The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1809-07-12 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. IX.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1366.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 12, 1809.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
The National Intelligencer is conducted by SAMUEL H. SMITH, and JOSEPH GALES, Jun. and printed at the Office of the former, to whom subscribers and correspondents are requested to address themselves.
The annual price, payable in advance, is Five Dollars.
ADVERTISEMENTS, not exceeding one square in breadth, are inserted the first time at fifty cents, and for every subsequent insertion twenty-five cents. If inserted less than three times a dollar is charged. If inserted but once a week, an addition of one fourth part is made. Other advertisements charged in the same ratio.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DEBATE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. (Continued.)
JUNE 23.
Mr. TAYLOR said that he too, as well as the gentleman just sat down, was very averse to changing our ground in relation to the belligerents. And having a view to the existence of this law, to the particular clause which does prohibit the armed ships of G. Britain from entering the waters of the U. States, the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Virginia, if adopted, will be changing that ground, and to the disadvantage of that nation. In what situation do we find ourselves? Commercial intercourse has re-commenced with Great Britain by the President's proclamation, but the British armed vessels are yet prohibited from entering our waters. And notwithstanding the doubts of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gold) I never had any doubt that the President had not the power to rescind that part of the law.
I am for remaining in statu quo . I think it would be dishonorable in this government to take a step in advance of the position in which we have placed the Executive, and in which we now stand by the arrangement with the British government—it would not be fulfilling the promises which we have in our legislative acts undertaken to perform. On the other hand, it would be equally embarrassing and unpleasant that we should recede. It would be like placing a General on our frontier, during a war, with an hundred thousand militia, making a truce, taking away the men, and at the end of that time leaving him to fight his battles alone. I am averse to it. An expression fell from a gentleman from Virginia that the arrangement with Great Britain as it now stands was not complained of by her. The gentleman from New York was desirous of knowing whence the gentleman derived his information. As no complaint has come to this House or to the Executive on the subject, because if it had he would have stated it, as to the operation of the first and second clauses, it is a fair presumption, without having any other data on which to form our opinions, than merely the circumstance of our not having it reported to us that this was a subject of difficulty, that it is quite satisfactory. Why we should volunteer to smooth the way I cannot discover. I consider the British government as perfectly satisfied with the situation which was produced by the acceptance of the offer to revoke the orders in council. If there is to be a discrimination at all, I would rather say that there are circumstances which would justify the continuance of the first section of the non-intercourse law with relation to the armed ships of Great Britain. I would mention, for instance, the affair of the Impéreuse; and as the subject of our seamen marched inland and incarcerated in France has been brought up by the gentleman from New York, I would mention the six thousand American seamen not only incarcerated, but, more than that, compelled to fight the battles of a country not their own. I do not mention this by way of balancing accounts. I am satisfied with things as they are, and willing that they should remain so. But in fact I do think that this throwing up our caps, this rejoicing for our great success, is beginning to rejoice before we have gained a victory. There is a topic which by the gentleman from New York, in his very liberal mode of discussing a subject, might have been introduced here. I feel pain at introducing it; but it is a duty which I must perform. I ask whether this country is in a more friendly situation in relation to Great Britain than was the government of Denmark at two particular times. At both of these times the sine qua non war car-
ried to her at the mouth of the cannon. Or are our relations with that government more friendly than were the relations between Great Britain and the Porte? The same sort of negotiant materials were used, & the same sort of diplomacy was attempted to be played upon that government. What would be the sensation of this government, of the gentleman himself, if this sort of punishment for supposed breach of faith were carried into the harbor of New York? Sir, promises to negotiate are not promises to settle every subject of difference. Mr. Rose was sent here for a particular purpose. Promises were made that he should come for that purpose. He came and he went away; nothing was done by him. The fact is, that, in our excessive desire to smooth the way to negotiation, we may be smoothing the way to the destruction of this nation. For I should not expect energy from the President of the U. States on minor points of differences, where a refusal to concur in a proposed article might occasion the destruction of the principal city of the United States, whose consequence and importance we have so often heard of. It is unpleasant to mention these circumstances on the discussion of this subject; but it really does appear to me, whether this negotiation is to end favorably or not, that it would be policy to adopt, as an irrevocable law of the land, a provision for the exclusion of all armed vessels. The true moral line of conduct which one nation is bound to observe to another with respect to the use of its ports and harbors, is precisely the same as respects the use of its terra firma ; & the sending or admitting a navy into your waters, unless by compact, is no less a violation of neutral right or a concession on the part of the government yielding its than it would be to send or admit armies on your soil. And although we may not at this time be able, from the disturbed situation of the world, to carry the principle as far as I wish, I hope to see the day when not an armed vessel shall come into our waters, except she come in hors du combat , unable to injure any of our citizens.
I have thrown out these observations to show that neither of the propositions meets my idea. But after the proposition now before the committee shall have been disposed of, I shall move that the 1st & 2d clauses of the non-intercourse act shall also be revived and contained. That course, I think, by excluding both belligerent armed vessels, would be maintaining our ground and not changing that which our government has taken in relation to England, nor will it be conceding an iota of our ground in relation to France.
Mr. DANA said that on this subject a general question had been frequently brought into debate. A position was advanced that to admit armed ships into our ports was the same in point of public law and on the general principles of neutrality as to admit an army within our territory. However that question may be in regard to public law (said Mr. Dana) there are reasons why the government of the United States should pause, should pause long before it adopts the principle of exclusion of all public armed ships. What, sir! A nation founded in a spirit of enterprize, which has extended its commerce to every quarter of the world, which has risen to a state of prosperity which makes it the second nation in the world as to its commercial marine, which owes its importance to the hospitality of the world—this nation is at once to shut the door of hospitality against all nations!
The proposition, I understand is, that it would be proper to exclude all foreign armed ships. Let it be recollected that our ships employed in the most enterprising commerce are armed, and have a force nearly equal to the force of public armed vessels. Do we never expect that cruisers will harass our commerce? And do we mean to abandon it, or that our vessels shall be suffered to perish for want of a port. When our commerce has been invaded in the Mediterranean, our public ships have been received with a hospitality too deeply felt by our navy and by our government to permit the adoption of such a principle as that hinted at.
Independently of this, if we ask the question generally of those who are acquainted with the point of fact in relation to public law and who are versed
in the writers on the subject, whether there is not a strongly marked distinction between an army and navy, they will answer you in the affirmative; and will tell you that an army of one nation cannot enter the territory of a friendly power, without being restricted as to its course, and the limits under which it moves. But, as respects public ships of war, it never was deemed any violation of territory for them to come into port without ceremony, although general usage excludes armies, unless previous permission be obtained. And the nature of the thing authorises this distinction. This I believe the gentleman will find to be the correct doctrine which is stated by some of the latest writers on public law, more particularly by those on maritime law. I shall acknowledge the right of every power, for its own security, to decide that it will not admit the armed vessels of any power in such numbers as to endanger its peace; or to regulate them when they come into port. But the principle assumed is not the same as announced by writers on public law and explained by the usage of the world. There is a difference between maritime and territorial force. I am not, however, for bringing the subject into discussion at the present moment; I do not conceive that it has a bearing on the question.
As respects the amendment moved by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sheffield)—I acknowledge that to me it does seem peculiarly contradictory in itself to say that the armed instruments of a government which wrongs us shall be received with open arms, and that the unoffending and inoffensive merchant vessels shall be excluded from our waters. I do not ask whether on this subject there is any contention with the British government, or whether the arrangements entered into bind us to one thing or the other. For myself I very much dislike the idea of being obliged to resist one belligerent power because another has ceased to wrong us. The broad principle on which we act should be different. It should be, that our rights we will maintain; and not that we will maintain them in consequence of the desire of any foreign power.
