The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1809-01-16 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. IX.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1290.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, JANUARY 16, 1809.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
SKETCH OF THE DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON THE NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT. (CONTINUED FROM OUR LAST.)
JANUARY 10.
Mr. Cook observed, that after so strong a vote for building gun-boats, he should scarcely expect the House would refuse to man them. For of what use would they be except they were manned?
The question on striking out the word "gun-boats" was taken by Yeas and Nays, and negatived—Yeas 28—Nays 93.
The question recurring on the amendment from the Senate,
Mr. Dana said he was placed in a situation in which he approved one part of the proposition presented to him, and disapproved of another. He felt considerable hesitation in equipping the frigates, because of the use to which they might be applied by the Executive, viz. to enforce the embargo laws; to enforce which in this manner he did not believe would redound to the credit of the U. S. because he did not believe that the effects would be produced by it which gentlemen contemplated. Much greater danger there was of a violation of the rights of the people in executing the embargo laws on land than on water; and when command was vested in inferior officers, much greater tyranny and insolence was to be expected than from superior and responsible officers. Employing frigates for the execution of the embargo laws was the least unconstitutional and the least objectionable of any mode. He felt a regret that these laws should be executed by the navy. He feared that the navy might be associated in idea with the laws which they enforced and thus give a prejudice against naval force. But nevertheless he thought the propriety of employing responsible officers, overbalanced this consideration. Another reason why he was in favor of equipping the frigates, was, because it would take some time to prepare them, and if a meeting of Congress took place in May or June, it might be expected that the embargo would be removed and then all the frigates would probably be put in service, before which time, if now ordered, they could not be prepared. They had been lying at the navy yard here, to rot and be repaired, to be repaired and rot again. Mr. D. observed that in fresh water decay took place more rapidly than in salt water; he wished to send them to their natural element; it would be conducive to their health and long existence. Another reason he stated why he should vote for the bill. There was an idea amongst some gentlemen that there was a probability of war. He had no idea of Congress this session declaring war, because they had made no preparation for it. And if we were to make war, he conceived that we should not do it like privates, but like officers; that it should not be a strife of children, but of men, and that preparation should be made for it. Whenever we had war, it must be for maritime and not territorial rights, and he had no idea of abandoning the very ground for which we contended. He was therefore willing to place our frigates on the sea-coast. It was a very different question from that of the establishment of a large navy. Had gentlemen considered the importance of a naval force on our coast? Had they considered the propriety of having a force sufficient to repel insults in our harbors? Mr. D. adverted to the superior advantages of our naval situation over that of other nations which could send a force on our coasts. He had said that he had no idea of our declaring war; neither had he any idea of any of the nations of Europe declaring war against us. Not a corporal's guard could G. Britain send here, without sacrificing objects on which her interest and honor depended, and the emperor of France, whilst collecting a force to resist the troops of G. Britain in Spain, would be abandon his conquests and the pretensions of his family, to send a force here when such numerous battalions could be arrayed against them? Another thing: the seasons were against their sending a force here for several months; war therefore was not to be expected this session, except as had been said it was a paper war, another supplemental broadside, as a gentleman had observed; but that species of war, Mr. D. said, he did not take into the question. If we were to have war, he wished an unanimity of sentiment to attend it, without which it would be ineffectual. When this unanimity, the result of the exercise of judgment by free and unbiased
minds, existed, we need fear no enemy. This could not exist when the people were called upon to be friends whilst gentlemen took the attitude of enemies; when they were called upon to be friends with an insinuation that they were traitors in their hearts. He wished this language to be expelled from our councils. Whatever differences of opinion might exist on local concerns, with respect to foreign nations, he thought we ought to shew that we are all ready to maintain the cause of the country; and to insinuate a doubt of this conveyed a reproach. And men long habituated to reproach, Mr. Dana said, did not feel that impulse to honorable effort which those felt who were not accustomed to it. He then adverted to the circumstance of one of the greatest military commanders of antiquity having selected a regiment or battalion whose fidelity or courage he had doubted, and placed them in a conspicuous place on the field of battle, appearing to place confidence in them and thus ensuring their good conduct. Mr. Dana held up this example to the attention of gentlemen. He concluded by saying, that because he wished to call into action all the resources of the country, though opposed to a part of this amendment from the Senate (that part relating to gun-boats) he thought it his duty to vote for the amendment.
Mr. Sloan intimated that he should vote for this amendment to get our frigates from the sickly situation in which they were now placed; to get them out of this state of embargo, and to restore them to health and freedom.
And the question on the amendment of the Senate was decided by Yeas and Nays as given heretofore, 64 to 59.
So the amendment was carried in the affirmative.
Mr. G. W. Campbell called for the Yeas and Nays on the next amendment relative to the number of seamen, &c.
Mr. D. R. Williams said he would give all his earthly goods if the last vote could be recalled; for he valued property and life less than the liberties of the country, which he believed would be destroyed by the consequence of that vote! He believed that they had pronounced against a man whom he had always censured when he thought he had acted improperly, but who had done great and important services to the country—the President of the U. S. a censure which he did not merit. What was this force for? Those who were desirous of war were perfectly consistent in voting for it; but for those who wished for peace it was the worst thing that could have happened. The first thing done by this navy would be to search out a British frigate and revenge the outrage on the Chesapeake. But a short time would elapse before it would involve us in war. He hoped a disagreement to the present amendment would take place, so as to defeat the object of the bill; he hoped so, because he was zealous to preserve peace.
Mr. Nelson said, that he was one of the minority on the question just taken; he wished that the decision had been different; but the decision having been made, he should vote for all the other amendments to the bill, because he conceived it a necessary consequence of having adopted the first.
Mr. Masters said that if justice were not done to this nation, we ought to go to war, and to be prepared for it. He thought there could have been no difference of opinion on that point. The only question had been, whether the embargo was the proper measure. The moment that G. Britain laid a tax on us, if not withdrawn, it was a cause of war. He had never entertained a different opinion. He then went into examination of the propriety of possessing some frigates, and declared himself much pleased at the vote just taken.
Mr. Dana had no idea of throwing a censure on the President of the U. S. by voting for this bill. Congress had the power to raise and support armies and navies; and it had been doubted whether any discretion should ever be given to the Executive on the subject. He had thought that a discretion might be given, but in this case he had thought it proper that Congress should exercise this right. He understood this force was to be employed in our waters, and if foreign nations did come into our waters and insult our national sovereignty, he said he should wish to teach them to respect it. He had no idea of causing war; he wished to preserve peace. But was peace the
yielding to violations of jurisdiction, and to insults in our own waters? And was a resistance of these war? No; it was the exercise of the natural right of all animated nature to resist when injured, and could not be called war in the general sense of the word. If the defence of our clear and indisputable rights was to be war, let it be war; for they must be maintained.
Mr. Gholson said he had hardly expected that a question once decided, would be again discussed. For the vote which he had given, he was accountable to his constituents and to his conscience, and not accountable to any honorable gentleman on this floor for it. From the commencement of our government to the present day, he said, our coasts had been infested with cruizers and plundering pirates; and it was with a design to drive off these that he had given this vote.
Mr. G. W. Campbell wished it to be understood that he should vote against this amendment. He believed the vote just taken to be unprecedented, of its own kind; no such thing as that amendment could be found on the statute book; it was giving power without means to carry it into effect; he considered it a dead letter, when connected with the small appropriation for the object, and should vote against the other amendments. They had heretofore given a discretionary power to call out the frigates, but now they had passed a peremptory order that they should be put in service. He regretted that the vote had passed; and believed that before one month had elapsed many gentlemen who had voted for it would wish that they had not given the vote. It would produce a sentiment abroad that we were to have a maritime war, and would thus delude the people. They would say, if we are to have four or five thousand seamen, and only 9000 men on land, it must be intended to carry on a maritime war. Mr. C. said he was willing to meet any event, if war did become necessary; but he did not wish to provoke it. Gentlemen had said that we have been insulted; but they would not say that our whole force would be competent to meet a single squadron of the British navy. The expence ought not to be overlooked—an expence of four millions; some gentlemen said six. It would be two millions in addition to what it would have been but for the amendments, without an atom of additional security to be derived from the money expended. He was willing to afford any assistance to American seamen in distress; but not to employ them because idle, when he believed their employment would be productive of mischief. He trusted until some way of filling the treasury were discovered, that they would not totally empty it.
Mr. J. G. Jackson said he had incurred the censure of the House for calling gentlemen to order, for whom he had high respect, during this session. After the example of this day it was time to desist, when, after a principle was solemnly adopted, gentlemen were permitted again to debate it. It was said that the adoption of the amendment was disrespectful to the President of the U. S. Mr. J. said he had the highest respect for this venerable sage. This principle of executive confidence was repugnant to the principle of the constitution. With this House was vested the power of war or peace, of raising armies and navies and of levying taxes, and with them properly rested the responsibility of employing the naval force. At a time when the President had been charged with wishing to excite a war pulse, he would of necessity be guarded in his expressions on the subject; and he had not expressly recommended any particular species of preparations. Gentlemen had said that they were desirous of peace. Mr. J. said that peace was already destroyed; and he said that he could not consent to cry out peace, peace, when there was no peace. What was the case which lately occurred at Savannah? But he did not conceive that we should rush into war, without giving an opportunity for procuring peace. Because we prepared for defence, did we invite war? No; and were we to be prevented from protecting our waters, from the fear of exciting sensations in a foreign government? He trusted not. This House had declared that it would not submit; and a permanent abandonment of the ocean would be submission. Our natural rights were to be protected at all hazards, and at every expence. He understood the question very differently
from the gentleman from Tennessee. He did not believe that the President of the U. S. possessed the power to employ all our vessels. There was such a law; but the number of seamen to be employed was limited. It was impossible that the President of the U. S. could carry the law into effect, and of course the power was mandatory without men and money. He had no idea in voting for this amendment that it involved war, or that it would delude the people into the idea that we meant to carry on a maritime war. If we went to war, we should adopt measures more efficient. He approved the sentiments of the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dana) and when gentlemen came out in this way, he was willing to do away distinctions of federalism and republicanism, and hail them as whigs, as Americans, as friends to their country. Mr. J. entered into an examination of the necessity of a small naval force, and urged several arguments in favor of its efficacy as a defence.
Mr. Sloan professed himself highly gratified at the vote which had just taken place, and he was at the same time as much in favor of peace as any gentleman. This in as much as had been looked for from sections of the country which must suffer in case of war. He thought it would tend more to harmonize than any measure adopted at this session. He rejoiced that the wishes of the people would be gratified by a removal of these frigates from this place, where they had been rotting so long.
