The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-07-27 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1215.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
CASE OF JOHN SMITH—Continued.
Agreeably to the order observed in the Senate the following speech should have preceded that of Mr. Adams.
MR. KEY—Mr. President—In the discharge of what duty to which we are now called by the permission of this honorable body, nothing could have been more gratifying than to have waived all objections to this proceeding or any of its forms; to have presented our evidence and rested our defence upon the unanswerable proofs which it contains. We could have wished to have trespassed no otherwise upon the attention of the Senate than by contrasting the purity, truth and respectability of that evidence with the foulness, falsehood and infamy of those to which the present accusation owes its origin and support. Were the principles which have always heretofore governed legislative and judicial assemblies in the investigation of facts admitted to their just and usual rank on this occasion, was the Senate to be guided by its own former decisions, or by those of every other intelligent tribunal, this would have been the course which we would most gladly have pursued.
But, sir, these principles are denied, and the force of these precedents attacked in the report which the Senate are now called upon to adopt, with a zeal and ability which we cannot hope successfully to resist; and new principles and a new mode of proceeding are recommended, by which we cannot consent to be tried; which we humbly conceive, render innocence, nay even the proof of innocence an unavailing defence.
It is, therefore, sir, that we feel ourselves most reluctantly compelled to protest against this enquiry; to plead to the jurisdiction of the Senate, and to deny the obligation of answering to this charge, in any manner and in any place, where those rights of defence which justice, law, and established custom entitle us to, are refused or doubted.
I shall therefore contend, that the Senate have no right to enquire into the truth of a charge which is indictable in a court of law. And I will undertake to prove this by resorting to the same sources from which a contrary conclusion is attempted to be drawn in this report—the commands of the constitution; the dictates of reason, and the sanction of precedents.
The 7th amendatory article of the constitution directs “that no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except, &c.” If it is said that this restriction relates merely to the judiciary, I ask why are certain cases contained in the exception which could not in their nature have the least connection with judicial proceedings? Why are cases in the army or navy excepted? If a soldier could not have been held to answer for a capital offence, but for the exception contained in this article; can one of the members of this House, unless a similar exception is shewn? If it would not have been sufficient, in order to try such a case, otherwise than by indictment, to say that this article related only to judicial cases, so neither can the Senate give themselves jurisdiction in this case by adopting this construction.
But, sir, the following article is still more conclusive. “In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.”
Let me ask if this privilege thus expressly secured by the most positive terms, is not violated by a proceeding like this. The member accused of an indictable offence may, and most probably always will be indicted; he has a right to a speedy trial. Can the Senate have the power to deny him this right by instituting an enquiry either before or just after he is indicted, and thus delaying the trial until they have procured the testimony of witnesses, and decided upon the accusation? Such a delay would be unavailing and considerable, where the offence was committed at a distance, and thus the accused is deprived of his constitutional right to a speedy trial. But what is of yet more importance to him, he is denied the right
of a trial by an impartial jury. For when this House has declared, after a deliberate investigation, that he is guilty, what jury would be unprejudiced by such a decision? Or if they declare him innocent, will any jury be likely to convict him upon the same testimony? Thus in either case he will not have a trial by an impartial jury.
But, sir, if these injunctions of the constitution can by any ingenuity be evaded, what answer can be given to those which are dictated by the equally authoritative voice of reason.
In the first place, such proceedings here are unnecessary, and if unnecessary, surely unreasonable; for this House and (more particularly from their numbers) the other branch of our national legislature may, if these enquiries are sanctioned, be called on repeatedly during a session to institute similar proceedings. When we consider the feelings which are excited by a warmly contested election, and the resentments of disappointed candidates, it is by no means improbable that many such cases will occur in both Houses. Let the time and attention which this has occupied, (and surely there has been no unnecessary delay) be considered, and it will be obvious that nothing but the most imperative necessity can justify the legislature in neglecting (as they manifestly must do) the various and important national concerns which are pressing upon them, and overlooking the interests of the country in their search after the crimes of each other—crimes too, sir, which are cognizable and punishable elsewhere; which it is the peculiar and exclusive duty of our courts to pronounce upon; which they can always pronounce upon in less time, for they sit more frequently; with less inconvenience, for they have nothing else to do, and I may add with equal justice; for this honorable House must sanction the characters selected to fill them. When they have thus pronounced, their record can be enrolled in this House, and if it contains a member whose guilt is declared by that record, nothing else will be necessary to remove the pollution.
The necessity however of this interference by the Senate between the accusation and the sentence of guilt, is warmly urged in the report of the honorable committee. It is there contended that the Senate are compelled to assume the jurisdiction and discharge the duties of a court, because those duties are neglected and violated by our courts.
Yes, sir, we are told that our judicial tribunals not only allow notorious offenders impunity for years, but that when a criminal is arrested and brought before them for trial, instead of ascertaining his guilt or innocence, they amuse themselves and him by enquiring into the “possibility of his innocence.” Whether this be a correct representation; whether the counsel for a criminal may plead to an indictment “that he is possibly innocent,” without any danger of the district attorney’s demurrer or the ridicule of the court; whether our judges be thus negligent, corrupt and foolish beyond all former example, I shall not pretend to enquire. But admitting it, how strange is the conclusion drawn from it? The judiciary is depraved; they disregard their duties, and therefore it is urged, that the legislative department should disregard their own duties to perform those of the judiciary. If, sir, this is the degraded condition of our courts, it is within the power, and it is the duty of this honorable House to restore purity and vigor to that department, not by assuming judicial functions, but by the exercise of its legitimate legislative authority. Let them frame a law compelling courts to do their duty; obliging them to catch offenders in a reasonable time, and to punish such as are guilty, notwithstanding they may be “possibly innocent.”
Thus, sir, no actual or fancied depravity in our judicial tribunals can impose on this House the necessity of enquiring into indictable offences committed by its members. And not only is it unnecessary, but most oppressive and unjust. I can conceive nothing more injurious to a person accused of a crime than to have the public from whom his jury are to be selected prejudiced against him. There is little difference between punishing a man without a trial and destroying the purity of that
trial. Let me ask if any honorable member of this House can reconcile it to his reason and sense of justice to express a public opinion of the guilt of a person about to be tried for an offence? And if he would feel this restraint as an individual, let me now urge him to forbear from throwing the weight of his authority and of the high official station which he bears, into those scales of justice should be most accurately balanced and held with the most even and steady hand. The offence charged upon Mr. Smith is confessedly indictable. Though the malice of his enemies has been lately foiled in its attempt to procure a prosecution against him at Chillicothe, though that grand jury disbelieved his slanderers, yet even in this case he may be subjected to answer to an indictment for this offence. If this should happen, can it be pretended that a laborious investigation and a solemn decision of the Senate of the United States will be without its influence upon that fair and impartial trial which is his right? Will the court and the jury feel no prejudice against him whose crime has been publicly ascertained and declared by so high an authority? The most innocent man alive could expect nothing but the confirmation of that sentence. The slightest circumstance would in such a trial be considered as conclusive proof—the most infamous witness thought worthy of credit—for where would he be disbelieved who had been listened to here? I should not, sir, be without my apprehensions that even the ghost of Elias Glover’s departed reputation might be conjured up by the magic of a vote of this House, might stalk into a court of justice restored to its capacity of mischief, and armed with the recommendations of the Senate of the U. S. I might even feel afraid of this shadow.
To these self-evident dictates of reason thus concurring with the opinion of our constitution, allow me now to add the irresistible force of the most deliberate and respectable precedents. These, sir, will shew that the principle for which we now contend has already received the solemn sanction of the Senate. The case of Mr. Marshall is precisely similar to the present. This gentleman while a member of this House was accused of perjury and an enquiry into his conduct solicited. A committee highly respectable for talents was appointed as in this instance; and their report is now among the records of this House. This report avows in the most unequivocal language (as will be seen by reference to it) that the Senate had no jurisdiction; that the offence was cognizable in a court; and therefore could not be enquired into here; and the Senate by a very large majority concurred with this report. The weight of this decision, so confessedly in point, is now most ingeniously resisted in the present report. It is said to have been adopted without due consideration and afterwards departed from, at the very next session in the case of Blount. There are no marks of haste or prejudice to be discovered in the conduct of the Senate on that occasion; no reason to suppose that they acted without that discernment and deliberation which should always attend the proceedings of this House. The accusation was presented by the legislature of Kentucky, a source entitled to respect and consideration. Nor could they have been prejudiced in favor of their associate, for he was anxious to waive all objections to their jurisdiction. It would indeed be strange that the very individuals who voted for this report should so soon afterwards have sanctioned a directly contrary one—and though it is contended by the present honorable committee that they have done so, I yet hope to acquit them from a charge of such gross inconsistency.
