The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1803-11-21 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER, AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. IV.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
No. CCCCXXXI.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANN.
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21 st , 1803.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, Oct. 25.
DEBATE ON THE LOUISIANA TREATY.
(Continued.)
Mr. RODNEY said, that in the observations he rose to make at that late hour, he should be brief, and apply them entirely to the constitutional question as it was scarcely contended the bargain was not a good one. In making them he cordially joined with the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Griswold) when he expressed his wish that the discussion should be conducted with coolness and temper. It was not only the duty, but the interest of every gentleman on the floor that this important subject should be decided on argument, and argument alone. He felt the force of the objection urged by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Nicholson) that the discussion of some of the points, was premature; he should, however, enter into a brief exposition of them.
It is contended that the United States have no right to purchase territory; that they have no right to admit the people of Louisiana to a participation of the rights derived from an admission into the union; and that a peculiar favor is about being granted to the ports of New Orleans in violation of the Constitution.
In the view of the Constitution the union was composed of two corporate bodies; of states and territories. A recurrence to the Constitution will show that it is predicated on the principle of the United States acquiring territory either by war, treaty, or purchase. There was one part of that instrument within whose capacious grasp all these modes of acquisition were embraced. By the Constitution Congress have power to "lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States."—To provide for the general welfare.—The import of these terms is very comprehensive indeed. If this general delegation of authority be not at variance with other particular powers specially granted, nor restricted by them; it is not in any degree comprehended in those subsequently delegated, I cannot, said Mr. R. perceive why, within the fair meaning of this general provision is not included the power of increasing our territory, if necessary for the general welfare, or common defence. Suppose, for instance, that Great Britain should propose to cede to us the Island of New Providence, so long the seat of pirates preying upon our commerce and the hive from which they have swarmed, will any gentleman say that we ought not to embrace the opportunity presented, as a defence against further depredations? Suppose the Cape of Good Hope, where our East-India men so generally stop, were offered to be ceded to us by the nation to which it belongs; and that nation should say, on our possessing it, you shall declare it a free port. Is there any member who hears me that could contend that we were not authorised to receive it, notwithstanding the great advantages it would insure to us?
But it appears to me, independently of this provision of the Constitution, and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Griswold) admits it, that according to the rights of war, we may extend our territory. An enemy might come within our lines, and we ex-pel him: our lines not being the limits to which our arms would be confined, we could pass them, and take possession of the enemy's country, and thereby undoubtedly acquire a right to the territory occupied. For in the Constitution it is expressly said that Congress shall have power "to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water"—and among the jura belli was clearly recognised the right of annexing territory. But there is one article of the Constitution which is predicated on the right to purchase territory. We have a right to obtain territory by purchase from a state. In the provision made in the Constitution respecting the territory of the United States, we find that Congress are invested with power, "to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by
the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings."—Here then is given to Congress exclusive legislation over particular places, over the ten miles square, and over such places as they may purchase. This provision is expressly predicated on the right to purchase, and only limits that purchase by the consent of the states. If Congress have the right of purchasing territory from a state, how can gentlemen contend that they have not the right of purchasing territory elsewhere, if in their judgment they shall consider it well calculated to subserve the great interests of the Union.
It does appear to me that the right of acquiring territory must be included in the treaty-making power; as there are very few treaties, which are not merely commercial, that do not change the property belonging to nations. And if this principal power be contained in the treaty-making provision, every incidental power, is of consequence to be considered as fairly embraced within it, and I should deem this important authority as nugatory, if it did not give the President and Senate the right to accept a cession of territory. It is certainly not the right of the President and Senate to make such a cession conclusively binding; when it shall embrace powers within the pale of those delegated to this House, it will require our sanction. Have we not also vested in us every power necessary for carrying such a treaty into effect, in the words of the constitution, which gives Congress the authority to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." It, therefore, appears very clearly to my mind, that, according to the constitution, the United States have a right to acquire territory. If they possess this right according to the constitution, this measure cannot be said to be unconstitutional, and it not unconstitutional, as the gentlemen who have spoken against it, did not insist upon the point of inexpediency, some of them because they believed that ground was not open, and others because it was not tenable, will ultimately give it their support.
But another constitutional objection is stated. Though the United States may acquire a valid title to the territory, the hills and the groves, the rivers and the lakes, it is alleged that they have no right to bring the persons inhabiting it, into a state in which they shall enjoy the blessings of free government. My friend from Maryland (Mr. Nicholson) has observed that the article of the treaty relating to this object is most cautiously worded. If ever there was a precision of language calculated to avoid the imputation of an invasion of the constitution it is the language of this article. Its words are:
"The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated in the Union of the United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of the federal constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of the United States; and in the mean time they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion which they profess."
How are these people to be admitted? According to the principles of the federal constitution. Is it an open violation of any part of the constitution? No, an express reservation is made by those who formed the treaty, that they must be admitted under the constitution. Now if admitted agreeably to the constitution, it cannot be said to be in violation of it; and if not in violation of it, the fears of gentlemen are groundless.
But as I observed before, does not the constitution refer to territory? Do not the United States possess territories now? Is the possession of territory confined by the constitution to those they now hold? I believe not; for in the constitution it is stated that "Congress shall have power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." Here is a clear recognition of territory belonging to the United States, and not merely of territory then held, but of territory which might future be acquired by treaty or purchase. And if this territory be ceded to the United States, Congress have power, as soon as ceded, to make rules and regulations respecting it.
There is another found answer to the
objections of gentlemen. This is property ceded to us by the power ceding it with a particular reservation. I am not for quibbling about words or distorting terms. Taking the 7 th article, and fairly considering it, it amounts to nothing more than a particular reservation; upon delivering possession of the territory which I take to be the true meaning of the language which is used; and will any gentleman say that accepting the treaty, under this stipulation, will not be most advantageous to us? What individual state will be affected by it more than any other? Does it give the state of Massachusetts an advantage over N. York? I would be glad to know what state it particularly affects, and in what way? "No preference," says the constitution, "shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another." In what way, under this treaty, is there any preference of one port over another? I would be glad to see it pointed out, and to be shown whether there is any preference of Delaware over Massachusetts, or of Virginia over Georgia. No. The constitution advertises to states themselves; and the distinction between states and territories is bottomed upon reason. Whence the necessity of the distinction? When territories grow into states, and become represented in the public councils, a majority of them may league together, and carry into effect regulations prejudicial to other states. Hence the constitution provides that in all commercial regulations all the states shall be equally affected. But such a league cannot be effected by territories, which have no Senators in the other branch, and in this only the voice, without the vote, of a single delegate. Independent of this consideration is this; it by any particular territorial regulation the territory of the United States is benefited, that territory being the common property of the United States, a public stock in which they all share, every state in the union reaps alike the benefit.
These are my reasons for considering this measure perfectly constitutional. I might dwell upon other reasons corroborative of this conviction; but these have been so ably enforced by my friends from Virginia and Maryland, and by other gentlemen as to render more remarks superfluous. I cannot, however, avoid noticing the observation made yesterday and reiterated to day that we do not know whether we have a title to this territory, or whether it be not the purchase of so many acres of mere moonshine. I voted yesterday for some papers because I wished beyond all cavil or dispute to establish the constitutional right of this House to call for papers, and from a respect to the opinions of some gentlemen who considered them important, not from any doubts of my own as to the validity of the title. The publicity of the cession of Louisiana by Spain, its former owner, to France, is too notorious, it has been noticed, dilated on and recognised in the British parliament, and in the senate of the United States. We have not in our possession, it is true, the original treaty of St. Ildefonso, nor the subsequent one, concluded between France and Spain at Madrid, which referred to the former, for we were not furnished with duplicates of either, nor have we the testimony of the king of Etruria to prove that every stipulation contained in them, was strictly complied with, poor man he is no more. We have not lent a commissioner to Madrid or St. Cloud to take the examination of the ministers of Spain and France, to obtain their evidence in order to verify the fact, of all conditions having been performed by France on her part; but we have seen in the papers which record the transactions of the times, the arrival of a French Prefect of Louisiana at New Orleans announced. We have read his proclamation to the inhabitants of that country informing them of the cession and, if I mistake not, our own government has received through the proper channel intelligence of the same event, which has been duly published. All these circumstances combined are satisfactory to my mind on this subject. No fact in the history of nations can be more rationally proven, and gentlemen should recollect that they rely on the same kind of testimony (the letter of Mr. King to the answer of lord Shelburne) when they confess themselves satisfied that England is agreed to this measure.
I would further observe from the course which the debate has taken, that if we had all the papers and documents, which the gentlemen desire, agreeably to the mode of argument which they have adopted, they might ob-
ject to passing the necessary laws, until we had got possession of the country and at the same time object to our taking possession, without laws to authorize it. By thus arguing in a circle as the logicians term it, they would most effectually defeat an object of the first importance to the community, and render the acquisition of an inestimable territory, of as little value as the same extent of moonshine or star light. With these impressions, believing the measure a good one and consistent with the constitution, I shall most cheerfully give my vote for carrying it into effect.