I am not pleased, sir, with any part of this system of non-intercourse. I think it peculiarly inconsistent to say that there are certain outrages continued, which are such as to induce us to stop all intercourse, and at the same moment to say that the merchant vessel which is the object of belligerent outrage shall be tamely surrendered up to spoil and destruction by armed vessels. For the course proposed I conceive to be this: When a palpable wrong is attempted to be inflicted on you, you permit the instruments of the outrage to partake of your hospitality. These vessels should certainly be the first objects of our displeasure. I therefore think it highly proper, when you exclude the commerce of a nation, also to exclude its armed ships. The armed ships of one of the belligerents seizes your merchant vessels, plunders them, and imprisons your seamen, and then comes into your waters. A respect to the peace and dignity of our own country ought to carry us so far as not to admit within our waters any vessel guilty of such an attack. It was one of the strongest arguments urged in favor of the prohibitory proclamation of the late President, that the excitement in the nation was so great that, as a measure of prudence, to preserve the peace of the nation, it was necessary for a time to exclude the whole British navy. The very fact of a nation's committing such outrages as to authorize all exclusion of intercourse, I consider a sufficient reason to refuse to it the rights of hospitality. I consider it much more compatible with the principle assumed at the last session of Congress, that the proposed amendment should take place. I do not know that the admission of French vessels rests upon any arrangement made at the last session. What was the report of the committee of foreign relations? What the import of all the votes passed by this House? The interdiction of commerce was put down as the consequence of the interdiction of armed vessels. Now it appears to me, that continuing the consequence and putting down the premises would be rather absurd. The report pledged us to the nation and to each other as to the integrity of our own character; it was a pledge on which the world were to rely as to the course which we
would pursue when our rights are violated. Though, sir, as respects a nation which declares that it will not submit, if it will not resist without a declaration in words, I very much question whether it will be bound by promises. By this bill, therefore, I contend that the principle of last session, however correct, is very decidedly contradicted, except some such amendment as that which is proposed be adopted.
Mr. RHEA (of Ten.) observed, that the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Jackson) by withdrawing the amendment by him offered, had given particular pleasure; there, then, was reason to have hoped, that the bill under consideration might have passed on without alteration or amendment. This hope is destroyed—another amendment is proposed—it involves two points for consideration:—first, whether it be necessary to make an explanatory declaration, that the public ships and vessels of G. Britain and France, are not interdicted from the waters, harbors and hospitality of the U. S. by the 3d section of the non-intercourse law? And whether it be right to discriminate, or, in other words, to admit the public vessels of one of these powers, to wit, G. Britain, and to keep interdicted the public vessels of the other power? If the diction or expression of the first section of the non-intercourse law is attended to, and also, that of the third section of that law, it will appear that the object of the first section is to interdict all armed ships and vessels belonging to G. Britain or to except France, as therein excepted, from the waters, harbors, and hospitality of the U. S. For that purpose the first section declares, "That from and after the passage of this act, the entrance of the harbors and waters of the U. S. & of the territories thereof, be, and the same is hereby interdicted to all public ships and vessels, belonging to G. Britain or France, excepting vessels only which may be forced in by distress or which are charged with dispatches or business from the government to which they belong, and also packets having no cargo nor merchandise on board;" and that the object of the third section is to interdict the entrance of the harbors and waters of the U. S. and territories thereof, to ships and vessels sailing under the flag of G. Britain or France, or owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject of either: and for that purpose the third section declares, "That from and after the twentieth day of May next, the entrance of the harbors and waters of the U. S. and the territories thereof, be, and the same is hereby interdicted to all ships or vessels sailing under the flag of G. Britain or France, or owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject of either; vessels hired, chartered or employed by the government of either country, for the sole purpose of carrying letters or dispatches, and also vessels forced in by distress or by the dangers of the sea, only excepted." In the first section of the law, the words, "public ships and vessels belonging to Great Britain or France" are used. In the third section the words "ships or vessels sailing under the flag of Great Britain or France, or owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject of either," are used. It is observable also, that the first section requires the interdiction, thereby provided for, to operate from and after the passage of the act, and the third section requires the interdiction thereby provided for to operate from after the twentieth day of May next, that is next after the passage of the act. The act was approved and became a law on the first day of March, in the year 1809—and therefore it may be concluded, that the interdiction provided for by the first section of the law operated on the second day of March next after the passage of the act, that is about eighty days previous to the day on which the interdiction provided for in the third section of the law was required to operate. The different periods determined by the law for the operation of the several interdictions, respectively provided for by the first and third sections, clearly prove, (even if there was no other reason,) that the interdiction provided for by the first section was designed to operate, (as the expression of the section clearly evinces) on the public; that is, the national armed ships and vessels belonging to G. Britain or France: and that the interdiction provided for by the third section, was de-
signed to operate on the unarmed private merchant ships and vessels belonging in whole or in part to citizens or subjects of G. Britain or France, and sailing under the flag of either G. Britain or France. The term "public ships and vessels belonging to G. Britain or France" used in the first section—and the term "ships or vessels sailing under the flag of G. Britain or France," are not synonymous—they cannot be construed to mean and intend the same description of ships and vessels, for this reason, (if there was no other,) that the law provides and limits distinct periods for commencement of the operation of the interdictions respectively provided for by the first and third sections: if then language is permitted to be the clothing or vehicle of distinct ideas, the first section of the law must be construed to operate against ships and vessels of one description or character—and the third section must be construed to operate against ships and vessels of another description or character.
Public ships or vessels are those which properly are denominated national or belonging to the sovereign. A public ship is national property, national territory, a part (if the expression will be permitted) of the national domain. A public ship is an armed floating fortress of the sovereign, completely equip, fortified, manned and directed to maintain and guard the rights of the sovereign owner—a public ship or vessel, (in propriety of nautical expression) carries and displays the proud ensign of sovereignty; it is said to carry the flag or ensign of sovereignty, and is not said to sail under the flag or ensign of sovereignty; the reason is, the public ship goes forth, in the majesty of its owner, to guard and protect the weak, unarmed, defenceless merchant ships and vessels sailing under the flag of the sovereign of the nation, of which its owner is a citizen or subject—the merchant ship or vessel is said to sail under a flag, pointing thereby to the nation of which its owner is a citizen or subject, and manifesting that it sails under the protection of that nation. If then the distinction, that a public ship or vessel carries the ensign or flag of sovereignty; and that a private or merchant ship or vessel sails under the flag of sovereignty, be correct, (and there is every reason to believe it is) it goes incontestibly to prove that the diction or expression of the first section of the non-intercourse law is proper and clearly defining an interdiction against armed ships and vessels; in other words, the public ships or vessels belonging to G. Britain or France exclusively. And that the diction or expression of the 3d sec. of the non-intercourse law is proper, and clearly defining an interdiction against private unarmed merchant ships and vessels sailing under the flag of G. Britain or France, or owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject of either country exclusively. From these considerations it may be concluded that there is no reason to adopt the proposed amendment on the ground of its being an explanatory declaration.
It may not be necessary to add to what has already been said respecting the other principle contained in the proposed amendment. On behalf of that discrimination in favor of G. Britain, it hath been urged, that the usages of nations, on the broad ground of morality, is to assist, consistently with their own interest, every nation. It would have been more satisfactory, if the gentleman had fully explained what he designed to be understood by the observation—Morality of nations! and you apply the observation to the old nations of Europe—What is it? If more particularly it is applied to that nation who first began and continued its unjust oppressions against the U. S. from the odious stamp act to the present time—What is the conclusion? The enquiry would lead to a recapitulation of all the injuries, outrages, oppressions, miseries and wars inflicted by G. Britain on the U. S. Many fine things have been said of morality; but how much soever it is to be deplored, it is a stubborn truth, that the morality of the old governments of Europe consisted more in theory than practice. To what principle of morality is the past or present conduct of any of the same nations towards the U. S. to be ascribed? Let the gentleman tell; he appears to know all about it. But it seems that a nation is to act on the broad ground of morality in assisting

every other nation, only so far, as is consistent with its own interest. With its own interest! unhappy adjunct, unfortunate addition. By this definition of national morality, benevolence, disinterested friendship, and every cardinal, social, manly, noble virtue is excluded from the morality of nations—consistent with its own interest. Great Britain then, whose apologist, Mr. R. observed, he would not say the gentleman had tried to be, extends the hand of friendship to the U. S. but it is only so far as may be consistent with her own interest. So then, a wonderful discovery is made—of what? Why of that only, which every gentleman in the House knows—only this, that G. Britain acts exclusively for her own interest; and this is the broad boasted ground of morality on which G. Britain always hath acted, and will, if able, continue to act on towards the U. S. And is this the strong, cogent, all-concluding, all concluding reason in virtue whereof the propriety of discriminating in favor of G. Britain is urged? A considerable quantity of time hath been consumed, in endeavoring carefully, sedulously, and closely to elucidate hypothetically the morality of the old nations of Europe. Away with such visionary theory; come to plain matters of fact; tell and state things and facts as they are, and argue from them as existing; that species of reasoning, which is bottomed on ifs and suppositions, will never do much honor to the political reasoner.