The decision in the case of Blount instead of being contradictory of any principle established by the case of Marshall is in the strictest conformity with it—they are perfectly reconcilable and mutually strengthen each other, and both enforce the principle I am now contending for. The offence with which Mr. Marshall was charged, was perjury, an indictable offence. That alleged against Mr. Blount was the writing a letter, certainly highly im-
proper and reprehensible, but for which it cannot be pretended that he was liable to indictment. This at once explains the grounds of these two decisions. In one case the Senate saw that our courts had cognizance of the offence; that if guilty a conviction there could be produced as the ground of expulsion; they therefore decided that they could not enquire. In the other case, the member was subject to no prosecution and they therefore with equal propriety and perfect consistency determined to enquire. Thus, sir, the authority of the case of Marshall is unimpeached by that of Blount, nay, they both concur to deny the correctness of such a proceeding as the present where the offence charged is indictable.
These, sir, are the only instances which have occurred in this country—and I shall not think it necessary to refer to the precedents of any other, to support a principle which has received so solemn and deliberate a decision here. Yet if those of England are resorted to they will be found consistent with them, except on one occasion in which prejudice and intemperance evidently operated. I allude to the case of Wilkes, the proceeding in which case was declared at the time to be unprecedented, and is now almost universally allowed to have been unjust. I do not suppose that the authority of this case can be held up as superior to that of decisions here, and will therefore make no attempt to shew the impropriety of that proceeding, & that even if justifiable there, there could be no pretence or excuse for introducing such a precedent in our country. I have now, sir, endeavored to show from the constitution, from reason, and from precedent, that the Senate are forbidden to proceed in this enquiry.
But, sir, if I have been unsuccessful in this attempt, if the Senate do proceed, if Mr. Smith’s guilt or innocence is to be established without a trial in a court of justice, let me at least hope that he will be tried as if he was in a court of justice; and that none of the substantial benefits allowed in judicial investigations will be denied him here. This honorable House, sir, are not now sitting in their usual deliberative capacity—this is no question of expediency. The moment this enquiry was instituted every such question was waived, and this House became to all intents and purposes a judicial tribunal—for what is that but a judicial tribunal which investigates a criminal accusation and forms and pronounces a judgment upon its truth. However different then the forms of this proceeding may be from those usually adopted in judicial tribunals, let me at least hope that we shall find the substance the same. But this, sir, the present report of the honorable committee forbids us to expect. The principles which always regulate judicial tribunals are denied to be authoritative here; and it is therefore urged that the depositions of witnesses with whom the accused has never been confronted, to whom he has never been permitted to put a question, should be received as evidence against him. Nay the most fundamental principle in criminal enquiries, the most obvious dictate of justice, that which presumes innocence till guilt is proved, is now advised (I humbly apprehend for the first time) not only to be dispensed with, but to be reversed. And why, sir, should the Senate, when acting as a judicial tribunal, thus disdain to resort to judicial principles and precedents? Does not the source whence they were derived deserve a respectful consideration? The situation of our country, the security which every man feels in the enjoyment of all his rights and possessions, that quiet and repose which is every where visible, constitute the best panegyric upon our civil tribunals and is an unanswerable proof of the purity and respectability with which they are filled, of the fidelity and ability and wisdom with which their duties are discharged: and if we look to the tribunals of that country from which our system of jurisprudence has been so wisely borrowed, we shall find them every way worthy of our regard and admiration. I do not, I think, speak from any professional prejudices when I affirm that the judicial department of that government has always displayed the
most marked superiority over every other. In times of the greatest political depravity when every other branch of their civil institutions was stained with pollution, into the sanctuary of their courts corruption did not dare to enter; and a profligate ministry, as their history will shew, have always found it cheaper and easier to purchase a whole Parliament than a single judge. Nor, sir, can it justly be said that those principles thus selected by intelligent men, for the promotion of justice, and matured and perfected by the wisdom and experience of successive ages, are either unreasonable in themselves or inapplicable to the present occasion. If the presumption in favor of the innocence of an accused person is universally and properly allowed, if it operates in favor of the meanest vagrant indicted for the most petty offence, the punishment of which is merely to subject him to confinement in a comfortable jail, or a few stripes upon a back already hardened by the lash, under what pretence can it be denied in the present enquiry, when an honorable member of this House, the purity of whose past life has procured him this high mark of confidence from his fellow-citizens, is about to be tried for the most odious offence, and doomed to the most ignominious punishment. And what, sir, can be alleged against the justice of that great rule of evidence which brings a man’s accusers from that secrecy which falsehood will always seek, commands them to stand before his face, to submit to his examination and to bear the keen searchings of the eyes of the beholders?
Can it possibly be thought more consistent with justice to dispense with this rule and introduce a mode of proceeding which is to give the name and the effect of evidence to exparte depositions, taken not only without any notice to the accused, but in the most secret and concealed manner for the very purpose of preventing him from having any knowledge of them. There are, sir, depositions now upon your table, of the contents of which and even of the names of the deponents neither the accused nor his counsel had the slightest information till they were yesterday read as evidence against him. And these deponents too, sir, are many of them the very persons who (as Mr. Smith has proved) were called upon by him to ascertain certain facts in his defence, and who refused to attend or to answer any of his enquiries. Against these new slanders, sir, what opportunity has the accused had of defending himself—can he be expected to produce testimony from Ohio to-day to disprove facts or to discredit witnesses which he never heard of till yesterday? Permit me, sir, to call the attention of the Senate to one circumstance which has taken place in this enquiry, which proves more strongly than any arguments I can urge, the flagrant impropriety of considering such information as testimony. When the deposition of Elias Glover was first read in the Senate and a summary proceeding was urged; this witness was no doubt believed, and had a decision taken place before Mr. Smith could have produced testimony to discredit him, his guilt would have been declared and his disgrace effected by a paper which is now rendered as perfectly harmless as if it had never been stained by falsehood. Will the Senate then receive proof taken under similar circumstances, and again run the risk of doing an act of injustice which they had before so happily escaped?
Here, sir, the case of Blount has been again introduced, and it is stated that the Senate on that occasion departed from the ordinary rules of evidence and acted upon such as a criminal tribunal would have declared inadmissible. We are most willing, sir, to submit to this precedent, we consider its authority most respectable and earnestly solicit that the principles there established may regulate the present proceeding.
What then is the evidence which the Senate received in the case of Blount, and which a court would have rejected? The report informs us, & so was the fact, that the Senate acted upon the “production of the original letter and the proof of Mr. Blount’s handwriting made by persons who had seen him write.” Instead of this being testimony that a criminal court would have rejected, (as it is stated to

be in the report) it is in my humble apprehension the very evidence, and the only evidence which such a court would have received.
I should not, sir, thus hazard an opinion in opposition to that advanced by the honorable committee, was I not supported in it by the universal practice of all courts and the concurrence of all writers upon the law of evidence, and enabled to declare that no instance can be produced of a contrary decision.
There can therefore, sir, be shown neither reason nor precedent for departing in this instance, nor in any other, from those rules and principles which constitute our system of jurisprudence, a system worthy of the admiration of the world as being the most distinguished production of human intelligence, and worthy of our warmest affection as being the greatest blessing we enjoy.
Having now, sir, stated these objections against the present enquiry, and more particularly and more earnestly against the principles which the honorable committee have recommended to govern it, I gladly proceed to discharge the remaining part of my duty by submitting a few remarks upon the testimony exhibited upon this occasion. It will be readily admitted that excepting Elias Glover, no witness deposes directly and positively to the guilt of the honorable member accused. Their testimony is wholly circumstantial, and I hope to be enabled to show, that from no circumstance they state can guilt be fairly inferred. But the chief question to be ascertained, the point to which this enquiry will be found nolly to turn, is the degree of credit which is to be given to the testimony of Elias Glover. I am much gratified, sir, in recollecting the importance attached to the evidence of this witness in the commencement of this proceeding, and the almost universal acknowledgement that Mr. Smith's fate depended upon the truth or falsehood of his testimony. We are most willing to rest it upon this issue; we could not ask a more favorable one than that which compels every man before he can believe in the guilt of the accused, to the necessity of first believing in the truth of Elias Glover, and this I now proceed to show is impossible.
(Mr. Key's speech to be continued.)
MILITARY LIBRARY. No. 10 of this valuable Work is just received, and for sale at R. C. WEIGHTMAN'S Book-store.