Dr. MITCHELL rose, and said, he entreated the indulgence of the committee, for rising at so late a stage of the debate, when seven hours have already been employed in the sitting of the day. And the reason of his request was, that such extraordinary doctrines have been advanced against carrying into effect the treaty with France which cedes Louisiana to our nation, and such repeated allusions have been made to the sentiments which he submitted to the House during the debate of yesterday, that he felt himself called upon to attempt a reply; and therein to show that the grounds taken by the gentlemen of the opposition are neither strong nor tenable. Although the subject is ample and copious, he should endeavor to condense his remarks, to moderate a compass, as not to trespass long upon the patience of the committee.
My colleague, said Mr. M. who opened the debate this morning, (Mr. G. Griswold) displayed in his speech the objections raised against the resolution on the table, so fully that he almost exhausted the subject. For in listening attentively to the reasoning of the gentleman from Virginia, who followed him (Mr. J. Lewis) and of the other gentleman from Virginia who spoke next (Mr. Griffin,) he could not discern that any new or additional matter of much consequence had been urged. Nor did he discover much more than a repetition in substance of his colleague's reasoning, in what had been urged by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Thatcher), and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. R. Griswold); though the statement of their objections had received a form and coloring diversified according to the skill and ingenuity of each.
In the reply which he should make to the gentleman in opposition to the appropriations for carrying the treaty into operation, he should not examine their arguments severally as they had been brought forward in the course of the debate. That mode would necessarily lead him into tedious and needless repetition. He should therefore endeavor to reduce all the arguments he had heard from the other side of the House into their elementary propositions, and having done so, to show that they were weak in their nature and wrong in their direction. And even this view of the question would be much circumscribed, on account of the strong and masterly manner in which a part of the objections had been already repelled by his eloquent friend from Virginia, (Mr. J. Randolph) and by the impressive remarks of his other friend from Delaware (Mr. Rodney).
The gentlemen, Mr. Chairman, who resist the provisions necessary to the completion of this treaty, so far as they have been ratified by the President and Senate in open violation of the constitution of the United States, and is therefore no treaty, but a nullity, an instrument void ab initio , not a part of the supreme law of the land, and consequently not binding upon Congress or the nation. They draw this bold and extraordinary conclusion from the style and meaning of the 3 rd and 7 th articles of the treaty. The former of these, they say, is unconstitutional, because it proposes to annex a new territory, with its inhabitants, to our present dominion; and the latter, because it abolishes for a term of years the discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within the ceded territory, giving a preference there to France and Spain, and leaving those duties unaltered in all the ports of the union.
By the 3 rd article, it is agreed that the inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated into the union of the United States as soon as possible, according to the principles of the federal constitution, and be admitted to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of the United States; and in the mean time they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property and the religion which they profess.
On expounding this article, my colleague has declared that the President and Senate have no power to acquire
new territory by treaty, and he argues that our people are to be forever confined to their present limits. This is an assertion directly contrary to the powers inherent in independent nations, and contradictory to the frequent and allowed exercise of that power in our own nation. We are constantly in the practice of receiving territory by cession from the Red Men of the west, the aborigines of our country. The very treaty mentioned in the President's message with the Kaskaskias Indians whereby we have acquired a large extent of land, would, according to this doctrine, be unconstitutional: and so would all the treaties which add to the size of our statute book, with the numerous tribes of the natives on our frontiers. According to this construction, all our negotiations so happily concluded with those people, whom we ever have uniformly acknowledged as the sovereigns of the soil, are nugatory; and to be holden for nought. He said, he was perfectly aware of the answer which would be made, that we held all our national domain, under G. Britain, by virtue of the treaty concluded at Paris in 1763. What, after all, was the amount of that cession by England? Certainly not a conveyance of a country which never was theirs, but rightfully belonged to the Indian natives; for it was in its true construction, merely a quit claim of the pretensions or title to the land which the English had obtained by conquest and treaty from the French. By that negotiation, the United States obtained a bare relinquishment of the claims and possessions of those two powerful nations. But the paramount title of the original inhabitants was not affected by this. However contemptuously the rights of these rude and feeble tribes had been regarded by the Europeans, their descendants in these states had considered them with recognition and respect. Until the Indians sold their lands for an equivalent, the humane and just principles of the American government acknowledged them to be the only legitimate owners. And the sovereignty acquired by treaty or purchase to our government was derived from the title which the natives transferred to them as grantees in a fair bargain and sale. Such, Mr. M. argued, were the rules of true construction, and these rules admitted and acted upon by the federal government; and yet according to the novel doctrine of this day, every treaty with the natives for parcels of their country, although hitherto deemed lawful, would be an unconstitutional act. According to this notion, every treaty for lands, held on with the aborigines since the organization of the government, was a violation of the constitution. And thus this invaluable instrument, this bulwark of our liberties, had been violated perhaps twenty times or more, since we began to buy the surplusage of their hunting grounds. The Indian tribes are as much aliens as any other foreign nations. Their lands are as much foreign dominion as the soil of France or Spain. Yet we have gone on to annex the territories which they sold us, to our present territory, from the time we acquired independence, and no mortal, until this debate arose, Mr. Chairman, has so much as thought that thereby a breach of the constitution was made. My colleague is surely entitled to great credit for his perspicuity in finding out that all our great and wise predecessors in administering this government, have been blunderers and constitution-breakers. But, Sir, the just judgment on this subject is, that the Presidents and Senators of the United States have heretofore acted constitutionally in acquiring by purchase foreign dominion from the alien Indians. And by parity of reasoning, they have acted not only constitutionally, but eminently for the interest of the country, in buying Louisiana from the White men, its present sovereigns.
But independent of correct principle and steady precedent in favor of the acquirement of new territory, it may be worth while to mention a few of the strange consequences which flow from the doctrine which the gentlemen of the other side of the House contend for. According to their reasoning, if by any force of the currents of the ocean, or any conflicts of the winds and the waves, a new surface of earth should emerge from the neighbourhood of Cape Hatteras, it would be unconstitutional to take possession of it. Yet it appears to me, Sir, very like an absurdity to My, the United States would break their bond of union by erecting a light-house on it. Suppose that by volcanic action, islands should be suddenly elevated from the bottom of the neighbouring Atlantic, as they have repeatedly risen from the

depths of the Mediterranean, would it be unconstitutional to take possession of them? So far from it, there would on the other hand be a duty in the government to assume the dominion of all adjacent islands. Again—suppose for a moment that our present limits were full of people, would it be unconstitutional to purchase additional territory for them to settle upon? Must the hive always contain its present numbers, and no swarm ever go forth? At this rate we should, before a great lapse of time, arrive at a plenum of inhabitants, and if no new settlement could be obtained for them, the Chinese custom of infanticide must be tolerated to get rid of those tender little beings for whom food enough could not be procured, to rear them to manhood. And thus, when this maximum of population shall have arrived, there would be no constitutional power, to purchase and possess any of the waste lands on this or the other side of the Mississippi, for them to spread and thrive upon. A doctrine against which, he confessed, that his understanding revolted.
Our government having in this manner the right of acquiring additional territory, had very often exercised that right by actual purchases and by possessions and settlements afterwards. The whole of the recent state of Ohio and of the Indiana territory, was obtained and peopled in this manner. And in the settlement of limits both on the side of Florida and Nova Scotia, the principle had again and again been acted upon; and strange to tell nobody, until this eventful time, had possessed acuteness enough to find out the error.
But the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Chairman, (Mr. R. Griswold) contends that even if we had a right to purchase soil, we have no business with the inhabitants. His words however are very select; for he said and often repeated it, that the treaty-making power did not extend to the admission of foreign nations into this confederacy. To this it may be replied that the President and Senate have not attempted to admit foreign nations into our confederacy. They have bought a tract of land, out of their regard to the good of our people and their welfare. And this land, Congress are called upon to pay for. Unfortunately for the bargain, this region contains civilized and christian inhabitants; and their existence there, it is alleged, nullifies the treaty. The gentleman construes the constitution of the United States very differently from the manner in which Mr. M. himself did. By the 3d section of the 3d article of that instrument, it is declared, that Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory and other property of the United States, and nothing therein contained shall be construed so as to prejudice any claims of the United States or of any particular state.
In the case of Louisiana no injury is done either to the nation or to any state belonging to that great body politic. There was nothing compulsory upon the inhabitants of Louisiana to make them stay and submit to our government. But if they chose to remain, it had been most kindly and wisely provided, that until they should be admitted to the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States, they shall be maintained and protected in the enjoyment of their liberty, property and the religion which they profess. What would the gentleman propose that we shall do with them? Send them away to the Spanish provinces, or turn them loose in the wilderness? No, Sir, it is our purpose to pursue a much more dignified system of measures. It is intended, first to extend to this newly acquired people, the blessings of law, and social order. To protect them from rapacity, violence and anarchy. To make them secure in their lives, limbs, property, reputation and civil privileges. To make them safe in the rights of conscience. In this way they are to be trained up in a knowledge of our own laws and institutions. They are thus to serve an apprenticeship to liberty; they are to be taught the lessons of freedom; and by degrees they are to be raised to the enjoyment and practice of independence. All this is to be done as soon as possible; that is, as soon as the nature of the case will permit; and according to the principles of the federal constitution. Strange! that proceedings declared on the face of them to be constitutional, should be weighed against as violations of the constitution! Secondly, after they shall have been a sufficient length of time in this probationary condition, they shall as soon as the principles of the constitution permit, and conformably thereto, be declared citizens of the United States, Congress will judge of the time, manner and expediency of this. The act we are now about to perform will not confer on them this elevated character. They will thereby gain no admission into this House, nor into the other House of Congress. There will be no alien influence thereby introduced into our councils. By degrees, however, they will pass on from the childhood of republicanism, through the improving period of youth, & arrive at the mature experience of manhood.