But it may be asked, does the definition alluded to mean and intend that, on the broad ground of morality, it would be proper that the United States do assist Great Britain and join in the war against France? And for that reason, to admit the public ships of Great Britain, and to exclude the public ships of France? Will that mode of proceeding be consistent with the interest of the U. States? If it be so, it hath yet to be proved, and it is not assumed that any gentleman of this committee thinks so. If it be otherwise, let the declaration be made, and then it will be known how to answer it.
Great Britain is bound in justice and honor to carry into complete effect the express and implied conditions in the late negotiation had at the city of Washington. It is urged that that power will recede from the late orders in council declaring a great part of the continent of Europe in a state of rigorous blockade. It is earnestly hoped that Great Britain will recede. So far as respected France and the dependencies of France, Great Britain certainly ought to have confided in the honor, justice and magnanimity of the United States, in this, that the United States would have continued the non-intercourse system as defined in the law, in full force, effect, and operation against France, until France will have rescinded her decrees violating the rights of the U. States. Great Britain hath not so confided in the United States, but hath assumed to herself, in this case, to act on the alluded to "broad ground of morality," consistent with her own interest." If Great Britain had acted on the true principle of morality, she would have waited until the result of Mr. Oakley's mission was known, and not have issued those blockade orders. The same late blockading orders do virtually take away the necessity of continuing the non-intercourse law against France, for this plain reason—the non-intercourse law interdicts all commercial intercourse with France. The late orders in council go to prevent all commercial intercourse between the United States and France. The blockading orders of Great Britain and the non-intercourse law of the United States act, as they relate to France and her dependencies, on the same subject. Both are not requisite, therefore; the late blockading orders of Great Britain have superseded and virtually taken away the force of the law of the United States interdicting commercial intercourse with France and its dependencies. It will not be denied, that Great Britain was well informed of the principles of the non-intercourse law, previous to the issuing of the same late blockading orders. It is desirable then that attention be given to these facts and to get clear of them, rather than be descending on hypothetical visions, which being compared with matters of fact, are like the sounds of a tinkling cymbal.
But it is urged on behalf of the amendment—"that the act of an individual cannot, if disavowed, bind a nation;" And "that a nation is not bound to surrender the individual who committed the disavowed act unless he be demanded." On what principle of moral justice are these assertions made? They are too of the left handed; crooked, vicious principles of that deceptive wicked policy, which hath never failed to destroy a nation. A nation may disavow the hostile act, but it is bound in justice to punish the individual who, in violation of the or-
ders and laws of his own government and in violation of the laws of public reason, perpetrated the hostile act; or to surrender him to the injured nation, although no demand of him be made. Let then all such unjust, deceptive, illusory assertions be omitted in reasoning and argument. Let Great Britain have the labor of justifying her own conduct. The sovereign people of the United States require the honest execution of the abilities of their representatives on their own side of the question, not only as the question relates to Great Britain, but to France also. It is incumbent on every nation to take care for itself. The nations of the old world are taking care for themselves, and it is presumed the United States will proceed in the adoption of measures which will eventually secure their peace, happiness and prosperity.
Monday, June 26.
The committee of the whole were discharged from the further consideration of the bill to revive and amend the non-intercourse act, &c.
The House then took it up. Mr. Sheffey observed that when the bill had been before the committee he had the honor to move an amendment which he now renewed as follows: "And provided also, that nothing therein contained shall be construed to prevent any public vessel from entering the waters and harbors of the U. S. belonging to any nation with whom commercial intercourse shall be permitted."
Mr. J. G. Jackson moved to amend the amendment by adding to the end of it the following: "Whenever a full and satisfactory adjustment of our differences shall have been made with such nation."
Mr. Dana said the amendment moved to the amendment of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sheffey) went to give a construction to the bill which would operate as a complete exclusion of the vessels of both powers until a satisfactory adjustment of all existing differences shall have taken place. What, said Mr. Dana, is the situation in which we are now placed? On what principle is it that British ships were first excluded and on which their exclusion was confirmed by the non-intercourse law? They were originally excluded by the proclamation of the President of the U. States in consequence of the attack on the Chesapeake. The President of the U. States now in office has declared his acceptance of the proffered terms of satisfaction for that outrage. And, after that, it is proposed that we shall continue the measure of hostility, when the cause alone which led to it is completely done away? I should suppose that in the very act of adjustment which took place between the British minister & the American Sec. it is implied that we should do nothing further on this subject. The President of the United States has accepted the satisfaction offered; he has declared those terms when performed to be satisfactory. And are gentlemen considering the restoration of the seamen taken from the Chesapeake as a reason why we should continue the interdiction? If we examine this subject fairly, the great principle of reparation was a disavowal of the claim to search our armed vessels, and a homage to our rights. That matter must be deemed to be settled, if the President of the United States had authority to settle it. If the President had not the power to settle it, this furnishes strong evidence that the vote of approbation of his conduct was a proper proposition.
As to the interdiction by the non-intercourse act, I apprehend that was founded on the violation of our neutral rights by the belligerent powers, the President of the United States being authorised to renew trade whenever the edicts violating our lawful commerce should be revoked. Whether or not the President has done right in accepting the assurance instead of the fact, gentlemen have considered it unnecessary for them to express any opinion upon it. If there be no edict affecting our lawful commerce in force by one belligerent, the interdiction is at an end in point of fact in relation to that one. The question of the affair of the Chesapeake is settled, if the President had power to settle it; and as to the other cause of interdiction the President has declared that the British orders will have been revoked on the 10th of June. Has the President acted correctly or not? If he has acted correctly in taking the assurance for the fact, the very principle of the non-intercourse is at an end as respects one of the belligerents, and there can be no ground for the exclusion of British armed vessels.
Mr. Taylor said he thought the gentleman from Connecticut used the word hostility in relation to this measure of including British armed vessels from the United States. Now, I believe, sir, (said Mr. T.) that if we
go to the opinions entertained, not by the President of the United States, but entertained and expressed in the very foundation of the arrangement which was made, it will be found that the hostility intended to be produced by the President's proclamation ceased at the moment when we passed the non-intercourse act in which we excluded the vessels of both the belligerents. The hostility was in the admission of the armed vessels of one and excluding those of the other. It ceased by the non-intercourse law, and so satisfactory was this law of the last session, that it was the very foundation on which the overture was made which ended so much to the satisfaction of this nation. So that, in fact, when we perpetuate the order of things produced by that act, we do not perpetuate the state of things produced by the interdictional proclamation of the late President. It was matter of satisfaction to the British government as expressed by their minister here, that the quality of hostility in the exclusion of her vessels was taken away by the non-intercourse law. Have we promised, in the negotiation which has taken place, that we will commit an act of hostility against France for the boon which we have received from the hand of Great Britain? No, sir.
—And yet, if we take the definition of Mr. Canning, as to excluding the vessels of one belligerent and receiving those of the other, according to the mode proposed by the amendment, without the sentence moved to be added to it, it will in fact be agreeing to go to war with France. According to the opinion of Britain, promulgated not only to this government but to the world, according to the demonstration made by the British government, you will undertake a measure of active hostility against France—for what? For any great boon that this government has received from the hands of Great Britain? No, sir. If all the promises were fulfilled to their full extent, we should then receive but justice at her hands. It was acknowledged too in the discussion which took place, that any nation, particularly a neutral nation, has a right to exclude the armed vessels of both belligerents; but that, on the contrary, the state now proposed to be produced, the exclusion of one and admission of the other, is an act of hostility to the party excluded. As I would not be compelled by the utmost ill usage by either belligerent to take part with the other against that one, neither will I take a consent or refusal from one or the other to do us justice as a motive for alliance or a war which shall compromise our neutrality. I now speak of both, for both have used us as ill as was in their power. As kicks and cuffs have not compelled us to take part with them, neither shall caresses or fawning, for we will mete out an equal measure of justice to both. I consider the state of things produced by the non-intercourse as totally distinct from that produced by the proclamation of our late illustrious President.
