cutts, Dawson, Desha, Eppes, Findley, Fisk, Frank- lin, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Isley, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Lambert, Love, Marion, M'Creery, D. Montgomery, J. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Mor- row, Jno. Morrow, Newbold, New- ton, Nicholas, Porter, Pugh, Rhea, (Tenn.) M. Richards, Riker, Seaver, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, S. Smith, Jno. Smith, South- ard, Storer, Taggart, Taylor, Thomp- son, Troup, Van Allen, Verplanck, Wharton, Whitehill, Wilbour, M. Williams, Wilson, Winn, Wither- ell—77.
A motion was then made by Mr. Randolph and seconded, that the said message and documents be referred to the committee of the whole House on the state of the Union.
And the question being taken there- upon,
It was resolved in the affirmative.
A motion was then made by Mr. Randolph and seconded, that the House do come to the following res- olution:
Resolved , That the injunction of secrecy imposed on the message of the President of the U. S. of the 30th instant, and the documents ac- companying the same, be taken off, so far as relates to the copy of a letter from M. Champagny to Gen. Arm- strong, of the 15th of Jan. 1808.
And on the question that the House do now proceed to consider the same.
It passed in the negative, Yeas 45, Nays 71.
The Yeas and Nays being demand- ed by one fifth of the members present,
Those who voted in the affirmative, are—Messrs. Alexander, L. J. Al- ston, Bibb, Champion, Chittenden, Clinton, junr. Cobb, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Desha, Durell, Elliott, Ely, Gardenier, Gardner, Garnett, Gray, Harris, Hoge, Jenkins, Key, Lewis, Lyon, Macon, Masters, Milner, Jno. Morrow, Mumford, Pitkin, Quin- cy, Randolph, Rowan, Russell, S. Smith, Stanford, Stedman, Tallmadge, Trigg, Upham, Van Cortlandt, Van Dyke, Van Horne, Van Rensselaer, D. R. Williams—45.
Those who voted in the negative, are—Messrs. W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Bassett, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyle, Brown, Bur- well, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, M. Clay, Clopton, Cutts, Dawson, Eppes, Findley, Fisk, Franklin, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Isley, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Lambert, Love, Marion, M'Creery,
D. Montgomery, J. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas, Por- ter, Pugh, Rhea, (Tenn.) J. Ri- chards, M. Richards, Riker, Seaver, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, Jno. Smith, Southard, Storer, Taylor, Thompson, Troup, Van Al- len, Verplanck, Wharton, Whitehill, Wilbour, M. Williams, Wilson, Winn, Witherell—71.
FRIDAY, APRIL 1.
A message from the President of the United States accompanied with a report from the Secretary of State was received.
The House being cleared of all per- sons except the members and the clerk,
The said message was read, in the words following, to wit:
To the House of Representatives of the U. S.
In answer to the enquiries of the resolution of the House of Repre- sentatives of the 30th of March rela- tive to certain dates. I transmit a re- port of the Secretary of State made to me on that subject.
TH: JEFFERSON. April 1, 1808.
Copy of a report from the Secretary of State to the President of the Unit- ed States.
The Secretary of State has the honour to report to the President in conformity to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 30th of March that the only information which has been received respecting the letter, from which the extracts inserted in General Armstrong's let- ter to the Secretary of State of Janu- ary 22d, 1808 was taken, is in the extract itself, to which no date is given; and that no copy of any letter, from the French Minister to him, is subjoined to, or known to be refer- red to in his said letter of January 22d, except that a copy of which was communicated to Congress by the President, on the 29th of March, and which bears date the 15th of January, 1808. It does not ap- pear from any information received by the department of state, at what date either this letter of January the 15th, or the letter from which the inserted extract was taken, were re- ceived by the Minister of the U. S. at Paris
Respectfully submitted. JAMES MADISON.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, April 1, 1808.
A motion was made by Mr. Ran- dolph, and seconded that the House do come to the following resolution:
Resolved , That the injunction of secrecy imposed on the message of the President of the United States of the 30th March be taken of so far as respects the documents accompanying the same with the exception of the letter from our Minister at Paris to the Secretary of State of the 27th of December, 1807, and the words contained in the pa- renthesis in the last sentence of the ex- tract from Mr. Pinkney's letter of Jan. 26, 1808.
And on the question, that the House do now proceed to take the said proposed resolution into considera- tion, it passed in the negative, Yeas 45, Nays 71.
The Yeas and Nays being demand- ed by one fifth of the members present,
YEAS.—Messrs. Alexander, Bibb, Champion, Chittenden, Claiborne, Clinton, Cobb, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Durell, Elliot, Ely, Gar- denier, Gardner, Garnett, Gray, Har- ris, Hoge, Jenkins, Key, Lewis, Lyon, Macon, Marion, Masters, Mil- ner, Mosely, Mumford, Pitkin, Quin- cy, Randolph, Rowan, Russell, S. Smith, Stanford, Stedman, Tallmadge, Trigg, Upham, Van Cortlandt, Van Dyke, Van Horne, Van Rensselaer & D. R. Williams—45.
NAYS.—Messrs. W. Al- ston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Bassett, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyle, Brown, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, M. Clay, Clopton, Cutts, Dawson, Deane, Desha, Eppes, Find- ley, Fisk, Franklin, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Humphreys, Isley, John- son, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Knight, Lambert, M'Creery, D. Montgomery, J. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, Jer. Morrow, Newbold, New- ton, Nicholas, Porter, Pugh, Rhea (Tenn.) J. Richards, M. Richards, Riker, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, J. Smith, Southard, Storer, Swart, Taylor, Troup, Van Allen, Verplanck, Wharton, Whitehill, Wil- bour, M. Williams, Wilson, Winn, Witherell—71.
A motion was then made by Mr. Randolph, and seconded that the House do come to the following res- olution:
Resolved , That the injunction of se- crecy imposed on the message of the President of the United States and the documents accompanying the same, be taken off so far as relates to the copy of an official note from M. Champagny to Gen. Armstrong, of the 15th of January, 1808, and of an official letter from Mr. Erskine (his Britannic majesty's envoy) to the
Secretary of State of the 23d Feb. 1808.
