The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-03-28 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1163.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, MARCH 28. 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, MARCH 28.
In the present crisis, when the affairs of this country with G. Britain have assumed so solemn an aspect, it is cause for high felicitation to find those men, who have hitherto in that nation stood forth as the champions of justice and the friends of the U. States boldly and unequivocally avow their reprobation of those measures which are the cause of the existing rupture—We say the cause of the rupture, for it is but too true that it must have been known to the British government that the powers given to Mr. Rose were altogether incommensurate to a settlement of the affair of the Chesapeake, and it doubtless was calculated upon by them that a rupture on this point would produce an entire suspension of the negotiation.
We have been told by the apologists of Britain here that her existence depended on the harsh and unjust measures lately taken by her; that her only resource was either to monopolise or to make the trade of the whole world tributary; we were told that her best men, however they may have once thought, perceived and acknowledged this necessity; and that, consequently, the orders of Council, and our worse than colonial subjection, would be maintained amidst every change of administration or vicissitude of politics in that country. The late accounts from England have taken this from the eyes of these prejudiced politicians; and, however they may regret, it belongs to us to rejoice that the Grenvilles, the Erskines, the Pettys; in short the best talents and the purest and most unsuspicious patriotism of England condemn these usurpations in terms as strong as those which are expressed by ourselves. In the late debates in the British Parliament—
“Lord Erskine observed, that he was amazed to hear noble Lords talk of the necessity or policy of the measures under discussion—“Did they shelter themselves under the principle of retaliation? If so, the House had long since been apprised that this measure of our government outstripped that of the enemy—it could not be defended on the principle of policy. The French decree, he said, as far as it affected America, had, he maintained, been satisfactorily cleared up to the minister then in France, and was deemed so even by the President of the United States—hence he concluded, that America was no party in the decree of the French Emperor. This he said, was evident also from her subsequent conduct; when aware even of our orders in council here, she ordered a general embargo.—Much had been said of the right of retaliation, on which these orders were founded; no body denied the right to resort to such a system, when the conduct of the belligerents justified its necessity—but even that law has its limitations, it should not ever overstep the nature of the evil which it went to redress; yet, in these orders, all limitation was lost sight of, and convenience alone regulated the extent. It would seem that if the French Emperor declared the Moon in a state of blockade, Great Britain would have a meeting of the Board of Longitude, and our most celebrated astronomers, to retaliate by a prohibition on the Satellites to Jupiter—when he commanded a dissolution of the Lunar motion of her conjunctions and opposites, they would react by a declaration that the whole Planetary System, should stop till—a (loud laugh from the ministerial bench)—he really conceived notwithstanding the manner in which the comparison was received, that the cases were in a great degree similar: inasmuch as he believed Bonaparte had as much efficacy over the moon as he had in his declaration of placing the British Isles in a state of blockade.
“Lord Greenville, in his speech, asked, was it not more natural to expect that ministers would defend their system of policy by a full discussion of the merits and necessity; that at least there would be an end to that eternal circle of arguing present questions from past transactions? With that feeling he entered on the discussion, believing in his soul, that on the Revocation or Non-Revocation of these orders depended the ultimate existence of the Country. He continued the most animated appeal to the House, to interpose between the country and its destruction—to re-tread its steps, as the path through which it moved led quickly to the grave—He warned them against the renewal of a system of taxation, ei-
ther directly or indirectly upon American trade; and conjured them to seize the opportunity afforded them, by the pre-eminence of France in this rivalry of injustice, of erasing from the records of the country, and of obliterating from the minds of the people, the last intention of acting upon a system of policy rashly introduced and wantonly pursued, calculated for no other purpose, than to involve the nation in an unjust war.”
“Lord Lauderdale thus expressed himself—“He wished the orders to be discussed on their own positive merits, and not on their comparative merits. He believed that they had been infinitely mischievous. They injured neutrals much more than the enemy; and were, in his opinion tantamount to a declaration of war against America.”