R. C. W. receives subscriptions for major Z. M. Pike's EXPEDITIONS to the sources of the Mississippi, and through the western parts of Louisiana, to the sources of the Osage, Arkansas, Kansas, La Platte, and — river, performed by order of the government of the United States in the years 1805, 6, and 7.
This work will be divided into three parts, but comprised in one volume large octavo—Price to subscribers, three Dollars, in Boards, payable on delivery.
Subscriptions are also received for an interesting Novel of Mrs. Opie, entitled "Adeline Mowbray, or the Mother & Daughter," in 2 vols. Price to subscribers 75 cents per vol. in boards; to non-subscribers 87 1/2 cents.
July 27—53
IMPROVED BREED OF SHEEP.
FOR SALE From 40 to 50 half blooded English EWES, (part of the flock of the subscriber) got by imported Rams of the celebrated Teeswater, Dishley and South Down breeds—price EIGHT dollars each; likewise half and three quarter blooded Ram LAMBS, TEN dollars each; to be viewed at Ross Hall, near Brunswick, New Jersey.
MILES SMITH.
July 27—31
MILITARY NOTICE.
MARY A. PIC has the honor to inform military gentlemen that she has just received an elegant assortment of articles in the Military Line, consisting of 100 pair Gold & Silver Epaulets, among which some are truly elegant. Plumes of all colors and sizes, Gold and silver tassels, Ditto cords, Tinsel do. Sword knots, Cockades, Stocks, &c. &c. She has also a parcel of fine VIRGINIA CLOTH, different patterns—umbrellas, a large assortment of split straw hats and bonnets—ribbons, and as usual every other article in the military line.
July 27—31.
FOR SALE.
THE Two story BRICK HOUSE, situated on square number 930 in the city of Washington now occupied by Mr. Tunis Craven, as a retail store. The eligibility of this stand for the retail business is excelled by none in this city; being situated on the principal street to the Navy Yard, and very near the Navy Yard Gate. Any person desirous of purchasing the above property may be shown it by applying to the subscriber, who will also make known the terms of sale.
WM BRENT.
Washington city, Dec. 18—wtf
FOR THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
FARMER—No. VII.
It has been observed, that the divisions which exist among the republicans have principally arisen, either from local disputes, from a difference of opinion with regard to the extent to which our naval establishment ought to be extended, or from a difference of opinion with respect to the principles which ought to regulate appointments to office. As to personal differences, those are thrown altogether out of the question. They are so contracted in their operation, and ordinarily so fugitive in their duration, that they can have but a very trifling influence on the weight of character of any individual or even administration. Even, however, on this head, were it considered at all necessary, it would be perfectly easy to show that there is scarcely a political man among us of equal distinction, who has steered so clear of personal collisions as Mr. Madison. His manners are, universally, allowed to be so amiable, his private virtues so estimable, and his mind so dignified, as to have insured him the universal esteem of all who enjoy his intimate acquaintance. These qualities, so valuable in the private gentleman, have not forsaken him in the councils of his country; where he has never been known to descend to personal altercation, or to break out into angry invective. His abstemiousness will be the more valued, by attending to the period when he took so distinguished a part on the floor of Congress; a period, full of the most interesting events, when the cause of federalism was upheld by a system of terror, and when every man who asserted an independence of character was sure to be overwhelmed by a torrent of abuse. Even, in these unfortunate days, it is not a little surprising that Mr. Madison's dignified deportment commanded the respect of such men; and that, while they assailed every other opponent, they were held in check by something in his character, which prevented them from taking a like liberty with him.
No man can be more fitted than Mr. Madison either to heal or to prevent the extension of the evils of a republican schism, which have arisen, or are likely to arise from local disputes. This has been, perhaps, the most prolific cause of the republican divisions. We have seen it raging with a mournful violence in some of the most powerful and respectable sections of the union, and prostrating every thing before it; producing incurable feuds among men, who ought never to have been disunited; separating large classes from the republican trunk, and, in some cases, eventually incorporating them with the common enemy. As of all divisions those of a local character are the most acrimonious, they have done more to endanger the power of the republican party than all the other causes united together. At these scenes the common enemy have looked on with a malignant satisfaction, and it is manifest that there is nothing on which they more exultingly calculate for eventual triumph. Elect Mr. Madison, and their hopes, in this respect, will be blasted. He has enlisted himself under the banners of no local party; he has no local cause on which his political standing or advancement depends; he has no local prejudices to gratify. On the contrary, from the first dawn of his political existence, which is coeval with his attainment of manhood, his mind has been occupied with enlarged principles, and with national concerns. And should he be elected President, we have, from this circumstance, the strongest assurance that he will take side with us local party, but by a steady pursuit of the great interests of the nation, give to all the local parties that may exist in the respective states a rallying point for union and restored friendship. An administration upheld by such principles will rest upon adamant; its foundations will be imperishable and unchanging: while an administration, dependent on the fluctuations of local passion, will soon find itself cast upon the angry waves of a tempestuous ocean, without the only anchor which can possibly enable it to outride the storm.
There is no point, perhaps, on which a greater diversity of opinion prevails among republicans, than on the extent to which our naval establishment ought to be carried. Whether justly or not, this has been ordinarily considered as a local question, on which it was the interest of the Eastern states to have a considerable navy, that of the Southern states to have no navy, while that of the middle states has been considered as doubtful: the commercial part of the latter states having maintained, and the agricultural part opposed the expediency of such an establishment.
It is the decided conviction of the writer of these pieces that the interest of the whole Union, on this point, as on every other of radical importance, is the same; and that the interests of the several classes of our citizens is so intimately interwoven, that what affects one will equally affect all. It is also his decided conviction that an attempt at the present period, or until a great change shall have been effected in the relative condition of the United States and Europe, to build up a great national establishment would be the summit of madness. Tho', however, this would evince the height of folly, yet there may be a point to which the U.S. may prudently progress in the creation of a naval force; and, perhaps, this ought altogether to be regulated by our ability to defend our ports and harbors and to enforce our revenue laws. These are objects which we have the power to attain; the moment we attempt to make use of a navy, on the ocean, at a distance from our shores, it becomes exposed, from its comparative insignificance, to perils, which in case of a serious collision with the great maritime power of Europe, would totally annihilate it. It seems, by the general assent of our citizens, to be reduced to a problem, that in case of a war with the enemies of England, we should have no occasion for such a naval force. Is it not equally clear that in case of a war with England, it would prove altogether useless? I admit, that, if the U.S. regardless of their true interest, which dictates an almost exclusive attention to their internal sources of wealth and prosperity, should resolve on pursuing the same career with Tyre, Venice, Holland, and Britain, and grasp at the possession of the commerce of the world, she possesses the means of ultimately gaining her end. I admit that if such should be her fixed and steady purpose, and if the hearts of the whole population were set upon it, she has now the means of commencing the establishment of a navy that would in a few years be formidable to England, and would eventually prostrate her navy. For it is a fact that our monied resources are now more than half those possessed by Britain, and that the freedom of our government, and the non-existence of monopolies, the vast field for the employment of capital, the comparative insignificance of our national debt, our exemption from the necessity of keeping up any considerable military force, the simplicity and frugality of our manners, the equal operation of taxes impartially laid and economically raised, the trifling expense of our public institutions, and the universal habits of industry of our citizens, would afford us means much beyond the proportion of those possessed by Great Britain—If then it should be the will of our countrymen to tyrannise on the ocean, to turn every Paradise on earth by conquest and colonisation into a prison and a wilderness, and to prostrate systematically the rights of others whenever they interfered with our interest, this high prize of ambition is within our reach. The seducing means of gratifying this passion, together with that of revenge, are within our power. We can destroy kingdoms as fast as Napoleon can make them. But, having seen this brilliant career, shall we be the happier for it? Will it add to the blessings of liberty, or to our stock of comforts? Will the hundreds of millions, buried in the ocean, or scattered over the face of the earth, instead of being employed in felling our forests, in draining our meadows, in fertilising our fields, in building comfortable dwellings, in cutting canals, in making roads, and in advancing the interests and diffusing the blessings of literature and science, add to our substantial riches or glory? The fountain of light may not be diminished or exhausted by the uninterrupted emission of its beams; but, it would be folly for us to imagine that what we thus prodigally gave to the winds and the waves would not be lost to the great purposes we have enumerated.
The fact is that the only just motto of the friend of an offensive navy must be "Cæsar aut nullus." There can be no intermediate point. The establishment necessarily tends to the creation of one leviathan, whose power will be uncontrolled and uncontrolable. The history of the world proves it.