And there they may be admitted to the full privileges which their merit and station will entitle them to. At that time a general law of naturalization may be passed. For I do not venture to affirm that by the mere act of cession, the inhabitants of a ceded country become of course citizens of the country to which they are annexed. It seems not to be the case unless specially provided for. By the 3d article it is stipulated, that the inhabitants of Louisiana shall hereafter be made citizens; ergo they are not made citizens of the United States by mere operation of treaty. In confirmation of this construction, I will mention the 2d article of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation between the United States and his Britannic majesty, concluded in 1794. It is therein stipulated that all British subjects who shall continue within the evacuated posts and precincts, should be considered, if they remained there longer than one year, to have abandoned all allegiance to the crown of Britain, and to have made their election to become citizens of the United States: after which by taking the oath of allegiance, they become instantly, by act of treaty, and by force of statute, citizens of the United States. I therefore consider the point already adjudged, when the treaty of 1794 was decided on, that without an act of Congress, aliens can be converted into citizens by the provisions of a treaty duly ratified by the President and Senate. In the treaty respecting Louisiana, there is happily no cause for alarm. This power of making citizens has not been exercised by the President and Senate; but at a future day may be used by Congress.
But I proceed to the second objection to the treaty. This is derived from an alleged unconstitutionality in the 7th article. By this, it is agreed that French ships coming directly from France, or any of her colonies, loaded only with the produce or manufactures of France or her said Colonies shall be admitted for twelve years into New Orleans and the other legal ports of entry in Louisiana, without being subject to any greater duty on merchandise or tonnage than is paid by our own citizens. The like covenant exists with regard to the ships, ports and colonies of Spain. This, they say, is a violation of a declaration contained in the ninth section of the first article of the constitution, which declares that no preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another.
In my view of this subject, Mr. Chairman, this prohibitory clause of the constitution is meant as a check to the legislative power of Congress only—and by no means, as a restraint upon the treaty making power of the President and Senate. The constitution leaves this, very broad and with great wisdom; it being improper and impossible to limit the negotiations which it might be expedient for this government to make with other governments. From the silence of the constitution on the matter and extent of treaties, it has been argued with great appearance of truth & fairness, that there is no constitutional boundary to the treaty-making authority. Hence, according to this mode of reasoning, the treaty-making privilege, being so vast and unlimited, is unfettered by constitutional impediments, and like that great charter of freedom itself, originates from its own source, supreme laws of the land. A treaty therefore can scarcely be conceived to be unconstitutional; except in the case of outraging all common principles, rights and feelings. On this ground, the commercial regulations of the 7th article are secured against all charges of unconstitutionality.
But, even if the treaty-making power was not so extensive and mighty, there would be no violation of any of its directions by granting the favors to Spain and France which the treaty stipulates. For the preference forbidden by the constitution applies to states in the union and equal members thereof. The domain we are about to acquire is not a state; for that is a sovereign and independent republic. Nor is it a province; this being an inhabited country subdued by force of arms. Nor is it a colony; which is a sprout or scion, as it were of the parent trunk. In its relation to us, it is a territory, a word signifying a peculiar and mingled idea of a country and inhabitants in the incchoate or initial condition of a republic. By the treaty therefore there is no preference given to one state over another, in any commercial regulations. The port of New Orleans is not a part of any state in the union. The abolition of the discriminating duties in favor of the two European nations is confined absolutely to the ports of Louisiana. They have no preference in the ports of any of the states. Nor is there given to one any advantage over the other. In right construction, these indulgencies are, in fact, a part of the purchase money; and on account of this valuable consideration, Congress will have less money to appropriate and the nation thereby be saved from several millions of additional debt. Our constituents have certainly great reason to rejoice at this. I therefore conclude that the ap-
prehension and alarm expressed by the two gentlemen from Virginia (Mr. J. Lewis and Mr. Griffin) were wholly unfounded. There is no breach of the constitution.
Notwithstanding all this, one gentleman says, the adoption of this 7th article will give "a death wound to the northern commerce of the United States;" and another declares, "that under it, France and Spain will gain a monopoly of the commerce and navigation of Louisiana, and the adjacent country." Mr. M. said he could not conceive how this should happen. Ever since the ratification of the treaty of St. Lorenzo el Real , there had been a great resort of American vessels to the Mississippi. From New-York in particular, there had been large and frequent commercial intercourse, almost ever since that time. This had been rapidly increasing, and promised to be more and more important—and all this under a foreign jurisdiction, and while Louisiana belonged to Spain. Now that province was about to be changed into a territory of the United States. What an augmentation of tonnage and navigation might we not expect, when our own Mississippi should be whitened with our canals? How eagerly would the eastern and middle states engage in a carrying trade, now rendered easy and free from impediment. It appeared to him that the transportation of the vast and valuable productions of both banks of that river, would increase the demand for vessels. Greater capital will be called for to carry on the Louisiana commerce, and greater profits would result. Ship building, and all the attendant arts would be promoted. The number of seamen would be augmented—who trained up to maritime discipline in merchant vessels, might on any appearance of danger be transferred to the navy, and serve as the bulwark and safe-guard of the nation. Valuing most highly as he did, the commercial prosperity of the United States, he considered that a new spring would be given to all its enterprise, by the acquisition of Louisiana. Our skill in commerce and dispatch in navigation would over match and bear down all the competition of the French and Spaniards. A more cordial union would be promoted between the western and eastern states; who would then be connected by the strong ties of commerce and interest, as well as of law and policy; and the jealousies, by which attempts had been made to divide them, and which had been raised to a mountainous magnitude, would be entirely levelled and done away. He was confident that all the Atlantic seaports; and beyond all, the great commercial city which he represented, would participate largely of the benefits flowing from our complete sovereignty of the Mississippi and all its waters.
Mr. M. then applauded the mild and dignified conduct of an administration, which had accomplished these great events by peaceful means, rather than war; and concluded, that if in the course of his observations he had not been successful in convincing the understandings of the gentlemen who thought differently from him, he had at least expressed some of the reasons which governed his judgment and would guide his vote on the proposition then depending. He hoped the resolution would be agreed to, for making immediate preparatory provision to take possession of Louisiana, according to the stipulations of the treaty.
Mr. J. RANDOLPH laid that a sense of duty alone could have induced him to rise at that late hour. He wished to call the attention of the committee to a stipulation in the treaty of London. Here Mr. R. read an extract from the 3d article of that treaty, whereby the United States are pledged not to impose on imports in British vessels from their territories in America, adjacent to the United States, any higher duties than would be paid upon such imports, if brought into our Atlantic ports in American bottoms. In this case, he said, gentlemen could not avail themselves of the distinction taken by his friend from Maryland (Mr. Nicholson) between a territory and a state, even if they were so disposed, since the ports in question were ports of a state. The ports of New York, on the Lakes, were as much ports of that state, as the city of New York itself. They had their custom house officers, were governed by the same regulations, as other ports,—duties were exacted at them—and yet, under the article of the British treaty which had been just read, British bottoms could & did enter them subject to no higher duties than were paid by American bottoms in the Atlantic ports. Mr. R. said that he did not mean to affirm that this exemption made by the treaty of London was constitutional, so long as a distinction prevailed between American and British bottoms in other ports. He had never given a vote to carry that treaty into effect—but he hoped the gentlemen from Connecticut both of whom he believed had done so; one of whom, at least, he knew had been a conspicuous advocate of that treaty. He hoped that gentleman (Mr. Griswold) would inform the committee how he got over the constitutional objection to it.
article of the treaty of London, which he had endeavoured to urge against that under discussion. How could the gentleman, with the opinion which he now holds, agree to admit British bottoms into certain ports, on the same terms on which American bottoms were admitted into American ports, generally? Thereby making that very difference,—giving that very preference to these particular ports of certain states, which he tells us cannot constitutionally be given to the port of New Orleans—although that port is not within any state, and if his (Mr. Griswold's) doctrine be correct, not even within the United States.