And on the question that the House do now proceed to take the said proposed resolution into considera- tion.
It passed in the negative, Yeas 45, Nays 73.
The Yeas and Nays being demand- ed by one fifth of the members present,
Those who voted in the affirma- tive are—Messrs. Alexander Bibb, Champion, Chittenden, Clinton, Cobb, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Durell, Elliot, Ely, Gardenier, Gardner, Garnett, Gray, Harris, Hoge, Jen- kins, Key, Lewis, Lyon, Macon, Marion, Masters, Milner, Mosely, Mumford, Pitkin, Quincy, Ran- dolph, Rowan, Russell, S. Smith, Stanford, Stedman, Taggart, Tall- madge, Trigg, Upham, Van Cort- landt, Van Dyke, Van Horne, Van Rensselaer & D. R. Williams—45.
Those who voted in the negative are—Messrs. L. J. Alston, W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Bassett, Black- ledge, Blake, Blount, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, Claiborne, G. W. Campbell, M. Clay, Clopton, Cutts, Dawson, Deane, Desha, Eppes, Findley, Fisk, Franklin, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Humphreys, Isley, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Knight, Lambert, M'Creery, D. Montgomery, J. Mont- gomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas, Porter, Pugh, Rhea, (Pen.) Rhea, (Tenn.) J. Richards, M. Ri- chards, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, J. Smith, Southard, Storer, Swart, Taylor, Troup, Van Allen, Wharton, Whitehill, Wilbour, M. Williams, Wilson, Winn & Witherell —73.
A motion was then made by Mr. J. Montgomery and seconded that the doors now be opened.
And debate arising thereon,
An adjournment was called for,
Whereupon the several orders of the day, were further postponed until to-morrow and the House adjourned until to-morrow morning at 11 o'clock.
SATURDAY, APRIL 2.
The House being cleared of all persons except the members and the Clerk.
A message in writing was received from the President of the U. S. by Mr. Coles, his Secretary.
[This message appeared in our last, as introductory to the publication of the letters of M. Champagny and Mr. Erskine.]
On motion of Mr. Randolph, and seconded, that the House do come to the following resolution:
Resolved , That the injunction of secrecy, imposed on the message of the President of the U. S. of the 30th of March, and the documents accom- panying the same, be taken off, so far as relates to the copy of an official note from M. Champagny to General Armstrong, of the 15th of January, 1808, and of an official letter from Mr. Erskine, (his Britannic majesty's envoy) to the Secretary of State, of the 23d of February, 1808, and that five thousand copies thereof be print- ed.
The question was taken that the House do now proceed to take the said proposed resolution into considera- tion, and resolved in the affirma- tive—Yeas 106—Nays 1.
The said resolution being then twice read, was on the question put thereupon, unanimously agreed to by the House by yeas and nays.
A motion was made by Mr. Black- ledge, and seconded, that the House do agree to the following order:
Ordered , That the secret journal of this House from the 30th of March to this day inclusive be published.
And the same being under consid- eration,
A motion was made by Mr. Black- ledge, to amend the said proposed order, by inserting after the word "published," the words following, to wit: "excepting the message of the President of the U. S. of that date."
And the question being put there- upon,
It was resolved in the affirmative— Yeas 85—Nays 22.
The yeas and nays being demand- ed by one fifth of the members present,
Those who voted in the affirmative are—Messrs. Alexander, L. J. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Bibb, Black- ledge, Blake, jr. Blount, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, Chittenden, M. Clay, Clopton, Cobb, Cutts, Dawson, Desha, Elliot, Eppes, Findley, Fisk, Franklin, Garnett, Goodwyn, Gray, Green, Harris, Heis- ter, Hoge, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Humphreys, Isley, Jenkins, John- son, Jones, Kenan, Key, Kirkpat- rick, Lyon, Marion, M'Creery, Mil- ner, D. Montgomery, jr. J. Montgo- mery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, John Morrow, Mumford, Newbold, Pitkin, jr. Pugh, Quincy, M. Richards, Ri- ker, Seaver, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, S. Smith, Southard, Stanford, Tag- gart, Tallmadge, Taylor, Thomp- son, Trigg, Troup, Upham, Van Allen, Van Dyke, Van Horne, Van Rensselaer, Verplanck, Wharton,

Whitfield, Wilson, Winn, Witherell.
Those who voted in the negative are—Messrs. W. Alston, jr. Champion, Dana, Davenport, jr. Deane, Ely, Gardenier, Lambert, Lewis, jr. Macon, jr. Morrow, Moseley, Nicholas, Rhea of Ten. Rowan, Russell, J. A. Smith, Stedman, Storer, Wilbour, D. R. Williams, M. Williams.
And on the question that the House do agree to the said order as amended.
It was resolved in the affirmative, Yeas 70—Nays 40.
The yeas and nays being demanded by one fifth of the members present.
Those who voted in the affirmative are—Messrs. L. J. Alston, jr. Barker, Bibb, Blackledge, Boyle, Burwell, Champion, Chittenden, Clinton, jr. Cobb, Dana, Davenport, jr. Dawson, Eliot, Ely, Gardenier, Gardner, Gannett, Gray, Harris, Hoge, Holmes, Howard, Jenkins, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Key, Kirkpatrick, Lewis, jr. Lyon, Macon, Marion, McCreery, Milner, D. Montgomery, jr. J. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, John Morrow, Mosely, Mumford, Newbold, Pitken, jr. Quincy, Randolph, Riker, Rowan, Russell, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, S. Smith, Stanfield, Stedman, Taggart, Talmadge, Taylor, Troup, Troup, Upham, Van Allen, Van Dyke, Van Horne, Van Rensselaer, Wharton, Wilbour, D. R. Williams, Wilson.
Those who voted in the negative are—Messrs. W. Alston, jr. Bacon, Bard, Blake, jr. Blount, Brown, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, M. Clay, Clopton, Cutts, Deane, Eppes, Findley, Frisk, Franklin, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Holland, Humphreys, Ilseley, Lambert, Jer. Morrow, Nicholas, Porter, Pugh, Rhea of Ten. M. Richards, Seaver, J. K. Smith, Southard, Storer, Thompson, Verplanck, Whitfield, M. Williams, Winn, Witherell.