Of such an establishment, then, if Mr. Madison were the friend, he ought to forfeit the confidence of every true American.
It is not pretended that he is; but it is contended that he is the enemy of any navy whatever, and that he is inimical to our whole commerce.
It would, perhaps, be sufficient to repel this charge, to state, that while the sticklers for a navy and commerce denounce him for not being its friend, those who are hostile to these establishments denounce him because he is their friend. Both these charges cannot be true; and as they are both
asserted with equal vehemence, it is more than probable that they are both unfounded.
The fact is, that it does not appear that Mr. Madison has ever directly avowed his sentiments on these points; no occasion having presented itself for such an announcement of his abstract opinions. But, if we look to his conduct as a public man, we shall find abundant reasons to consider him as deeply impressed with the importance of commerce, and as so far favorable to a naval force as it is connected with every practicable protection of trade.
In Congress he was the projector of the discriminating duties, which, by imposing a greater tax upon foreign than domestic goods and ships, has given us nearly the whole navigation that carries our trade, and by far a greater share than falls to our proportion of that trade. If this evinces hostility to trade, it can only be surpassed by the merchants themselves who grow rich by pursuing it!
Since he has been at the head of our foreign relations, he has been anxiously solicitous to protect the rights of our seamen, and to vindicate those of our merchants in all their lawful pursuits. Deeply as he, with the whole administration, has valued the blessings of peace and harmony with foreign nations, he has insisted upon these great objects as indispensable terms; and, he has, no doubt, acted with the President, in refusing to sanction a treaty which did not embrace them; and, finally, he has written, if common fame is to be relied upon, a tract, more replete with learning and sound argument, on our neutral rights, than has been produced by any other American.
Who, then, it may be fearlessly enquired has done more, has indeed done so much, in defence of our commerce, as Mr. Madison? The federalists have, it is true, extolled their own friendship to commerce with as much vehemence, as they have denounced the enmity of the republicans to it. But the professions of party men are lighter even than lovers' vows. They have said much, but what have they done? They have abandoned several commercial rights, but what commercial rights have they secured? They have given up the inestimable principle of free ships making free goods; but what correlative privilege have they acquired?
This charge then against Mr. Madison is idle, unfounded, base. It is coined in the mint of detraction; and those, who are the most busy in giving it currency, themselves know it to be spurious.
Misrepresentation and falsehood have been equally active with regard to Mr. Madison's sentiments respecting a navy. Nothing which he has said or done proves either his enthusiastic attachment or deadly hostility to it. What his abstract ideas are on this head we have no means of pronouncing. Whether, if his will were the law, he would give us a great navy, or deprive us of that which we have, cannot absolutely be pronounced. There is, however, strong reason to think that on this subject he coincides with the sentiments which appear to have influenced our councils ever since the triumph of republican principles. Of those who co-operated in this triumph, some are averse to any navy, others in favor of its considerable extension. This division of opinion, upon a question of the deepest interest, has created a spirit of conciliation and forbearance. The establishment, as it existed, on Mr. Jefferson's accession to office, has been maintained unimpaired. No one, however ardent his patriotism or decided his convictions, has come forward with a proposition to prostrate the establishment altogether.
As we know nothing to the contrary, it is not most fair to infer that these ideas are the same with those of Mr. Madison? If he has ever avowed others, let them be stated. Until this shall be done, we must conclude that his ideas are the same with those ascribed to the President, to the administration generally, and to Congress.
We are told, upon almost every important occasion that Mr. Jefferson's and Mr. Madison's sentiments are the same; that, early friends, they have been brought up in the same political faith. Is it not then to be inferred that the same correspondence of sentiment, that so happily subsists on other important subjects, likewise subsists on this? If then the course pursued on this head by the President and Congress has been satisfactory to the country, is there not the best reason to believe that that pursued under the Presidency of Mr. Madison, will in being the same be equally satisfactory?
A FARMER.
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 27.
The Secretary of State left this city yesterday for his seat in Virginia.
General Wilkinson left this city on Monday last for Baltimore.
The opposition prints are still industrious in their efforts to misrepresent the measures of the administration with respect to foreign nations. For this purpose, in defiance of truth, they ascribe to them a disposition to propitiate France by unworthy concessions, while more is required of England than we have a just claim to. It is alleged, that, while the conduct of Britain is condemned in the most unqualified terms, that of France is viewed as at least venial, inasmuch as flowing altogether from the conduct of Britain.
Nothing can be more unjust or untrue than this representation. However censurable the measures of the British cabinet may be considered, they are not admitted to be a sufficient reason for the measures of France towards us. Although England may have no cause to complain of them, we have. The measures of both governments are viewed as unjust invasions of our rights, and we do not admit the right of one belligerent nation, on the plea of retaliation against another, to infringe, much less to destroy our essential rights. We venture to say, boldly, that our government, viewing the conduct of both governments in this light, has held the same language to them.
As this has, undoubtedly, been the course pursued by our government, so ought the sentiments on which it has been adopted be those of every friend to his country. Predilections or antipathies to this or that foreign nation, ought universally, in such an exigency, to give place to patriotism.
But the opposition prints will not suffer this honorable sentiment to prevail. They seem to have two objects equally at heart; to libel their own government, and to eulogize that of Britain. Hence their assiduity to prove France the original aggressor in those infractions of neutral rights which have caused the present crisis. If they can succeed in establishing this fact, they seem to consider their point gained, and especially to have altogether exculpated England.
Although for the reason we have assigned, even if their success in establishing this fact should be complete, they would not exonerate Britain from censure, or take from us just grounds of complaint against her, we will meet them on their own ground, and shew, to the satisfaction, we trust, of every candid mind, that the original aggressions on our rights were on the part of Britain.
We have not time, nor is it necessary to enter into an elaborate discussion of the subject. The view, we shall offer, shall be concise, and will principally consist in an enumeration of facts.
The Berlin decree of the 21st of November 1806, declaring the British Isles in a state of blockade, is pronounced the original aggression. But the absolute falsehood of this allegation appears by the following facts:
1. By the previous extensive violations, by Great Britain, of the colonial trade, under the order of council of June 11, 1803, unlawfully restricting the trade of the United States with a certain portion of the unblockaded ports of her enemies, and condemning vessels with innocent cargoes, on a return from ports where they had deposited contraband articles.
For ascertaining the character and extent of these invasions of neutral rights reference may be had to the numerous mercantile memorials presented to Congress in the session of 1805-6, which emanated principally from the opponents of the administration, and the orthodoxy of which they cannot therefore contest. From the volume of remonstrances presented on this subject, we shall confine ourselves to the following extract from a representation of Mr. Gore to the Secretary of State, made on the 18th of Nov. 1805.
"The principle," says Mr. Gore, "understood to be admitted by Great Britain is, that in time of war, a trade carried on between two independent nations, one neutral and the other belligerent, is unlawful in the neutral, if the same trade was not allowed and practised in time of peace. This principle, though assumed by Great Britain, is now, and always has been resisted as unsound by every other nation. She always assumes as a fact, that the trade with a colony has always been confined exclusively to ships of the parent country. In virtue therefore, of this assumption of principle and fact, she deems unlawful and derogatory to her rights, the trade of a neutral with the colonies of her enemies. However, in the last war

she so far modified her principle, as to assent to the lawfulness of the voyage of a neutral, if direct between the ports of a neutral, and the colony of the enemy; and also a trade in such colonial articles, from the country of the neutral to any other country, even to the parent country of such colony, provided such articles were imported, bona fide, as in the other case."
And afterwards—"What renders the conduct of Great Britain peculiarly injurious to the merchants of our country, is the extension of this offensive doctrine, contrary to her own express and public declaration of the law during the last war; for it was then declared that the importation from an enemy's colony to the country to which the ship belonged, and the subsequent exportation was lawful, and so of property, the produce of the parent country, going from the U. States to the colony."
2. By various blockades, in virtue of orders of council, merely notified to our minister at London, and thence made a ground of capture, against the trade of the U. S. in entire disregard of the law of nations, and of the definition of legal blockades laid down by the British government itself; particularly by the blockade of the whole coast from the river Elbe to Brest, of the 16th of May, 1806—which, Lord Westmoreland, a distinguished member of the present ministry, has openly declared in his seat in Parliament to have been the cause of the Berlin decree. He adds, in defending the orders of 11th Nov. 1807, "The order of blockade of 1806 had been previously passed, and also the order of council of January 7, 1807. By the former of these measures the commerce of one half of Europe had been completely interdicted, and by the latter the direct trade of all neutrals had been totally prohibited. It amounted in fact to a total confiscation of all neutral trade. The blame, therefore, does not lie with us, but with our accusers," (the Foxs' administration.)