The gentleman from Connecticut professed a wish that this important discussion should be conducted with moderation and candor. In this sentiment he concurred—he was therefore altogether unprepared, after this preamble, to hear the gentleman from Connecticut represent the treaty in question as conceding the most valuable commercial privileges to France and Spain, and thereby sapping the very foundation of our own carrying trade. In the spirit of candor, the stipulations in question would be viewed, not as conceding advantages in trade to those nations, but as securing them to ourselves. The article in question did indeed profess to grant, for a limited time, to French and Spanish vessels, laden with the products of their respective countries, admission into the ports of the ceded territory, on equal terms with our own ships. But although, nominally an advantage has been conceded to these nations, substantially their situation was changed for the worse, and the benefit in fact conferred on us. For what were our rights in these ports, and what were theirs, setting aside the treaty? The treaty then had rendered our situation more eligible and theirs less so. How then could gentlemen declare that it was calculated to injure our carrying trade? When by it our trade was put on the footing of absolute security—whilst that of France and Spain was admitted under considerable restrictions, enjoying in but one particular, and for twelve years only an equality with ours. Their trade, before on so superior a footing, had descended from its pre-eminence in privilege, and given way to ours. And yet gentlemen warn us of the destruction of our carrying trade, and commercial prosperity, from the very source which has enlarged and secured both. The enemies of the treaty, therefore, are the advocates of the trade of France and Spain, and the enemies, so far, of our own. Since by retaining things in their present posture, they would continue to those nations the superior advantages which they now enjoy in the ports of Louisiana, they would continue the restrictions which heretofore have fettered our commerce to that country, and they would refuse to put our trade on a footing superior to that of France and Spain.
But whilst gentlemen endeavor to alarm us with the idea of this formidable competition, I cannot, Sir, (said Mr. R.) feel a moment's apprehension from this quarter. Exclusive of the limitation of twelve years, and the restriction that their cargoes shall be of French or Spanish growth or manufacture, who, that considered the present condition and future prospects of those countries could regard them as formidable commercial competitors? Was there not infinitely greater probability that the 3d article of the treaty of London, which had no limitation as to time, and embraced our whole frontier on the side of Canada, would enable Great-Britain to supply that frontier on terms as cheap, or cheaper, than we ourselves could?
With more candor, however, the gentleman has boldly avowed that he was among the number of those who, at the last session of Congress, were for pursuing "vigorous measures," for enforcing our rights in relation to the Mississippi. What those vigorous measures were the House would be at no loss to determine. The gentleman had declined to deny his principles—he would not now shrink from what he had then advocated, and Mr. R. said he applauded him for it.
Mr. Randolph said the gentleman had laid his premises a great way off, as if from the expectation that they would not be closely examined, and that, therefore, there would be nothing to oppose to the conclusions, which he had drawn from them. He had stated a case scarcely supposable, and from it inferred the very principle in question. His whole argument was founded on presuming the very principle to be granted which was in dispute. The United States, says he, cannot incorporate into the union Great-Britain or France; and therefore they cannot unite to themselves the colonies of either nation. If the gentleman meant to prove the impolicy or impracticability of adding France or England to the United States, no one, he believed, was disposed to question the justice of his remark. But the position in contest was, can the United States, constitutionally, extend their limits? And this point in dispute the gentleman takes for granted by saying, that we cannot extend our dominion over Eng-
land or France, and therefore cannot acquire dominion in any other country. That is, we cannot, because we cannot.
On the subject of expediency, the gentleman had undervalued the country west of the Mississippi, and had declared that he considered the barren province of Florida as more important to us. Mr. R. asked if the country west of the Mississippi were not valuable, according to the gentleman's own statement, since it afforded the means of acquiring Florida, which he prized so highly, from Spain. He had no doubt of the readiness of that power to relinquish Florida, in itself a dead expense to her—only valuable as an out-work to her other possessions, and now insulated by those of the United States, for a very small portion of the country which we claimed in virtue of the treaty under discussion. He said that he stated early in the debate, and had stated truly, that the limits of Louisiana were not accurately defined—but nevertheless, we were not without some light on this interesting subject. Thirty years before the Spaniards made their settlement of the Adais, the French had established themselves on the bay of St. Bernard, or St. Louis: the nearest Spanish colony being then on the river Panuco, 100 leagues to the west. The great river of the north as nearly equi-distant between the Panuco and bay of St. Bernard was, on the principle generally admitted by European nations forming establishments in savage countries, considered by France, as the boundary between French and Spanish America; and accordingly we find it so laid down in many of the old maps. This boundary would embrace within the limits of Louisiana some very valuable dominions of Spain, including the rich mines of St. Barbe, and the city of Santa Fe, the capital of New Mexico. On the other hand, in virtue of her settlement of the Adais, Spain might claim the country as far east as the river Mexicana, and to the highlands dividing the waters of the north river from those of the Mississippi. Beyond them she could have no color of claim. In settling this important barrier there were ample materials for the acquisition of Florida, still retaining to ourselves all the country watered by the Mississippi.
Another gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dana) had declared that if the inhabitants of the ceded territory were now, or should hereafter be, admitted into the union, it would be a violation of that clause of the constitution which relates to the establishment of a uniform rule of naturalization, since those people will be converted from foreigners to citizens, not in the mode prescribed by our naturalization law. Mr. Randolph wished to know in what manner the subjects of Great-Britain, settled around our western posts, were admitted to the privilege of citizenship? Whether it was not done by treaty, and not in the mode prescribed by law? How did the people at Natchez become entitled to the rights of citizens? Although born out of our allegiance, the moment our government was established over them, did they not possess, of right, a security for their lives and property? Could they not demand trial by jury in case of criminal prosecution? When he spoke of their acquiring the rights of citizens, (Mr. Randolph said) he did not mean in the full extent in which they were enjoyed by citizens of any one of the particular states; since they possessed not the right of self-government—but those rights of personal liberty, of personal security and of property, which were among the dearest privileges of our citizens. A stipulation to incorporate the ceded country does not imply that we are bound ever to admit them to the unqualified enjoyment of the privileges of citizenship. It is a covenant to incorporate them into our union, not on the footing of the original states, or of states created under the constitution, but to extend to them, according to the principles of the constitution, the rights and immunities of citizens; being those rights and immunities of jury trial, liberty of conscience, &c. which every citizen may challenge, whether he be a citizen of an individual state, or of a territory subordinate to and dependent on those states in their corporate capacity. In the mean time they are to be protected in the enjoyment of their existing rights. There is no stipulation, however, that they shall ever be formed into one or more states.
He denied the correctness of the doctrine advanced by the same gentleman, that the stipulation entered into by France, in time of war, to raise the duke of Parma to the throne of Etruria, bound her to obtain a recognition of that king from every power of Europe. All which concerned us in that treaty had been recited in ours with France. By the treaty of St. Ildefonso his Catholic Majesty stipulates "to redeliver ( retrouer ) to the French Republic, six months after the full and entire execution of the conditions and stipulations herein, relative to his royal highness the duke of Parma, the colony or province of Louisiana." What these stipulations were is certainly known only to the parties themselves, for they never were officially

made public, although we are at no loss to conjecture them. Nor are we at all concerned whether France has, or has not, complied with them—Because in a treaty executed at Madrid, six months after, in March 1801, they shewed that they consider the former treaty as having passed the title to the country to France. The fifth article is as follows. "This treaty being in pursuance of that already concluded between the First Consul and his Catholic majesty by which the king delivers to France possession of Louisiana, the contracting parties agree to carry into effect the said treaty" &c: Spain, therefore, being satisfied as to the stipulations entered into by France in the treaty of St. Ildefonso, declares herself, in the second treaty, ready to redeliver the country to her whenever she was ready to receive it, and Mr. Randolph said, he had it from high authority that the royal mandate to that effect, was in the hands of the minister of the French republic, near the United States, and would be forwarded to the existing government of Louisiana so soon as the treaty should be confirmed on our part.
Having departed considerably from the particular point on which he wished to be satisfied by the gentleman from Connecticut, who had spoken first (Mr. Griswold) he would again recall the attention of that gentleman to the 3rd article of the treaty of London and request that he would reconcile its provisions to the doctrine which he had advanced on the seventh article of the treaty then before the committee.
WASHINGTON CITY
MONDAY, November 21.
It will be perceived, by the sketch of Friday's proceedings, that the House of Representatives have determined, by a majority unusually great, to continue the salaries established by the act of Congress of March 1799. This measure, it may be boldly averred, will receive the approbation of the people. Whatever murmurs a similar measure may have heretofore excited, arising from misapprehension or misrepresentation, we are satisfied that when the public attention shall be fully attracted to it, as we have no doubts it will be, it will prove a popular act.
Let it be recollected that the salaries, as they at present stand, were fixed by a federal legislature for federal officers. That party, therefore, have decided the principle, and have by their acts pronounced it wise and just. It is now confirmed by a republican legislature and applied to republican officers; thus uniting the suffrage of both parties. Can that which both approve be condemned? Does not such an uncommon union of sentiment stamp it with the highest character of propriety?
But there are stranger proofs of its wisdom than this unusual concurrence in opinion; proofs, which address themselves, with unelitable force, to the feelings of every enlightened republican.
The government of this country is at present wisely administered. Why is it wisely administered? Because a sufficient compensation, that compensation which this law continues, is given to men of the first talents and virtues; enabling them to devote the whole of their time, and, of consequence, the undivided powers of their minds, to the public service. Reduce their compensation, render their subsistence dependent upon an attention to their private affairs, and what will become of the public business? Are men of talents so many fabled Camelions that can live on air? Will fame, or conscious virtue feed them?
The proposed reduction would have saved 6,500 dollars; and what is 6,500 dollars to twelve annual millions, whose economical and wise expenditure is under the direction of those who receive these salaries? It is not a one hundred and eighty fourth part. If men, without talents, or without virtue, had the disbursement of this immense sum, their folly or crime would cost the nation a very different sum.