Mr. Macon expressed his surprise at the change which appeared to have taken place in the House, within a few days. The current had set in favor of the embargo a short time ago, but its course was turned, and it was now for war. He was for holding to the present measures as long as we could. He cautioned gentlemen against measures which would provoke war; and intimated as his belief, from the vote just given, that it would take place in three months. It was yet time for gentlemen to prevent it, by withholding the sinews of the navy, by disagreeing to the remaining amendments proposed by the Senate. Send out the navy in its present disposition, said he, and you send it to war. He had been afraid, from the commencement of the session that we should have war; and war would assuredly follow the going out of these frigates. Did he not appreciate the character of the American seamen, their courage and spirit, he should not fear war from it. He could not account for the change which had taken place in the House within a few days. Whence this leaning to war? Nothing new had occurred that he knew of but the trifling case at Savannah. He knew that for years past we had had cause of war. Not a year since the commencement of the French revolution, in which we might not with good reason have declared war. But he wished a fair experiment of the embargo first. If we were to go to war there was no man in the nation who could foretell its result. He was not surprised that the gentleman from Connecticut should be against the embargo, because he had been so from the first. He would hold on to the embargo as long as he could. He thought he sufficiently understood the interests of the people whom he represented, and of the U. S. generally, to know that they would suffer by war. When he had said that the attack on the Chesapeake was as much cause of war as the attack on Copenhagen, the changes had been rung through the nation on his words. He was not in favor of war. He was surprised to hear gentlemen saying that the people would not bear the embargo; and that the friends of the measure were yielding to this impression. Come the day when it would, they would find war no slight matter. Gentlemen talked about sending these vessels out to protect trade. If sent out they would fight. He could not see what good ten frigates were to do as a defence. He had always feared that we should have a fleet; and he said no nation could maintain a navy and live well. Liberty was of no value if it was only tongue liberty; and a navy would soon strip the citizen of his property, and leave him but the liberty of speech. He had been in hopes that the country would not have followed the track of Europe. He hoped this navy policy might not eventually change the form of our government. Take this bill, said he, with the 50,000 men proposed—call them what you will—they are not militia—and see what it looks like. With respect to supporting our sailors, was there, for now, he asked, a bill before
the House for appropriating a sum of money for supporting them? When compared the number of seamen proposed to be employed with the actual number in the U. S. he had no idea that the bill was intended to relieve them. No. It squinted at war. He was not for any of these war measures till it was ascertained that the embargo did not produce an effect. This measure had occasioned less inconvenience than any great national measure could, and had been productive of more by saving property, &c. than any other would have been. Give foreign nations time and time again to reflect on proposals for peace, said he, before you launch into war. He thought with the gentleman from S. Carolina, that the agreement to the amendment was a reflection on the President. This was not the proper place for him to say what he thought of that man; but the censure was undeserved. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Jackson) says, that Congress alone has the power to declare war. The President also has a share in the power, and it cannot be declared without his concurrence. Mr. M. referred to the section of the constitution which says that every order, resolution, act, &c. shall be presented to the President for his approbation. The very next section declared that Congress shall have power to declare war, raise armies, &c. &c. and would any man say that they had the power to do it without the consent of the President? No, sir. [Mr. J. G. Jackson said that the gentleman wholly misunderstood him. He had no idea that the consent of the President was not necessary.] Mr. M. then observed that the pain he felt in his breast prevented him from proceeding further.
Mr. Taylor said as this was a very important question and one which the House had entered into, he should conceive that they wished to come to a conclusion, and would not therefore occupy much of their time. He did not believe with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Nelson) that it was his duty, because the first amendment was adopted, to adopt the remainder. He protested against the doctrine. He believed that it was in the power of the majority to negative any amendment. The amendment of the Senate contemplated an increase of expence at least double that contemplated by the bill as sent from this House, and yet the Senate had struck out the sum adequate for one half the actual number now contemplated, and inserted $400,000! He could not understand a system which authorized double the force proposed by the bill sent from this House, and for which it appropriated but one half the sum. There must be some mode of calculation in that honorable body which he did not understand.
The town is besieged; and instead of taking the system of defence into our closet and examining it, we are to take it in a speech as we can catch it, without having it upon paper to judge of it. It ought to have been upon our tables weeks ago. He would say what he thought of it. It was leading to the abandonment of our most efficient force for our weakest—to the abandonment of the embargo for a naval war. If we were to have war, this was not to be the whole force employed. This sum of 400,000 dollars, could deceive no one. With the money necessary for 4000 additional seamen an army of 30,000 men could be paid, who would sweep the Canadas in a year. A landsman, he had heard said, cost the U. S. 130 dollars annually, whilst a mariner cost 1100, seven and a third times as much. The House had been told that the nation must contend for its rights on the element where we must enjoy them. In the language of the great Chatham, France was conquered in America; G. Britain has been conquered in America, & may be conquered on terra firma again. He said, instead of launching a navy on the ocean, he would advance to the Gibraltar of America, possess ourselves of it and take from G. Britain her only depot on the American continent. He would force her whole commerce on the northern continent of America to pass under our cannons' mouth. He believed that it would be an extravagance to appropriate this money for a small naval force, when with it we could sweep the enemy from our northern frontier altogether. He wished not to be considered as an advocate of either mode. He was for an adherence to the embargo. If that were given up, he was for putting our resources to the best possible use for the defence of the country, and he was not for launching into an element where our enemy must be ready. He be-

lived if we were to have war on the ocean, that we should do more mischief by individual enterprise, by seizing a straggler here and a straggler there, plundering a squadron here and a squadron there, than by any regular force of the U. S. With respect to invasions of our territory, he had understood that gun-boats co-operating with fortifications, were competent to the defence of our harbors. Now it seemed that they could not drive out a picaroon. And would any one say that this immense appropriation for gun-boats would have been made but under an expectation that they would supersede the necessity of frigates? He said he should not himself have voted for the gun-boats if he had supposed that the House would have refused the other part of the system—the marine militia. He adverted to the refusal of the proposition to erect dry docks, and the subsequent proposition for a marine militia. He concluded by observing that he conceived that the terms of the amendment went to cast a censure on the President, to dishonor that sage whom gentlemen affected to revere.
(Sketch to be continued.)
DEBATE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS CONTINUED.
December 7.
Mr. QUINCY.—Mr. Speaker, I offer myself to the view of this House with very sensible embarrassment, in attempting to follow the honorable member from Tennessee (Mr. Campbell) a gentleman, who holds so distinguished a station on this floor, through thy blessing, Mr. Speaker, on his talents and industry. I place myself, with much reluctance, in competition with this, our great political Eneas—an illustrious leader of antiquity, whom, in his present relations, and with his present projects, the gentleman from Tennessee not a little resembles. Since, in order to evade the ruin impending over our cities, taking my honorable colleague (Mr. Bacon) by one hand, and the honorable gentlemen from Maryland (Mr. Montgomery) by the other, little Tulus and wife Crea, he is posting away into the woods, with Father Anchises and all the gods—hold gods.
When I had the honor of addressing this House, a few days ago, I touched this famous report of our committee of foreign relations, perhaps, a little too carelessly; perhaps I handled it a little too roughly, considering its tender age and the manifest delicacy of its constitution. But, sir, I had no idea of affecting very exquisitely the sensibilities of any gentleman. I thought that this was a common report of one of our ordinary committees, which I had a right to canvass, or to slight, to applaud, or to censure, without raising any extraordinary concern, either here or elsewhere. But from the general excitement, which my inconsiderate treatment of this subject occasions, I fear that I have been mistaken. This can be no mortal fabric, Mr. Speaker. This must be that image which fell down from Jupiter—presents, or future. Surely, nothing but a being of celestial origin would raise such tumult in minds, tempered like those, which lead the destinies of this House.
Sir, I thought that this report had been a common piece of wood— Indule lignum . Sir, just such a piece of wood as any day laborer might have hewed out in an hour, had he health and a hatchet. But it seems that our honorable chairman of the committee of foreign relations, “ matutina Deum .” Well, sir, I have no objections. If the workmen will, a God it shall be. I only wish, that when gentlemen bring their sacred things upon this floor, that they would “blow a trumpet before them, as the Heathens do,” on such occasions, to the end, that all true believers may prepare themselves to adore and tremble, and that all unbelievers may turn aside, and not disturb their devotions.
I assure gentlemen, that I meant to commit no sacrilege. I had no intention, sir, of canvassing very strictly this report. I supposed that, when it had been published and circulated, it had answered all the purposes of its authors, and I felt no disposition to interfere with them. But the House is my witness, that I am compelled, by the clamour raised, on all sides, by the friends of administration, to descend to particulars, and to examine it somewhat minutely.
My honorable Colleague, (Mr. Bacon) was pleased the other day to assert:—Sir, in referring to his observations on a former occasion, I beg the House not to imagine, that I am about to follow him. No, sir. I will neither follow nor imitate him. I hang upon no man's skirts. I run barking at no man's heel. I canvass principles and measures, solely with a view to the great interests of my country. The idea of personal victory is lost, in the total absorption of sense and mind, in the importance of impending consequences—I say, he was pleased to assert, that I had dealt in general allegations, against this report, without pointing out any particular objection. And the honorable chairman (Mr. Campbell)
has reiterated the charge. Both have treated this alleged omission with no little asperity. Yet, sir, it is very remarkable, that so far from dealing in general allegations, I explicitly stated my objections. The alternatives presented by the report—war or suspension of our rights, and the recommendation of the latter, rather than take the risque of the former, I expressly censured. I went farther—I compared these alternatives with an extract from an address made by the first continental Congress to the inhabitants of Great Britain, and attempted to shew, by way of contrast, what I thought, the disgraceful spirit of the report. Yet these gentlemen complain that I dealt in general allegations. Before I close, sir, they will have, I hope, no reason to repeat such objections. I trust, I shall be particular to their content.
Before entering upon an examination of this report, it may be useful to recollect, how it originated.
By the 3d section of the 2d article of the constitution, it is declared, that the President of the U. S. “shall, from time to time, give to Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” It is, then, the duty of the President to recommend such measures as in his judgment Congress ought to adopt. A great crisis is impending over our country. It is a time of alarm and peril and distress. How has the President performed this constitutional duty? Why, after recapitulating, in a formal message, our dangers and his trials, he expresses his confidence that we shall “with an unerring regard to the essential rights and interests of the nation, weigh and compare the painful alternatives , out of which a choice is to be made,” and that “the alternative chosen will be maintained with fortitude and patriotism.” In this way our chief magistrate performs his duty. A storm is approaching—the captain calls his choice hands upon deck, leaves the rudder swinging, and sets the crew to scuffle about alternatives . This message, pregnant with non-descript alternatives, is received by this House. And what do we? Why, constitute a great committee of foreign relations, and lest they should not have their attention completely occupied by the pressing exigencies of those with France and Great Britain, they are endowed with the whole mass; British, Spanish and French; Barbary powers and Indian neighbors. And what does this committee? Why, after seven days solemn convclave, they present to this House an illustrious report, loaded with alternatives —nothing but alternatives . The cold meat of the palace is hashed and served up to us, piping hot, from our committee room.