3. By the numerous outrages committed by British armed ships on our coast, and especially by the destruction of a French national vessel within our waters.
This is one view of the subject, of itself abundantly conclusive; but take another.
Even separating all antecedent aggressions, the British orders of council of January 7, 1807, cannot be justified on the principle of retaliation. The Berlin decree, which they are said to have been issued to retaliate, bears date November 21, 1806, only six weeks antecedent, within which period it was impossible for it to have been known in the United States. In this view, therefore, the orders are to be considered as in fact preceding the Berlin decree.
2. This is further shown by the note of the British commissioners accompanying the rejected treaty, which bears date the 31st of December 1806, only 6 days after it was presented, which does no more than threaten to retaliate in case the United States should submit to the practical application of the Berlin decree to her. After referring to the provisions of the Berlin decree the commissioners add
"The undersigned cannot, therefore believe that the enemy will seriously attempt to enforce such a system. If he should, they are confident that the good sense of the American government will perceive the fatal consequences of such pretensions, to neutral commerce, and that its spirit and regard to national honor will prevent its acquiescence in such palpable violations of its rights and injurious encroachments on its interests."
"If however the enemy should carry these threats into execution, and if neutral nations, contrary to all expectation should acquiesce in such usurpation, his majesty might be compelled however reluctantly, to retaliate in his just defence, and to adopt, in regard to the commerce of neutral nations with his enemies, the same measures which those nations shall have permitted to be enforced against their commerce with his subjects. The commissioners of the U. States will therefore feel, that at a moment when his majesty and all neutral nations are threatened with such an extension of the belligerent pretensions of his enemies, he cannot enter into the stipulations of the present treaty, without an explanation from the United States, of their intentions, or a reservation on the part of his majesty in the case above mentioned if it should ever occur."
And yet, notwithstanding these explicit declarations and even assurances that retaliation would only ensue from the actual enforcement of the decree and the submission of the U. States, the orders of the 7th of January were issued, without the occurrence of any of the alleged causes of a just retaliation. It is, therefore, palpably absurd for its authors to justify it on the grounds of retaliation.
3. It cannot be said, in their justification, that the orders of January 7, 1807, are founded on the rule set up in 1756, because they are stated, on their face, (by the late administration) to be retaliatory; because they are expressly denied by the existing administration to be conformably to that rule; and because they are in fact very different from it.
4. The amount of depredations under these orders is much greater than that under the Berlin decree, on the high seas, committed, too, before any depredation under that decree.
The proceedings, therefore, under the British orders not being warranted, under these circumstances, by the Berlin decree, must be considered as the original aggressions.
As to the British orders of the 11th of November last being justified on the principle of retaliation, the following circumstances will show the futility of this plea.
They were issued before the practical extension of the Berlin decree to the U. States was known in England, the correspondence with M. Regnier, in which it is first avowed, not having been published in France at the time, or known for a considerable time thereafter in England. The case of the Horizon, the only instance of an American vessel captured under the decree, was not decided on by the subordinate tribunal until the 6th of October, and was certainly not known in England before the 11th of Nov. Moreover; the decision was not final. An appeal was entered on the part of the U. States from the prize court to the council of state, answerable to the English lords of appeal; and the appeal was not decided till the 19th of March last. During the intermediate time the original condemnation was subject to reversal; nor could the determination of the French government be ascertained until this finally expressed. Then, and then only, could just grounds for retaliation exist. To show that we are correct in this important, conclusive fact, we add a transcript of the act of final condemnation.
COUNCIL OF STATE. Napoleon, Emperor of the French, King of Italy and Protector of the confederation of the Rhine. Upon the report of our commission of controversies.
Having seen the plea set up by Mr. Alexander M'Clure, an American captain and proprietor of the ship Horizon and of the cargo on board, against the decision of the Imperial Council of Prizes of the 6th of last October, tending to annul the said decision, as to that part of the merchandise which is recognized as the growth or manufacture of the British isles;
The memoir produced in support of the plea;
The decision of the said council of the 18th September; and
The advice of our commission of controversies;
Considering that the spirit and letter of the Imperial decree of the 21st of November, 1806, ordain without distinction and in an unqualified manner the confiscation of all goods the produce of the soil or manufacture of Great Britain, and that in applying it in this sense to the cargo of the American ship Horizon, our Imperial council has conformed to the provisions of the said decree—
Our council of state being heard—
We have decreed and do decree as follows:
The plea of the American Captain, Alexander M'Clure against the decision of our Imperial council of prizes of the 16th of October, 1807, is rejected.
Approved in our place of the Thuilleries the 19th March, 1808.
Signed, NAPOLEON, By the Emperor, The Secretary of State, Signed, HUGUES B. MARET.
Delivered by us Secretary General of the Council of State, Signed, J. G. LOIRE.
Considering, therefore, the subject in the three views taken, it conclusively appears;
First, that the aggressions of Britain were numerous and aggravated before the Berlin decree was issued.
Second, that the British Orders of Council of Jan. 7, 1807, in fact preceded the Berlin decree; and
Thirdly, that the British orders of Nov. 11th last could not have arisen from that decree, as it either had not then been practically extended to the U. States, or was not known to have been so extended in England.
And, consequently, that the ground of retaliation, frivolous and unjust as
it is, cannot be maintained by her in a single point taken by her apologists.
"Jefferson, with the assistance of a celebrated Anatomist from Philadelphia, has been for some time engaged in fitting up the Skeleton of a Mammoth, intended as a present to that Mammoth destroyer of mankind—Bonaparte. We have not heard that it goes in the Hope. It will probably form the subject of a special mission."
[Wash. Fed.] We have nothing to say to the wit of the foregoing article. Let that go for what it is worth. The truth, however, is, that Dr. Wistar, an eminent physiologist of America, did lately pay the President a visit at his request, for the purpose of selecting such parts of the Mammoth Skeleton, lately received by him from the Western country, for the Philosophical Society at Philadelphia, of which he is President, in order, as far as possible, to render the skeleton in their possession complete. We understand that it is the intention of the President to present the remaining parts of the skeleton to the French National Institute, of which he is a member. Had it been destined for the Royal Society of London all would have been right, and we should, doubtless, have heard much of the liberality and enlarged spirit of philosophy.
THE STEAM BOAT. —We are rejoiced to hear that this useful invention, this favorite of the people of New York, is meeting with the most encouraging success.
On the 2d inst. she left New York with 115 passengers. On the 9th she had 104 do. On the 16th 141 do. Fifty passengers applied who could not be received on board.
We understand that Mr. Fulton has commenced a second boat with additional accommodations which is to run from New York to Albany, 160 miles, in 29 hours.
Under the head of New-York, in this day's paper will be found an account of a second revolution in Spain. The precision with which the circumstances are detailed, and the official documents relative to it (which shall appear in our next) leave no doubt of the authenticity of the intelligence.
This event, in its nature extraordinary and in its probable consequences most important, will excite the attention of politicians, from the change which it operates in the situation of European affairs. It is said that the people of Spain are enthusiastic in a determination to resist the occupation of their country by the French; and that the Spanish fleet will be by them delivered up to the English, together with Cadiz. Should this statement of facts be true, it needs not the eye of intuition to foresee that Spain will become the theatre of a bloody war; and more extraordinary events have lately occurred than that the old monarchy, should, by the voluntary resignation of all hereditary claimants of the throne, become a new Republic.
One sentiment cannot but pervade the breast of every citizen of America on perusing this intelligence—a sense of gratitude that from its geographical situation as well as its neutral policy, our country is exempt from the horrid scenes of slaughter and devastation at this day inevitably resulting from foreign alliances, to those nations entangled in them.
The following communication is from one of the committee appointed to draft an address to General Wilkinson. His name is left with the Editor.
Mr. Smith, Sir, In reply to the communication which appeared in your last paper, on the subject of the public meeting lately held at the council chamber, it is only necessary to make the following observations.
1st. The citizens assembled in pursuance of notice given in the National Intelligencer and the Monitor. So far from the meeting being small, it was very numerously attended, considering our limited and scattered population. Near 100 persons were present at the commencement—tho' some retired before a division took place on the resolutions and address. It has rarely happened that so large a meeting of the citizens has taken place. At the same time the question was taken there were four times as many present as met a few evenings before, pursuant to a public call from the mayor on a most important subject. Therefore it cannot be said with propriety that the citizens refused to attend.