But it is a little extraordinary that we are called upon to volunteer, in this business, in what, according to the doctrine of the British diplomats, is war against France, without any requisition made by the British minister here, or any hint given that this step is necessary or proper. I have seen none such, and therefore conclude that there has been none. And, in point of candor, if the treaty-making power does suppose that it will be of advantage that this step should be taken, it would be right that we should hear from him. As we have not heard from the President on this subject, it is a fair conclusion that he does not suppose it will be of advantage but of disadvantage to him.
Another thing, sir. The British minister's not applying in form might thus be construed. We know that he (Mr. Erskine) is an honorable gentleman, one who will act with the utmost candor towards this government. Now as some nations are in the habit of using Grotius, Puffendorff and all the other writers on public law as engines of diplomacy, in fact, of using vellum, parchment, paper and books for the purpose of producing friendly arrangements with those governments with whom they come in contact, so other nations will use a different mode. And if the British minister recollects the course of conduct pursued by one great nation in their manner of managing diplomacy, it would be very candid in him not to ask you to produce such a state of things as his government might take advantage of. I believe, if he knew that such was the mode in which the pending negotiation was to be carried into effect, that he would not ask it. I am sure he would not.
I think it is the best way to continue things precisely in the state in which they were when the arrangement was made; and that more cannot be asked, either as respects the justice due to G. Britain or fair play to the officer managing the negotiation.
Mr. Fisk.—It was my intention not to have troubled the House with any remarks on the bill now under consideration. I could readily have reconciled it to my feelings to have given a silent vote in favor of the bill, had not so many and various objections been made against it. But as it seems to be objectionable and susceptible of so many amendments in the opinion of so many gentlemen, the House will indulge me, while I offer the reasons which will govern my vote.
This bill, for which we were convened, has, during the time we have been here, received as yet but a small portion of our attention; and it is so important that upon its passage and the principles it shall embrace may depend the destinies of our country. It deserves our immediate and most serious attention. I hope it may be coolly and dispassionately examined, and treated according to its real importance. Its principles have been carefully and scrupulously investigated by the committee who reported it, or a bill similar in its provisions, of which committee I had the honor to be a member.
The language is plain—public ships are not interdicted. There is but one question to be decided in disposing of this bill, and that is respecting public ships—for I believe all will agree to renew the non-intercourse act as respects France. The question is, what regulation shall we make respecting public ships, and one of three courses is to be pursued? Shall we exclude both, admit both or discriminate?
There are many who would be willing to exclude the armed ships of every foreign power from our harbors and waters. And considering what we have suffered by admitting them, it may be well questioned whether it would not be the best policy of this nation to interdict them by a permanent law; yet many gentlemen object to this, as being inexpedient at this period. It is said, and it is the principal argument urged against it, that it might embarrass our impending negotiations with Great Britain to interdict her public ships by this act. As I feel as much disposed for an amicable adjustment of our differences with that nation as any member of this House, and would be as unwilling to embarrass the negotiation, I would not insist on this interdiction.
It is also said that England has made reparation, or agreed to make reparation for the aggression which caused the interdiction of her public ships—and that as the cause no longer exists the interdiction should cease. Be it so—and may we never have fresh cause to renew it!
But, say gentlemen, we must not now recede from the ground we have taken with respect to France, we must discriminate. Let us for a moment view the ground we have taken—not only as relates to France, but England also.
We are not at war with either of the belligerents. Our ministers at their respective courts are endeavoring to negotiate, and by negotiation to obtain redress for the injuries of which we complain—and whatever precautionary measures we might adopt, would not be deemed a violation of our neutral character so long as those measures were equally applicable to both the belligerents. We could not be deemed to have taken part with either to the prejudice of the other while no other was benefited by our measures. While British public ships were interdicted, and our embargo existed, as offer was made to both the belligerents to resume our trade—the same equal terms were tendered to both. The nation refusing is left without a cause of complaint against us, for resuming our trade with the nation accepting the offer.
Before either nation does accept, America changes her position. The embargo is abandoned and a general interdiction of the public ships of England and France, and a non-intercourse with these nations and their dependencies is substituted. By this non-intercourse act, the particular interdiction is merged in a general regulation. This was to exist until the end of the next session of Congress only. This was virtually saying, that the Proclamation interdicting British public vessels from our waters for a particular aggression shall be revoked; and a general municipal regulation, over which the President shall have no control, shall be substituted in its stead. It was then, in order to preserve our neutral character, necessary that this rule should embrace both the belligerents. It may be said, and has indeed been frequently said, that the reason of extending this restriction to France, was her having burnt our vessels and imprisoned our seamen. But never, at least in the history of diplomacy, have cause and effect been more distant and unconnected. France on the high seas burns our vessels, and in her own territories imprisons our
seamen. We, at the distance of a thousand miles, interdict our public ships from her public ships, which do not or dare not come within 500 leagues of the line of our interdicted territory, and this is to retaliate for the aggression. Can this interdiction be defended on this ground? It cannot. There must have existed some other reason. It was to preserve our relations with the belligerents in that state, that should be consistent with our professions of neutrality. Had the interdiction been confined to British vessels, by this law, what would G. Britain have said at this discrimination? In vain might we have told her that we meant to preserve our neutral character, and not take a part with her enemies in the war against her. Our acts would have been directly opposed to our professions. With this discriminating permanent municipal law, could we expect G. Britain to treat with us as a neutral? If we did, we should be disappointed. If then it be inexpedient to make this discrimination against G. Britain, how is it less so, when directed against France? We are to admit British and exclude the French. And are we to endeavor to negotiate as neutrals with France, upon this ground, with any reasonable prospect of success? It is desirable that the commercial intercourse between this country & France should be restored. Peace and free trade is the interest and the object of America. While we throw wide open the door of negotiation to England, why should we shut it against France? While we facilitate negotiations with the British, why should we embarrass and prevent the same with the French? I wish to leave the Executive and treaty-making powers of our government free and unshackled, to enter on negotiation with both these governments, under every advantage of success which we can give. On what ground can this discrimination be defended? You adopt this measure. Our minister at Paris is requested to explain it. Is there any advocate for this discrimination in this House, who can conceive the grounds upon which our minister or our government are to justify this measure with our relations of neutrality? It cannot be defended. I am not for yielding to either nation, but let our conduct be consistent, impartial and defensible. If then, we are to be involved in war with either, the resources of the country, and the hearts of our citizens will support the government, and we need not be afraid of the world. But those men, or that administration that will upon a mere useless punctilious point of etiquette commit the peace and happiness of this country to the ravages of war, will meet the indignation and feel the vengeance of the intelligent citizens of the country. This temerity would meet its merited punishment. The people of America can see and will judge for themselves—they can readily discern the difference between shadow and substance—they are neither to be deceived or trifled with, especially on subjects of such immense moment to their liberties and happiness.
Let me ask gentlemen what possible benefit is to result to this country from this discriminating regulation—is it to keep the scene of naval action at a distance from our territories? During the late wars no naval engagement has taken place between these powers within our waters, unless it was the combat between the Ambuscade and Boston in 1794, off N. York—none is to be apprehended. As well might we apprehend that the continental powers would make Louisiana the theatre of action. It cannot be required to secure us from a danger so remote as renders it a subject of neither fear nor probability. Is it to prevent trespasses and aggressions? Let those who have seen the public ships of France on our coast during the late revolutions, say whether danger is really to be apprehended from this quarter, especially when we reflect on the state of her naval force. For what purpose is it then to be adopted? No good can, but much evil may result from it. Will any one say that our relations with England require it? None acquainted with the views that government has of the subject can say so. America complains of the restrictions of her trade, by the orders and decrees of the belligerents.—France and England retaliate upon each other this system of restriction, and both call on America to resist—but how? By interdicting our waters to their public ships? No truly. To restrain this unwarrantable system of warfare, by those means which we command, and which may operate upon the interests of the aggressor—what are these? Interdicting their public vessels from our waters? No. How would this affect France? She has no occasion for our hospitality. It never could be considered an object with her, that we should deny to her the use of that which was neither asked for nor wanted by her. This measure could never be

deemed either by England or France a measure of resistance to their blockading decrees. It would and must be absurd and ridiculous if contended for in this point of view. How has resistance been wished? By restrictions on our trade. In this way, and in this only can we affect the interest of the aggressor. A non-intercourse is the only effectual means in the power of America to resist these unjustifiable orders, unless we take an active part in the war, which is neither required nor to be expected, at least by either of the belligerents.