A motion was then made by Mr. Willis Alston and seconded, that the report of the Secretary of State which accompanied the message from the President of the U. S. of the first instant, be printed for the use of the members.
And the question being taken thereupon, It passed in the affirmative.
FOR SALE, A hands me new GIG & HARNESS COMPLETE. Enquire of the Printer. Washington, April 6—
PORTER & ALE CELLAR. LEWIS ZIMMER, at his store near the NAVY YARD, begs leave to inform the Public that he is just opening a PORTER CELLAR, near the gate of the Navy Yard, where the best kind of Porter and Ale from Philadelphia shall at all times be procured in bottles or otherwise.
He has also received from Philadelphia, a parcel of the very best LIQUID BLACKING, for Boots and Shoes in bottles and half bottles—the fine shining glass of this blacking is so well fixed on the surface of the leather, that you may pass a white handkerchief over your boots without soiling them in the least; in short, it is difficult to describe all the admirable qualities of this Liquid Blacking.
He continues to keep a general assortment of GROCERIES & DRY GOODS, which he offers for sale on very moderate prices. April 6—2t
MRS. THOMPSON at the SIX BUILDINGS has her best Drawing Room and Four Bed Chambers unoccupied with Stables and Carriage houses. April 6—3t
BAKER, RIGGS & Co. At E. Riggs' old stand, (sign of the Plough) a few doors above the Union Tavern, Have just received a large supply of SPRING GOODS;
Among them are fancy muslins, undressed chintzes, ginghams, linen cambrics, cambric handkerchiefs, long lawns, fancy printed robes, long shawls, Leno veils, Italian silks, spring bonnets, gloves, flowers, hosiery, ribbons, ladies' and gentlemen's umbrellas, India crapes, white jeans, fancy Mar seilles, tablecloths, Irish linens, superfine cloths, 4 4 and 3 4 Russia diapers, and many other fancy and substantial articles; all of which have been selected at the best markets, (principally for each) enables them to sell very low. Geo. Town, April 5—M&F6w
ADVERTISEMENT. TO be sold on Thursday the 7th of April at the Dwelling House of Mrs. ANN SMITH in High street, Her whole Household Furniture, consisting of Feather Beds, Bedsteads, Blankets, Chairs, Mahogany Tables, Desk, Mirror, Glasses, Grate, 4 Stoves, Brass Fender, Andirons, Crockeray War, Kitchen Furniture, a Milk Cow, Shower Bath, a pair of Globes, and an excellent Pian, in perfect repair; the Piano to be sold either at private or public sale; a valuable Negro woman about twenty, with a fine boy, near two years old; the woman is a good plain cook, a washer, ironer, and house maid. George Town, March 28—
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6.
The books for receiving subscriptions for the election of a bridge over the Potomac were on Monday opened at Stelle's Hotel, when 1578 shares were subscribed for; leaving only 322 to be subscribed, of which being done in a few days there is scarcely a doubt. We congratulate the public on this evidence of the spirit and resources of the district, and on the certain accomplishment of such a great local and national object. Those, who wish to subscribe, have still an opportunity, by application to the commissioners, who will attend daily at Stelle's from 12 to 3 o'clock.
IN THE CASE OF JOHN SMITH.
APRIL 2.
The Senate resumed, at about 11 o'clock, the consideration of the case of John Smith.
Mr. Key proceeded with the testimony on the part of Mr. Smith, and read the depositions of Thomas Rawlings, Jacob Feuble, Wm. M'Farlane, Richard Southgate, Ethan Stone, Samuel I. Brown, Pallas P. Stewart, D. L. Kearney, Ephraim Morgan, Jacob Burnett, Arthur St. Clair, jun. George Russell, Nathaniel Nicholls, John Armstrong, Isaac G. Burnett, Nicholas Longworth, James Laurie, B. Chambers, Stephen M'Farland, Griffin Yeatman and Barnet Hulings, to discredit the testimony of E. Glover.
Mr. Harper then, in order to present a connected view of the whole testimony, read the depositions of Peter Northrop, Nathan Platt, Gershom Somers, Henry Bottsworth, Philip Nichols, Josiah Fairchild, Sampson Burch, Jonathan Goodall, Timothy Shepherd, Bennet Perry, H. Foote, Gideon Boxford, Michael Parks, Samuel Beers, Moses Boxford, Mox K. Boxford, Asa Chapman, Amos Beers, Truman Beers, David B. Beers, David Beers, John Bennet, G. Hansford, Henry Rice, Josiah Hansford, Benjamin Hall, R. Griffin, Watkins, Wm. Watkins, Joshua Webster, John C. Hodgkiss, Wm. Andrews, R. Baldwin, in support of the character of Elias Glover.
Mr. Key said he would, in the next place, proceed to adduce evidence relative to the affidavit of Peter Taylor. Although the counsel, he said of Mr. Smith, did not consider the evidence of Peter Taylor, of Colonel James Taylor, and others, as proving anything material against Mr. Smith; yet they would be able to show, that it abounded with mistakes. With regard to Peter Taylor, they should not question his general character, but they would offer evidence to show that the circumstances and situation in which he was placed were not such as entitled his testimony to credit; they would show that he had testified to what were not facts. They should prove this by his own declarations, as well as by those of others.
Mr. Key then read the deposition of Peter Taylor, lately taken at Marietta, and the depositions of Dudley Woodbridge, John Brough, and Morris B. Belknap.
Mr. Harper said that among the charges against John Smith, was his having expressed to Col. Taylor sentiments unfavorable to the Union. Although they might contend that such a charge, if substantiated, contained nothing of criminality, they were not disposed to rest the defence on that ground. They denied the charge. In saying this, they did not believe that Col. Taylor had intentionally mistated the expressions of Mr. Smith. They would, however, adduce the testimony of a man who was present at the conversation alluded to, who considered it very differently from Col. Taylor, viz.—Dr. John Seliman, a man of respectable character, both as to veracity and knowledge.