In considering this report, I shall pay no attention to either its beginning or its conclusion. The former consists of shavings from old documents, and the latter of bird lime for new converts. The twelfth page is the heart of this report. That I mean to canvass. And I do assert, that there is not one of all the principal positions, contained in it, which is true in the sense and to the extent assumed by the committee. Let us examine each separately.
“Your committee can perceive no other alternative, but abject and degrading submission —war with both nations—raccoonance and enforcement of the present suspension of our commerce.” Here is a tri-forked alternative. Let us consider each branch and see if either be true in the sense assumed by the committee. The 1st, “ abject and degrading submission ,” takes two things for granted; that trading, pending the objects of France and Great Britain, is submission ; and next, that it is submission , in its nature, abject and degrading . Neither is true. It is not submission to trade, pending these edicts, because they do not command you to trade. They command you not to trade. When you refuse to trade you submit, not when you carry on that trade, as far as you can, which they prohibit. Again, it is not true that such trading is abject and disgraceful , and that too upon the principles avowed by the advocates of this report. Trading, while these edicts are suspended over our commerce is submission , say they, because we have not physical force to resist the power of these belligerents; of course, if we trade, we must submit to these restrictions; not having power to evade, or break through them. Now admit for the sake of argument, what however in fact I deny, that the belligerents have the power to carry into effect their decrees so perfectly, that by reason of the orders of Great Britain we are physically disabled from going to France, and that by the edicts of France we are in like manner disabled from going to G. Britain. If such be our case, in relation to these powers, the question is, whether submitting to exercise all the trade, which remains to us, notwithstanding these edicts is “ abject and degrading .”
In the first place, I observe, that submission is not to beings constituted as we are, always “ abject and degrading .” We submit to the decrees
of Providence—to the laws of our nature—absolute weakness submits to absolute power—and there is nothing in such submission, shameful or degrading. It is no dishonor for finite not to contend with infinite. There is no loss of reputation, if creatures, such as men, perform not impossibilities. If then, it be true, in the sense asserted by some of the advocates of this report, that it is physically impossible for us to trade with France and G. Britain, and their dependencies, by reason of these edicts, still there is nothing “ abject or degrading ” in carrying on such trade as these edicts leave open to us, let it be never so small or so trifling; which however it might be easily shewn, as it has been, that it is neither the one nor the other. Sir, in this point of view, it is no more disgraceful for us to trade to Sweden, to China, to the North West coast, or to Spain and her dependencies, not one of which countries is now included in those edicts, than it is disgraceful for us to walk, because we are unable to fly; no more than it is shameful for man to use and enjoy the surface of this globe, because he has not, at his command, the whole circle of nature, and cannot range at will, over all the glorious spheres, which constitute the universe.
The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Campbell) called upon us just now, to tell him what was disgraceful submission, if carrying on commerce, under these restrictions, was not such submission. I will tell that gentleman, that submission is “ abject and disgraceful ,” which yields to the decrees of frail and feeble power, as though they were irresistible—which takes council of fear, and weighs not our comparative force—which abandons the whole, at a summons to deliver up a part—which makes the will of others the measure of rights, which God and nature not only have constituted eternal and unalienable, but have also endowed us with ample means to maintain.
My argument on this clause of the report of the committee, may be presented in this form: either the United States have, or they have not, physical ability to carry on commerce, in defiance of the edicts of both, or of either of these nations. If we have not physical ability to carry on the trade, which they prohibit, then it is no disgrace to exercise that commerce, which these irresistible decrees permit. If we have such physical ability, then, to the degree, in which we abandon that commerce, which we have power to carry on, is our submission “ abject and disgraceful .” It is yielding without struggle; it is sacrificing our rights, not because we have not force, but because we have not spirit to maintain them. It is in this point of view that I am disgusted with this report. It abjures what it recommends; it declines, in heroics, against submission, and proposes, in creeping prose, a tame and servile subserviency.
It cannot be concealed, let gentlemen try as much as they will, that we can trade, not only with one, but with both these belligerents, notwithstanding these restrictive decrees. The risque to Great Britain against French capture, scarcely amounts to two per cent. That to France against Great Britain is, unquestionably much greater. But what is that to us? It is not our fault, if the power of Britain on the ocean is superior to that of Bonaparte. It is equal and exact justice between both nations, for us to trade with both, as far as it is in our power. Great as the power of Britain is on the ocean, the enterprise and intrepidity of our merchants are more than a match for it. They will get your products to the continent in spite of her navy. But suppose they do not? Suppose they fail, and are captured in the attempt? What is that to us? After we have given them full notice of all their dangers and perfect warning, either of our inability, or of our determination not to protect them if they take the risque, it is at their peril; and upon whom does the loss fall? As it does now, through the operation of your embargo on the planter, on the farmer, on the mechanic, on the day laborer? No, sir. On the insurer, on the capitalist, on those who in the full exercise of their intelligence, apprised of all circumstances, are willing to take the hazard for the sake of the profit.
I will illustrate my general idea by a supposition. There are two avenues to the ocean, from the harbor of New York, by the Narrows and thro' Long Island Sound. Suppose the fleets both of France and Great Britain should block up the Narrows, so that to pass them would be physically impossible, in the relative state of our naval force. Will gentlemen seriously contend that there would be anything “ abject or disgraceful ,” if the people of New York should submit to carry on their trade through the Sound? Would the remedy, for this interference with our rights be abandoning the ocean altogether? Again—suppose that instead of both nations blockading the same, each should station its force at a different one. France at the mouth of the Sound, Britain at the Narrows. In
such case, would staying at home and refusing any more to go upon the sea be exercise of independence in the citizens of New York? Great philosophers may call it “ dignified retirement ,” if they will. I call it, and I am mistaken, if the people would not also call it, “ base and abject submission .” Sir, what in such case would be true honor. Why, to consider well, which adversary is the weakest, and cut our way to our rights, through the path which he obstructs. Having removed the smaller impediment, we should return with courage, strengthened by trial and animated by success, to the relief of our rights, from the pressure of the strongest assailant. But all this is war; and war is never to be incurred. If this be the national principle—avow it; tell your merchants you will not protect them; but for Heaven's sake do not deny them the power of relieving their own and the nation's burdens, by the exercise of their own ingenuity. Sir, impassable as the barriers, offered by these edicts, are in the estimation of members on this floor, the merchants abroad do not estimate them so insurmountable. Their anxiety to risk their property, in defiance of them, is full evidence of this. The great danger to mercantile ingenuity is internal envy, the corrosion of weakness or prejudice. Its external hazard is ever infinitely smaller. That practical intelligence, which this class of men possesses, beyond any other in the community, excited by self interest, the strongest of human passions, is too elastic to be confined by the limits of exterior human powers, however great or uncommon. Build a Chinese wall, the wit of your merchants, if permitted freely to operate, will break through it, or overleap it, or under-creept it.
mille adde catenas Effugiet tamen, haec sceleratus vincula Proteus.
(Speech to be continued.)
FRIDAY, JANUARY 13.
Mr. Lewis reported a bill to incorporate the trustees of the Presbyterian church of Alexandria. Twice read and referred.
A bill from the Senate amendatory of the act for the establishment of an uniform militia (by establishing a marine militia) was referred to the committee on our military and naval establishments.
Mr. G. W. Campbell presented two memorials on the subject of the bature at New-Orleans, which were referred.
ADDITIONAL DUTIES.
Mr. G. W. Campbell from the committee of Ways and Means reported a bill for imposing additional duties on all goods, wares and merchandise imported into the U. S. from any foreign port or place; which was twice read and referred to a committee of the whole. [The bill is blank as to the amount of duty.]
Mr. Burwell, from the committee appointed to enquire into the propriety of providing for a supply of salt, reported, in part, a bill authorising the President of the U. S. to permit vessels to depart from the ports and harbors of the U. S. for the purpose of bringing in salt. Twice read and committed. The following letter from the Secretary of the Treasury was also laid before the House:
TREASURY DEPARTMENT.
January 7th, 1809.
Sir—I had the honor to receive your letter of the 27th ult. requesting such information as I may possess respecting the means of obtaining immediate and permanent supplies of salt from the establishments of the U. S.
The annexed statement A shews the annual consumption of imported salt for each of the calender years 1802—1807, after deducting the quantities used for the cod-fishery, and also for pickled fish and salted provisions exported from the U. S.
The annual average is almost three millions of bushels, weighing each 56lbs. equal to 75,000 tons, and requiring in fact 125,000 tons of shipping for its importation. It must also be observed that the deductions above mentioned being calculated by the allowances on fishery and drawbacks; and the allowance being in fact greater than the amount of duty on salt employed in the cod-fishery, the quantity of imported salt actually consumed in the U. S. is greater than appears by the statement.
The statement B is intended to shew the gross amount of salt annually imported for the years 1802—1807, and the countries from which imported. The manner in which the accounts are kept at the treasury has rendered it more convenient to give the amount in this instance for the years ending the 30th Sept. than for calender years.
It will be perceived by the statement A that the domestic establishments have not increased, even in the same ratio as the population of the U. States, for the average of their consumption of imported salt is greater for the last than for the first years of the statement. Considering also the regularity of the importations and the well known fact that the article has been principally imported as ballast from England, there is rea-
son to believe that the quantity now in the country is very inadequate to the supply of the present year; and I am confident that there can be no reasonable expectation of the deficiency being supplied for that year from internal resources.
I am therefore clearly of opinion, that every encouragement should be given to immediate importations, and that measures should at the same time be adopted for the purpose of insuring for the succeeding years a supply from domestic establishments.
The only means of promoting immediate importations, appear to be, 1st either to except salt from the operation of the non-intercourse act, or to put off the general operation of that act till the first of July next; which last alternative appears in every respect the most eligible: 2ndly, to authorise the President to permit American vessels to proceed, during the continuance of the embargo, to such foreign ports as may be designated by law, for the sole purpose of bringing in cargoes of salt.
The internal resources must be drawn from either the salt springs in various parts of the Western states, from the Onondago springs in the state of N. York, or from the Atlantic shores.
The high price of salt in the Western states does not arise from the actual expence incurred in manufacturing the article; for it does not cost more than 75 cents per bushel at the Indiana or Wabash Saline; and yet its market price has not been less than two dollars. It follows, that the price is kept up by reason of the quantity made being much less than the actual demand, and therefore that no considerable addition can be expected from that quarter; none certainly beyond the wants of that part of the country.