Our trade is the engine by which we are to raise these orders. But we shall recede without cause from the ground we have taken, it is urged. Why have we receded from resisting British orders? We have a promise. Have we not the same from France? The Milan decree was founded on the orders of the 10th of November. When these are repealed, the basis of this decree is gone. Is nothing due to this declaration of the French government? shall we not wait a moment to see what course will be now pursued by the French government after the relaxation by the British? What is the benefit which in every possible case is to result to us from this discriminating restriction? None. Much evil may; it may break up our negotiations with France, and in all probability will, for it can neither be explained or justified by any national expediency or diplomatic ingenuity. Perhaps a negotiation is now in train with the French government, and a messenger may be on his way with despatches to this country.
The French minister here finds us discriminating between the British & his own government, and to the expense, if you please, of the latter. Would he feel himself authorised to proceed without further and additional instructions? Surely not.
If gentlemen wish for peace upon honorable terms; if they will not for a puerile sacrifice our neutral character, I hope they will unite in favor of this bill.
The advocates of this bill may be charged with being under French influence. But my own views and feelings justify me against this imputation. My God, who knows my heart, knows that instead of cherishing, I deplore, and as sincerely as any one deprecate, foreign predilections.
The Senate, the treaty making power, have passed this unanimously, and after much deliberation; this consideration has great weight with me. For the subject of this bill is under the control of the treaty making power. A subject of this nature and moment would never have passed the other branch of the legislature without deep and mature reflection. Having thus passed, and unanimously, can we expect they will agree to the proposed amendment, which changes the very nature and principles of the bill; and if they should agree to it, that the President, who, I repeat cannot justify it in his diplomatic instructions, would sanction the law.
If this bill should not pass the three branches, and we thus abandon the ground we had taken; can we expect our negotiations with England will progress to a favorable termination? We are as a nation pledged to continue the non-intercourse with that nation which continues her orders; but not so with the interdiction of public vessels—one is a municipal regulation, the other a public law.
To the amendment, I am decidedly opposed. I hope we may pass the bill as it came from the Senate. I am prepared to vote for it, and I have taken the liberty of stating some of the reasons which have operated on my mind. I have gone into them more at length than I intended. The House will consider the principles of the bill very important, and in this consideration may perhaps find an apology for the time I have claimed their indulgence.
(To be continued.)
PROPOSALS
For engraving a representation in honor of THOMAS JEFFERSON, ESQ. Late President of the U. States.
The piece proposed to be engraved, is a representation of THOMAS JEFFERSON under the conduct of MINERVA, in which FAME, with her trumpet, announces to the world his retirement from office.
The most correct judges pronounce it to be an elegant production, and a striking likeness of Mr. Jefferson himself. It was conceived and executed by Mr. Thomas Cimbreda, an artist of taste and reputation. It is confidently expected that no circumstances of political feeling will withhold public patronage from works of Genius.
CONDITIONS.
The dimensions of this engraving will be 8 by 6 inches—Price 1 dollar to subscribers, and 2 dollars to such as do not subscribe. Any person who shall procure 10 subscribers shall be entitled to 1 copy.
* * Subscriptions received by the publisher, John Hopkins, Philadelphia—Also by all the Booksellers.
July 12—
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 12.
It has been justly remarked that every season brings with it an obligation to the performance of particular duties. The remark holds equally true of communities and individuals. The period of war or revolution calls for ardor of feeling and energy of conduct; while that of tranquil and peaceable times requires sedateness and an industrious pursuit of the ordinary avocations of life. The happy versatility of the human character admits of an easy transition from one of these extremes to the other; and, at least for a time, the animation and exertion of war seem to afford as much delight as the calm of peace. There is, consequently, but little difficulty in creating or maintaining in a nation a temper accommodated to either of these situations.
The great difficulty is to graduate the national pulse to an intermediate state of things, which, neither demanding the noise or exertion of war, nor satisfied with the security of peace, requires a state of mind the most difficult of acquisition; a state of mind, under the dominion of which the arts of peace shall be actively cultivated with a scrupulous vigilance against the dangers that may beset them; a state of mind, which though full of hope is not devoid of fear, and which shall, at the same time, dictate a pursuit of ordinary avocation, without relapsing into a security which may prove fatal.
Such, it may be confidently assumed, is our present situation. The sun has pierced the dark clouds which lately hung over us; but whether it will continue to enlighten us with a steady ray, or whether new clouds will arise to obscure our future prospects, may be considered as very uncertain.
The promises of Great Britain are fair. They are such as ought to induce us to hope for every thing. But while we entertain this best feeling of an honest heart, let us shield ourselves with a spirit that is prepared for events, whatever they may be. The fact is, that while the world continues in its present troubled state, every day may be expected to bring with it a new vicissitude. Ardently as we may strive to withdraw ourselves from its collisions, we are a part of the great family of mankind, and cannot, by any prudence on our part, avoid participating more or less in the evils that beset it.
Besides, it will be almost a miracle to remain for any length of time on an equally good footing with France and England. The manifestation of the good will of one is almost of itself sufficient to produce the enmity of the other; and the actual or probable hostility of either should teach us the duty of maintaining an imposing attitude.
It is, probably, to these considerations that we are to ascribe the measures of the late session of Congress; or rather their abstinence from the adoption of measures, which, however desirable in periods of profound peace, might, and, it is likely, would have had a pernicious effect on our foreign relations. While that body have honorably passed the necessary acts to carry the pacific arrangements of the President into effect, they have refused to make any relaxation in their measures of defence against eventual danger. They have wisely considered the expenditure of a few millions as an atom compared with the maintenance of peace, the security of our rights, and the preservation of our honor. They have, therefore, neither reduced the army or the navy, or, indeed, relaxed a single defensive measure adopted the last winter. On the contrary, they have added to those measures, by the liberal appropriation of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars for fortifying our ports and harbors.
It is almost a work of supererogation to say a word in justification of a policy, the correctness of which has been scarcely questioned in or out of Congress. But, to test its correctness, two enquiries may be addressed to the mind of every intelligent reader, whose solution must be conclusive.
However probable, is it certain that we shall obtain from G. Britain an observance of our maritime rights?
If the event should be otherwise, and the strong arm of her power should be imposed upon us, who would not condemn the infatuated credulity and wretched parsimony, that, regardless of every admonition of experience, took promises for acts, and to save a little money jeopardised the whole wealth of the nation?
Such has been the course pursued by the government, a course which every good man will rejoice to see crowned with the general approbation of the nation. The government has done its duty. Let the people do theirs. Let them support the attitude
it has taken. Let them assume and maintain, what may be justly denominated, an armed neutrality. Let them do justice to the amicable sentiments of the British government. Let them meet them with correspondent feelings. Let them convince the world, that they sincerely wish to be on a footing of good will with all nations. Having demonstrated this, they will have the inestimable satisfaction of having discharged every duty which can be required of them by God or man. They will feel the proud consciousness of virtue. They will have secured, by those happy means, their rights and peace; or, they will be prepared, like a band of brothers, in case of failure, to embark the collective energies of the whole nation in defence of its rights. The justice of mankind will be on their side, whose best wishes, perhaps best efforts will attend them.
In manifesting this amicable feeling, two evils ought to be guarded against. In our exultation at an accommodation with G. Britain, we should be so guarded as to avoid inspiring her with the opinion that, to gain it, we are ready to sacrifice any of our essential rights, or inducing France to consider our disposition to England as arising from hostility to her. As it is our interest, so it ought to be our constant effort to manifest a sincere desire to be on good terms with both nations, for the jealousy entertained by each of whom in regard to whatever effects the other we ought to make a due allowance. This will go far towards impressing both with the conviction that our sentiments are rigidly impartial, and that if the course we pursue towards one be different from that pursued towards the other, it arises solely from their different conduct towards us; and, that so soon as their conduct towards us shall become the same, our measures towards them will be characterised by a like similitude. In our joy, therefore, let there be a chastened sobriety. It will not be the less sincere, because manifested in terms of gravity and forbearance. For these are the traits of an enlightened judgment, and have, moreover, a manliness and stability about them in vain sought for in the ravings of immoderate passion. Something too is certainly due towards our self-respect. Immoderate and extravagant rejoicings at the good will of a foreign nation may derogate from our character and produce the belief that we are so dependent upon it for our happiness, that we will, if pushed, make unworthy sacrifices to gain it, thus depriving our government, in the management of our exterior relations, of the important auxiliary which it might otherwise derive from the unyielding patriotism of the people, on whose disposition in a republican government every thing must eventually depend.