Mr. Harper then read the depositions of Dr. John Seliman, and Gen. Henry Carberry.
The last point, Mr. Harper said, on which they would adduce testimony, was relative to the journey of Mr. Smith to Frankfort, where he had interview with Col. Burr, and they would show that his objects and motives in taking it altogether regarded the transaction of his own personal concerns.
The counsel then read the depositions of Joseph Taylor, John Jordan, junr. Thomas Hart, Daniel Bradley, Alexander Parker, and James Kelly.
When the Senate adjourned, about the usual hour, to Monday.
MONDAY, APRIL 4. Various depositions were read, as well such as had been transmitted to the Senate, as such as were offered on the part of Mr. Smith.
TUESDAY, APRIL 5. Mr. Harper read the depositions of Jos. H. Brett, Jno. T. Moore, Gabriel North, Erastus Root, C. Kelsier, Isaac G. Burnett, David Zeigler, Jno. Bradford, Jacob Broadwell, Joseph Van Horne, Samuel Hildige, George Williamson, M. Williams, William Goforth, Messrs. Van Rensselaer,
Jer. Morrow, Talmadge, Bacon and Davenport, of the House of Representatives, and Mr. Tiffin of the Senate, were then examined, and attested to the general respectability of character of several of the witnesses from whom depositions had been received on the part of Mr. Smith.
About 12 o'clock Mr. Key commenced a speech, which he concluded about four o'clock, when the Senate adjourned.
Mr. Smith reached this city on Sunday, and has since given his attendance in the Senate.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, APRIL 4.
Mr. Boyd a member from New Jersey in the stead of Mr. Ezra Darby, deceased, appeared and took his seat.
Messrs. Upham and Jenkins, obtained leave of absence for the remainder of the session.
Mr. Randolph, from the committee to whom the subject had been referred, reported a bill making provision for arming and equipping the whole body of the militia of the U. S. which was twice read and referred to a committee of the whole.
The engrossed bill for raising an additional military force was then read; and the question having been put, "shall this bill pass?"
An extremely interesting debate arose, which occupied the House until they adjourned, at 4 o'clock, without taking a question. Messrs. Clapton, Howard, Smilie, Troup, Alston, Rhea, Taylor, Lyon, and Quincy supported the bill, and Messrs. Randolph and D. R. Williams opposed it. [This debate will be given with all possible dispatch.]
TUESDAY, APRIL 5.
Mr. M. Williams obtained leave of absence for the remainder of the session.
A petition was received from the inhabitants of Newburyport, Mass. praying the liberty of exporting fish; which was referred to the committee of the whole on the state of the union.
Mr. Gardner laid upon the table a resolution to appoint a committee to enquire into the propriety of providing by law for the adjournment of Congress to an earlier period than already provided by law.
Mr. Barker presented several petitions from dealers in fish, praying the liberty to export the same, &c. which were referred to a committee of the whole on the state of the union.
On motion of Mr. Ilseley,
Resolved, That a committee be appointed to enquire into the expediency of authorizing the President of the U. S. to exchange the site of the fortification near Portland harbor for other land more suitable for a fortification for the protection of said harbor, and that they have leave to report by bill or otherwise.
Mr. Stanford, from the committee appointed on a message from the President of the U. S. relative to the deficit of appropriations for public buildings in the city of Washington, reported a bill to make appropriations for that purpose, and for other purposes.
This bill, after some debate, was recommitted to the committee who reported it, with instructions to make a detailed report, and to enquire into the expediency of abolishing the office of surveyor of the public buildings. [Detail of proceedings on this in our next.]
The House took up the unfinished business of yesterday, on which a debate continued till near five o'clock, when the House adjourned.
Messrs. Stanford and Randolph opposed the bill, and Messrs. Macon, Blount and Burwell supported it.
A motion made by Mr. Randolph to postpone the subject for one week was negatived 68 to 38.
The following message was received on the 25th ult. and has been referred to Messrs. Blount, Quincy, Burwell, Cook, Riker, Troup, and Witherall.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States.
In proceeding to carry into execution the act for fortifying our ports and harbors, it is found that the sites most advantageous for their defence, and sometimes the only sites competent to that defence, are, in some cases, the property of minors, incapable of giving a valid consent to their alienation; in others, belong to persons who may refuse altogether to alienate, or demand a compensation far beyond the liberal justice allowable in such cases. From these causes the defence of our seaboard, so necessary to be pressed during the present season, will in various parts be defeated, unless a remedy can be applied. With a view to this, I submit the case to the consideration of Congress, who estimating its importance, and reviewing the powers vested in them by the constitution, combined with the amendment providing that private property shall not be taken for public use, without just compensation, will decide on the course most proper to be pursued.
I am aware that as the consent of the legislature of the state, to the purchase of the site, may not, in some instances, have been previously obtained, exclusive legislation cannot be exercised therein by Congress, until that consent is given. But in the mean time it will be held under the same laws which protect the property of individuals, and other property of the United States, in the same state: and the legislatures, at their next meetings, will have opportunities of doing what will be so evidently called for by the particular interest of their own state.
TH: JEFFERSON. March 25, 1808.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the U. S.
"I transmit to both Houses of Congress a report from the surveyor of public buildings, of the progress made on them during the last season, of their present state, and of that of the funds appropriated to them. These have been much exceeded by the cost of the work done, a fact not known to me till the close of the season: the circumstances from which it arose are stated in the report of the surveyor.
TH: JEFFERSON. March 25, 1808."
The subjoined resolution has passed both houses of the legislature of New York by an unanimous vote.
IN SENATE, March 26, 1808.
Resolved—(if the honorable the assembly concur therein) that the senators and representatives of this state, in the Congress of the U. S. be requested to represent in the most earnest manner to the national government the exposed situation of the port of New York, and the urgent necessity in the present menacing state of our exterior relations of making and applying such appropriation of money as may be fully adequate to the protection of that important part of the state, and that they be further requested to represent the destitute condition of our seamen—the danger of their migrating to foreign countries for employment—and the improper considerations of justice, humanity, and policy, which combine in favor of ameliorating the situation of that meritorious description of citizens, and of securing their services in defence of the country.