Lord Auckland concluded his speech in the following terms: “It is true, that the French decree professed at first to operate as widely and as severely as any of the British orders; but it was well known, that on the remonstrance of the American minister at Paris, the French government gave a new interpretation to the decree, and consented to relax considerably of its severity in favor of the Americans. Now, how must we stand with regard to America in the eye of justice, or of policy, if we determine to act against her trade with all the rigor of the French decree, & retaliate against her all the injury which France meditates and would inflict upon this country. Do, Noble Lords, recollect the nature and extent of the connection of this country with America? Have they well weighed the immense advantages we derive from that intercourse? Do they bear in their minds the amount of the imports by America from this kingdom? Have they seriously considered what the consequences of a rupture with America must be to so many descriptions of persons in this country? Have they examined why the last year has brought such an accession to our exports, such an increase to our general commerce; and have they not discovered that the main source from which that increase of commerce has sprung, was the condition in which America stood between the two belligerents, and the facilities which it afforded to enrich us by enriching America. If, Noble Lords, have seriously turned all these considerations in their minds, and yet feel not the impolicy of these orders in council, their minds must be very differently organised from his. Their operation with respect to America, was the chief point to consider: he must entreat their Lordships more narrowly to examine that point and the various consequences to which it gave rise; and he doubted not they would begin to think with him. It was not yet too late to prevent the mischief. The noble Lord next proceeded to enquire into the nature of the retaliation into which we entered against France, and asked what could be the object of it. Did ministers mean to starve France, and the countries depending on her by the operation of these orders; or did they wish to teach those countries to forego the use of the commodities they derived from this country, or to set their ingenuity at work to contrive substitutes for these commodities? He was at a loss to know what useful or rational purpose they were at all likely to answer. Noble Lords, he observed, would also please to take into their consideration the endless embarrassments in which neutrals, but particularly Americans, must be involved, by the crossing provisions and enactments of these orders. They varied according to the nature of the cargoes, and the places for which they were destined. Whatever may be the nature of their cargoes, or the course of their destination, they must all come first to England, and be subject to a duty in this country, before they proceeded to any other destination. The certificates of origin were also liable to the most serious objections; in short, the orders of council appeared to him to be contrary to every law; to be as irreconcilable with policy as with justice; and to be pregnant with mischiefs for which we should find little consolation, in reflecting upon the character of the measure that must bring them on the country.”
Lord Grenville again said, “There could not be a rational hope entertained that America would submit to this measure. He thought a rupture with America would be one of the most ruinous external calamities that could befall this country, and was ready to make any effort to prevent it. If they
had then to discuss the propriety of the measures that had been taken, he was sure they would never sanction them with their approbation. But his majesty's servants had taken the whole responsibility upon themselves, and done away the deliberation of Parliament. They had now nothing to do but to tread back their steps, and not to continue in error to avoid the shame of retraction. It was not from any distrust of the resources of the country that he feared a rupture with America, because the war with that country on the ground of these orders would be unjust, and in the prosecution of it they could not expect the same feeling would animate their defenders, as if they were convinced of the justice of their cause. The boon that was said to be given by these orders to America, was no more than what she had a right to, and what this country had no right to take from her. As to the duties proposed to be levied under these orders of council, he should only say, that when the peace of 1782 took place, he never thought that he should have lived, or, that the British Parliament should have lived to see the day, when a proposition would be made to impose a tax upon America. He had hoped that the duties proposed would have been confined to articles of colonial production, and that no duty would be imposed upon American produce. He was sorry, to find, therefore, by certain resolutions on the table, that certain articles of the domestic produce of America were to be liable to a duty. America could never submit to such conditions, and it was an act of gross injustice to impose any duty upon goods not intended to be imported into this country, when forced into our ports under the execution of these orders of council.”
Such are the sentiments of noble, high minded Britons—Britons educated in the principles of whiggism—men who have shown themselves ready to save their country; but unwilling to retain power the moment it ceases to be consistent with honor and justice. These are the men, these the principles, which must eventually triumph even in England, provided we have the nerve to resist these audacious aggressions on our rights, these insolent and unnumbered outrages on our honor.
Since we penned these remarks, we have received the Protest of Lord Erskine against the Danish Expedition . For vigor of mind, precision of ideas, energy of expression, and splendor of diction, it may proudly challenge competition with any state paper extant. There is not a sentiment in it which is not as orthodox here, as it ought to be in Britain and in every other part of the civilised world. Read it, Americans, with attention! Listen to the sentiments of one of the best of men in the worst of times! Restrain not the just sensibility which such a portrait ought to excite! Feel for Denmark as you would for yourselves! For the arrogant power, that “has lost her moral station in the world,” wants but the impulse of a sordid interest to hurl on your shores as much destruction as she has already breathed defiance. For this Paper see the last page.
Documents accompanying the Message of the President of the 22d March, relative to the Chesapeake.
(Continued.)