We have received a manuscript copy of an oration pronounced by John Nicholas, of the state of New-York, on the 10th of June, which, notwithstanding its great length, we shall take an early occasion to lay before our readers. It is a most able vindication of the measures of the late administration in regard to our foreign relations, and will be perused with great interest, notwithstanding the extensive and multifarious discussion those measures have already excited. In bestowing this merited eulogium, we must not be understood as expressing an unqualified approbation of its contents, as it is characterised by aised by a few features, which, in our opinion, it would have been better to have suppressed.
By an accidental explosion of two ammunition chests in Fort Constitution, Portsmouth, N. H. on the 4th of July last, several citizen were instantly killed and many more shockingly wounded.
From the Bee.
COMMUNICATION.
On Monday the 5th instant, the term of the court of common pleas for the county of Columbia commenced, when the charge to the grand jury was delivered by his honor Wm. P. Van Ness, a charge which commanded the unanimous admiration and respect of the bar and court, and which, in the opinion of all the professional gentlemen present, incomparably surpassed anything of the kind which had ever before been delivered within the walls of that house. There is an extent of information about this gentleman, which, when added to the decision of his conduct, the elegance of his style, and the solidity of his judgment, calculates him for becoming pre-eminently useful to his country, and entitles him to the first rank in society.
A Member of the Bar.
Office of the New York Gazette, Sunday, 9th July, 1809. By the ship Caroline, in 39 days from Cadiz, we have received Seville
Gazettes to the 28th of May—and by the ship Paragon, Hague, Lisbon papers to the 5th of June. From these papers the editors of the New-York Gazette have made a translation of several important articles.
By the Caroline, we learn, verbally, that the French army had retreated from Seville, and it was supposed they were on their return to France.
We have received a letter from our correspondent, dated Lisbon, June 5, enclosing a paper of that city, of the 4th, stating the arrival of a British brig in 15 days from Malta, with the official news of the declaration of war on the part of Russia against France. Our correspondent also notices, in a triumphant strain, the brilliant success of the Austrians on the Tyrol, and the surrender of the French army in Portugal to the British and Portuguese troops. Soult, with a few of his troops, had, it is said, made their escape. This, with the taking of Oporto and St. Andero, occasioned the greatest rejoicings at Cadiz.
Captain Johansen says he had a Spanish paper containing the Russian official declaration of war against France, which, through pressing solicitation, he gave to an officer of a British cruiser, who boarded his ship. He speaks in the most positive strain on this subject; and his assertion is confirmed by captain Bowie, who came passenger in the Caroline.
Captain Hague, of the ship Paragon, sailed from Lisbon on the 17th of June; he informs us, that the news of the surrender of Oporto to the English, together with the 25,000 French troops, reached Lisbon on the 1st of June.—That the English merchants, &c. who had left Oporto, previous to the French taking possession of it, were returning. Lisbon was illuminated two nights in consequence of this glorious news.
It was reported that the Austrians had obtained a complete victory over the French, the latter having lost 25,000 men, including the killed, wounded and prisoners.
A considerable force of cavalry arrived at Lisbon from England on the 2d of June, destined for the interior of Portugal; and it was supposed that they would proceed to Spain. The British and Spaniards were making use of exertions to clear the country of French, and there was no doubt of success. They calculated that Bonaparte had enough to do on the continent.
It was reported at Lisbon, that Russia had declared war against France.
It appears from our papers, that an action was fought on the 16th of April on the Tyrol, between the Austrian and French armies; the advanced guard of the former of 35,000 men was twice repulsed by the latter, being 50,000 strong, under the command of Prince Eugene Beauharnois, when the archduke John came up with a body of reserve of 20,000 men, and entirely defeated the French army, with the loss of 20,000 men in killed, wounded and prisoners, chiefly the former, with the whole of his artillery and baggage. Prince Eugene was wounded.
Extraordinary Gazette of the government.
Seville, 27th May, 1809.
By official letters received from Trieste, dated 20th of April, the Supreme Central Junta have advice of the archduke John having beat the French army of 50,000, under the command of the vice king of Italy, Beauharnoise, at Salle, Porsia Cornigliano.
They have also received officially through the same channels, advice of Russia having declared in favor of Austria against France.
Richmond, July 4.
Last Tuesday the first piece of Artillery—a six pounder—was cast at the Virginia Manufactory of Arms. It will be used to announce the Anniversary of American Independence.
The machine for the making of cannon has been prepared and put up, under the inspection of Mr. Foxall, of George-town.—It is said to be excellent and ingenious.—Mr. F. is to receive 5,000 dollars from the state for his services.
WASHINGTON THEATRE.
On Thursday Evening, July 13, 1809, Will be presented a celebrated play, in Five Acts, Call'd
ABALLINO,
OR,
THE GREAT BANDIT.
To which will be added, A Comic piece in one Act, called SYLVESTER DAGGERWOOD:
OR,
THE MAD DUNSTABLE ACTOR. Price One Dollar—Pitt Three Quarters of a Dollar.
Tickets for Children at 50 cents. * * Tickets to be had at the Office of Dinmore and Cooper, Eleventh-street, near Pennsylvania Avenue.
Doors will open at Six—Certain rise Quarter before Seven o'Clock.
CITY AUCTIONEERS.
THE subscribers beg leave to inform their friends and the public, that having given the security required by law, they obtained a license to sell goods, wares and merchandise at vendue in this city. To accommodate those who may be pleased to employ them, they have built a commodious house adjoining the Store of the Purser of the Navy and opposite to Wm. Proul's, and from their close attention to business, they flatter themselves that they will give general satisfaction.
NICHOLAS L. QUEEN, HENRY M. QUEEN.
May 29—tf
N. B. At their Auction Room, will be Sold a variety of Household Furniture, Dry Goods, Sugar in Boxes and a quantity of Beef, Shad and Herrings in Barrels, &c. &c. N. L. & H. M. Q. Aucts.
July 12—
TUESDAY DINNER.
ON WEDNESDAY the 19th inst. at Three o'clock precisely, a fine GREEN TUR- TLE, weight 184 pounds, will be served up at A. Lindo's tavern (Sebastian Spring.) Those gentlemen desirous to partake will find subscription papers at Messrs. Stelle's, Long's, Lindsay's and Rhodes' hotels city of Washington.—Dinner & a pint of wine 25 cts.
July 10—3t
TO BE LET
And entered on the 27th of this month, The HOUSE in F street in the occupation of J. M. Baker. Likewise to be LET and entered on the 15th of September, the HOUSE on the Pennsylvania avenue, now occupied by Wm. Cooper. For particulars enquire of
WM. COCKING, 19th street west.
July 12—wif
100 DOLLARS REWARD.
RANAWAY on the 6th inst. from the subscriber, living near Clarkburg, (in which there is a post office) Montgomery county, Maryland, a negro man named
SAM,
About 30 years of age, about 5 feet 6 or 7 inches high, has lost the sight of his left eye, which is very perceptible, is bow-legged and has some impediment in his speech; had on when he went away an iron collar. His dress, country tow linen shirt and trousers, round about full cloth jacket, and some other clothing. It is likely he will get his collar off, change his name and endeavor to pass for a free man. Whoever secures the said negro, so that I get him again, shall have, if taken 10 miles from home, 10 dollars, if 20 miles, 20 dollars, if 30 miles, 30 dollars, and so in proportion to the above reward, including what the law allows, paid by
WALTER WATERS.
July 12—3t&w3t.
PROPOSALS,
For engraving a representation of America, figured under the form of a Goddess extending the hand of relief to suffering humanity.