The quantity of salt made at the Onondago springs may certainly be considerably increased. I have been informed that about 300,000 bushels are now annually made; and that the amount might, perhaps, be increased to 600,000. On that subject, however, I cannot form a positive opinion; but am satisfied that the most sanguine calculations fall very short of the annual consumption of the U. S. and that the principal resource to be relied on is the increase of establishments on the sea shore. These may be multiplied in numerous places from Massachusetts to Georgia; and although the repeal of the law laying a duty on importation has checked their progress, experience has proven that capital may be advantageously employed in that manufacture. I think that nothing more is necessary to induce at present, the application of a capital sufficient in a short time to produce an adequate supply that the certainty of not being ruined by the competition of large importations at reduced prices. But it is doubtful whether it would be most eligible to effect that object by a bounty on the domestic manufacture, or by a renewal of the duty on the importation, to take place after the first of January 1810, and to continue for 10 years. A combination of both would perhaps be best calculated to ensure success, and also most equitable. But a duty on importation alone is the easiest to execute, and is not liable to any constitutional objections.
The encouragement thus given to domestic establishments may indeed, during the number of years to which the duty or bounty would be limited, encrase the price of salt. But that temporary inconvenience should be cheerfully submitted to, if an adequate supply of that necessary article may thereby be ever after insured on reasonable terms, and from internal resources not liable to be affected by war or by any other interruption of commerce.
I have the honor to be, &c.
ALBERT GALLATIN.
Honorable William A. Burwell,
Chairman, &c.
NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT.
The House resolved itself into a committee of the whole—Mr. MACON in the chair—on the amendments of the Senate to the bill for employing seamen and marines.
Mr. J. Montgomery moved to strike out the first amendment of the Senate (requiring the President to cause to be manned and employed all the armed vessels and gun-boats of the U. States) and insert a provision, leaving it discretionary with the President to employ them whenever in his opinion the public service may require it.
A division of the question was called for, so as to take it first on striking out the words in the amendment of the Senate.
On this motion a desultory debate of three or four hours took place, in which Messrs. J. G. Jackson, G. W. Campbell, Sloan, Smide, Southard, Bacon, Gardner, Guison, Dawson, Newton, Lloyd, Mosely, Love, Lyon and Van Dyke partook.
The motion to strike out was carried 53 to 42; and the motion to insert negatived, 53 to 47.
It was understood that this vote destroyed the first amendment in committee of the whole; but that the

House might disagree to the report of the committee.
The question was taken separately on each of the other amendments from the Senate (for adding to the number of midshipmen, corporals, seamen and marines); and carried by majorities of four, five and six votes.
The committee then rose and reported to the House their disagreement to the first amendment of the Senate, and their agreement to the remainder. And the House adjd.
SATURDAY, JAN. 14.
NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT.
The documents from the Senate on the subject of the naval establishment, were ordered to be printed.
The House agreed now to take up the report of the committee of the whole of yesterday on the amendments from the Senate, 43 to 39.
Mr. Nicholas moved to postpone the consideration of the subject till Monday, that the documents might be printed.—54 to 31.
DISTRESSED SEAMEN.
The House resolved itself into a committee of the whole, on the bill for the relief of sick, disabled and distressed seamen—Mr. Desha in the Chair.
The blank for the sum to be appropriated for the purpose, was filled with 200,000 dollars, 68 rising in the affirmative.
The committee rose and reported the bill. The question on concurrence with the committee in filling the blank, having been stated—
Mr. Burwell said he should vote against this, because he did not consider this class of the community as particularly entitled to relief from the Government; and even if it were proper, there was no security in the bill that the money would be properly applied. He did not believe that there was any such distress among the seamen as represented.
Mr. Newton explained that the Secretary of the Treasury had the direction of the fund for the relief of distressed and disabled seamen, which had heretofore been supplied from a tax on their wages. This fund was now exhausted; and the Secretary of the Treasury said, if money were not appropriated, the doors of the hospitals must be closed against them, an office which the Secretary did not wish to perform. He had therefore recommended an appropriation of 200,000 dollars for their relief. Mr. Newton then stated the peculiar hardships attached to the seaman's situation, &c.
Mr. Holland considered this a novel measure. The seamen who were in distress, he conceived, entitled to relief from the respective states in which they might be, who were bound to support their poor. Indeed this money could not be applied to the use of the embargoed seamen generally, because it was only for the relief of those who were subject to the municipal regulations of the state in which they may be.
Mr. Quincy observed, that the fund for the support of distressed seamen had heretofore been derived from a tax on the wages of the seamen. This fund, which had heretofore been sufficient, having been destroyed by the suspension of commerce, he asked whether the general government was not pledged to do something for these men, who would not have suffered but for its measures?
Mr. Smith was in favor of the bill. The funds heretofore established for the relief of our seamen had been destroyed by a measure which had been deemed necessary for the good of the country; and he thought assistance ought to be given to them. Mr. Smith called for the reading of the Secretary of the Treasury's report on the subject.
Mr. Tallmadge said, that every gentleman who attended to the reasoning of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, could not fail to be convinced of the rectitude of his statement, and the conclusion which he had drawn from it. The general government had destroyed the service, by which the seamen had heretofore been supported; in doing which they had thrown a burthen on the community in the same ratio as the service had been destroyed. The Secretary of the Treasury had fairly and candidly told the House, that the fund for the support of the distressed seamen was destroyed. What should be done? Should nothing be apportioned from the funds of this government to support the establishment? He hoped and trusted that there would. For the information of the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Burwell) who did not know that this class of men was more distressed than any other, Mr. T. said, he would mention that he had letters from different parts of the union, particularly from Philadelphia, from one of the most respectable merchants in this city, informing him that the merchants had formed a fund for the relief of these persons, which had been exhausted, the seamen being in the greatest distress, without a stick of wood in their victuals; and requesting him as a member of the general government to exert himself for their relief. Mr. T. said he would venture to declare that this was the case in all the ports of the U. S.; and he thought it most
unquestionably became the government to grant some sort of relief to these citizens. He believed that the appropriation proposed was proper; and that less than that would be too little for the purpose.
Mr. D. R. Williams thought the object of the bill very laudable, but he wished a modification of the principle. He was willing to advance the 200,000 dollars, subject to be refunded, from the funds hereafter to be received for the support of this establishment. He thought this amendment would be highly proper, because from a document in his hands, he found that the funds of the establishment for the relief of sick and disabled seamen, had always been more than sufficient for its support. In June 1802, the balance of the fund was 76,188 dollars; in 1803 the balance was 67,448 dollars. This shewed that the funds arising out of the 20 cents a month tax on the seamen's wages, was more than adequate for the purposes for which it had been established, and that the fund would hereafter be able to refund to the government the monies now about to be appropriated. Considering the commercial prosperity of this government since 1803, it was fairly presumable, he said, that at the time of the imposition of the embargo, the balance on hand was greater than at the former period. Under this view of the subject, though he had not the slightest wish to delay the bill, he moved that it lie on the table till an amendment could be prepared.
Mr. Newton said that the fund heretofore derived from the tax on seamen, had not been more than adequate to their support. In the town in which he lived, persons had not been admitted into the hospital who were acknowledged to be entitled to relief. In consequence of the construction put upon the law, a great many of the very people who had paid 20 cents a month out of their wages had been thrown upon the community as paupers and supported by the community at large.
Mr. D. R. Williams replied that the result of the amendment which he contemplated would be, that if there never was a balance in the funds, the monies appropriated would never be repaid.
Mr. Story deprecated the delay which would result from the bill lying upon the table. The means of supporting this fund were destroyed by a law of the U. S. and he thought that the general government should, by giving an aid to it, supply the deficiency. He represented the peculiarity of the seamen's general character; having no thought for to-morrow, when deprived of his monthly pay, he was of course subjected to distress. In the protection of the general rights of the community, the general government had been compelled to subject the seamen to a particular calamity. He therefore thought that an additional aid for the support of the sick and disabled should be afforded by Congress.
Mr. D. R. Williams withdrew his motion for postponement, with a view of moving an amendment.
Further debate took place on this subject, in which Messrs. Sloan, Alexander, Quincy, Story, Smith, Newton & D. R. Williams advocated the principle of the bill, and Messrs. Holland, Boyd, GARDENER & Mason opposed it. Mr. GARDENER stated a constitutional objection to the bill; he said that there was no power given under the constitution, by which either House of Congress could be converted into an almshouse; it was assuming the exercise of the legislative powers of the states, which had never even been proposed to be given to the general government. He said he thought he saw a disposition in a certain part of the government to encroach upon the rights of the states; and in however pleasing forms those encroachments were dressed, they ought to be guarded against. To this it was replied by Messrs. Quincy and Story, that as under the sanction of a law of the U. S. hospitals had been erected, and they laboured under a temporary embarrassment, it was in the power of the general government to afford them temporary assistance. If the general government had a right to establish marine hospitals (which question had been settled and acted upon for many years) and the funds for their support should fail, it was in the power of Congress, under the general clause of the constitution, to provide temporary funds for their support.
The question on inserting 200,000 dollars, was taken by Yeas and Nays, and carried—Yeas 69.
Mr. D. R. Williams moved to add to the clause making the appropriation the following words: "and that the same shall be refunded into the Treasury of the United States out of such sums as may accrue to the fund for the relief of disabled seamen." This amendment was modified, on the suggestion of Mr. Quincy by adding to it the words— "At such times and in such manner as may not defeat the general purposes for which such fund was established." The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. Sedman moved to add to the bill the following sentence, which he conceived would make the bill conform to the Secretary of the Treasury's letter on the subject: "And shall be expended therein in proportion to the amount collected in each port on account of the fund for the relief of sick & disabled seamen during the year 1807." This was objected to by Messrs. Mason, D. R. Williams & Newton, who declared that it would defeat the object of the bill; and if adopted would compel many to vote against the bill. Mr. Sedman, desirous that the bill should pass, withdrew his amendment.
And on the question, "Shall the bill be engrossed for a third reading?" there were
In favor of it 54 Against it 24 Majority 30 The bill was ordered to be read a third time on Monday.—Adjourned.
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, JANUARY 16.
The following letter, represented to be from Mr. Canning to Mr. Pinkney, has made its appearance in the New York Gazette, with these introductory remarks:
"This letter establishes two IMPORTANT FACTS, which ought never to be forgotten."
"The first is, that the offer of Mr. Jefferson to raise the embargo on the rescinding the Orders in Council, was only communicated to Mr. Canning by Mr. Pinkney in his INDIVIDUAL capacity, in a verbal communication, and with an expression of a belief only, that his government would raise the embargo IF the British government would FIRST remove their obnoxious Orders in Council."