Mr. Monroe to Mr. Canning. Mr. MONROE presents his compliments to Mr. Canning, and has the honor to inform him that he called at his office yesterday, for the purpose of making some remarks on the subject treated in the note which he addressed on the instant to Mr. Canning. Mr. Monroe regrets that he had not the pleasure of seeing Mr. Canning at that time, and requests that he will be so good as to give him an interview to-morrow, at such hour as may be most convenient to him. Mr. Monroe will be happy to attend Mr. Canning in the country, should it be more agreeable to Mr. Canning to receive him there.
Portland Place, Sept. 9, 1807.
From Mr. Canning, in answer.
Mr. CANNING presents his compliments to Mr. Monroe, and will be happy to have the honor of seeing him at the foreign office to-morrow at 12 o'clock.
Mr. Canning has but this minute received Mr. Monroe's note.
Burlington House, Wednesday, September 9, 1807.
3-4 p. 8, P. M.
Duplicate. No.
London, Sept. 16, 1807.
Sir—I had the honor to receive your letter of July 6th, by Dr. Buller, on the 31st ultimo, and did
not lose a moment in entering on the business communicated to me by it, in the manner which seemed most likely to obtain success. The details shall be communicated to you in my next dispatch. All that I can state at present is, that the whole subject has been placed fully before this government in as strong an appeal to its interest and judgement as I could make, and that a week has elapsed since my official note was presented. I am in daily expectation of receiving its decision on it. The moment is in many views very favorable to a satisfactory result, but still it is not in my power, from any thing that has occurred, to speak with confidence of it. The joint negotiation committed to Mr. Pinkney and myself, was suspended by the intelligence of the affair with our frigate, and has never been revived since. That intelligence reached this about a week after Mr. Purvis, so that we had only been able with the utmost diligence, to take the preliminary step of presenting to Mr. Canning, in conformity to our instructions, a project, and of explaining to him in the most minute and comprehensive manner that we could, every circumstance appertaining to it. No answer was given to our communication; the suspension therefore of the negotiation, was imputable to Mr. Canning: had he answered our communication and proposed to proceed in the negotiation, it would have become a question for the commission to have decided, how far it would have been proper under existing circumstances to comply with the invitation; his silence however relieved us from that dilemma.
Permit me to present to you Mr. Jos. A. Smith, of South Carolina, and to refer you to him for much information of a general nature, on the subject of our affairs with this country. Having been long in Europe, and visited almost every part, he possesses great information of the political state of its several powers, especially of Russia, from whose sovereign he received very distinguished marks of attention. In much communication which I have had with Mr. Smith for a year past, I have found him to be animated with strong sentiments of patriotism towards his country, and as he has expressed a desire of being personally known to the President, and yourself, I have been happy to promote his object, by giving him this introduction.
I am with great respect, sir, your most obt. servant.
JAS. MONROE.
P.S. A copy of my note to Mr. Canning is enclosed.
JAMES MADISON, Secretary of State.
From Mr. Canning.
No. 16.
Foreign Office, Sept. 23d, 1807.
Sir—I have laid before the king my master the letter which I had the honor to receive from you, on the 8th of this month.
Before I proceed to observe upon that part of it which relates more immediately to the question now at issue between our two governments, I am commanded, in the first instance, to express the surprise which is felt at the total omission of a subject, upon which, I had already been commanded to apply to you for information: the proclamation purported to have been issued by the President of the United States. Of this paper, when last I addressed you upon it, you professed not to have any knowledge, beyond what the ordinary channels of public information afforded, nor any authority to declare it to be authentic.
I feel it an indispensable duty to renew my enquiry on this subject. The answer which I may receive from you is by no means unimportant to the settlement of the discussion which has arisen from the encounter between the Leopard and the Chesapeake.
The whole of the question arising out of that transaction, is in fact no other than a question as to the amount of reparation due by his majesty for the unauthorised act of his officer; and you will, therefore, readily perceive that, in so far as the government of the United States have thought proper to take that reparation into their own hands, and to resort to measures of retaliation, previously to any direct application to the British government, or to the British minister in America, for redress; in so far the British government is entitled to take such measures into account, and to consider them in the estimate of reparation which is acknowledged to have been originally due.
The total exclusion of all ships of war belonging to one of the two belligerent parties, while the ships of war of the other were protected by the harbors of the neutral power, would furnish no light ground of complaint against that neutral, if considered in any other point of view, than as a measure of retaliation for a previous injury; and, so considered, it cannot but be necessary to take it into account in the adjustment of the original dispute.