Extract of a letter from Leghorn, dated January 20. received by a merchant in New York.
"An embargo was laid in Leghorn on the last of January, on all vessels excepting French. The ship Grace, from Boston, is captured and carried into Porto Ferrajo; schr. Hope from Philadelphia, do. and carried into the Gulf of Spezia; and brig Eliza, from Boston, boarded and captured in Leghorn Roads, after coming to anchor, by French privateers. These vessels were not boarded by any British cruisers on their passage.
"A retro-active power is given to the French decree of 17th December, and vessels are seized for having been boarded by English cruisers, before the decree could in the nature of things be known. Two American vessels have been confiscated at Marseilles, under this plea.
"The interruption apprehended in discharging the Vermont did not take place; the whole of the cargo has been transported to Leghorn, under bond, by coasting vessels; & the goods generally in bad condition, from the long detention."
The legislature of Nova-Scotia, at their late session, passed a vote appropriating £100 to purchasing a sword or piece of plate, to be presented, in behalf of the province, to admiral Berkeley. Gov. Wentworth returned the vote to the legislature with the following message:
Gentlemen of the House of Assembly,
"Having fully considered the vote communicated to me, for granting one hundred pounds to vice-admiral Berkeley, for a sword or piece of plate; it appears to be objectionable in so many respects, that I feel it my duty to decline giving my assent to it.
J. WENTWORTH. Government House, 28th Jan."
Gov. Wentworth has offered one guinea to masters of vessels for each British seaman they may bring, and 4d. per day for each while on board the vessel.
British vessels at Halifax now find ready freights; 5 or 6 sail every week for the W. Indies.
A letter from St. Sebastians, dated February 22, (received at New York) says—"At the present moment great consternation prevails in this province. The French have taken possession of the fortifications of Figuera, a principal key to Spain, and to the citadel of Pampelune. Here the Spaniards cry aloud for vengeance. The courier of this morning brings news, that the King of Spain has consented to their keeping possession of the citadel of Pampelune, and it is said also that the French are at Barcelona."
New York, April 2. Letters from France mention, that there was an embargo at Amsterdam in February.
Protection of New York —Yesterday a bill, brought in by Mr. Clinton, passed the Senate appropriating 100,000 dollars for the defence of the port of New York—Also providing for the removal of the banks from that city in case of war, or other imminent danger.
A bill has passed both Houses, authorising the corporation of New York to purchase the Manhattan Water Works, and granting to the Manhattan Company their bank privileges for the term of thirty years. The Hudson Bank bill has also passed both Houses; capital of the bank 300,000 dollars.
[COPY.] To Messrs. J. Lasher, David Luffin, Samuel Foster, Elias Davis, William Sowle, and John Brown, masters of American vessels now lying at Algesiras, to the care of P. Poiral, vice-consul of the United States at that place.
Madrid, 9th February, 1808.
GENTLEMEN—Your letter of the 29th ult. was duly received by the courier of yesterday. I had been previously informed of the capture of four of your vessels under the Spanish decree of January 3, and had made a suitable representation to the government. My note upon this subject remains unanswered, hence I am unable to give you any certain assurances as to the issue of your trials by the inferior tribunal of Algesiras; and as no appeal, from such tribunals on questions arising under this last decree, has yet been decided by the high court of Admiralty, for the same reason I cannot feel any great confidence in the result of the appeals which you may make to it in case of condemnation at Algesiras. Nevertheless, since obviously the trade of the U. S. cannot properly be subjected to the provisions of such decrees, and indeed, by the existing treaty, is particularly exempted from them, and since also, it is not the intention of the French government (in imitation of whose policy this measure of his Catholic Majesty has been taken) to execute its decree of the same tenor, against the property of American citizens. Hence it is reasonably to be expected, that the Spanish government will also relax from the strict letter of the instrument, and adopt the application of it, which may be observed by its ally. Therefore, in case any of your vessels or cargoes should be condemned at Algesiras, I must recommend an appeal to the admiralty here. If such a course should become necessary, you would do well to send your powers of attorney, and employ as your agent here, Moses Young, the consul of the United States, and to communicate with him fully on all the circumstances of your respective cases.
Gentlemen, Your obedient servant, (Signed) GEORGE ERVING,
Philadelphia, March 31
Capt. Fowler of the Indiana, informs that the evening he sailed from Havana (March 12th) news was just received from Martinico, via Trinidad in Cuba, that a British fleet had arrived at that island and landed Six thousand men, who were all, it was said, cut off by the French; this was communicated to capt. F. by a respectable Spanish Officer, a few hours before he sailed—How far it is to be depended on time must determine.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, APRIL 1.
The following resolution was received from the Senate:
Resolved, That a committee be appointed to join such committee as the House of Representatives may appoint on their part to enquire and report what business is necessary to be done by Congress the present session, and when it may be expedient to close the same.
A report yesterday made by the committee on the post office and post roads relative to the transportation by mail of the documents accompanying the President's message, and declaring it inexpedient, was taken up and negatived; and on motion of Mr. D. R. Williams, a committee was instructed to report a bill to provide for their transmission.
Mr. Dawson having called for the reading of the engrossed bill for raising an additional military force.