"The second fact, is, that Mr. Pinkney, (in reply to Mr. Canning's request for the information) states unreservedly, that when the President recommended the embargo, he had no information of the passage of the British Orders in Council now complained of."
We are even more astonished at the profligate falsehood of these assertions, ostensibly penned by an American, than at the hardihood of the British minister, whom we had during the course of the last summer occasion to detect in the most ingenious misrepresentation and distortion of facts. The coincidence of misrepresentation can only be accounted for by the ascription of the letter as well as the comment to the same foreign feelings.
The falsehood of the first allegation will abundantly appear from a reference to the documents recently published, from which the following extract will suffice.
Mr. Pinkney, in his note to Mr. Canning, bearing date the 23d of August, precisely a month anterior to the date of Mr. C's extraordinary letter, says—
"I had the honor to state to you, sir, that it was the intention of the President, in case G. Britain repealed her orders, as regarded the United States, to exercise the power vested in him by the act of the last session of Congress, entitled "An act to authorise the President of the U. States under certain conditions, to suspend the operation of the act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the U. S. and the several supplementary acts thereto," by suspending the embargo law and its supplements, as regards G. Britain."
"I am authorised to give you this assurance in the most formal manner; and I trust that upon impartial enquiry it will be found to leave no inducement to perseverance in the British orders, while it creates the most powerful inducements of equity and policy to abandon them."
If Mr. Pinkney is to be credited, Mr. Canning has most egregiously misrepresented him on this point. And if on this point, there is equal reason to infer that he has equally misrepresented him on the other; nay, stronger. For, in this last instance, however unimportant the fact in dispute, let it be recollected that the opposition in this country had taken the ground contended for by Mr. C. who in this part, as in every other of the controversy between the two governments, appears most wonderfully to have co-operated with the American malcontents. Whether the government of the U. S. had a perfect knowledge of the orders of November 11th, previous to the imposition of the embargo, is of no importance; but it is certain that they were in existence time enough to have reached this country before that event, and that the government, as well as the people, knew of their existence, and enough of their contents to justify, with other causes, the embargo.
On the general tenor of Mr. Canning's letter, it will be but fair for the reader not to decide until Mr. Pinkney's answer shall appear. From the late date of Mr. C's note, it may be presumed that Mr. Pinkney's reply had not reached the U. S. when the documents were laid before Congress.]
Mr. CANNING to Mr. PINKNEY, accompanying his letter of September 23, 1808.
FOREIGN OFFICE,
September 23, 1808.
Sir, In laying before the king, your letter of the 23d of August, and in communicating to you the accompanying answer, which I have received his majesty's commands to return to it—I confess I feel some little embarrassment from the repeated references which your letter contains, to what has passed between us in conversation. An embarrassment arising in no degree (as you are perfectly aware) from any feeling of distrust in you personally, but from a recollection of the misrepresentation which took place in America of former conferences between us. You gave me, on that account, the most satisfactory proof that such misrepresentation did not originate with you, by communicating to me that part of your dispatch, in which the conferences particularly referred to, were related correctly; but this very circumstance which establishes your personal claim to entire confidence proves, at the same time, that a faithful report of a conference on your part is not a security against its misrepresentation.
It was for that reason, principally, that after hearing, with the most respectful attention, all that you had to state to me, verbally, upon the subject of the present overture, I felt
myself under the necessity of requiring, as "indispensible," a written communication upon the subject.
It is for that reason, also, that as in your written communication you referred to our late conversations for the "bearings and details" of your proposal, I felt it necessary to recapitulate, as shortly as I can, what I conceive to have passed in these conversations beyond what I find recorded in your letter.
The principal points on which the suggestions brought forward by you in personal conference, appear to me to have differed in some degree from the proposal now stated by you in writing are two—the first, that in conversation the proposal itself was not distinctly stated as an overture authorised by your government—the second, that the beneficial consequences likely to result to this country from the acceptance of that proposal were "pursued" through more ample "illustrations."
In the first of our conferences, I understood you to say little more on the authority of your government, than that you were instructed to remonstrate against the orders in council of the 7th of January, and 11th of November 1807—but to add, as from yourself, an expression of your own conviction, that if these orders were repealed, the President of the U. S. would suspend the embargo with respect to Great Britain.
Upon the consequences of such a suspension of the embargo, while it would still continue to be enforced against France, you expatiated largely—still speaking, however, (as I understood) your own individual sentiments.
It was suggested by you, that America would, in that case, probably arm her merchant ships against the aggressions of France—an expedient, to which, you observed, it would be perfectly idle to resort against Great Britain. The collisions of armed vessels would probable produce war—and the United States would thus be brought into the very situation in which we must wish to place them—that of hostility to France, and virtual, if not formal alliance with G. Britain.
In our second conference, you repeated and enforced the arguments calculated to induce the British government to consent to the repeal of the orders in council, and in this conference, though not stating yourself to be authorised by your government formally to offer the suspension of the embargo as an immediate consequence of that repeal—yet you did profess (as I understood you) a readiness to take upon yourself to make that offer, provided that I should give you before hand an unofficial assurance that, coupled with that offer so made, the demand of the repeal of the orders in council of January and November, 1807, would be probably rescinded.
I, of course, declined to give any such previous assurances—but as you appeared to attach great importance to this suggestion, and as I was led to think that a compliance with it might relieve you from a difficulty in executing the instructions of your government, I consented to take a few days to consider of it, and to reserve my definitive answer until I should see you again.
I never doubted in my own mind, as to the inexpediency and impropriety of encouraging you to take an unauthorised step, by an unofficial promise that it should be well received—but in a matter of such delicacy I was desirous of either confirming or correcting my own opinion by the opinion of others.
The result was, that in a third interview, which took place shortly after the second, I had the honor to inform you, that after the most mature deliberation, I found it impossible to yield to your suggestion, and that it, therefore, remained for you to frame your proposition according to the instructions of your government, as to your own unbiassed discretion.
My own share in these several conferences, beyond what was implied in the above statement, was very small. I have (as you know) always wished to refer the argumentative discussion of the subject of the orders in council, to the official correspondence, which I have more than once been taught to expect you to open upon it, than to engage with you in a verbal controversy, which, if confined to ourselves, would be useless—If afterwards to be reduced into writing for the purpose of being communicated to our respective governments—superfluous.
But to the representations which you have repeatedly made against the orders in council of January and November, "as violating the rights of the United States, and affecting most destructively their best interests upon grounds wholly inadmissible both in principle and fact,"—I have uniformly maintained the unquestionable right of his majesty to resort to the fullest measures of retaliation, in consequence of the unparalleled aggression of the enemy, and to resort upon that enemy the evils of his own injustice—and have uniformly contended that "if third parties suffer from those measures, the demand of reparation must be made to that power, which
first violates the established usages of war and the rights of neutral states."
There was, indeed, one point upon which I was particularly anxious to receive precise information, and upon which, from your candor and frankness, I was fortunate enough to obtain it. The connecting together in your proposed overture, the suspension of the embargo, and the repeal of the orders in council—as well those of November, as the preceding one of the 7th of January, might appear to imply that the embargo had been the immediate consequence of those orders, and I was, therefore, desirous to ascertain whether, in fact, the orders in council of November, had been known to the government of the U. S. previous to the message of the President proposing the embargo—so as to be a moving consideration to that message. I had the satisfaction to learn from you, that such was not the fact—that rumors, indeed, might have reached America of some measure of further retaliation, being in the contemplation of the British government, that, perhaps, (as I understood you), some more severe and sweeping measures might have been expected—but that the orders in council of the 11th of November, as having been issued, there was no knowledge of in America—at least none in possession of the American government, at the time of proposing the embargo. Such, sir, is, (according to the best of my recollection,) correctly, the substance of what has passed being us, at our several interviews, previous to the presentation of your official letter; and such I have represented to have been the substance of what has passed on those several occasions in the reports of our conferences, which it has been my duty to make to the king.
If, in this recapitulation, there is anything mistaken, or any thing omitted, you will do me the justice to believe the error unintentional, and you may rely on my readiness to set it right. I have the honor to be, &c. GEORGE CANNING.
Michael Leib is chosen Senator of the U. S. for Pennsylvania, in the room of Samuel Maclay, resigned, for the remainder of the present session.
POSTSCRIPT.
The British ship Ann has arrived at Charleston, and brings London papers to the 10th and Liverpool papers to the 12th of November. They do not contain any news of much importance. On the 26th of October a smart action took place between Gen. Blake & Marshal Ney, at Zennosa; the Spaniards acknowledge the loss of 2,000 men, but state the loss of the French as having been much more considerable.
London, November 10. A report was circulated this morning, with considerable confidence, that the Emperor of Austria had declared war against France, and that Bonaparte, upon receiving the intelligence, had suddenly returned to Paris. We of course, do not pledge ourselves for the truth of this statement, but it appears from the foreign papers that the French recently actually stopped the circulation of the Vienna Gazette, in the North of Germany.
A MEETING of the TRUSTEES of the PUBLIC SCHOOLS in the city of Washington is requested at Mr. Lindsay's Hotel, Pennsylvania avenue, on Tuesday the 17th inst. at half past 5 o'clock, P. M. January 12—
THE SALE of the VALUABLE PROPERTY advertised to be sold at the Union Tavern, Georgetown, at 12 o'clock THIS DAY, is Postponed till MONDAY the 23d inst. at the same hour and place. JOHN DAVIDSON. WALTER HELLEN. January 16—4t
NOTICE.
ALL Persons to whom JAMES DUDDLE is indebted are requested to produce their accounts properly adjusted on or before the 25th inst. to the Subscribers, who have been appointed trustees to all his property and effects, at a general meeting of his creditors. BULLER COCKE, MATTHEW WRIGHT. January 16—3t
TO LEASE FOR A TERM OF YEARS, A LOT on which is situated a Soap and Candle Manufactory in the town of Fredericksburg Virginia.
THE Proprietor being desirous of retiring from the business, will lease out his Soap and Candle Manufactory with all the apparatus thereunto belonging, for the term of three, seven, or ten years; and will also, if agreeable, hire an excellent manufacturer for the same period. It is unnecessary to give a description of the Lot and Manufactory, as it is presumed that any person inclined to Lease would first view the premises—suffice it to say that the Lot is equal if not superior to any in the state for the business. It has a spring in it almost sufficient to turn a grist mill, which is conveyed by pipes to a factory house 52 feet by 16 having 4 rooms besides the cellar where the boiler is erected. It is the only establishment of the kind on the Rappahannock, and ashes, tallow, &c. may be procured in the greatest abundance. The terms may be known by addressing a letter to the subscriber. GEO. W. B. SPOONER, Fredericksburg Virg. January 16—w4t
(CIRCULAR.)