I am therefore distinctly to repeat the enquiry, whether you are now enabled to declare, sir, that the proclamation is to be considered as the authentic act of your government? And, if so, I am further to enquire, whether you are authorised to notify the intention of your government to withdraw that proclamation, on the knowledge of his majesty's disavowal of the act which occasioned its publication?
The light in which you are directed to represent admiral Berkeley's conduct, and the description which you give of the character of the measure imputed to him,—that “he acted as if he had the power to make war,” and “to decide the causes of war;” sufficiently evince the necessity of comprehending in this discussion, all the circumstances which have led to, or have followed the action with the Chesapeake.
Undoubtedly the attack upon a national ship of war, is an act of hostility, and the very essence of the charge against admiral Berkeley, as you represent it, is the having taken upon himself to commit an act of hostility without the previous authority of his government.
The provocation which may have led to such an act, without such previous authority, if it cannot justify, may possibly extenuate it; as the steps which have been taken in reprisal, though they cannot alter the character of the original act, may and do materially affect every question concerning the reparation claimed for it.
On this ground it is, that, while I am commanded to repeat to you (what you consider as so satisfactory) that the general and unqualified pretension to search ships of war for deserters, is not asserted by this country, “I am precluded from concurring in the inference, that therefore the national character of the men who were violently taken from on board the Chesapeake, makes no part of the present question.”
If the right to search ships of war for deserters is not insisted upon by this country, it is not because the employment and the detention of British mariners on board the national ship of any state are considered as less injurious towards Great Britain than their employment on board of merchant vessels (a proposition which would be manifestly absurd!) It is not intended to allow that the sailors of Great Britain may be justly employed, against her consent, in foreign ships of war; but merely that redress is, in that case, to be sought for by government from government; and not to be summarily enforced by the unauthorised officer of any of his majesty's ships of war.
It follows from this reasoning, that not only the “national character” of the men taken out of the Chesapeake is matter for consideration; but that the reparation to be made by the British government to that of the U. States, would depend, among other circumstances, on the question whether an act, which the British government would be justified in considering as an act of hostility, had been committed by the government of the U. States, (in refusing to discharge the British seamen in their national service) previously to commission of an act of hostility of an officer of his majesty.
The act of the British officer would still be an unauthorised act, and as such liable to complaint and disapprobation; but the case, as between government and government, would be materially varied.
At the same time that I offer to you this explanation of the principles upon which his majesty has authorised me to discuss with you the subject of your representation, and that I renew to you the assurances of the disposition to conduct that discussion in the most amicable form, and to bring it to a conclusion satisfactory to the honor and to the feelings of both countries; it is matter of regret that you should have been instructed to annex to the demand of reparation for the attack of the Leopard upon the Chesapeake, any proposition whatever respecting the search for British seamen in merchant vessels; a subject, which

is wholly unconnected with the case of the Leopard and the Chesapeake, and which can only tend to complicate and embarrass a discussion, in itself of sufficient delicacy and importance.
In stating the grounds upon which your government expect with confidence that "the whole subject of impressment shall be taken up at this time," and that in making the reparation which is claimed for the particular injury alleged to have been sustained by the U. States, in the late unfortunate transaction off the capes of Virginia, "a remedy shall be provided for the whole evil," you appear to have been directed to assume that this act of violence (such as you describe it) is the natural and almost necessary result of the practice of impressment of British seamen from merchant vessels of other states; and to represent the particular transaction and the general question of impressment, as "identified in the feelings and sympathies of your nation, was well as in the sentiment of your government."
With every attention due to the feelings of the people of the United States, I am sure you will readily allow that those feelings cannot properly be considered as affecting the merits of the case.
The first ebullitions of national sensibility may very naturally have communicated an impulse to the proceedings of the American government; but it cannot be expected, that they should guide the deliberate opinions & conduct of the government with which you have to treat. I would farther observe to you, that your government cannot reasonably claim any advantage in argument from the expressed sense of its own people, unless it be prepared at the same time to take upon itself a responsibility (which there is no desire of attributing to it) for the outrage & indecency, with which upon the late occasion, that expression has in too many instances been accompanied. It is better for temperate reasoning, and assuredly it is more advantageous for the government of the U. States, that the consideration of popular feeling should be wholly omitted in this discussion.
The right and the practice of which you are instructed to complain, as irreconcilable with justice, and intolerable in all their parts, have been exercised by G. Britain from the earliest ages of the British naval power, even without any qualification or exception in favor of national ships of war.