Further: The people know that by refusing to public officers a competence, those in low or middling circumstances, however splendid their talents, or illustrious their virtues, are virtually disfranchised of that participation in the government to which they are entitled.
Knowing this, and knowing that the very existence of a republican government depends upon the wisdom and virtues of those who rise to importance for the great mass of society, they must be in favor of that which is the only means of introducing and retaining such men in the great offices of government.
We are well aware that this topic has been fruitful of party and personal uses. We well know that some men entertain a formidable dread of what they call the prejudices of the people. But we know, also, that these are the reproaches of the enemies of liberty, and that the people do not deserve them. Without complimenting the American
people, it may be fearlessly pronounced, that they possess sufficient discernment to appreciate merit, and that they have magnanimity to acknowledge, and liberality to reward it.
The SECRETARY of the NAVY has received dispatches from the MEDITERRANEAN SQUADRON, dated September 20th, 22d, 23d & 26th. The frigate Philadelphia of 40 guns, and schooner Vixen of 12—18 pound Carronades, had on the 16th Sept. been ordered by the Commodore to repair to Tripoli and scour the coast.
The ports and coast of Morocco were well watched by the frigates Constitution of 44 guns, the New-York of 36 guns, and the John Adams of 32 guns, and the schooners Enterprize and Nautilus.
Lieut. Stewart, of the brig Siren of 16 guns, had orders from the Commodore to cruise for the Moorish 30 gun frigate, the Maimona, and if he should meet her, to take her into Gibraltar.
On the 16th Sept. the Nautilus had been sent from Gibraltar to Malaga to convoy down 18 sail of merchant vessels.
House of Representatives.
FRIDAY, November 18, 1803.
The House resolved itself into a committee of the whole—Mr. Varnum in chair—on the bill fixing the salaries of certain officers therein mentioned.
Mr. J. Randolph moved to fill the blank in relation to the salary of the secretary of state with "five thousand dollars."
Mr. Chittenden moved to postpone the bill until Monday.
Motion lost—Ayes 49—Noes 63.
Mr. Leib moved to fill the above blank with "three thousand five hundred dollars."
Whereupon a debate of considerable length ensued. Messrs. J. Randolph, Allston, Findley, Sanford, and Skinner advocated the filling of the blank with 5,000 dollars; and Messrs. Leib, Chittenden and J. Clay, supported the motion to fill it up with 3,500 dollars.
When the question on 5,000 dollars was taken and carried—Ayes 79
It was then carried, without a division, to fill up the blank respecting the salary of the secretary of the treasury with 5,000 dollars.
Mr. Randolph moved to fill the blank respecting the salary of the secretary of war with 4,500 dollars.
Mr. Leib enquired the reasons wherefore there was a difference between the compensation of the secretary of war, and of the secretaries of state and treasury.
Mr. Nicholson said if the gentleman from Pennsylvania would move to fill the blank with 5,000 dollars, he would second the motion.
Mr. Randolph explained the reasons for the difference.
The question to fill the blank with 5,000 dollars, was lost without a division, when that to fill it with 4,500 dollars, was carried—Ayes 74.
The blank for the salary of the secretary of the navy, was filled with 4,500 dollars by the same vote.
Mr. J. Randolph moved to fill the blank for the salary of the attorney general with 3,000 dollars.
Mr. J. Clay moved 2,000 dollars.
Mr. J. Randolph spoke at some length in favor of 3,000 dollars, and was followed on the same side by Mr. Skinner and Mr. Nicholson.
Mr. J. Clay and Mr. Goddard spoke in favor of 2,000 dollars.
When the question was taken on 3,000 dollars, and carried—Ayes 69—Noes 30.
It was then agreed, without a division, to fill the several other blanks with the same sums allowed by the act of March 1799, to the Comptroller, the Treasurer, the Auditor, the Register, the Accountants of the War and Navy departments.
On filling the blank respecting the salary of the Post-Master General, Mr. Lyon moved to fill it with 3,500 dollars.
Lost without a division.
It was then agreed to fill it with 3,000, and that respecting the Assistant Post-Master General with 1,700 dollars.
Mr. Eustis moved an amendment to the first section, so as to make it read "that from the end of the present year the following annual compensations, as established by an act passed on the 2d of March 1799," &c.
This motion was opposed by Messrs. Lowndes and Goddard.
Carried Ayes 65—Noes 43.
The committee then rose and reported the bill with amendments, which the House immediately took up.
On the question to agree to the first amendment (that moved, as above, by Dr. Eustis) Mr. J. Clay hoped it would not be agreed to; as it decided the principle of the bill he called for the yeas and nays, which being taken, were Ycas 69—Nays 46.
The second amendment was to fill the blank in relation to the Secretary of State, with 5,000 dollars.
Mr. J. Randolph observed that as this question would more correctly than the last try the sense of the House on the principle of the bill he desired the taking the yeas and nays; which, being taken, were Ycas 82—Nays 28.
The remainder of the report was then agreed to without a division.
When the question on engrossing the bill for a third reading on Monday was taken by yeas and nays, and carried in the affirmative—Ycas 78—Nays 28. (The debate in course.)
"Free ships make free goods."
In the House of Representatives, Thursday 17th of November, on the third reading of the bill authorizing reprisals on "the vessels, goods and effects, belonging to the Emperor of Morocco or his subjects." Mr. Crowninshield of Massachusetts rose and said, he wished to recommit the bill to a committee of the whole House in order to introduce an amendment immediately at the end of the first section. He stated that as the clause now stood a power was given to our cruisers to capture the merchant vessels of friendly and allied powers, having on board goods and effects the property of the Emperor of Morocco of his subjects.
Mr. Crowninshield—I will suppose, Mr. Speaker, that our public ships should meet with a neutral vessel which is suspected to be loaded with enemies goods, and a capture follows; and it should afterwards appear upon a proper examination in port, that a mistake had been committed, and that the cargo as well as the ship was neutral; I would ask whether the United States would not be held responsible to pay heavy damages; and if an unjust condemnation were to take place, should we not be answerable to the owner of the neutral ship, or to his government?
I have known the flag of our country torn away from the mast, and the fairest documents trampled upon, and thrown into the sea, by the lawless free-boaters of the ocean. I have also known, and the members of this House cannot be ignorant of the fact, that more than one thousand American merchant vessels were captured during the late war in Europe, and wantonly and unjustly condemned, as enemies property, when every timber belonging to the vessels and every dollar of the cargoes were bona fide American.
And having seen this I do not with an authority should be given to our own cruisers, whereby the merchant vessels of an unoffending nation may be captured, and their cargoes afterwards adjudicated.—Mr. Crowninshield here offered the following amendment to the bill to be introduced at the termination of the first section—"Provided nothing herein contained shall be construed to authorize the capture or detention of any vessel bearing the flag of any European power whatever, although such vessel may be loaded in whole or in part with goods and effects belonging to the Emperor of Morocco or his subjects,—contraband goods destined to the enemies ports excepted."—After reading the amendment in his place, Mr. C. said that he offered it to the consideration of that honorable body, wishing most sincerely that it should be incorporated into the bill, or that some other provision might be introduced guarding against the practice he had alluded to by the ships of the belligerent nations.
After some debate, in which Mr. Nicholson supported the amendment upon the principle that free ships ought to make free goods. It was put and lost, 39 members only being in favor of it, but we understand that the bill may be yet amended in the Senate and should this be the case, it would come down to the House, where it is not improbable, upon further discussion, this liberal and important principle may be finally agreed to.
Ten Dollars Reward.
STOLEN from the plantation near Upper Marlboro, on Saturday night the 29th October—an iron grey HORSE, about fourteen hands one inch high, seven years old, stout made, trots and gallops only on the road, is rather dull and goes heavy, having been broke to the plough—he has lately been triamied about the head and ears. Any person giving me information so that I get him again shall receive the above reward and if brought home all reasonable charges paid by,
BENJAMIN ODEN. November 21—tf
25 Dollars Reward.
RAN away from the subscriber on the 7th instant at Stevensburgh Virginia a negro boy named JACK about 15 years old stout made, had on when he went off an outside jacket and white pantalettes, he was raised in Dorchester county in the state of Maryland, from whence he once ran away and attempted to get to Philadelphia—Upon the confinement of the said boy in any jail within the states of Virginia or Maryland and information thereof given to col. John B. EARLE at the city of Washington or to the subscriber at Pendleton court house, South Carolina, the above reward and all reasonable expenses shall be paid.
WM. RICHARD. November 21—3t
(BY AUTHORITY.)
AN ACT
Making an appropriation for carrying into effect the 7th article of the treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation, between the United States and his Britannic majesty.
BE it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That a sum not exceeding fifty-thousand dollars, to be paid out of any monies in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, be, and the same hereby is, appropriated for the purpose of carrying into effect the seventh article of the treaty, concluded at London, on the nineteenth day of November, seventeen-hundred and ninety-four, between the United States of America and his Britannic Majesty.
SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That the accounting officers of the treasury be, and they are hereby, authorised, to allow an interest not exceeding the rate of six per centum per annum, on one third part of the amount of any award made in pursuance of the aforesaid article, and presented at the treasury previous to the passing of this act to be calculated from the time when such award shall have been presented.