Department of State, Jan. 14th, 1809. MERCHANTS and others wishing to forward letters to Europe are informed that Two Vessels under the orders of government, will sail from New York on the 25th of this month, or as soon thereafter as possible, the one for Falmouth the other for L'Orient, and will deliver all such letters as may be respectively consigned to those ports, or to other places through the same. The postage on the letters to be paid by the sender.
January 15—

PROPOSALS for carrying Mails of the United States, on the following post roads, will be received at the General Post-Office in Washington, until the 16th day of January next inclusive.
34. From Clarksville, by Duckhan's and Randolph ch to Pendleton ch once in two weeks. Leave Clarksville every other Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Pendleton ch the next Friday at 10 a m. Leave Pendleton ch every other Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Clarksville the next Monday by 6 p m. 35. From Fredericksburg, by Falmouth, Elkins church, Fauquier ch to Oakhill and Salem, or Ash's store to Paris once a week. Leave Paris, every Saturday at 6 a m and arrive at Fredericksburg on Monday by 8 p m. Leave Fredericksburg every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Paris on Friday by 6 p m. 36. From Alexandria by Fairfax ch, Centreville, Haymarket, Buckland, Warrenton, Ashenton, Culpeper ch to, Burtonsville, or Madison ch to, to Stanardsville once a week. Leave Alexandria every Friday at 2 p m, arrive at Fairfax ch by 6 p m and arrive at Stanardsville on Monday by 5 p m. Leave Stanardsville every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Alexandria, on Friday by 10 a m. 37. From Fredericksburg, by Germanna, Stevensburg, Culpeper ch to, Gain's Cross Roads, & Front Royal to Winchester once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Friday at 2 p m and arrive at Winchester on Monday at 6 a m. Return. Leave Winchester every Monday at noon, and arrive at Fredericksburg on Wednesday by 6 p m. 38. From Culpeper ch, by Woodville, F. T. Village, Washington, Pass Mills, Thornton's Gap, Munford's Store, & Hawke's Bill mills, to Newmarket once a week. Leave Culpeper ch every Monday at 6 a m and arrive at Newmarket on Tuesday by 10 a m. Leave Newmarket at 2 p m and arrive at Culpeper on Wednesday by 6 p m. 39. From Fredericksburg, by Thornsburg, Roger's Mills, Chilsees, Chesterfield, ch, Newfound mills, Oxford, Crow's store, Goodland ch to, Michels', Yanceyville, Price's mills, Cuckoo's, Louisa, ch to, Potomacville, Bibb's store & Spottsylvania ch to Fredericksburg, once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Tuesday at noon, arrive at Goodland ch on Thursday by 11 a m and at Fredericksburg the next Tuesday by 9 a m. 40. From Fredericksburg, by Port Royal, Fiesville, Layton's, Lloyd's, Tappahannock, Urbanna, Clemis, & Gloucester ch to, to Yorktown once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Yorktown, on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Yorktown every Sunday at 5 a m, and arrive at Fredericksburg on Wednesday by 10 a m. 41. From Fredericksburg, by King George ch to, Broadfield, Mattox Bridge, Leeds town, Templeman's Cross Roads, Richmond ch to, Motnt Airy, Farnham, Kinsale, Northumberland ch to and Lancaster ch to Kilmarnock once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Wednesday at 2 p m and arrive at Kilmarnock, the next Saturday by 3 p m. Return. Leave Kilmarnock every Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Fredericksburg the next Wednesday by 10 a m. 42. From Tappahannock to Richmond ch once a week. Leave Richmond ch every Thursday at noon & arrive at Tappahannock by 6 p m. Return. Leave Tappahannock on Thursday at 6 1/2 p m & arrive at Richmond ch on Friday by 9 a m. 43. From Bowling Green, by Baitorsville, Broadus's mill, Harrisonville, Newtown, Dunkirk, Wallerston, King William ch to, Lilly Point, & Cumberland, to New Kent ch once a week. Leave Bowling Green every Tuesday at 6 a m & arrive at New Kent ch on Wednesday by 10 a m. Return. Leave New Kent ch every Wednesday at 2 p m & arrive at Bowling Green on Thursday by 8 p m. 44. From Richmond by Hanovetown, Aylet's and Dunkirk, to Tappahannock once a week. Leave Richmond every Wednesday at 1 p m, arrive at Dunkirk on Thursday by 8 a m. Leave Dunkirk at 9 a m and arrive at Tappahannock by 1 p m. Return. Leave Tappahannock every Sunday at 6 a m & arrive at Richmond on Monday by noon. 45. From Dunkirk, by King and Queen ch to, Snicker's Ford, Gloucester ch to & North End, to Matthews ch, once a week. Leave Dunkirk every Thursday at 8 a m & arrive at Matthews ch on Friday by 7 p m. Return. Leave Matthews ch on Saturday at 6 a m, & arrive at Dunkirk on Monday by 6 p m. 46. From Richmond, by Granville to Charles City ch, once a week. Leave Charles City ch every Tuesday at 6 a m, & arrive at Richmond by 4 p m. Leave Richmond every Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Charles City ch by 6 p m. 47. From Fredericksburg, by Orange ch, Lindsay's store, Charlottesville, New York & Wanchamp to Staunton twice a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Tuesday & Saturday at noon, arrive at Charlottesville on Wednesday & Sunday by 5 p m. Leave Charlottesville at 5 1/2 p m and arrive at Staunton on Thursday & Friday by 11 a m. Return. Leave Staunton every Thursday & Monday at 1 p m, arrive at Charlottesville on Friday and Tuesday by 7 a m. Leave Charlottesville at 7 1/2 a m and arrive at Fredericksburg on Saturday and Wednesday by 11 a m. 48. From Staunton by Middlebrook, Brownsville, Lexington, Natural Bridge, Pattonsburg, Fraziers, Ams erdam, Salem Annot, and Montgomery ch to Wythe ch twice a week. Leave Staunton every Monday and Thursday at 1 p m, arrive at Fincastle on Tuesday & Friday by 7 p m, arrive at Montgomery ch on Wednesday and Saturday by 8 p m & arrive at Wythe ch on Thursday and Friday by 8 p m. Return. Leave Wythe ch every Monday and Thursday at 8 p m, arrive at Fincastle on Tuesday & Saturday by 8 p m and arrive at Staunton the next Thursday and Monday by 11 a m. 49. From Wythe ch, by Crab Orchard, Abingdon, Blountsville, Rossville, Rogersville, Whitesville, Bean's Station, & Rutledge, to Knoxville twice a week. Leave Wythe ch every Monday and Friday at 4 a m & arrive at Sullivan ch on Tuesday and Saturday by noon, at Beene's Station on Wednesday and Sunday by 2 p m and at Knoxville on Thursday & Monday by 11 a m. Return. Leave Knoxville every Monday and Thursday at 1 p m, arrive at Beene's Station on Tuesday & Friday by 10 a m, at Sullivan ch on Wednesday and Saturday by noon, & at Wythe ch, on Thursday & Sunday by 8 p m. 50. From Richmond by Goochland ch to, George's, Timberlake's, and Milton, to Charlottesville twice a week. Leave Richmond every Tuesday & Saturday at 6 a m, and arrive at Charlottesville on Wednesday & Sunday by 4 p m. Return. Leave Charlottesville every Tuesday & Friday at 8 a m, & arrive at Richmond on Wednesday & Sunday by 7 p m. 51. From Richmond, by Hopkin's, Powhatan ch, Carter'sville N.W. Canton, Duckhan's ch, and Burt Creek, to Lynchburg once a week. Leave Richmond every Friday at 3 p m, arrive at Powhatan ch on Saturday by 10 a m and at Lynchburg on Monday by 10 a m. Return. Leave Lynchburg every Monday by 10 a m and arrive at Powhatan ch on Tuesday by 10 a m and at Richmond on Wednesday by 7 p m.