The grounds upon which such a distinction has been admitted in later times, and upon which, for the course of nearly a century, the crown has forbore to instruct the commanders of its ships of war, to search foreign ships of war for deserters, I have already had the honor to explain to you—And you will have perceived that those grounds are wholly inapplicable to ships in the merchant service.
That a foreign power will not, knowingly, retain in its national service, mariners the natural born subjects of his majesty, who have been recalled by public proclamation, may be regarded as a presumption arising out of the hostile nature of the act & out of the probable consequences to which such an act of hostility must lead.
But with respect to merchant vessels, there is no such presumption.
When mariners, subjects of his majesty, are employed in the private service of foreign individuals, under private civil contracts, the king's subjects, and the foreign individuals with whom they serve, enter into engagements inconsistent with the duty of his majesty's subjects towards him; but to those engagements the government of the foreign nation has not made itself a party.
In such cases, the species of redress which the practice of all times has admitted and sanctioned, is that of taking those subjects at sea out of the service of such foreign individuals; and recalling them to the discharge of that previous and paramount duty which they owe to their sovereign and to their country.
That the exercise of this right, involves some of the dearest interests of G. B. your government is ready to acknowledge, & has accordingly authorised you to propose certain regulations which you apprehend would be equivalent in their effect for the preservation of the interests concerned.
There will be no indisposition here to entertain, at a proper time, the discussion of such proposed regulations. But when you recollect that many proposals to this effect have already been brought forward, and have been found wholly inadmissible; when you have, yourself, recently had occasion to experience the difficulty of framing any satisfactory arrangement upon the subject; with all the anxiety which is properly felt by both governments for the speedy adjustment of the difference between them, and for the "healing of that deep wound which you state to have been inflicted on the national honor of the U. States,"
attempt, which has already been made so often, and which has hitherto uniformly failed.
Your own reasoning shews that you are aware of the more than ordinary difficulty which must attend any arrangement for the prevention of desertion, between two nations, whose similarity of manners and habits, and whose identity of language, interpose so many impediments to the discrimination of "national character."
To these circumstances, and not (as you almost seem to insinuate) to any peculiar harshness towards the United States, it is owing, that the exercise of this right, as with respect to them, is necessarily more frequent, than with respect to any other nation: and is felt by them to be more rigid and vexatious. But these circumstances cannot furnish an argument for the suspension of the exercise of the right with respect to America; unless it be contended, that multiplicity of frauds and difficulty of detection are reasons against suspicion or motives for acquiescence.
As little foundation is there for the complaint that the practice has grown out of the recognition of American independence; and that the character of that event is affected by its continuance.
It is needless to repeat that these rights existed in their fullest force, for ages previous to the establishment of the U. States of America as an independent government: and it would be difficult to contend that the recognition of that independence can have operated any change in this respect; unless it can be shown that in acknowledging the government of the United States, Great Britain virtually abdicated her own rights as a naval power; or unless there were any express stipulations, by which the ancient and prescriptive usages of Great Britain, founded in the soundest principles of natural law, though still enforced against other independent nations of the world, were to be suspended whenever they might come in contact with the interests or the feelings of the American people.
I would now recall your attention to the consideration of the question respecting the late transaction between the Leopard and the Chesapeake; which till the receipt of your letter, I imagined to be the only question actually in discussion between us, and in consideration of the delicacy and pressing importance of which, we had, by common consent, waved the consideration of all other matters pending between our two governments.
Into the discussion of this question I am prepared to enter; with what disposition, on the part of his majesty's government, to consult the feelings and the honor of the government of the United States, it is not necessary for me here to declare—for you have yourself done justice to the sincerity of that disposition.
The difficulties in the way of such adjustment are already smoothed, by the disavowal, voluntarily offered, at the very outset of the discussion, of the general and unqualified pretension to search ships of war for deserters. There remained only to ascertain the facts of the particular case, and to proportion the reparation to the wrong.
Is the British government now to understand, that you, sir, are not authorized to enter into this question separately and distinctly; without having obtained, as a preliminary concession, the consent of this country to enter into discussion, with respect to the practice of searching merchant vessels for deserters?
Whether any arrangement can be devised, by which this practice may admit of modification, without prejudice to the essential rights and interests of Great Britain, is a question, which as I have already said the British government may, at a proper season, be ready to entertain: but, whether the consent of Great Britain to the entering into such discussion, shall be extorted as the price of an amicable adjustment, as the condition of being admitted to make honorable reparation for an injury, is a question of quite a different sort, and one which can be answered no otherwise than by an unqualified refusal.