IN this piece, two unfortunate strangers, with a young babe, after having escaped from oppression and death in their native country, and more immediately from the watery element, appear in distress on our shores. The wife, seated on a rock, with the almost expiring infant in her lap, exhibits an image of grief and despair.—The husband, with countenance irresistibly pathetic and eloquent, implores the blessings of God, at the same time seeming to regard rather his tender companion and infant offspring than his own sufferings. At this juncture the GODDESS AMERICA, crowned with beauties and with glories, driven in a chariot by the GODDESS OF LIBERTY, the horn of plenty pouring out its fruits, is introduced upon the scene.—She is arrested in her course by the unhappy objects on her shores. Whilst her seeds are held by one of the aboriginal inhabitants, she appears descending from her chariot to their relief, in an attitude of infinite dignity, her beautiful face a picture of benignity and of pity. It is this point in the history that our author seizes upon, and every circumstance of perspective, drapery, and costume in general, are adapted to it. A description of this kind can however convey a faint idea of such a piece; for as the parts which compose it, must be necessarily successive to each other in their operation on the mind, it cannot make that full and entire impression produced by a simultaneous view of all the parts of the picture itself. This marches directly to the heart, which recognises, by a single glance of the eye, its elegant and touching pathos.
This representation serves to illustrate the agreeable truth, that while through the greater part of the Globe, the Pillars of the Temples of Liberty have been torn from their bases, in this favored land they stand in Corinthian elegance and pristine glory—that while the voice of humanity is almost drowned by the din of war, its cries are still heard in this happy clime. From the great progress of taste and refinement, it is not doubted that the American public will give that fostering encouragement to productions of this nature, without which Genius must languish in inaction and obscurity. The polite nations of the world have boasted of their celebrated galleries and collections of the works of fine art, and it is extremely probable that the frequent contemplation of their statues and paintings tended to keep alive the sentiments, ideas and objects they were made to represent. It is moreover stated that the Italians were never so incited to resistance, nor so thoroughly sensible that their political privileges were gone, as when the French Emperor violated their galleries.
The author of the piece is Mr. Thomas Cimbreda, a young gentleman of classic education and correct taste. In smaller trials of his art, he has already attracted the respectful notice of the enlightened citizens of Baltimore, and it is expected that a publication of the proposed engraving, will afford him that remuneration for his labor, in the gratitude and consideration of society, which he justly merits.
CONDITIONS.
The above mentioned piece will occupy a space of 24 by 18 inches.
The price, which is payable on delivery, will be three dollars to subscribers, and five dollars to such as do not subscribe.
Every person who shall obtain ten subscribers will be entitled to one copy.
Subscriptions received by the publisher John Hopkins, Philadelphia.
Also, by all the Booksellers.

EIGHTY DOLLARS REWARD. RUNAWAY from the subscriber on the 5th inst a mulatto lad—JIM—who is about seventeen years of age, has straight black hair, lately cut, and black eyes. He had on when he absconded from me, a short blue kersey jacket, and blue pantaloons patched with white, a large pair of laced shoes, an old hat, osnaburg shirt, with an old handkerchief round his neck—he has a father living in the city of Washington, near the navy yard, by the name of George, or George Bell, who served his time with Mr. John Addison, Jun. and a mother by the name of Sophy, who I sold to her husband a few years past, and expect he will make to them or probably to Baltimore as he has some friends and relations there also. I will give forty dollars for securing said lad in jail so that I get him again, or the above reward if taken out of the district of Columbia or state of Maryland. RACHEL PRATT, Prince George's County, June 18th, 1809. June 19—3w.
SPRING GOODS BAKER & RIGGS—SIGN OF THE PLOUGH, Has received by the late arrivals an extensive assortment of DRY GOODS, Which they will sell at reduced prices for cash, or to punctilious customers at short dates. Among their stock are— 550 Pieces Calicoes, Cambrie Muslins, Gingham, Dimities, Chintzes & Shirting Muslins. 500 Pieces of coarse and fine India Muslins. 2500 Yds. Bright Ingrane and Venetian Carpeting. 600 Yds. Indian, French and India Silks. Notions, Ceded, Mulmul and Leno Muslins. Fancy Robes, Long Shawls, Spencers and Veils. Silk and Cotton Hosiery, Sleeves and Gloves. Cloths, Fancy Waist coating, and fine Hats. Elegant Silk Shawls, Linen Cambrics and Laces. 10 Cases Furred and Wool Hats—Cheap. Furniture Calicoes, Dimities and Checks. Furniture Fringe, Lace, Tassels and Hatters Trimmings. Bed Tickings, Sheetings, Table Cloths and Diapers. White Janes, Country Linen and Ozanburghs, &c. —ALSO— Many other articles not mentioned—A liberal deduction will be made to large buyers and those that buy to sell again. Also—Just received from the manufactory of Rhode Island, 1200 yards of American made BED TICKING, Cheaper and superior in quality to the imported. June 7—copy.
GEORGE W. RIGGS, Has just received and for Sale, Gold and silver velvet lace. do. do. do. cords, &c. &c. Plated and gilt lace. Gold and silver epaulets. Gold watches, plain and repeating. Silver do. warranted. Jewelry of the newest fashion. A considerable choice of silver and plated ware, With a variety of fancy goods too tedious to mention. —ALSO— 2800 RACCOON SKINS, Of the best quality, assorted to suit the buyers. Georgetown, June 21—w8t.
VALUABLE FARM AND LOTS FOR SALE. WILL be sold at public sale, on the first Monday in October next, if not previously disposed of, that valuable farm in Prince George's County, Maryland, known by the name of ST. OSYTH.
ST. OSYTH contains by estimation seven hundred and fifty acres of Land, between seventy and eighty acres of which are meadow, now fit for the scythe, and capable of being made to produce an hundred tons of hay at a crop—about two hundred and fifty or three hundred are in wood and timber, and the residue arable. No place perhaps in America, can be better watered or more healthy. The improvements consist of a dwelling house, two stories high, forty-two feet long by thirty-six wide, with a passage through the middle, three rooms below and four above, with a garret the whole size of the house, a kitchen and laundry under the same roof, two stories high, with two large rooms above for servants, a meat house, wash house, corn house and granary, a large tobacco house which may very easily be converted into a barn, a productive garden and pigeon house, and a young thriving orchard of excellent fruit, and of great variety from Prince's nursery on Long Island. The inclosures are new and in good order. Upon the same property and within a quarter of a mile is a small dwelling house with three rooms below and two above stairs, a kitchen, meat house and barn. This place at a small expense may be easily fitted up and made a most comfortable house for a small family. St. Osyth lies within four miles of the city of Washington, and about the same distance from the nearest ferry to Alexandria. If sold at private sale the lowest price for this valuable property is ten pounds an acre. A further description of the property is deemed unnecessary as those inclined to purchase will doubtless come and see it. The terms of sale may be known on applying to the subscriber living on the premises, Col. Sam. Hanson of Washington, or Dr. Wm. Baker, Georgetown. On the same day, if not before by private sale disposed of, will be sold the negroes, stock, &c. attached to the estate of the late O. Carr, deceased. The negroes will be sold for a term of years. For sale—Also, the following lots in the city of Washington: Lot No. 2, in sq. 702, front 54 feet 7 in. depth 175 ft. 8 in. In sq. 906 Lots No. 13, front 57 1/2 1-2, depth 100 ft. 25 ft. No. 14, front 58, depth 75. No. 15, 54 front, 78 and 100 1-2 depth. No. 16, 54 front, 100 ft. 10 1-2 in. depth. No. 17, front 49 ft. 6 in. depth 100 1-2. JONA B. CARR, Executor. May 17—1w.
FOR SALE. Or to be rented for a term of years, or on perpetual ground-rent. A NUMBER of well built brick houses, several of which are immediately rentable—situate on Greenleaf's point—Also, house lots in almost every part of the city. Apply to JAMES GREENLEAF, or in his absence to SAMUEL ELLIOT, Junr. July 5—8w.