Mr. Randolph said that previous to taking up the engrossed bills it was the general practice to transact other business. It will be recollected by the House, said he, that during our proceedings yesterday, two motions which I did then believe, and which I do still believe to have been of extreme consequence to the public, were crushed in embryo by a refusal to consider them. I then understood the Speaker, who is the fountain of order in this House, that the rule stands thus: that when a member makes a motion, it is the right of any member to require him to reduce it to writing, and being so reduced to writing a previous question becomes necessary—that a question, which ad-

mits of no debate, must be taken, whether the House will consider that motion or not. It is perhaps because of the very late introduction of this practice into the House, or of this novel construction of the old rule, that no attempt has been hitherto made to amend it. That rule, according to my humble apprehension, is at war with the constitution itself; it is the engine by which a majority of this House may be enabled at any time to prevent any question from being debated within these walls, unless it shall have received their previous sanction. It does enable the majority to impose their indivisibiliter on any question introduced, in like manner as in despotic governments the prince puts his imprimatur on the press. This rule is inconsistent with the principles of our government. The majority being once fixed, it is utterly impossible for any member not of that majority, to have any question he may choose to raise, discussed. I know very well that gentlemen did assign reasons, and sometimes do assign reasons for not considering a motion, but in private, for they cannot do it in debate—reasons, very good perhaps, but certainly applicable only to the passage of the motion, and not operating against the consideration and discussion of it. It is very true that there are a multiplicity of speeches made in this House, and that they are to a certain degree an evil; but if it be our object to prevent that evil, let us do it by preventing a member from speaking more than twice, in committee, of the whole, or once in the House to the same question: whatever method we take to cure it, for heaven's sake let us not be excluding one part of the assembly from having their motions deliberated upon and discussed at all. But after all, for what was our government instituted, and we placed here, but to discuss and deliberate the great concerns of the government. It is not, from the very nature of our government, possible that it can act with the celerity of one wielded by despotism; but let it be recollected that this is one of the few sacrifices for the enjoyment of the inestimable blessings which we possess. I say that the practice under this rule is an innovation upon the old practice: and to the best of my recollection and belief it has commenced this session of Congress. In the worst of times, when the rules of this House were changed to prevent particular views of the minority, and especially to prevent the gentleman who at present is at the head of our Treasury, from (as it was then called) clogging the wheels of government, this was certainly never tried, and I believe never thought of; if it had been adopted, however, it would not have been submitted to by the people of the United States. This is an invention which gentlemen may think works very handsomely in their hands; but let it be recollected that like pretty invention the guillotine, the instrument may be worked upon the selves, hereafter which is worked by them now. Considering the decision of the Speaker to have been final, I offer the following resolution:
Resolved , That when any motion is made and seconded, it shall be considered as in possession of the House, and the question for considering such motion shall not exclude debate upon it.
Mr. Stanford said he was well acquainted with the history of this padlock upon debate; it was in fact an innovation.
The Speaker declared that no motion had been made to consider the resolution; no question being before the House, the gentleman was out of order.
Mr. Stanford said if he was out of order in this, if his friend from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) would give him an opportunity by withdrawing his motion, while he was up he would make another motion.
Mr. Randolph said that his resolution was simply laid on the table; the gentleman was of course at liberty to make any motion which he pleased.
Mr. Stanford said he would then make a motion which he had felt to be an interesting one to the nation, and in doing which, so far as respected his own feelings, he should discharge his duty. It is, said he, a motion respecting the city of Washington. I have perceived different documents and motions, which have for their object the removal of the mint, the war school, &c. to Washington; and really, if they are to exist any where, I can see no objection to their coming here. I wish, therefore, inasmuch as a motion was some time ago made for the removal of the seat of government, to which I was opposed, that something should be done to further the prosperity of the place, by an enquiry whether any arrangement can be made in the public buildings to accommodate these different establishments. I have drawn up the motion so as to refer the subject to the committee on the district of Columbia, because I believe them friendly to the city and district; I wish not to provoke debate, but that the committee may have the subject under their consideration, that at a future session they
make such a report as may shew whether any alteration can be made in the plan of the public buildings or the city which will go to accommodate such institutions as may give prosperity to the seat of the general government—such as the bank of the United States, if its charter is to be renewed, and it will operate with advantage, the war school or military academy, the mint, &c.—any institution which may go to give something to the city. I assure the House that I have no other object in view than to befriend the city.
Mr. S. offered the following—
Resolved , That the committee on the district of Columbia be instructed to enquire and report to this House how far the present plan of the city of Washington, and the arrangement of the public buildings, belonging to the United States can be so modified or altered, or other measure taken as shall go both to promote the convenience of the government, and at the same time the future growth and prosperity of the city.
The yeas and nays being agreed to be taken on the question for considering the resolution.
Mr. Stanford wished now to put to the Speaker a question on the point of order, whether debate is admissible on a question to consider a motion? For himself he believed the gentleman from Virginia had no occasion to make the motion, as it was but an innovation.
The Speaker said that the honorable gentleman who had preceded him in the chair had uniformly put this construction on the rule; and it being also his opinion, he must decide that debate on such a question was contrary to order.
Mr. Stanford appealed from the decision of the Speaker. Mr. S. made some observations against the Speaker's decision, declaring it be laying down a principle subversive of all the rights of a minority, completely excluding them from originating a motion.
Mr. Randolph made some observations going to shew that the rule of the House which excludes debate on priority of business is applicable to that which is already before the House, and not to a motion when originated. He professed himself extremely obliged to the gentleman from N. C. for having made a motion which enabled him to bring this question of order to a decision. When the gentleman made the motion, said Mr. R. I was entirely at a loss to know what his object could be; but as I have discovered his object, I am extremely happy, for if the rule is to have this interpretation, I wish it to be confirmed by the full sense of the House. It is a rule which the British ministry from the time of Cecil to that of the elder or younger Pitt, would never have dared to introduce into their Parliament; yet here it is introduced by construction without due deliberation, I do not say with a view to any certain purpose—God forbid that such a disposition as that should exist, or that I should suspect any one of a wish to silence debate, not by argument, but by a rule of order. There would be very little chance, more especially in conclusion, that the liberty of debate would be more abused in that case than in others. Sir, when we are shut up in quatuor muros , within the four walls of this House, what object can any one have in wishing for debate, but to reason? He can have none; more especially if he invite discussion on a certain position, and declare himself willing to abandon it upon conviction of its inexpediency. It is really extremely surprising that when gentlemen are invited to a discussion of a certain point, and none has come under consideration of greater importance during the present session, that they will preserve a sullen or rather perhaps dignified silence, and that reasons which might perhaps shew that they were right even in refusing to come over to our proposition, should be urged not in debate but in private from one to another as reasons for absolutely refusing to take a matter into consideration, a matter which if it be not taken into consideration, & on which if the people, who are now in the depths of utter darkness be not speedily informed, no man can say what the consequences will be. Upon that subject I will say no more at present. I have certainly no disposition to divulge that which the rules of the House require to be kept secret; I will just observe that it is absolutely necessary that the good old practice should be reinstated either by a reversion of the decision of the chair, or by an alteration of the standing rules & orders of the House.