52. From Lynchburg by New London & Liberty to Fincastle, once a week. Leave Fincastle every Sunday at 6 a m, & arrive at Lynchburg on Monday by 10 a m. Leave Lynchburg every Monday at 2 p m & arrive at Fincastle on Tuesday by 7 p m. 53. From Richmond, by Manchester, Chesterfield ch to Springfield, Colesville, Goochland ch to, Pridaville, Perkinsonville, Painsville, Lintonville, & Jamestown, to Farmville once a week. Leave Farmville every Monday at 6 a m and arrive at Richmond on Tuesday by 4 p m. Leave Richmond every Wednesday at 8 a m and arrive at Jamestown on Thursday by 8 p m. 54. From Powhatan ch, by Cumberland ch to, Castra, Farmville, Prince Edward court house, Charlotte court house, to Halifax ch, once a week. Leave Powhatan ch every Saturday at 10 a m, arrive at Prince Edward ch on Sunday by 4 p m & arrive at Halifax ch on Monday by 4 p m. Leave Halifax ch on Tuesday at 4 a m, arrive at Prince Edward ch on Wednesday by 6 a m. Return. Leave Prince Edward ch on Wednesday at 6 a m, & arrive at Powhatan ch on Wednesday by 3 p m. 55. From Prince Edward's ch, by Leicestershire, Wheeler's Springs, Reeds & Campbell ch to New London once a week. Leave Prince Edward ch every Sunday at 4 1/2 p m & arrive at New London on Monday by 8 p m. Return. Leave New London on Tuesday at 4 a m & arrive at Prince Edward ch on Wednesday by 6 a m. 56. From Halifax ch by Danville, and Dixonsville, to Lenox Castle, N.C. once a week. Leave Lenox Castle every Sunday at 6 a m & arrive at Halifax ch on Monday by 6 p m. Leave Halifax ch every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Lenox Castle on Wednesday by 6 p m. 57. From Halifax ch, by Halifax Oldtown, Pennsylvania ch, Pittsylvania old ch, Peyton'sburg, Henry ch, Hughesville, & Patrick ch to Germanton once a week. Leave Halifax ch every Tuesday at 6 a m, arrive at Henry ch on Wednesday by 3 p m & at Germanton on Friday by 10 a m. Return. Leave Germanton every Friday at 2 p m & arrive at Henry ch on Sunday by 3 p m. Leave Henry ch at 4 p m and arrive at Halifax ch on Monday by 6 p m. 58. From Henry ch, by Rocky Mount, to Liberty, once a week. Leave Henry ch every Thursday at 6 a m & arrive at Liberty on Friday by 11 a m. Leave Liberty every Friday at 1 p m and arrive at Henry ch on Saturday by 6 p m. 59. From Petersburg, by Brookington, Namazeean Bridge, Henderson, Nottoway ch to, Hungantown, Double Bridge, Halesburg, Wilkesville, Bibb's Ferry, & Scottsburg, to Halifax ch, once a week. Leave Petersburg every Friday at 2 p m, arrive at Wilkesville on Monday by 9 a m. Leave Wilkesville at 10 a m and arrive at Halifax ch by 4 p m. Return. Leave Halifax ch on Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Wilkesville by 2 p m. Leave Wilkesville at 3 p m and arrive at Petersburg on Friday by 10 a m. 60. From Harrisville, by Fielder's mill, Quarlesville, M'Farlands, Lunenburg ch, Christiansville, Marshallsburg, Meeklenburg ch to, St. Tamany's, Gee's Bridge, Edmundson, & Fielder's mill to Harrisville, once a week. Leave Harrisville every Tuesday at 6 a m, arrive at Marshallsburg by 5 p m. Leave there on Wednesday at 6 a m & arrive at Harrisville by 6 p m. 61. From Harrisville, by Bellfield, Hicks's ford & Alexandria, to Halifax, twice a week. Leave Harrisville every Tuesday and Saturday at 5 a m and arrive at Halifax by 8 p m. Leave Halifax every Wednesday & Sunday at 5 a m and arrive at Harrisville by 8 p m. The mail is to pass by Putney's store and Dancy's on Tuesday and Sunday. 62. From Petersburg, by Sussex ch to, Jerusalem & South Quay, to Murfreesboro' N.C. once a week. Leave Petersburg every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Murfreesboro' on Wednesday by 4 p m. Return. Leave Murfreesboro' every Sunday at 8 a m and arrive at Petersburg on Monday by 6 p m. 63. From Smithfield, by Urquhart's store, Jerusalem, Bethlehem Cross Roads and the Cross Keys, to Hicks's Ford, once a week. Leave Hicks's Ford every Thursday at 5 a m and arrive at Smithfield on Friday by 7 p m. Return. Leave Smithfield every Saturday at 7 a m and arrive at Hicks's Ford on Sunday by 7 p m. 64. From Suffolk, by Everett's Bridge & Gates ch to, to Edenton N.C. twice a week. Leave Suffolk every Wednesday & Sunday at 10 a m, & arrive at Edenton on Thursday & Monday by 3 p m. Leave Edenton every Tuesday & Saturday at 4 a m & arrive at Suffolk on Wednesday & Sunday by 3 a m. 65. From Norfolk by Kempsville, N.W. R. Bridge, Tulls Creek, N.C. Indianotown, Currituck ch to, Jonesboro', Elizabeth City, Nixonton & Hertford to Edenton, once a week. Leave Norfolk every Tuesday noon, & arrive at Edenton the next Friday by 10 a m. Return. Leave Edenton every Friday at 2 p m & arrive at Norfolk the next Tuesday by 6 a m. 66. From Charlottesville, by Warren, Warminster, New Market, New Glasgow, Amherst ch, & Madison, to Lynchburg, once a week. Leave Charlottesville every Thursday at 6 a m & arrive at Lynchburg on Friday by 6 p m. Leave Lynchburg every Saturday at 6 a m & arrive at Charlottesville on Monday by 10 a m. 67. From Lynchburg by Bethel, Pedlar's mills, and Wineanton, to Lexington once a week. Leave Lynchburg every Monday at 2 p m, arrive at Lexington on Tuesday by 3 p m. Leave Lexington at 5 p m and arrive at Lynchburg on Wednesday by 8 p m. 68. From Lynchburg, by Hermitage and Hunter's Tavern, to Prince Edward ch, once a week. Leave Lynchburg every Monday at 2 p m, arrive at Prince Edward ch on Tuesday by noon. Leave Prince Edward ch every Tuesday by 2 p m and arrive at Lynchburg on Wednesday by noon. 69. From Lynchburg, by Campbell ch, Hanson's store, Marysville, Grasty's store, Stone's store, Pittsylvania ch, and Beaver's, to Danville, once in two weeks. Leave Lynchburg every other Monday at 2 p m, arrive at Danville on Thursday by 4 p m. Leave Danville every other Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Lynchburg on Monday by 8 a m. 70. From Staunton, by Kinkaid's, the Warm Springs, or Bath ch, Morris's, Callaghans, and the Sulphur Springs, to Lewisburg, and from thence by Uniontown, the Sweet Springs, Callaghans, &c. to Staunton, once a week. Leave Staunton every Thursday at 2 p m and arrive at Lewisburg on Sunday by 10 a m. Leave Lewisburg by noon, and arrive at Staunton the next Thursday by 10 a m. 71. From Lewisburg, by Boyer's, Huff's, Morris's, Kenhaway ch, Point Pleasant, Gillipolis, and Sciota salt works, to Chillicothe once in two weeks. Leave Lewisburg every other Sunday at noon, arrive at Chillicothe on Friday by 4 p m. Leave Chillicothe every other Saturday at 6 a m and arrive at Lewisburg the next Saturday by 10 a m. 72. From Wythe ch by Austinville, Grayson ch, Scull Camp, Mount Airy, and Bethania to Salem N.C. once a week. Leave Wythe ch every Monday at 6 a m and arrive at Salem the next Friday by 10 a m. Return. Leave Salem every Saturday at 6 a m and arrive at Wythe ch, on Sunday by 6 p m. 73. From Wythe ch, by Tazewell ch, Russel ch, and Lee ch to, Robinson's mills, once in two weeks. Leave Wythe ch every other Monday at 6 a m, arrive at Robinson's mills on Thursday by 6 p m. Leave Robinson's mills every other Friday at 6 a m, arrive at Wythe ch on Monday by 6 p m. 74. From Waterford, by Braden's store, Janney's store, and Snicker's Gap to Upperville, once a week. Leave Waterford every Wednesday at 10 a m, arrive at Upperville on the next Thursday by 2 p m. Leave Upperville every Thursday at 4 p m, arrive at Waterford on Friday by 6 p m. 75. From Leesburg to Centreville, once a week. Leave Leesburg every Saturday at 4 a m, arrive at Centreville same day by 11 a m. Leave Centreville every Saturday at noon, arrive at Leesburg on same day by 7 p m. 76. From Petersburg to City Point. Leave City Point every Monday at 6 a m, arrive at Petersburg same day by 9 a m. Leave in two hours and return to City Point by 3 p m.
77. From Edenton, by Lee's mills, and Plymouth, to Washington, once a week. Leave Edenton every Tuesday at 6 a m, arrive at Plymouth by 7 p m. Leave Plymouth on Wednesday at 6 a m and arrive at Washington by 6 p m. Return. Leave Washington on Sunday at 6 a m, arrive at Plymouth at 4 p m. Leave Plymouth at 4 1/2 p m and arrive at Edenton on Monday by 4 p m. 78. From Washington, by Bath, to Woodstock, once a week. Leave Woodstock every Wednesday at 7 a m and arrive at Washington by 4 p m. Leave Washington at 7 p m and arrive at Woodstock on Thursday by 2 p m. 79. From Newbern, by Trenton, North West Landing, and Richmond, to Wilmington, once a week. Leave Newbern every Tuesday at 5 a m and arrive at Wilmington on Thursday by 10 a m. Leave Wilmington every Thursday at 2 p m and arrive at Newbern on Saturday by 7 p m. 80. From Newbern to Beaufort once in two weeks. Leave Newbern every other Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Beaufort on Saturday by 10 a m. Leave Beaufort the same day at 2 p m and arrive at Newbern on Sunday by 6 p m. 81. From Warrenton, by Ransom's Bridge, Jonesville, Halifax, Scotland Neck, Hogton, Williamson, Daily's, Plymouth, and Lee's mills, to Scuppernong, once a week. Leave Warrenton every Tuesday at 4 a m, arrive at Ransom's bridge by noon. Leave Ransom's bridge at 1 p m and arrive at Halifax by 6 p m. Leave Halifax at 7 p m and arrive at Scuppernong on Friday by 11 a m. Return. Leave Scuppernong every Friday at 1 p m, arrive at Scotland Neck on Saturday at 11 a m and arrive at Warrenton on Monday by 3 p m. Leave Halifax at 8 1/2 a m, arrive at Ransom's bridge by noon, and arrive at Warrenton at 1 p m and arrive at Warrenton by 7 p m. 82. From Halifax, by Northampton ch, Princeton, Murfreesboro', Winton, Colerain, Pate's Landing and Windsor, to Edenton, once a week. Leave Halifax every Wednesday at 4 a m and arrive at Murfreesboro', by 4 p m. Leave Murfreesboro', by 3 p m and arrive at Edenton on Friday by 10 a m. Return. Leave Edenton every Friday at 2 p m, arrive at Murfreesboro', on Sunday by 7 a m and at Halifax by 3 p m. 83. From Warrenton by Ransom's bridge and Jonesboro' to Tarboro', thence by Nash ch, and Still's store to Warrenton, once a week. Leave Warrenton every Friday at 8 a m and arrive at Tarboro' on Saturday by 1 p m. Leave Tarboro' at 2 p m and arrive at Warrenton on Monday by 8 p m. 84. From Halifax, by Tate's store, Enfield, Tarboro', Greenville and Washington to Newbern, twice a week. Leave Halifax every Wednesday and Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Newbern on Saturday and Wednesday at 10 a m. Return. Leave Newbern every Wednesday and Saturday at 2 p m and arrive at Halifax on Saturday and Tuesday by 6 p m. 85. From Scotland Neck, by Norfleet's ferry, Grandberry cross roads and Clarksville to Windsor once a week. Leave Scotland Neck every Tuesday at 6 a m and arrive at Windsor by 4 p m. Leave Windsor every Friday at 6 a m and arrive at Scotland Neck by 6 p m. 86. From Raleigh, by Chapel Hill to Hillsboro', once a week. Leave Raleigh every Friday at 8 a m and arrive at Hillsboro' on Saturday by 8 a m. Leave Hillsboro' every Wednesday at 5 p m, and arrive at Raleigh on Thursday by 5 p m. 87. From Hillsboro' by Mount Tipton, Person ch, Leesburg, Gafwell ch, Lenox Castle, B. & W. & R. & R. & R. to Germanton, once a week. Leave Hillsboro' every Saturday at 10 a m, arrive at Gafwell ch on Sunday noon, and arrive at Germanton the next Tuesday by 8 p m. Leave Germanton every Wednesday at 6 a m, and arrive at Hillsboro' the next Saturday by 8 a m. 88. From Averysboro' by Haywood, Pittsburg and Jones's ferry to Hillsboro', once a week. Leave Averysboro' every Thursday at 6 a m, & arrive at Hillsboro' on Saturday by 8 a m. Leave Hillsboro' every Saturday at 10 a m and arrive at Averysboro' on Sunday by 6 p m. 89. From Raleigh, by Nuttall's, Oxford or Merrittville, once a week. Leave Raleigh every Friday at 4 a m & arrive at Oxford by 6 p m. Leave Oxford every Saturday at 4 a m & arrive at Raleigh by 6 p m. 90. From Raleigh, by Paul's ferry, Warrenton's cross roads, Richardsons Woodards, Dowsons, or Tolsont, to Tarboro' once in two weeks. Leave Raleigh every Friday, at 6 a m, arrive at Tarboro' on Saturday by 6 p m. Leave Tarboro' every other Sunday at 6 a m and arrive at Raleigh on Monday by 6 p m. 91. From Williamsboro' by Bullock's store, Brown's store, Williamsville, Serlingville & Red House, to Gafwell ch once a week. Leave Williamsboro' every Saturday at 4 a m, arrive at Gafwell ch on Sunday by noon. Leave Gafwell ch every Sunday by 2 p m and arrive at Williamsboro' on Monday by 10 a m.