FOR SALE AT PUBLIC AUCTION. PURSUANT to an order from the Orphan's Court of Washington county, District of Columbia, will be exposed to public sale on the premises, near the Navy-Yard Gate, all the personal property of James Boddington, deceased, consisting of household and kitchen furniture. Also, two gold watches. Conditions of sale are all sums under twenty dollars cash on delivery above that amount. A credit of three months will be given on good bonds or negotiable notes, with approved endorser, bearing interest from the day of sale. The sale to be on Monday the 17th day of July instant, to commence at 1 o'clock precisely. ROBERT ROSE, ROBERT BROWN, } Execs. to the estate of Jas. Boddington, dec'd. By N. L. & H. M. QUEEN, Auc. July 7—3t.
FOR SALE. By virtue of a decree of the Honorable the Chancellor of Maryland, will be exposed to public sale on Monday the 17th day of July next, if fair, if not on the next fair day, on the premises, all the estate, right, title, claim and interest of Nathaniel Washington of St. Mary's county, in and to a tract or parcel of land lying and being in St. Mary's county, on the Patuxent river, being part of a tract of land called Trent Neck, to which the said Nathaniel Washington is entitled in right of his wife Margaret Washington. This land is of a superior quality. —ALSO— All the estate of the said Nathaniel Washington and Margaret his wife, in and to one other tract or parcel of land, lying in St. Mary's county aforesaid, being another part of the aforementioned tract, called Trent Neck, situated in the forest, at the distance of three or four miles from the tract before mentioned. A more particular description of these tracts of land is deemed unnecessary: And there will be offered for sale at the same time and place, a variety of personal property of the said Nathaniel Washington, consisting of Negroes, Horses, Stock, Utensils and Household furniture. The above property will be sold in such lots or parts to accommodate purchasers as shall be judged most advantageous. Terms of sale—a credit of twelve months, purchasers giving bond with sufficient security, and to be on interest from the day of sale. JOHN RALPH, Trustee. N. B. The creditors of the said Nathaniel Washington are hereby notified to exhibit their claims to the auditor of the Court of Chancery within six months from the day of sale. J. R. T. Charlotte Hall, St. Mary's County, June 19—4w.
TO BE SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION. At Northumberland court house, in the county of Northumberland, and state of Virginia, on Tuesday the 5th of September next, at 11 o'clock in the forenoon, five contiguous plantations, amounting together to about 2,700 acres, situate on the river Potomac, and within about three miles of the court house. These estates formerly belonged to Presley Thornton, Esq. and are the same on which he lived. They have never been seen by either of the subscribers, but it is understood, that about 1700 acres of them are as valuable low grounds as any on the river, and a considerable part thereof of heavily timbered. The uplands consist of about 1000 acres, and the whole is well calculated for the production of corn, wheat, tobacco, timothy and small grain of all kinds, in great abundance. The waters are said to abound with excellent fish, oysters and wild fowl. The water carriage is easy and convenient to Norfolk, Baltimore, Alexandria and the city of Washington; and as these estates possess several good mill seats, with an abundance of water and a plentiful supply of timber, they must be very valuable. The premises will be shown to persons inclined to purchase, by Col. James Moore, who lives on them, or by Samuel Blackwell, Esq., who lives near to them; and the terms of payment may be known a sufficient time before the sale, by applying to either of them, or to THOMAS ROBINSON, Near Chester, Delaware, Or to W. LEWIS, at Phila. June 7—tds.
LAND TO SELL OR EXCHANGE. I AM desirous to sell or exchange for lands lying below the Blue ridge, about 4000 acres of old Military land, situated in the county of Mason, state of Virginia, on the river Ohio, about 8 miles from the mouth of the Great Kanawha. Half of the above quantity is rich river bottom unsubject to fresches, and on which from 60 to 100 bushels of Indian corn has often been made to the acre. On a part of this land, intended to form a farm of 700 acres, and near the bank of the river, has lately been erected a single story framed dwelling, 40 feet by 20, with a stone walled cellar under the whole, rising 4 feet above the surface, which with little alteration might be made agreeable summer rooms. I will take for this land, as well as for a third part of 2000 acres on Kentucky river, and a third part of a military survey, in the forks of the Ohio and Tennessee, both valuable tracts all kinds of public securities or exchange as above. JOHN FENTON MERCER. Fredericksburg, June 9. Letters directed to me, Gallipolis, Ohio, after the 15th of July, will be attended to. June 21—3w.
ORATION. This Day is published and for sale at R. C. Weightman's bookstore, Pennsylvania Avenue, D. R. Kapkin's, Capitol Hill, and I. Milligan's, George-Town. AN ORATION Pronounced by Mr. JOEL BARLOW, in this City, on the 4th inst. July 7—3t.
Just arrived from St. Bartholomew on board the brig Betsey, Capt. Nelson, and for sale at my Warehouse— 50 pun cheons 3d proof rum, 40 hlids. molasses, 70 do. Sugar, 12000 lb. green Coffee, Apply to CH: HERSTON'S, or the Subscriber, Who has for Sale, Best qualified Port Wine, Old Madeira do. Claret by the box, Old Jamaica and Antigua Rum, Cogniac Brandy, Holland and Country Gin, Loaf and Lump Sugars, Coffee in Bags and Banells. Imperial, } Hyson, } Young Hyson, } Hyson skin, } Souchoong, } Bohea. } TEAS. Port, Beef, Herrings, Rice, Cheese, Bacon, Flour, Meal, Corn, Ground Plaster, Soap, Dipe, Mould, and Spermaceti Candles. 20 or 30 tons Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia Bar Iron well assorted, together with many articles of Ship Chandlery. RICHARD PARROTT, George Town, June 28—4t.
ROMULUS RIGGS, Has just received and opening at his New Cash Store, a complete and well selected assortment of SEASONABLE AND FANCY GOODS, Which being purchased for money, gives him the opportunity of offering the same at Baltimore and Philadelphia Prices , as he is determined to sell for very small profits. He intends keeping on hand a good assortment of Goods, to be sold by the piece; and those who purchase to sell again, will be furnished at as low rates as they can purchase in any market in the United States, being determined to sell. CASH GIVEN FOR TOBACCO Inspected at the Georgetown Warehouse. FOR RENT, The upper part of the House I now occupy, which has Six well finished Rooms, and every necessary back building, all newly furnished and in complete order—The rent will be low to a genteel family, if application is immediately made. June 9—4t.
CITY LOTS FOR SALE. THE undermentioned lots of ground are offered for sale, either separately or by squares, on liberal terms either for cash or on credit; they are all free from mortgage or incumbrance, and are subject to no litigation or contest as the titles are derived, by immediate conveyance from the Chancellor of Maryland and the commissioners of Washington, to Messrs. Henry Pratt, Thomas Willing, Francis, John Miller, Jur. John Ashley, and Jacob Baker of the Aggregate Fund. Square No. 54 Lot no 9 sq 72. Lots no 2 4 8 10 12 13 14 15 18 sq 84 Lot no 1 sq 85 Lots no 20 21 22—sq. 103 Lots no 7 8—sq 145 Lots no 1 2 7 8—sq 146 Lots no 1 2 3 sq 147 Lot no 4 sq 163 Lots no 5 6 7 12 13 14 sq 238 Lots no 6 7 10 11 12 15 16 sq 293 Lots no 1 2 3 7 8 11 12 13 18 sq 349 Lots no 1 2 8 sq 376 lots no 16 17 18 sq 409 Lots no 3 4 7 8 9 17 18 sq 487 Lots no 5 6 7 10 sq 488 lot no 8 7 12 sq 489 Lots 5 6 9 sq 491 Lot no 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 24 sq 491 Lots no 7 8 sq 492 Lots no 8 9 10 sq 531 Lot 3 4 8 11 12 13 14 sq 533 Lots no 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 583 whole square East of 590 whole square. Sq 635 Lots no 1 2 3 5 6 9 10 sq 638 Lots no 1 2 3 sq 639 Lot no 1 sq 640 Lots no 1 2 3 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 sq 641 whole square Sq 642 Lots no 1 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 sq 644 Lots no 1 5 7 West of 645 whole square Sq 878 Lots no 16 17 18 19 20 sq 973 Lots no 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1023 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1024 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1050 Lots no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1051 Lot no 1 sq 1052 Lot no 2 sq 1053 Lots no 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1054 Lots no 1 2 3 7 sq 1045 Lots no 9 10 12 sq 1046 Lots no 2 14 15 sq 1047 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1048 Lots no 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 sq 1049 Lots no 1