Mr. Smilie made some observations in reply to the gentleman from N. Carolina and Virginia (Messrs. Stanford and Randolph.) As to the British Parliament, if there were no such rule, he said the gentlemen very well knew that the previous question answered every purpose the ministry desired. At present a gentleman in making a motion, is at perfect liberty to speak for an hour; he may argue for the whole session and the House has no control over him. Is not the House, said Mr. S. capable of judging for themselves, after so long a preface, whether the motion is of such a nature that it will be proper to consider
it? Some gentlemen seem to have an idea that others are not possessed of understandings and therefore they will instruct them. I would observe that there are many among us who never speak at all, and yet are not inferior in understanding to those who do. However, be that as it may, the gentleman from Virginia has no reason to complain of multiplicity of speeches, as he is allowed his full share. I believe that if we are now seriously determined to do public business, we shall not withdraw this rule; for I foresee that even without it we shall have much more discussion than is necessary. I wish to God that the business of putting the country in a state of defence were the object of all, instead of occupying time with business which can only impede it.
Messrs. Masters and Quincy now opposed the decision of the Speaker, and Mr. Marion supported it.
A message in writing was at this moment received from the President of the U. S.
Mr. Gardner wished the message to be read, and therefore moved that this business lie on the table—Negatived, Ayes 20.
Mr. G. W. Campbell after some observations on the point of order, said he should not now take the liberty of recapitulating what had yesterday been done in conclave; but as the business had been stated as important he would say this: that to his mind no question had been proposed in their secret sitting which affected either the interests or the liberties of the people of this country which has not been considered; and in his view no object could be answered by considering the questions alluded to, or consequence proceed from them which could produce any good to the nation. The gentleman asks what reasons there can be for preventing debate when the doors are closed. I in turn ask what motive can be attributed to a refusal of debate when the doors are closed except to save time? Eloquent as those gentlemen who wish debate may be, and great as may be their power of reasoning, they will hardly tell the people of the union that it is so great that they could by it carry us a way which we do not wish to go. Except this be their belief, however, what motive can there be for wasting our time and the public money? There is not nor can be any other motive for refusing consideration to a motion; than that which springs from a wish to transact the public business and to avoid wasting time in attempting to do what cannot benefit but may injure the public interest. I can see no advantage from the alteration of the rule at present. The advantage now, if on any side, is certainly to the mover; he may state all his reasons previous to presenting a motion, by suggesting that he intends to make one. The public then have all the reasons in support of the motion, and have to trust to the good sense of those who oppose its consideration; and of course it must be a clear case before we vote against the consideration of a motion. This is the case in public; but in private there can be no earthly reason but to save time, unless it can be supposed that members trusted with the confidence of the public are afraid that the eloquence and arguments of others will carry them beyond their own good sense; and such a reason as this will scarcely be assigned for their conduct. I wish not to be understood as supposing that gentlemen who make these motions have any other object in view than the good of their country; it is not my wish to impeach their motives, for whenever I do that I do it directly, and they cannot mistake me. But as no good in my mind could have arisen from the consideration of the motions yesterday, I may be permitted to repeal the assertion that any possible good can arise from considering, or in consequence of success in obtaining a decision if the motion had been considered.
Mr. Stanford said he perceived a message from the President of the U. S. had been received; as he did not wish a hasty decision on this motion, he would recall the appeal, that gentlemen might have time to consider it.
The question now recurring on the consideration of the resolution of Mr. Stanford.
Mr. Randolph observed that notwithstanding the observation of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Smilie) that he took up more of the time of the House than he was entitled to, which by the bye Mr. R. said he did not think precisely correct, for he believed that he trespassed not as frequently or uselessly as some others—yet he must now continue to be, perhaps with the gentleman from Pennsylvania, of the number of those who did not give evidence of good sense by holding their peace. It had been said, that no motion had been made yesterday involving deep and great public interest; so different was his view—
[Mr. Wilbour wished to know what question was before the House?]
The Speaker said it was on a motion for consideration, on which there could be no debate; consequently,
the gentleman from Virginia was not in order.
Mr. Randolph wished Mr. Stanford to withdraw his resolution, as he wished to make a motion.
Mr. Stanford having withdrawn the resolution,
Mr. Randolph proceeded.]
So different, said he, was my understanding of the subject, from that of the gentleman from Ten. that I shall continue to reiterate those motions until I can prevail upon the House to consider them; and when I am convinced that they are improper to be adopted by the discussion which ensues upon them, I am as willing to give them up as any member on the floor. It has been asked, is it presumable that members of this House are afraid to trust themselves to the force of eloquence and arguments of other gentlemen? This is one of those presumptions which do not require an answer. It was however added that it is a clear case—one of those clear cases in which gentlemen confiding in the good sense of the public and the understandings of the people are willing to leave it to themselves. That is precisely my object; I wish the people themselves to decide according to the dictates of their plain, honest common sense; but I would trust their understandings and that good sense after they are put in possession of the whole truth. Gentlemen may very willingly refer a decision upon a naked vote to the public when the motives, when the facts, I will say, on which that decision is to turn are concealed. I certainly did not yesterday (and I am not conscious of having done it to-day) impeach in any wise the decision of the House, or the motives which induced it; very far from it. On the contrary, I always wish to pay every possible deference to the sentiments of the House; and I bore my defeat, if not with pleasant looks, at least with heart felt good humor, and shewed every possible respect to the members of this House, and to yourself, Mr. Speaker; and this I shall continue to do, as far as is consistent with my respect for my own character, and my duty to my country, from which I shall never depart, now or in future. I say that I will reiterate these motions until I can prevail upon the House to discuss them. I recollect a case not dissimilar to this.
The Speaker interrupted the gentleman to observe that he had discovered that the message just received from the President was of a confidential nature; the rule of the House declaring that in such cases the galleries should immediately be cleared, the Speaker doubted whether any motion could be received till that was done.