2d. It is stated that 30 persons were particularly engaged to attend the meeting. If by that observation it is
intended to be implied that any undue influence had been employed over thirty persons or any individual of that majority, it is a gross and unfounded libel on the majority, and ought not to have been asserted without positive proof of such corruption. The fact is, that no opposition was expected to the measure and no exertions were made by the friends of it. If necessary it might be very satisfactorily proved that before the meeting, considerable exertions were made to frustrate its object and intent.
3d. It appears to be the object of the protesters against that meeting, to have it believed, that the near equality in number of those who favored and those who opposed the resolutions, proves either the unfavorable or undecided sentiments of the citizens, on the character and conduct of General Wilkinson. But so far from this being the case, not a word was said against that persecuted officer until a late period of the discussion. The objections made to the proposed resolutions, were drawn from our dependent situation on Congress, from the impolicy of making enemies of some of those who held our interest in their own hands; from the impropriety of our interfering in political concerns, as we had no political rights, and from the want of sufficient notice among the citizens of the object of the meeting. These arguments, though fully answered, induced many persons to vote against the resolutions, who entertained the highest respect for General Wilkinson, and the fullest conviction of his innocence.
4th. It is also said that persons under age voted for the resolutions. It is obvious that objections to improper votes ought to have been made at the time they were taken—two of those persons who have volunteered their statement for the citizens, and from whom this objection proceeds, were tellers, and if minors were counted, it was their fault. It cannot be suspected that these gentlemen, who have in so extraordinary a manner displayed their zeal and accuracy of discrimination, would have committed an error of this kind, even on their own side of the question.
5th. The communication concludes by stating that it is inserted on behalf of the Citizens of Washington—Who authorised the authors of that piece to use the name of the citizens, and how can they charge the persons who composed the majority of the meeting with imposing on the public, when they themselves are guilty of so palpable an imposition?
6th. The political opinions of the gentlemen who have declared themselves in the Monitor to be the authors of that communication, are not such as they have implied; nor do they venerate as they have stated, the character of the Sage who presides over the government of our country. I make this assertion upon such information, as I have not a right to doubt. But the remark would not have been made, had not their statement been calculated to imply, that though of the present republican party, they were opposed to general Wilkinson.
VERITAS. Washington, July 23d 1808.
New-York, July 22. ANOTHER REVOLUTION IN SPAIN. By the brig Aurora, Captain Ripley, arrived last night at quarantine, we have received a Trinidad paper of the 25th June, containing the following important intelligence:—
TRINIDAD, JUNE 25. Yesterday evening arrived in this port the polacre ship L'Orient after the short passage of 20 days from Gibraltar.
We regret that this paper was so far advanced before the public prints received by this occasion were put into our possession, that we cannot gratify our readers with an account of the important intelligence they exhibit, respecting the fate of the Spanish monarchy, now in all probability annihilated by the treachery of the Corsican.
We therefore propose to bring it into one point of view, by publishing a Gazette extraordinary, which we will lay before our readers early in the ensuing week. Let it suffice at present to say that another revolution has taken place in Spain, by which the old king, Charles IV. has again resumed the reigns of government; but by a fatality which appears to attend all the continental crowned heads, he has put himself under the tuition of Bonaparte, who keeps him, the Prince of Asturias, the Prince of Peace and several of the grandees, who accompanied the royal visitors to Bayonne, prisoners. The grand duke of Berg, under the authority of the deluded monarch, now executes the office of lieut. general of Charles, in the government of his kingdom. The intelligence upon the whole is highly important and exhibits
a scene of treachery on the part of the Corsican, not equalled by any of his former iniquities in his extraordinary career; which however, it is very possible, his present attempt may lead to a crisis.
We have received, by the Aurora, arrived last night from Trinidad, the "Trinidad Current" of the 26th June, containing the official detail from the Madrid Gazette, of the suppressing events which have recently taken place in Spain, they will fill five columns. The old king of Spain formally renounces his right to the throne in the following manner:
"I have ceded to my ally and dear friend, the Emperor of the French, ALL MY RIGHTS TO SPAIN AND THE INDIES, having stipulated that the crown of Spain and the Indies shall continue independent and entire, such as it has been under my dominion; and likewise that our holy religion, is to be not only the established religion, but the only one professed throughout the territories of this monarchy." &c.
The Prince of Asturias and their highnesses Don Carlos & Don Antonio have also renounced their right to the throne of Spain.
The following is an extract of a letter from a gentleman of the first respectability, in Trinidad, to his friend in this city, dated June 27, 1808.
"Two revolutions have taken place in Spain since the 13th of March. One produced the abdication of the old king in favor of the prince of Asturias; the other, the resignation of the prince in favor of the father; and as they could not agree among themselves, they went to Bayonne to submit their differences to the decision of BONAPARTE who has laid violent hands on the whole party, including the prince of peace, and several of the grandees and keeps them all prisoners. He has made the king appoint MURAT lieut. general of the kingdom. Murat, they say, is in Madrid, with 54,000 men; but I don't believe he has more than 30,000. The provinces have revolted against this and the authority of Charles; proclaimed Ferdinand the 7th the lawful king and called all faithful Spaniards to take arms in defence of their religion and their country. The supreme council of government is at Seville; in Andalusia alone 150,000 men were in arms. It would appear that they rise en masse, and massacre all who do not wear the red cockade, which the council has ordered that every man shall wear. We are before now I suppose, in possession of CADIZ and the SPANISH NAVY, which the council have agreed to deliver up in trust to admiral PURVIS and general SPENCER whose expedition, it now appears, was sent out to favor the king's emigration to Mexico. Six French ships of the line are also in the inner harbor of Cadiz but they are completely in jeopardy. Not a man dare go on shore, and Purvis is in the rear with 14 ships. THE POPULACE OF CADIZ TORE OLD OSLAND THE GOVERNOR TO PIECES, from a suspicion that he was in the French interest. The French merchants are all on board the French ships, and the only means of saving their lives is to surrender to the British admiral Purvis; for if they land, they would be hunted down like wild beasts by the people." N. York paper.
Fresh Teas, Nutmegs, sugars, Coffee, &c.
W. & C. SMITH have just received by the Maria from New York, 6 Ch sts } 20 Boxes } Fine Imperial Teas 100 Canisters } 25 Chests } 15 Boxes } Hyson Teas 100 Canisters } 20 Chests } 18 Half do. } Young Hyson Teas 30 Boxes } 10 Chests hyson skin do. 1 Cse nutmegs and cloves. 52 Hds St. Croix sugars—part of them very first quality. 40 Bags best Martinique green coffee. 12 Bags Corks. 20 Small baskets best Marseilles refined olive oil. 10 Quarter casks London particular Teneriffe wine. Georgetown, June 20—2wtf.
RUNAWAY.
WAS Committed to the jail of Washington County, District of Columbia, as a Runaway on the 17th instant, a black man who calls himself ELLICK, and says he belongs to David R. Williams, Esq. Chew District, South Carolina, he is about 20 years of age, 5 feet 3 1/2 inches high, had on when apprehended a black hat, striped silk coat, cotton shirt, blue cotton trousers and old shoes. His owner is desired to come prove him and take him away, or he will be sold for his jail fees and other expenses as the law directs.
CARTWRIGHT TIPPETT, Keeper of the jail, for Washington Beyd, Marshall, July 25—43t.

The ADVERTISEMENT dated April 26, 1808, is withdrawn.
PROPOSALS
For carrying Mails of the U. States on the following Post Roads, will be received at the General Post Office in Washington City until the first day of August next, inclusive.
Leave Richmond every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at 7 A. M. and arrive at Norfolk on the next days by 10 A. M. in 27 hours. Leave Norfolk every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at 2 P. M. and arrive at Richmond the next days by 5 P. M. in 27 hours.
Dec. 1 to May 1.
Leave Richmond every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 7 A. M. & arrive at Norfolk on the next days by 5 P. M. in 34 hours. Leave Norfolk every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 7 A. M. and arrive at Richmond the next days by 5 P. M. in 34 hours.
16. From Petersburg by Cape Henry, Smithfield, Surry court house, & Sleepy Hole ferry, to Norfolk, 3 times a week. May 1, to Dec. 1.
Leave Petersburg every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, at 1 P. M. and arrive at Norfolk the next days by 10 A. M. Leave Norfolk every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, at 2 P. M. and arrive at Petersburg the next days by 11 A. M. in 21 hours.
Dec. 1, to May 1.
Leave Petersburg every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday at 1 P. M. and arrive at Norfolk the next days by 5 P. M. Leave Norfolk every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, at 7 A. M. and arrive at Petersburg the next days by 11 A. M.