NATHL. MACON, Speaker of the House of Representatives. JOHN BROWN, President of the Senate pro tempore. November 16, 1803. APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
Philadelphia, 14th Nov. LATEST FROM EUROPE.
Yesterday morning arrived at this port, the ship Lewis-William, captain Butler, in 35 days from Bristol, Eng.
The English dates received by the Lewis-William, are to the 3rd October. Some of these are given in this day's Gazette. It is scarcely necessary to observe, that they do not contain any intelligence of moment. Although we have received a connected and regular file of the London Star to the 2nd ult. they furnish but little matter to awaken curiosity, or gratify enquiry. In England, there is exhibited but one scene; and that consists of daily military exhibitions, of marches and counter-marches. In their ports, considerable battle and animation prevail.
LONDON, September 29.
A private letter from Paris, dated September 5, says, "It is certain that Bonaparte has now in his view two distinct objects; the one is to make a descent on the coasts of England, Ireland or Scotland, and the other to get possession of certain points on the Mediterranean, from whence he may dispatch a part of the troops now apparently destined to act against England. If he is forced to renounce his plan of invasion, or if his projects be defeated by a reversal in the first instance, then he will endeavor to occupy the attention of the French people by another attempt, and will pretend that the menace of an invasion of England was meant only to mark a design of a descent on Egypt.—His generals are allowed to say, that he will employ 300,000 men in the army, as it is termed, of England, and that the attack is to be made on five different points—namely, one on Scotland, one on Ireland, and three on England. The multitude swallow these exaggerations, but men of sense know that it is impossible for the Corsican to send more than 100,000 men, and that he has not, as yet, collected transports for more than half that number."
September 30.
We have not received any farther accounts respecting the boats reported to be preparing to quit Ostend, but supposing each of the 150 to carry 70 men, the whole will be little more than 10,000—a number not very formidable, we should think, to an armed people. It may be possible enough for Bonaparte to bring them over, but if there is a tolerable distribution of our naval force, is there any probability that he can assemble his boats at one spot, and take advantage of a favorable opportunity; the wind and weather will not suit the whole line of his coast, and there is always the strongest probability that our navy will destroy some part of the armament. Any thing less than 30 or 40,000 men in England would make no impression whatever, and we are confident, that the fate which awaits even such an advanced guard as this, will be such as not to encourage any more of our besiegers to cross the ditch of Dover.
ATTACK ON CALAIS.
It would appear, by comparing the different accounts which have reached us, that the attack on Calais ceased with the cause which gave rise to it. A number of gun-boats were known to be there preparing to sail, and accounts had been received by our cruisers that a much greater number, some say 150 gun-boats, were about to leave Ostend.
Of course it became an object of immediate to prevent it possible, any kind of co-operation, and an attempt was made to destroy those at the former place.
The attack commenced on Tuesday, as we have before informed our readers, but we have since learnt some important particulars not yet stated. A cannonade was first made to the Eastward, at Dunkirk it is believed to draw the attention of the enemy that way, and this manoeuvre succeeded so effectually, that when our squadron bore in upon Calais, the cannonade and bombardment was so sudden and unexpected, that the enemy could not get their gun and flat bottomed boats up the harbour, out of the reach of our fire. It was even a considerable time before they recovered so much from their surprize and confusion as to be able to fire a single shot; so that our vessels were able to do them a great deal of mischief. They afterwards opened a fire upon our squadron from every point of the shore, but we are happy to state, that on that occasion not a single individual was killed, or even wounded, on board our vessels.
The greatest part of our shells were seen to fall among their gun boats, where they could not fail to do a great deal of damage. None of them fell short of the boats, but some went over into the town, where they did much mischief, especially in the East quarter, which was set on fire in different places.
Whether the enemy had the temerity to imagine they could face our flotilla, or found themselves so much annoyed where they were, that they thought they would be as safe to endeavor to skirt along the shore to some other port under the protection of the numerous batteries which line the coast, and in consequence ventured to quit the harbor of Calais, we cannot take upon us to determine. We are however rather inclined to attribute their movement to the latter motive, which would also be strengthened by the consideration that, by quitting the harbor, they would draw away our fire from Calais, which was suffering severely from the bombardment, the town being in a blaze in different quarters. But whatever was the inducement, it is certain, that on Wednesday morning, from 25 to 30 of the gun boats were seen to come out of Calais harbor, as we yesterday stated.
They appeared at first to have an intention to proceed to the Eastward, but soon after, probably in consequence of perceiving some of our vessels too much in shore to allow of their passing, without more risk than they were willing to encounter, they changed their course and proceeded along shore towards Boulogne. Our flotilla pursued them, keeping up a brisk fire, and sailing as near shore as the depth of water would allow. The gun boats could be plainly seen from Dover, between our vessels and the shore. One of the frigates and a gun brig were constantly enveloped in smoke. The whole of the French coast, extending from the Cliffs at the westward of Calais to the entrance into Boulogne Bay, was one continued line of smoke, and the wind being to the Eastward, almost every gun was heard on the opposite English coast. Some of the enemy's boats were driven on shore, but the greater part, it is believed, made their way into the Bay of Boulogne, whither our fleet was seen to be chasing them about half past two o'clock on Wednesday, still keeping up such a tremendous fire, that they must have suffered very severely.
It would appear, however, by the accounts that have reached us this morning, that they are likely to experience as little civility from our squadron in their present quarters as in those they last quitted; for with the dawn of day, a fresh cannonade and bombardment commenced again yesterday, and continued till between three and four o'clock, when it became most tremendously heavy. The French coast being covered with a heavy fog our squadron could not be seen from the coast about Dover, but from the sound, its direction plainly appeared to come from Boulogne, whither our brave tars had chased the enemy the preceding day. Next post we expect will bring us some interesting particulars respecting the attack.
NOTICE.
FOR SALE One hundred and fifty acres of land, One hundred acres of which is in wood—it is situated within six miles of the Eastern Branch Jerry. For terms apply to MICHAEL LOVE Prince George county, July 22. ratf
Conveyancer's Office. THOMAS HERTY,
Grateful for past favors, informs his friends and the public, that he continues to prepare CONVEYANCES BY LAND and every other species of DEED or INSTRUMENT in the line of his profession, with legal precision, and on moderate terms, title investigated, &c.
A choice selection of lots on the Pennsylvania avenue and in other desirable situations in the City to lease or sell.
N. B. Herty's Abridgement of the laws of Maryland in 1 vol. and Herty's Digest of the laws of the United States in a vol. for sale at the above office.
City of Washington, April 18. rawf

FOR SALE. ABOUT 2000 acres of land on the East side of the Eastern Branch, and adjoining it, three miles from the city of Washington. Vessels drawing 12 feet water, may load at the landing, where there is a tolerable good wharf. Near 400 acres of this land is a rich bottom through which there are several streams of water, that turn a mill, erected on the land, and which might be used to advantage, in watering meadow: a part of the bottom is now in Timothy grass and the whole is capable of producing grass in abundance, and tobacco. There may be between five and six hundred acres in wood, the rest is cleared land. A part of the land adjoins a commodious brick dwelling house, with all convenient out-houses; and a large and handsome garden, but not in good repair, on the borders of the town of Bladensburg.
This property, so convenient to the city of Washington, which affords a market for grass and all other productions of land, equal to any in the United States; so certain from its situation to rise in a few years, to a price several times as high as will now be taken for it, well deserves the attention of men of fortune. The whole land including the dwelling house and improvements, and mill, will be sold for 10 pounds per acre. It is questionable whether the meadow ground, alone, is not worth all the money; it is certain, that it might easily be made to pay more than the annual interest of the whole purchase. BEN. STODDER T. George Town, Nov. 15—3w
FOR SALE, An excellent second handed Forte Piano; The owner being about to remove from Washington, will dispose of it low for cash—Enquire of the printer hereof. November 16—6t
THORNS FOR HEDGES.
FOR sale by the subscriber, at his nursery near the Little Falls of Potomac, upwards of fifty thousand plants of the American White Thorn, assorted at 4, at 5, and at 6 dollars per thousand—purchasers who desire it, will be particularly informed of the methods used by the subscriber in planting and cultivating hedges by the assistance of the plough. Through what means the hedges are expeditiously planted, easily cleaned from weeds, and by the benefit of regular cultivation kept in a healthy thriving state, at a small expense, the whole cost or trouble of attendance annually, and but for a few years, not being materially different from the culture of a row of Indian corn of equal extent—gentlemen who reside at a distance can be accommodated with plants of a small size; 10 or 15000 of which may be packed in a box of convenient bulk for easy postage, in which they may remain in good preservation until the middle of April.
The subscriber has also for sale, a few trees of the choicest sorts of pears; among which are the Brown burre, bonetier, jargonel, creffane, Longueville, trowford or lammas, autumn, Dutch English, and orange bergamots, mourg-wilgts, citeran-de-Carmis, drummond, &c. Also some trees of the Newtown pippin apple, none such nonpareil, Spitzenberg, sweet russet, the kackage from Ireland, golden pippin, golden rennet, &c. Also a few vine cuttings of the black Hamburgh, white Frontinac, white chasselas, white and black muscadines, black prince &c. Gooseberry plants, of the best new sorts the paper mulberry, pyracantha or ever green thorn, laburnum, pride of China, foxglove &c. &c. THOMAS MAIN. November 16—3t
To be sold at public auction by virtue of a decree of the high court of Chancery of Maryland, for the benefit of the creditors of Robert Whitaker deceased, on Thursday the 15th day of December next on the premises.