Mr. Randolph. I meant to wind up my observations with a motion to clear the galleries; so that in any case my object will be gained.
The galleries were then cleared accordingly, and the House sat with closed doors until they adjourned at about four o'clock.
SATURDAY, APRIL 2.
On this day the House met with closed doors, and so continued till near five o'clock, when the doors were opened.
Mr. Rhea, (T.) then reported a bill for transportation of documents, &c. by mail. Twice read and referred.
A resolution from the Senate for appointing a joint committee to consider what business is necessary to be done previous to adjournment, was taken up, passed, and a committee of five appointed on the part of this House.
By his excellency ROBERT WRIGHT ESQ. GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND, A PROCLAMATION.
WHEREAS it has been represented to me on oath that an horrid murder has lately been committed in Cecil county, by a certain John McGuire, on certain James Coyle; that said John McGuire is described to be about five feet seven inches high, light complexion, dark hair, boyish countenance and cast down look, aged about twenty years, stout make, strong and active—had on when he escaped an old short blue coat, linsey trowsers and swans-down vest; his wrists considerably marked with the irons and perhaps his legs also, and has lately broke jail; and whereas it is the duty of the Executive, in the execution of the laws, to endeavor to bring all malefactors to justice; I have therefore thought proper to issue this my proclamation, and do by and with the consent of the Council, offer One Hundred and Fifty Dollars Reward to any person or persons who shall apprehend and bring to justice the said John McGuire.
Given in Council, at the city of Annapolis, under the seal of the state of Maryland, this ninth day of March in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the thirty-second.
ROBERT WRIGHT. By his excellency's command, NIANIAN PINKNEY, Clerk of the Council. Ordered, That the foregoing Proclamation be published twice in each week for the space of four weeks in the American, and Federal Gazette, at Baltimore; the Maryland Gazette, at Annapolis; the National Intelligencer, the Republican Advocate, at Frederick Town; the Maryland Herald, at Hagerstown, and in the Star at Easton. March 14—2aw4w
PUBLIC SALE. By Virtue of a decree of the honorable the High Court of Chancery of Maryland, will be exposed to sale on the 8th day of April next at 12 o'clock at the store of Thomas Duvall, a Tract of LAND, containing One Hundred and Eighty-Seven acres, called Brashears Pacoison, the property of John Turner deceased, lying in Prince George's county, about 7 miles from Bladensburg, 10 from the city of Washington, and 23 from Annapolis; about one third in wood, the remainder in a state of productive cultivation. The terms of the above sale are, that the purchaser shall give bond with good security such as shall be approved of by the trustee for paying one half within 9 months, and the other half within 18 months with interest on each payment from the day of sale.
GEO. PAGE, Trustee. The Creditors of John Turner, deceased, who have not yet exhibited their claims, are hereby notified to bring the same into the Chancery Court, with the vouchers thereof within six months from the day of sale. G. PAGE. March 16—3w
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 Testamentary on the personal estate of Comand Plowden late of the county aforesaid deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same with vouchers thereof to the subscriber, at or before the 25th day of September next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Given under my hand this 18th day of March, eighteen hundred & eight. HENRY NEALE, Ex'r. March 23—6w
FAMILY PHYSICIAN. A new and greatly improved Family Physician, entitled "The Planter's and Mariner's Companion." FOR SALE AT R. C. WEIGHTMAN'S Book-store, Washington city. J. MILLIGAN'S George-Town, And KID & THOMAS'S, Market street Baltimore. March 28—3w
CHARLES H. VARDEN MERCHANT TAILOR, Respectfully informs the gentlemen of the District of Columbia and public in general, that he has just received by a late arrival from Philadelphia,
A CHOICE ASSORTMENT Of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, single and double milled, superfine Coatings, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment of Spaniards and rich silk Mouselins for waistcoats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season. Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform style of fashion. Richard Horswell's celebrated patent partial suspenders far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms as at his manufactory. November 27—1f
PUBLIC SALE. By order of the Orphan's Court of Washington county, District of Columbia, the subscriber will offer at Public Sale, on Friday the 8th of April,
PART of the Personal Estate of John Wright deceased, consisting of Wheat, Corn, Oats, Rye, Horses, horned Cattle; among which there is one yoke of valuable Oxen, Hogs, Sheep, Plantation Utensils, &c. The sale will commence at 11 o'clock, A. M.—Farms all sums under 20 dollars cash, above that sum a credit of six months, the purchaser giving bond, with approved security, to bear interest from the date.
WASHINGTON BOYD Ex'rs of AND GEORGE MOORE, Ex'rs of March 30—epids
THE subscriber has purchased out the stock of GOODS lately belonging to Mr. Nitsch Riggs, and will be enabled, from the conditions of purchase, to dispose of them in the same house on as liberal if not better terms than they were sold before. He expects by capt. Hand, from Philadelphia this week or the first of next, a handsome Spring Supply, which will make his assortment complete. They were laid in for cash, therefore will accommodate his friends no doubt satisfactorily. JOHN PETER, George-Town, March 16—epdw
NOTICE. The Subscriber being anxious to settle all his business, has sold his entire stock of goods to John Peter; he therefore requests all those indebted to him to call and pay their accounts, (particularly such as are of long standing, as further indulgence cannot be given them). His books are removed to the counting house of his brother Romulus Riggs, where all his accounts will be ready for settlement by his assistant Mr. Samuel C. Offutt or ELISHA RIGGS. George-Town, March 15—cf
PURSUANT to an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed at November session, 1806, entitled "An act authorizing the collection of certain ground rents due on lots in the Town of Cumberland, in Allegany county," and a supplement thereto, passed at November session, 1807, Public Notice is hereby given to all persons holding unimproved lots in said town, on which ground rents are now due, that unless the said rents are paid on or before the first day of December next, the said lots will on that day be offered at public sale to the highest bidder, on a credit of 60 days. The sale to be held at Mr. J. Rine's tavern in said town, to commence at ten o'clock, A. M. and continue from day to day, until the whole are sold. THOMAS BEALL, of Saml. March 21—epids