I earnestly recommend to you, therefore, to consider whether the instructions which you have received from your government, may not leave you at liberty to come to an adjustment of the case of the Leopard and Chesapeake, independently of the other question, with which it appears to have been unnecessarily connected.
If your instructions leave you no discretion, I cannot press you to act in contradiction to them. In that case there can be no advantage in pursuing a discussion which you are not authorised to conclude: and I shall have only to regret that the disposition of his majesty to terminate that difference amicably and satisfactorily, is for the present rendered unavailing.
In that case, his majesty in pursuance of the disposition of which
for bringing this unfortunate dispute to a conclusion consistent with the harmony subsisting between Great Britain and the United States. But, in order to avoid the inconvenience which has arisen, from the mixed nature of your instructions, that minister will not be empowered to entertain, as connected with this subject, any proposition respecting the search of merchant vessels.
It will, however, be far more satisfactory to his majesty to learn, that upon re-consideration, you think yourself authorised to separate the two questions.
I hope you will allow me to express, at the same time, the sincere pleasure which I should feel in having to treat with you, sir, personally for the re-establishment of a good understanding between our two countries.
I have the honor to be, &c. (Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
Portland Place, Sept. 29, 1807. Sir—I have had the honor to receive your letter of the 23d of this month, and shall transmit it without delay to my government.
I perceive by it, with great regret, that his Britannic majesty's government is not disposed to enter into an arrangement at this time, of all the differences that have arisen between our governments, respecting the impressment of seamen from American vessels by British cruizers; that it is willing to look to one object only, the late aggression, and provide for it, while the other is left to depend on future adjustment. My government had presumed that his majesty's government would have seen in the recent and greater injury, a strong motive for bringing the whole subject into one view, and providing for it at the same time. The excess of the latter outrage could not fail to revive in the mind of the suffering party, a high sense of former injuries, and it was reasonable to infer that the great injustice inseparable from the practice, of which the incident furnished so striking an example, would have produced between our governments the most prompt and friendly co-operation in the means of suppressing it. That the United States have suffered a greater injury by a recent occurrence, than they had done before, cannot be a good reason, & ought not to be a motive for delaying redress of the others, especially when it is considered that they were already in a train of amicable accommodation and arrangement. Since, however, you inform me that his majesty's government is unwilling to take up the subject in a combined view, it is unnecessary for me to press it.
You ask whether I am authorised to separate this latter incident from the general practice, and to treat it as a distinct topic? On this point I have to state, that my instructions, which are explicit, enjoin me to consider the whole of this class of injuries as an entire subject; and indeed so intimately are they connected in their nature, that it seems to be difficult, if not impossible, to separate them for any useful purpose to either party. My government being sincerely desirous to place the relations of the two powers, on the solid basis of permanent friendship, is satisfied, as well by what has occurred in the general practice, as by the more awful admonition derived from the late incident, that that can only be done with effect, by mounting to the source of the evil, and providing an adequate remedy for it. In pursuing this great object, it is my duty to repeat, that my government does not seek to confine the remedy proposed to the injuries which the United States have suffered, and continue to suffer, but is desirous to extend it to those also which are complained of by Great Britain. Experience has shown that both parties complain of injuries, though certainly of a very different character and less urgent nature. How much more advisable then is it not, in every view, for them to enter into an arrangement which shall provide an adequate remedy for their respective injuries; which shall bind the honor of each government to do what is just and right in respect to the other, and enlist the feelings of each nation on its side, than to suffer things to remain longer in their present state? How much more advantageous would not such an arrangement be likely to prove to Great Britain, in the particular object which she has in view, than her adherence to a practice which rejects a mean which could not fail to be more productive; a practice which cannot be maintained in principle; which leads by immutable causes, that ought to inspire different sentiments in the parties to each other, to great and constant abuse, and which is also considered by the United States as subversive of their rights, and degrading to their character as an independent power.
So much I have thought it proper to state, in order to place in a just light the conduct of my government on the present occasion, on this great and very interesting subject of im-
pressment that any doubt should be suffered to exist on that point.
You inform me that his majesty has determined, in case my instructions do not permit me to separate the late aggression from the general practice of impressment, to transfer the business to the United States, by committing it to a minister who shall be sent there with full powers to conclude it. To that measure I am far from being disposed to raise any obstacle, and shall immediately apprise my government of the decision to adopt it. Under such circumstances, I perfectly agree with you in the opinion, that it would be useless to pursue a discussion, which it would be impossible for me to bring to a satisfactory conclusion.