A Valuable Tract of Land, containing about 500 acres of rich fertile land, one third at least in heavy wood and timber with at least fifty acres of excellent meadow land, part of which is now under the sythe, the improvements are two dwelling houses, three tobacco houses with all other necessary out houses, the situation only two miles from Upper Marlboro, and about the same distance from Patuxent river—this valuable property will be sold together or will be divided to accommodate purchasers—at the same time and place will be offered at public sale a valuable mill set, containing 14 acres on which has formerly been a very valuable merchant mill, the improvements at present are only a large dwelling house—there is a never failing stream abundantly sufficient with a good dam and sufficient stone on the land for foundations &c. even a country mill on it would have constant employment; this property lies within half a mile of Upper Marlboro, where there is a very considerable inspection of tobacco, and the water for flats from Patuxent river. The above property will be sold on a credit of one and two years bond with security being given to the trustee for the principal and interest from the day of sale, and on payment a good title will be made by deed from the trustee, according to the decree. All persons having claims yet outstanding against the estate of the said Robert Whitaker are required to lodge them with proper vouchers in the Chancery office on or before the 15th day of March next. ISAAC LANSDALE, Trustee. Prince Georges County, November 16, 1803.—5t12w
Physiogntrace LIKENESSES ENGRAVED. THE subscriber respectfully informs the public, that he will leave this city by the 20th of this month, and therefore takes the liberty of requesting those persons who intend to employ his talents, to make their application before that time. St. MEMIN. November 16—3t
WAS taken from a Glafs safe in the store of the subscribers, on Wednesday morning, the 9th inst. by some person unknown. One lady's locket set in stone, One do. set in pearls, representing a female figure, supporting a lamb in her arms, One do. do. plain, representing a temple, One do. do. do. feather, One do. do. do. anchor, One handsome tortoise shell, segar box, Some silver pencil cases, high finished razors, and scissors. As it is probable they were taken by some servant and may be offered for sale; any person apprehending the thief and securing the articles or any part of them shall be handsomely rewarded. RAPINE, CONRAD, & Co. near the Capitol. November 14.
WAS taken off the Race ground on the evening of the ninth instant a bright bay HORSE, with the marks of a collar on both sides of his withers; he is branded on his near side with the letter B both on his buttock and shoulder. Whoever will deliver the said horse to Washington Boyd in the city of Washington shall receive ten dollars reward and no questions asked. November 14—4t
Taken up as a Stray, and brought before me this day by George Jones, living near the twenty buildings, a Mout-colored MARE with a bald face and glassy eyes, about 7 or 8 years old, and 12 hands high; she has been in the care of said Jones near 12 months. The owner is desired to prove property, pay charges and take her away. CORN COMINGHAM. Washington, Nov. 12—3t
A. J. VILLARD, PRESENTS his respects to the gentlemen of Washington and George Town, and gives them notice that he has opened a Coffee & Oyster House, In the same stile as the one he kept last winter: His rooms are decorated with diverse models of architecture, and a fine collection of engravings for the amusement of the curious: He has different kinds of plays for the recreation of those who will honor him with their visits: He intends to keep all sorts of liquors of the first quality, Martinique cordials &c. &c. Oysters cooked in any manner, so as to suit the palate of the greatest epicure! Two Boarders will be taken. Pennsylvania Avenue opposite the Center Market. November 14—4t
THIS is to give notice that the subscriber of Washington city hath obtained from the Orphans court of Washington in the district of Columbia, letters of administration on the personal estate of NATHANIEL GOODALL late of said city and county deceased; all persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same, with the vouchers thereof, to the subscriber at or before the 15th day of May next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate—Given under my hand this 4th day of November, 1803. ORLANDO COOK, Adm. N. B. The sale will commence on Saturday the 19th November. November 4—taw3w
NOTICE. ORDERED that Orlando Cook administrator of Nathaniel Goodall deceased, give notice to the creditors of the deceased to exhibit their claims against him by advertisement in the usual form, inserted in a newspaper in the city of Washington twice a week for three successive weeks. Ordered also that the said administrator sell the personal property of the said deceased at public auction—on a credit of sixty days where any purchaser shall buy to the amount of more than twenty dollars; taking bond with security for payment with interest from the day of sale—all sales under the above sum to be for cash. But he shall give fifteen days previous notice of the time, place and terms of sale by advertisement in the National Intelligencer, and also at the most public places in the city of Washington. Test JOHN HEWITT, Reg. November 4—taw3w
MILITARY LANDS FOR SALE. By virtue of a power delegated to his executors, by the last will and testament of John Rose, esq. deceased, late of the county of Westmoreland we the subscribers, having taken upon ourselves the execution of his said will, and qualified thereto according to law, now offer for sale, the following tracts of land, viz. One tract of fifteen hundred acres, by patent, bearing date 7th of day of January, 1796, lying on Cumberland river, in the state of Kentucky. One of 1500 acres by patent, bearing date the 30th day of August, 1797, on the waters of Paint Creek, between the Miami and Sciota rivers. One of 1500 acres by patent, bearing date the 25th of April 1800, also on the waters of Paint Creek. One of 1200 acres by patent, bearing date the 25th day of April 1800, lying on the banks of the Sciota river. Two other small lots of one and two hundred acres on the waters of Lees creek a branch of the Rattle Snake fork of Paint creek. One other small tract, of 360 acres, in the same neighborhood—and lastly, One other tract of 1500 acres, surveyed and patented for Burgess Bell, lying on a branch of Gaspars river, adjoining the upper corner of George Washington's survey, and the same having been sold and conveyed by the said Bell to the said Rose. Proposals for a purchase of the whole or any part of the said lands will be received verbally or by letter, addressed to any of the subscribers. The taxes on these lands have been regularly paid, and a clear and indisputable title will be made the purchaser, by HENRY ROSE, Alexandria, WM. ROBINSON, Leeds, AU. BERRY, Port Royal, } Executors. September 26.
4,000 weight of first quality FIRKIN BUTTER Just received and for Sale by ALEXANDER MCCORMICK. Capitol Hill, Washington, Nov. 7—tf
RAPINE, CONRAD & Co. NEW JERSEY AVENUE. Have just received the following NEW BOOKS. The life of Lorenzo De' Medici, 3 vol. Denon's travels in Upper and Lower Egypt during the campaigns of gen. Bonaparte in that country, 2 vol. Willich's Domestic Encyclopedia; or Dictionary of facts and useful knowledge, vol. I. & II for which the subscription is still open—the price will be enhanced to nonsubscribers. The Marriage Promise, a new comedy Public characters, or contemporary biography, containing the memoirs of the most celebrated personages of this country and Europe John Bull, or an Englishman's fire side, a new comedy. Tale of Mystery ditto, Friend of Women, translated from the French. Bollet's Select Sermons, &c. &c. N. R. & Co. Have always on hand at moderate prices, writing letter and wrapping papers, quills, wafers, sealing wax, ink powder, ink and ink stands, pocket books, playing cards, parchment, blank and account books, copper plate copies, &c. &c.
NOTICE. WILL be sold at public auction, on Wednesday the 23d inst. at the Twenty buildings in the city of Washington, the personal property of Redmond Barry deceased, consisting of some plate, household kitchen furniture, together with a horse and chair with harness, and one cow and calf. Terms six months credit for all sums over 29 dollars, the purchasers giving bonds with approved security for the payment with interest from the day of sale until paid. JOHN NNA BERRY, admx. November 7—3t
COLUMBIAN INN. GEORE TOWN. THE Subscriber begs leave to solicit the patronage of his former friends and customers, and in order to them he still continues at the Columbian Inn—where he will be happy to have it in his power to accommodate them as usual. JOHN H. BARNEY. September 27. eptj
All persons having claims or demands of any nature against the subscriber are requested to exhibit their accounts, without delay, to JOHN HEWITT or RICHARD FORREST, Esqrs. of the city of Washington, who are authorised, in my name, to adjust and settle the same; and all persons indebted to me are requested to make payment to either of the gentlemen above named. SAMUEL BLODGET. March 30. tf
FOR SALE. THE Plantation on which I live, containing about 600 acres of valuable and. The improvements are, an exceeding good dwelling house two stories high, 42 feet long, by 36 feet wide, with a passage through the middle, three rooms below, and four above stairs, with five places in all but one, and a dry sweet cellar, the size of the house, in which is a capital vault with two rooms, and above is a fine airy pantry. A kitchen 36 by 18, two stories high, with a kitchen and laundry below, and lodging rooms for servants above. A washing house, meat house and dairy and in short every necessary improvement for the accommodation of a family, and a very fine collection of grafted and budded peach trees of the most approved kinds, chiefly from Princes nursery on Long Island, which are just beginning to bear. This property is situated in a healthy genteel neighborhood, about four miles from the city of Washington, five from Alexandria. Nearly one half is in wood and timber, and the residue arable and meadow land, of the latter, there are about 50 or 60 acres under the scythe and more may be easily laid down. Perhaps no tract of the same size, abounds more in fine springs, there being a never failing stream in every field, besides an abundant one which runs through the meadow and from which the greatest part of it may be watered. For terms apply to the subscriber on the premises. OVERTON CARR. September 19. eptf
JUST RECEIVED, By the UNITED STATES, Capt. Finley from Liverpool, Fall Goods, viz. Brass Plate and wire fenders and irons, shovel and tongs, pokers, bellows, coal hods, bell metal kettles, brass footmen, knives and forks, plated bridle bits and stirrups, with a variety of saddlery, brass ware, kitchen furniture, tools and building materials, &c. HENRY INGLE. Washington, Oct. 28.—epam.