ON application by petition, in writing, of GEORGE W. WILLETT, of Prince George's county, to me the subscriber, an associate judge of the first judicial district of Maryland, composed of Saint Mary's, Charles and Prince George's counties, in the recess of Prince George's county court, for the benefit of the act of Assembly, passed at November session, 1805, entitled "An act for the benefit of sundry insolvent debtors," and the several supplements thereto, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors, as far as he can ascertain them on oath, being annexed to his said petition, and being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said petitioner is a citizen of the state of Maryland, and that he has resided therein the two last preceding years; and being also satisfied, that the said George W. Willett is now in actual confinement for debt, and for no other cause, and the said petitioner having entered into a bond with security for his appearance in Prince George's county court on the first Monday of April next, to answer such interrogatories as his creditors may propose to him. It is thereupon ordered and adjudged, that the said George W. Willett be discharged from his imprisonment, and the said first Monday of April next, and hereby is appointed, for the said petitioner to deliver up his property, and to have a trustee appointed, for the benefit of his creditors; and the said petitioner, by causing a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer, once a week for three months successively, before the said first Monday of April next, give notice to his creditors to be and appear before the Judges of Prince George's county court on the day aforesaid, to recommend a trustee for their benefit. Given under my hand, this eighteenth day of June, 1808.
Test JOHN READ MAGRUDER, jun. C P G Cy Ct
ON the application, by petition in writing, by John M. Burgess, of Prince George's county, to this court for the benefit of the act of assembly passed at November session, eighteen hundred and five, entitled "An act for the benefit of sundry insolvent debtors," and the several supplements thereto, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his said petition, and the court being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said petitioner is a citizen of the state of Maryland, and that he hath resided therein the two last years preceding his application, and being also satisfied that the said John M. Burgess is now in actual confinement for debt, and the said petitioner having entered into bond with security for his appearance in this court on the first Monday in April next to answer such interrogatories as his creditors may propose to him. It is thereupon ordered and adjudged, that the said John M. Burgess be discharged from imprisonment, and the said first Monday in April next is appointed for the said petitioner to deliver up his property and have a trustee appointed for the benefit of his creditors—and it is ordered that the said John M. Burgess by causing a copy of the aforesaid order to be published once a week for three months successively in the National Intelligencer before the said first Monday in April next give notice to his creditors to be and appear before this court on the said day, to recommend a trustee for their benefit.
Test JOHN READ MAGRUDER, JR. CK. November 8—w3m
ON the application by petition in writing of Dennis M. Burgess of Prince George's county to this court, for the benefit of the act of Assembly passed at November session eighteen hundred and five, entitled "An act for the benefit of sundry insolvent debtors," and the several acts supplementary thereto a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to the said petition and the court being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said petitioner is a citizen of the state of Maryland, and that he hath resided therein the two last years preceding his application, & being also satisfied that the said Dennis M. Burgess is now in actual confinement for debt, and the said petitioner having entered into bond with security for his appearance in this court on the first Monday in April next, to answer such interrogatories as his creditors may propose to him. It is thereupon ordered and adjudged, that the said Dennis M. Burgess be discharged from imprisonment, and the said first Monday in April next is appointed for the said petitioner to deliver up his property and to have a trustee appointed for the benefit of his creditors; and it is ordered that the said Dennis M. Burgess by causing a copy of the aforesaid order to be published once a week for three months successively in the National Intelligencer before the said first Monday in April next, give notice to his creditors to be and appear before this court on the said day to recommend a trustee for their benefit.
Test JOHN READ MAGRUDER, JR. C. P. G. C. C. December 26—w3m
ON application to me the subscriber (in the recess of the court) an associate judge of the first judicial district, in the state of Maryland, by petition in writing, of NATHANIEL HAGAN, of Prince George's County, praying for the benefit of the act, entitled, "An act for the relief of sundry insolvent debtors," and the several supplements thereto, on the terms mentioned in the said act, and its supplements, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his petition, and the said Nathaniel Hagan, having satisfied me by competent testimony, that he has resided in the state of Maryland, two years immediately preceding the time of his application—and the said Nathaniel Hagan, having also stated in his petition, that he is now in actual confinement, for debt, and not on account of any breach of the peace, or for the non-payment of any fine or penalty for the breach of the laws of this state, or of the United States, and having produced to me the certificate of the Sheriff of Prince George's county to that effect, and having prayed to be discharged from confinement, on the terms prescribed in the said act and its supplements, and having given security for his personal appearance at the next county court, to be held in and for Prince George's County aforesaid, on the first Monday in April next, to answer any allegations that may be made against him by his creditors. I do also order and adjudge, that the said Nathaniel Hagan be discharged from his imprisonment, and by causing a copy of this order to be inserted in the National Intelligencer for three months successively before the first Monday in April next, to give notice to his creditors to appear before the County Court, at the Court House of said County, on the said first Monday in April next, for the purpose of recommending a trustee for their benefit, on the said Nathaniel Hagan, then and there taking the oath by the said act prescribed, for the delivering up his property, and to show cause if any they have, why the said Nathaniel Hagan should not have the benefit of the several acts of assembly for the relief of insolvent debtors. Given under my hand this thirtieth day of November, eighteen hundred and eight.
DANIEL CLARKE. December 30—w3m. THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE, THAT I intend to petition to the next County Court of Charles, for the benefit of an act of insolvency. GEORGE BOARMAN Charles County, Jan. 6—2awn3.
ON application by petition in writing, of ROBERT M'KOY, of Prince George's county, to this court, for the benefit of the act of Assembly passed at November session eighteen hundred and five, entitled "An act for the benefit of sundry insolvent debtors," and the several supplements thereto, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his said petition, and the court being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said Robert M'Koy, is now in actual confinement for debt, and the said petitioner having entered into bond with security for his appearance in this court on the first Monday in April next to answer such interrogatories as his creditors may propose to him. It is thereupon ordered and adjudged, that the said Robert M'Koy be discharged from his imprisonment, and the said first Monday in April next is appointed for the said petitioner to deliver up his property and to have a trustee appointed for the benefit of his creditors; and it is ordered that the said Robert M'Koy by causing a copy of the aforesaid order to be published once a week for three months successively in the National Intelligencer, before the said first Monday in April next, give notice to his creditors to be and appear before this court on the said day to recommend a trustee for their benefit.
Test JOHN READ MAGRUDER, JR. C. P. G. C. C. December 26—w3m
ON the application by petition in writing of ROBERT M'KOY, of Prince George's county, to this court, for the benefit of the act of Assembly passed at November session eighteen hundred and five, entitled "An act for the benefit of sundry insolvent debtors," and the several supplements thereto, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his said petition, and the court being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said Robert M'Koy, is now in actual confinement for debt, and the said petitioner having entered into bond with security for his appearance in this court on the first Monday in April next to answer such interrogatories as his creditors may propose to him. It is thereupon ordered and adjudged, that the said Robert M'Koy be discharged from his imprisonment, and the said first Monday in April next is appointed for the said petitioner to deliver up his property and to have a trustee appointed for the benefit of his creditors; and it is ordered that the said Robert M'Koy by causing a copy of the aforesaid order to be published once a week for three months successively in the National Intelligencer, before the said first Monday in April next, give notice to his creditors to be and appear before this court on the said day to recommend a trustee for their benefit.
Test JOHN READ MAGRUDER, JR. C. P. G. C. C. November 8—w3m
ON the application by petition in writing of ROBERT M'KOY, of Prince George's county, to this court, for the benefit of the act of Assembly passed at November session eighteen hundred and five, entitled "An act for the benefit of sundry insolvent debtors," and the several supplements thereto, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath as far as he can ascertain them being annexed to his said petition, and the court being satisfied by competent testimony, that the said Robert M'Koy, is now in actual confinement for debt, and the said petitioner having entered into bond with security for his appearance in this court on the first Monday in April next to answer such interrogatories as his creditors may propose to him. It is thereupon ordered and adjudged, that the said Robert M'Koy be discharged from his imprisonment, and the said first Monday in April next is appointed for the said petitioner to deliver up his property and to have a trustee appointed for the benefit of his creditors; and it is ordered that the said Robert M'Koy by causing a copy of the aforesaid order to be published once a week for three months successively in the National Intelligencer, before the said first Monday in April next, give notice to his creditors to be and appear before this court on the said day to recommend a trustee for their benefit.
Test JOHN READ MAGRUDER, JR. C. P. G. C. C. November 8—w3m
AN ACT, To empower the Executive to purchase arms for the use of the militia of this state, and for other purposes therein mentioned. BE it enacted by the General Assembly of Maryland, That for the space of five years after the first day of November next, there shall be annually provided, at the expense of this state, twelve hundred good and serviceable muskets or firelocks, with a bayonet and cartridge box to each, also two six pound iron field-pieces complete, also fifty brace of horsemen's pistols, and one hundred horsemen's swords complete, for the use of the militia when occasion may require, to be deposited at such suitable and convenient places as the Executive may direct. 2. And be it enacted, That the Executive are hereby authorised and required to contract for and procure the aforesaid arms and accoutrements for the use of this state, and to publish for the information of the mechanics of the state of Maryland, and others willing to contract for the whole, or any part thereof; that at the time of contracting they must exhibit a pattern of the particular kind of arms or accoutrements designed to be contracted for. 3. And be it enacted, That the muskets or firelocks to be procured under the provisions of this act, shall be of the same caliber and dimensions as those described by the act of Congress, and now made for the use of the United States. 4. And be it enacted, That in order to effectuate the objects of this act, the Executive are hereby authorised to draw from the treasury of the western shore annually for the space of five years after the first day of November next, any sum not exceeding fifteen thousand dollars, out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.