17. From Charleston by Jacksonboro', Pocotaligo and Coosawatchy to Savannah, three times a week.
Leave Charleston every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, at 2 P. M. and arrive at Pocotaligo by 8 P. M. Leave Pocotaligo every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, at 2 A. M. & arrive at Savannah by 8 P. M.
Leave Savannah every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, at 4 A. M. and arrive at Pocotaligo by 8 P. M. Leave Pocotaligo every Tuesday, Thursday & Saturday, at 2 A. M. and arrive at Charleston by 10 A. M.
18. From Augusta by Jacksonboro and Ebenezer, to Savannah once a week. Leave Savannah every Friday, at 8 A. M. and arrive at Augusta on Sunday by 3 P. M. Leave Augusta every Tuesday at 5 A. M. and arrive at Savannah on Thursday by 3 P. M.
19. From Augusta by Wanesboro and Louisville to Savannah once a week. Leave Augusta every Thursday at 2 P. M. and arrive at Louisville on Friday by 10 A. M. Leave Louisville at 11 A. M. and arrive at Savannah on Sunday by 6 P. M.
Leave Savannah every Monday at 8 A. M. and arrived at Louisville on Wednesday by 9 A. M. Leave Louisville same day at 10 A. M. and arrive Augusta on Thursday by 10 A. M.
20. From Savannah by Bryan court house, Midway church, Richboro' and McIntosh court house, and Darien to Augusta, once a week by land. Leave Augusta every Monday at 8 A. M. and arrive at St. Mary's on Thursday by 10 A. M. Leave St. Mary's every Thursday at 2 P. M. & arrive at Savannah the next Sunday by 6 P. M.
21. From Darien by Brunswick, to Frederica, once a week.
Leave Darien every Wednesday at 5 A. M. & arrive at Frederica on Thursday by 10 A. M. Leave Frederica at 2 P. M. and arrive at Darien by 6 P. M. on Friday.
22. From Millidgeville (G.) to Athens, (G.) once a week. Leave Millidgeville every Friday at 4 A. M. and arrive at Athens on Saturday, by 11 A. M. Leave Athens every Saturday at 1 P. M. and arrive at Millidgeville on Sunday, by 8 P. M.
23. From Sparta by Millidgeville and Jonesboro, to Fort Ocmulgee, once a week. Leave Sparta every Saturday, at 6 A. M. and arrive at Ocmulgee on Saturday by 6 P. M. Leave Ocmulgee every Monday, at 6 A. M. and arrive at Sparta on Tuesday by 6 P. M.
24. From Millidgeville by Putnam county and Morgan county to Randolph county, once in two weeks. Leave Millidgeville every other Monday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Randolph county on Tuesday, by 6 P. M. Leave Randolph county the next day at 6 A. M. and arrive at Millidgeville on Wednesday by 6 P. M.
25. From Woodbridge, (N. J.) to Amboy, three times a week. Leave Woodbridge Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at 6 P. M. and arrive at Amboy by 7 P. M. Leave Amboy every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, at noon, and arrive at Woodbridge by 1 P. M.
26. From New Lisbon to Canton, (Ohio). Leave New Lisbon every Sunday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Canton by 6 P. M. Leave Canton every Monday at 8 A. M. and arrive at New Lisbon by 6 P. M.
27. From Boston by Dorchester, Quincy, Braintree, Weymouth, Hanover, Pembroke & Kingston, to Plymouth, three times a week.
Leave Boston every Tuesday Thursday and Saturday, at 6 A. M. and arrive at Plymouth by 6 P. M. Leave Plymouth every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 6 A. M. and arrive at Boston by 6 P. M.
NOTES.
1. The mail will be carried on the routes, number four to fourteen inclusive, in the same time through the year; and the contractor must calculate upon conveying the mail in a sulkey, when the roads will not admit of its being conveyed by the usual stage; or if it shall be shewn, that the roads are too bad for a sulkey, the mail of letters will be separated from the newspapers,
which are to be conveyed by stage, as fast as the roads will admit, and the letters conveyed on horseback within the time limited, so that bad roads shall never be admitted as an excuse for non-performance.
2. The Postmaster General may expect the mails and alter the times of arrival and departure at any time during the continuance of the contracts; he previously stipulating an adequate compensation for any extra expense that may be occasioned thereby.
3. Fifteen minutes shall be allowed for opening and closing the mail at all offices where no particular time is specified.
4. For every thirty minutes delay (unavoidable accidents excepted) in arriving after the times prescribed in any contract, the contractor shall forfeit one dollar; and if the delay continue until the departure of any mail, whereby the mails destined for such depending mail lose a trip a forfeiture of double the amount allowed for carrying the mail one trip shall be incurred, unless it shall be made to appear that the delay was occasioned by unavoidable accident, in which case the amount of pay for the trip will, in all cases, be forfeited and retained.
5. Persons making proposals, are desired to state their prices by the year. Those who contract will receive their pay quarterly, in the months of February, May, August and November, one month after the expiration of each quarter.
6. No other than a free white person shall be employed to convey the mail.
7. Where the proposer intends to convey the mail in the body of a stage carriage he is desired to state it in his proposals.
8. The Postmaster General reserves to himself the right of declaring any contract at an end, whenever three failures happen, which amount to the loss of a trip each.
9. The contracts for the routes numbered 1 to 16, are to be in operation on the first day of Oct. next and to continue in force two years from that time; for the routes from No. 17 to 25 to commence at the same time, & to continue in force until the 31st of March, 1811. For the routes, 26, 27, and 28, to commence at the same time, and continue in force one year.
GIDEON GRANGER, Postmaster General General Post Office. Washington City, May 26, 1808 May 16—wTA.
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, Tra-fulgar, and silver cords,  Velvets,  Imperial, Brunswick waistcoating,  Silk moleskins do.  Tollinets, swansdown do.  Plain and figured Marseilles do.  Beaskin coatings,  Pkins, kerseys, halfhicks,  Rose and duffel blankets, flannels,  Superfine green cloth table covers,  Calicoes, colored cambrics,  Gingham, silk and cotton chambrays  Furniture Chintz,  Cambric and jaconet muslins,  India and British book do.  India mullmull figured and plain,  Plain and figured lenoes,  Laced cambrics,  Elegant tambooured mulls,  Gracian ropes and Pelisse dresses,  8-4 damask and raw silk shawls,  Damask do.  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,  Long 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, floss threads,  Scarlet and other colored bombazets,  Hearth rugs, Russia sheeting, ticklingburg,  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 Havanna segars.  T. C. is determined to sell on the lowest terms.  February 3—tf 
LANDING THIS DAY, From on board the schooner MARIA, capt. Fitzhugh, from New York—A quantity of prime St. Croix sugar, Coffee, Molasses, Port Wine, Nutmeg, and Chocolate. Also, Gun Powder, Imperial, and Hysan Teas, in chests, half and quarter chests and cannisters of this spring's importation, For sale by ROSS & GETTY. George Town, June 20—tf
WANTED
AT the Woodyard for the ensuing year a Manager, to take charge of the whole estate. He must be a sober, diligent and discreet man—well acquainted with the culture of wheat, corn and tobacco, and the management of negroes. To such a man who can produce unquestionable testimonials of his capacity, sobriety and fidelity, high wages will be given. A person not connected in the neighborhood will be preferred.
Apply to RD. W. WEST, Woodyard. N. B. Application must be made before the 1st. Sept. next. May 13—ptS
PROPOSALS for carrying the Mails of the United States, on the following Post Roads, will be received at the General Post Office, until the 5th day of September next.
1. From Athens in Georgia, by Apalachicola, Flint River, and Coweta to Tuckabatchy on the Mississippi territory estimated at 220 miles, once a week. Leave Athens every Saturday at 1 p. m. and arrive at Tuckabatchy the next Tuesday by 8 o'clock p. m. Leave Tuckabatchy every Wednesday at 4 a. m. and arrive at Athens the next Saturday by 10 o'clock a. m.
2. From Tuckabatchy by Majors Creek on Alabama, or Tensaw to Fort Stoddert, estimated at one hundred and seventy-three miles, once a week.
Leave Tuckabatchy every Wednesday at 4 o'clock A. M. and arrived at Fort Stoddert the next Saturday by 10 o'clock A. M. Leave Fort Stoddert every Saturday at 2 P. M. and arrive at Tuckabatchy the next Tuesday by 8 P. M.