It is still my duty to give the explanation which you have desired, of the motives which induced the President to adopt the measures announced in his proclamation of the 2d July last. However great the injury which the United States had received by the aggression complained of, it is just that it should be shown that the President did not lose sight in those measures of the friendly relations subsisting between the two powers. When the hostile nature of the attack on the Chesapeake, is taken into view, and the general conduct of the British squadron within the waters of the United States, before and after the attack, I am persuaded that there was no limit to which the President would not have been justified in going, which he might have thought essential to the honor and safety of the nation. Before the attack, the British squadron had violated the jurisdiction of the United States, by the impressment of men within it, whom the commander had refused to surrender; and after the attack the attitude which he assumed continued to be of a very menacing and hostile character. An act of hostility, it must be admitted, justifies any act of a like nature towards the party who commits it. The President, however, did not believe that his majesty's government had authorised the conduct of the British squadron, and his measures were evidently founded on that belief. They were marked by no circumstance of hostility, or of retaliation towards Great Britain; but were intended simply to preserve order within the jurisdiction of the United States, to which end the removal of the British squadron without their limits became indispensable. After the acts of violence which had been committed by that squadron, it was impossible that it should remain long, there without increasing the irritation and widening the breach between the two nations, which it was the earnest object of the President to prevent. There certainly existed no desire of giving a preference in favor of the ships of war of one belligerent party to those of another. Before this aggression, it is well known, that his Britannic majesty's ships lay within the waters of the Chesapeake, and enjoyed all the advantages of the most favored nation; it cannot therefore be doubted that my government will be ready to restore them to the same situation, as soon as it can be done consistently with the honor and rights of the United States.
I cannot conclude this communication without expressing my earnest hope, that the differences which have unhappily arisen between our governments, may soon be settled, on conditions honorable and satisfactory to both the parties. To have co-operated with you in the accomplishment of so great and useful a work, would have been highly gratifying to me. The disposition which you have brought to the discussion, and the sentiments which you communicated on the principal transaction, when the first intelligence of it was received, inspired me with great confidence, that we should soon have been able to bring it to such a conclusion. To have been a party to it, would have terminated my mission to his majesty in the mode which I have long and sincerely desired.
I have the honor to be, &c. (Signed) JAMES MONROE.
To Mr. Canning. Portland Place, Oct. 9, 1807.
Mr. Monroe presents his compliments to Mr. Canning, and requests that he will be so good as to inform him, whether it is intended, that the minister whom his majesty proposes to send to the government of the United States, shall be employed in a special mission without having any connection immediate or eventual with the ordinary legation. Mr. Monroe has inferred from Mr. Canning's note, that the mission, will be of the special nature above described, but he will be much obliged to Mr. Canning, to inform him, whether he has taken a correct view of the measure. Mr. Monroe would also be happy to know of Mr. Canning at what time it is expected the minister will sail for the United States. Mr. Canning will be sensible that Mr. Monroe's motive in requesting this information, is, that he may be enabled to communicate it without delay
to accept the assurance of his high consideration.
The Right Hon. George Canning, Esq. &c. &c.
FROM MR. CANNING. Foreign Office, Oct. 10, 1807.
Mr. Canning presents his compliments to Mr. Monroe: and in acknowledging the honor of his note of yesterday has great pleasure in assuring him that he is at all times ready to answer any enquiries to which Mr. Monroe attaches any importance, and which it is in Mr. Canning's power to answer with precision, without public inconvenience. But it is not in Mr. Canning's power to state with confidence what may be the eventual determination of his majesty in respect to the permanent mission in America. The mission of the minister whom his majesty is now about to send will certainly be limited in the first instance to the discussion of the question of the Chesapeake.
Tripletone. London, October 10, 1807.
Sir—I have the honor to transmit you by doctor Bullus, a copy of my correspondence with Mr. Canning on the subject which was committed to my care, by your letter of the 6th of July last. You will find by it that the pressure which has been made on this government, in obedience to the instruction contained in that letter, has terminated in a decision to send a minister to the United States, to adjust the business there. What the powers of that minister will be; whether it is intended to confine them to the sole object of reparation for the special outrage, or to extend them, in case the proposed separation of that from the general topic of impressment is admitted, to the latter object, it is not in my power to state. Mr. Canning has given me no information on that head in conference, and his note is not explicit on it. It states that the minister who shall be sent to the United States, to bring the dispute relative to the attack on the Chesapeake to a conclusion, shall not be empowered to entertain, as connected with that subject, any proposition respecting the search of merchant vessels—a presumption is authorized by those terms, that the minister will have power to treat on the general topic after the special one is arranged. But it is possible that that presumption may have been raised for some other purpose, or that the terms which excited it, were introduced merely to convey the idea that the mission should be confined to the special object.