On Monday next will be published at Duane's Store Pennsylvania Avenue. BLACKSTONE'S COMMENTARIES, WITH NOTES of REFERENCE to the CONSTITUTION and LAWS of the Federal government of the United States, and the Commonwealth of Virginia. IN FIVE VOLUMES WITH AN APPENDIX TO EACH VOLUME. Containing short tracts upon such subjects as appeared necessary to form a correct view of the laws of Virginia, as a member of the federal union. By St. George Tucker, Professor of law, in the university of William and Mary; and one of the Judges of the General Court in Virginia. A large collection of the most valuable books, and an extensive assortment of stationery will be opened on the same day—Catalogues will be published in the course of the
FOR Sale or Rent. A Convenient two story BRICK HOUSE and Lot, situated on the Pennsylvania avenue near the Center Market. Possession will be given the first of March. For terms apply to the subscriber, WM. WOODWARD. November 12—tf
TEN DOLLARS REWARD. DERIVED from on board the United States frigate Essex, THOMAS WILLIAMS a seaman, about 19 years of age, five feet four or five inches high, pitted with the smallpox. Whoever apprehends said defector and delivers him to captain John Collins, superintendent of the Navy Yard, shall receive the above reward and all reasonable charges paid. Also RICHARD DAVION a seaman from the hospital belonging to the frigate Congress, dark complexion, about five feet 10 inches high, thick set. November 18—3t
THOMAS CARPENTER, TAYLOR. HAS just received an handsome supply of fall goods, which he is determined to sell and make upon the most reasonable terms, and in the best and most fashionable manner, and greatest expedition. Pennsylvania Avenue, near the President's Square and Capitol Hill, seventh house from the Capitol. Oct. 14. tf
LECTURES. IN a science so various and complicated as the present system of the LAW, nothing which tends to facilitate the progress of the student can be deemed useless. It is with this view that the subscriber proposes to deliver during the winter, (and if suitable encouragement offers, annually) A COURSE OF LECTURES, On Education, Belles Letters, Composition, History and Law. The subscriber means to divide the same into two distinct courses. The object of the division is, that young gentlemen who are designed to fill stations in active life, distinct from those of the learned professions, may resort to that course of lectures which will be delivered without a relation to the Law, which will be the sole foundation of the other. If the plan should meet with success, the subscriber contemplates furnishing, next winter, a handsome Library, for the use of such gentlemen as feel desirous of patronising the undertaking. The municipal laws of each state will then be provided—That students of law from any part of the United States will find their interest to repair to the Metropolis, to pursue their studies; where they will have the advantage of attending the Congressional debates. The facility of access which the houses of Congress offer, is a circumstance peculiarly advantageous to the student, and the youthful pleader, not only from the light which is thrown in the course of debate on controverted questions of law; not only to be derived from witnessing the eager contests, the vigorous attacks, the wary methods of defence, exhibited by men of the most conspicuous talents, rivals alike in abilities and interest but especially from this consideration, that the speakers are, in general, exempted by the nature of their functions, from those defects to which pleaders are peculiarly exposed. The Lectures will commence the first week in December next, and continue until twelve distinct Lectures in each course shall have been delivered. The terms may be known by applying personally, or by letter post paid to ROBERT WARE PEACOCK, Attorney at Law. City of Washington, October 17, NI&UG&D
Lots for Sale. IN eligible situations, and upon very advantageous terms—A plan of the several squares in which they are contained may be seen and terms thereon by applying to, ROBERT W. PEACOCK. Attorney at law and Conveyancer. I WILL sell five hundred and fifty acres of land whereon I live, in Fairfax county, within five miles of the court house, and within twenty of the City of Washington, Alexandria, Dumfries, and twelve of the Occoquan mills, it is a healthy situation, the land fertile, and has about two hundred acres of wood to cut, there is a great proportion of white and red oak, popular and hickory timber.—There is nearly one hundred acres of prime land for meadow, I will give six months credit for one fourth of the purchase money—twelve months for the other quarter, eighteen for the third, and two years for the last payment, a purchaser will find me on the premises. Tobos. POLLARD Feb. 21st. ep
TO RENT AND immediate possession given, a two story frame HOUSE, in the city of Washington, on sq. 224, opposite to Robert Peacock's esq. lately occupied by doctor Tabbs. Containing 3 rooms and a large pantry on the 1st floor, two on the 2d floor with garret rooms—Piazza and balcony to the fourth front, cellar and dry well, with an excellent garden—kitchen stable and carriage house, with every other convenience fit for the reception of a genteel family—for further particulars, enquire at the store of Mr. Xaupi a few doors east of Rhodes's tavern, north F street. October 19. tf
NOTICE. APPLICATION is intended to be made at the Treasury for the renewal of the following described certificates of Registered debt which have been lost, viz. No. 2203 and 2201, given to James Moore and Andrew Henderson for 165 69-100ths cents each—one to Charles Aurnet, No. 2199 for 165 69 100ths cents—another to M. redith Webb, No. 2193, for 264 62 100ths cents, and one granted to Charles Miller, No. for 165 69 100ths cents, all bearing interest from 1st July 1781. WILLIAM CALHOUN, October 26.—6w
CHARLES VARDEN, TAYLOR, FROM PHILADELPHIA. HAS received from Philadelphia an elegant assortment of the best quality Superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, Silk florantine, Black and fancy silk moleskin velvet, white & figured Marcellas, Swandowns, Toilettines, Velveteens, Fancy cords, Coating, &c. With a variety of other articles suitable for the winter season. N. B. Ladies Habits, Regimentals and Navy uniforms made in the first style of fashion. New-Jersey Avenue, the second House from the Capitol Square. November 8, 1803. This day is Published, By SAMUEL H. SMITH. And for sale at his Office, and at the bookstore of Rapine, Conrad and Co. Price 25 Cents—
REFLECTIONS ON THE CESSION OF LOUISIANA TO THE UNITED STATES. By SYLVESTRIS. October 17, 1803.
THEO. HOLT, HAS received from Europe and for sale, fine mixed Tulips, double Dutch Hyacinths, separate colors in good order for glasses, Pots and Persian Ranunculus, Crocus several colors, fine mixed Arenonies, &c—Split Peas, Durham Mustard, Bird Seeds, Grass Seeds, Garden Tools, Garden Seeds, &c. He has also a large assortment of Fruit Trees, Flowering shrubs, Lombardy Poplars, &c. Eastern Branch, Nov 2—tawtf
Valuable Land for Sale. The executors of the last will and testament of Anthony Holmead deceased, will sell at private sale about forty acres of land adjoining the city of Washington at the northern extremity of 20th street west. This land is generally allowed to be one of the handiest situations near the city, having a beautiful prospect of nearly the whole of the city of Washington, Alexandria and George Town, and any person inclined to purchase this valuable property, will be shown the same, and know the terms by application to the subscriber near the premises. JOHN HOLMEAD. November 11—tf
CHINA, GLASS, & QUEENS WARE, STORE. THE subscriber has just received an elegant assortment of china, glass and queens ware, among which are, A few sets of French china, East India do. China plates and bowls of all sizes, China glass mugs, Cut tumblers, do. wine glass, do. goblets, do. decanters, pint and quart, do. jelly glasses, do. salts. He has also as usual an assortment of groceries—best Spanish segars, Makintosh tobacco, Scotch and rappée snuff, Macabob, &c. A. L. JONCHERES, a few doors below the Union Tavern, November 11—eop7t
Lately published And for sale at RAPINE, CONRAD, & Co. New Jersey Avenue, near the Capitol, (PRICE ONE DOLLAR.) Letters from his Excellency GEORGE WASHINGTON, to ARTHUR YOUNG, and Sir JOHN SINCLAIR, containing an account of his Husbandry, with his opinions on various questions in agriculture; and many particulars of the rural economy of the United States. November 11—w3t
WAS committed to the goal of Baltimore county as a run away, on the 3d inst a negro man by the name of GEORGE FAIRFAX—he is about 17 years of age, 5 feet 5 inches high, dark complexion, bow legged, has a scar over his right eye, and has lost two of his upper foreteeth; he has on a country made cotton shirt and nankeen trowsers—he says he belongs to Mr. Priestly Wright, living in Westmoreland county Virginia, near Cole Carter's mill. This owner does not release him he will be sold for his goal fees according to law. James Wilson, Sheriff. September 12. 1awtf