3. From Fort Stoddert to Farre's on Pearl River, estimated at 160 miles, once a week. Leave Fort Stoddert every Saturday at 2 P. M. and arrive at Farre's the next Tuesday by 8 o'clock P. M. Leave Farre's at Pearl River every Wednesday at 4 o'clock A. M. & arrive at Fort Stoddert the next Saturday by 10 o'clock A. M.
4. From Farre's on Pearl River to New Orleans, once a week.
Leave New Orleans every Monday noon, and arrive at Farre's on Tuesday by 3 P. M. Leave Farre's every Wednesday at 4 A. M. and arrive at New Orleans on Thursday by noon.
NOTE 1. If the depending mail shall not have arrived at the time fixed for departure, the contractor shall be bound to wait for it, provided it arrives within six hours after such fixed time.
NOTE 2. For every failure, and for every delay which shall continue so that the depending mail loses a trip, the contractor shall forfeit double the pay he would have received for such a trip, unless the failure shall have been occasioned by unavoidable accident; and in that case, the amount of the pay for such trip shall be forfeited, so that no pay shall be made unless the service is performed.
NOTE 3.
For every hours delay, the Contractor shall forfeit one dollar; but no forfeiture for the delay of any one trip can exceed double the value of such trip. The contracts are to commence on the 1st day of October next, and continue in force until the 31st March, 1810. General Post Office, July 20th, 1808.
PUBLIC SALE.
By virtue of a decree of the honorable the Circuit Court of the district of Columbia, sitting as a court of Chancery for the county of Washington in the suit of
Gideon Snow—complainant, against Abigail Perkins, widow and administratrix, and Hannah Perkins, sister and heir of Joseph Perkins deceased, and Nathan Bond—Defendants.
WILL be sold at public auction to the highest bidder on Monday the twenty ninth day of August next at Rhodes's hotel in the city of Washington, at the hour of 10 A. M. all the Estate, right, title, claim and demand both in law and equity of the said Joseph and of the said defendant Hannah, as heir at law of the said Joseph, of, in, and to Lots Nos. 5 and 6 in square No. 533, and Lot No. 2 in square No. 403, with their improvements, all lying and being in the city of Washington, and which said lots are laid out and designated in the general plan of said city as above described.
The terms of sale are, a credit of six months, the purchaser or purchasers giving bonds with approved security for the amount of the purchase money, bearing interest from the day of sale.
This sale is not to affect any claim of dower which the said Abigail Perkins may have in said lots. JOHN G. McDONALD, Trustee. July 18—3wep
20 DOLLARS REWARD.
ESCAPED from the subscriber on the road leading from George Town towards Leesburg, about 15 miles from the former place, a negro man named LUKE, about 35 years of age, 6 feet high, dark skin, two of his upper fore teeth are out; he has a down cast look, and generally speaks in a low voice; his clothes and name he will probably change, I purchased him of Mr. Theophilus Hughs to take to my residence in Kentucky, he has had several masters about Bladensburg, and he will certainly be lurking about that place as he has a wife, the property of Mr. Isaac Barrett near Bladensburg. I have appointed Mr. Everard Gary of George Town my agent, and the above reward will be paid by him to any person who will deliver the said fellow to Mr. C. Tippet in the city jail. SAML. McLEAN. July 25—6w
NOTICE.
Is hereby given that application is intended to be made to the Treasury of the United States for the renewal of the undermentioned Certificates of Six per Cent Stock issued by Joseph Nourse, Register of the Treasury, in the name of Christian Alexander , of London or of Bath in Great Britain, which certificates were sent in the ship Bristol Packet, capt. Burns, captured and burnt by the French, and lost in the same, viz.
N. B. The name is sometimes written Christine but it is the same person.
   Denomination of the stock. Dates of the Certificates. Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock 1792 December 5. 8.68 11 000   1795 May 11. 13168 806   1796 July 16. 13450 250 08   1796 June 11. 14837 2,000   1797 February 7. 14942 277 50   1798 February 1. 15605 2,975 25   1799 December 17. 16918 882   Standing to her credit on the 1st. April 1808. 19,999 99  
Also for the following Certificates of six per Cent Stock issued as above, in the name of Jane Alexander of Bath aforesaid, which were also lost in the said ship Bristol Packet, viz.
   Denomination of the Stock. Dates of the Certificates. Numbers. Sums in   Dolls. Cts.     6 per cent stock. 1796 June 14. 14344 2,000   1797 February 7. 14944 222 05   1798 February 1. 15604 1,500 65   1799 December 17. 16917 980   Standing to her credit on the 1st April 1808. 25,891 05  
WILLIAM WHANN.
June 20—en6w
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—ep1td
CLARLES 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 Coating, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment of Spaniels and rich silk Moleskins 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 Horwell's celebrated patent parallel suspenders far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms retail, as at his manufactory. November 27—tf
FOR SALE.
By virtue of a decree of the high court of Chancery of the state of Maryland, will be exposed to public sale, in the town of Port Tobacco, Charles county, at the court house at 3 o'clock in the afternoon of the second day of the next August term of Charles county court (which commences on the fourth Monday of August next) a parcel of land called Poynton Manor, lying upon a branch of Nanjemoy creek on the post road leading to Nanjemoy from Port Tobacco near the "Hill Top" & about seven miles from Port Tobacco. This land consists of about 300 acres, of which between 50 and 100 acres are well timbered, about twenty acres are in marsh, and the remainder arable and very productive.
The terms of sale are that the purchaser shall give bond with sufficient security to pay the purchase money in twelve months from the sale. It will be sold entire or in parcels as may best suit the persons inclined to purchase. F. S. KEY, Trustee. July 4—tdos
BURNS AND BEALL.
WOOLLEN drapers, men's merchants, and tailors, New Jersey Avenue, opposite the Secretary of the Navy's, 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
STATE OF MARYLAND—IN CHANCERY, July 2nd, 1808. Alexander Clagett, and Richard Henderson, vs.
Margery Beall and others. THE object of the bill is to obtain the sale of two tracts of Land called "Azadia," and "Gleaning," for the payment of a debt due from Isaac Beall deceased, to Samuel Beall deceased, or so much thereof as will be sufficient for the payment of that debt; the bill states that Isaac Beall was indebted to David Ross, Richard Henderson, and Samuel Beall, to secure the payment of which debt, the said Isaac Beall on the ninth day of January seventeen hundred and seventy-five, executed a bond to them for the conveyance of the aforesaid land, with an endorsement on the bond that it was intended merely to secure the debt, That the said Isaac Beall died without paying the debt, and by his Will devised the said land to his children, Anne, Alexander, and Margery Beall in tail as tenants in common after the death of Margery his wife; that Ann and Alexander have since died intestate, under age, and without issue; that Margery married a certain Charles Vance, and that the defendants all reside in the state of Virginia.
The bill further states, that said Samuel Beall has also died intestate and that the complainant Alexander Clagett, administered on his estate, that the debt due as aforesaid was at the instance of Isaac Beall and his heirs paid by your complainant Clagett, out of the estate of said Samuel Beall. It is thereupon on the motion of the complainants, ordered that they cause a copy of this order to be inserted at least once in each of three successive weeks in the National Intelligencer, before the 6th day of August next, to the end that the said Margery Beall may have notice of the complainants application to this court, and of the subject and object of this bill, and may be warned to appear in this court in person or by solicitor on or before the 6th day of December next, to show why a decree should not pass as prayed.
True copy, Test NICHOLAS BREWER, R. C. C. July 11—w3t
50 DOLLARS REWARD.
RAN AWAY from the subscriber living near Bryan Town, Charles county, Maryland, negroes STEPHEN and RALPH. Stephen absconded on the 5th inst. is a short black man about 20 or 21 years of age; he took with him a white country cloth jacket, double woven, a blue cloth under jacket, an Irish linen shirt, a cotton country shirt and trousers, and a black wool hat.
Ralph ran off on the 14th inst. is about 22 years old, nearly 5 feet 7 or 8 inches high, a bright black complexion, a large scar under his left eye, and another on one of his feet—he took with him a dark bay horse, about 16 hands high, about 9 or 10 years old, a small star on his forehead, with a few white spots on his nose, and is rubbed a little on his shoulders with the grass, trots and gallops. He had on and took with him a black broad cloth coat, striped swansdown under jacket, an old Irish linen shirt, a country cotton shirt and trousers, black wool hat. Stephen and Ralph are brothers, and probably will be found together. A reward of 50 dollars will be given for the delivering of them with the horse, bridle and saddle, if brought home, or 15 for either of them, if secured in any jail, so that I get them again, or 10 dollars for the horse, saddle and bridle, if brought home, by BENEDICT BOARMAN. July 18—w3t