In the discharge of this delicate and important trust, I thought that I should be able more effectually to promote its object, by opening the subject to Mr. Canning in conference, than by an official note. As the attitude taken by my government, which was evidently supported by the whole nation, was of a very impressive nature, it seemed probable from the feverish state of the public mind here in regard to us, that a tone of conciliation, which should not weaken the pressure, would be more likely to succeed in obtaining the reparation desired, than an official & peremptory demand. Under this impression, I had several conferences with Mr. Canning, the substance of which, in each, I will endeavor to state with precision. A knowledge of what passed in these interviews, in aid of that which is afforded by the correspondence, will enable you to form the most correct idea of the object of the proposed mission, that present circumstances will admit of.
The first interview was on the 3d of September, as soon as it could be obtained, after the receipt of your letter of July the 6th, which was on the 30th of August. I informed Mr. Canning, that as I wished the discussion in which we were about to enter, to terminate amicably and honorably to both our governments, I had asked the interview, for the purpose of promoting the desirable end; that by explaining to each other fully, in friendly conference, the views of our respective governments, relative to the late aggression, I was persuaded that it would be more easy for us to arrange the business, to the satisfaction of both parties, than by any other mode which we could pursue. He expressed his sensibility to that which I had chosen, and his readiness to concur in it; I then stated in detail, in explicit terms, the reparation which my government thought the United States entitled to, and expected that they should receive, for the injury and indignity offered by the late aggression; that the men taken from the frigate should be restored to it; that the officers who had committed the aggression should be exemplarily punished; that the practice of impressment from merchant vessels should be suppressed; and that the reparation consisting of those several acts should be announced to our government, through the medium of a special mission, a solemnity which the extraordinary nature of the aggression particularly required. I observed that as the aggression and the principle on which it was founded had been

which it was desired should constitute the proposed reparation; that to the first acts, the restoration of the men, there could doubtless be none, as the least that could be done, after such an outrage, would be to replace the United States as far as it might be practicable, on the ground they had before the injury was received; that the punishment of the officers followed, as a necessary consequence, to the disavowal of the act; that the suppression of the practice of impressment from merchant vessels had been made indispensable by the late aggression, for reasons which were sufficiently well known to him. I stated to him that the mode in which it was desired that the reparation should be made, by a special mission, was that which had been adopted by other powers, and by Great Britain herself, for injuries less severe than the one alluded to, of which I gave him the examples furnished me in your letter of July 6th.—Mr. Canning took a note of what I had stated, and made some general remarks on the whole subject, which were intended to give his view of it, on each point, but without committing himself in a positive manner on any one. He said that, by the proclamation of the President, and the seizure and detention of some men who had landed on the coast to procure water, the government seemed to have taken redress into its own hands; he complained of the difference which he said had been made between France and England, by restoring deserters to the vessels of the former, and not the latter: he insisted that the late aggression was an act different in all respects from the former practice, and ought not to be connected with it, as it showed a disposition to make a particular incident, in which they were in the wrong, instrumental to an accommodation in a case where his government held a different doctrine. I urged in reply, that the proclamation could not be considered as an act of hostility or retaliation for injuries, though the aggression had provoked and would have justified any the strongest act of reprisal, but as a mere measure of police, which had become indispensable for the preservation of order within the limits of the United States; I informed him that the men who had landed from the squadron, in defiance of the proclamation, and of the law on which it was founded, had been restored to it: that with respect to the other point in difference, said to be made in the case of deserters from British and French ships, I was unacquainted with the fact, but was satisfied, if the statement was correct, that the difference was imputable to the local authorities, and not to the national government, because as the U. States were not bound by treaty to restore deserters from the service of either nation, it was not presumable that their government would interfere in the business. I observed, however, that if such a preference had been given, there was a natural and justifiable cause for it, proceeding from the conduct of the squadrons of France and England, on the coast of the United States, and on the main ocean, it being a well known fact that the former did not maintain as a right or adopt in practice the doctrine of the latter, to impress seamen from our merchant vessels. I then discussed at length, and urged with great earnestness the justice and policy of his terminating at this time all the differences which had arisen between our governments from this cause, by an arrangement which should suppress the practice on the part of Great Britain, and remedy the evil of which she complained.
In aid of those reasons which were applicable to the merits of the question, I urged the example given by the late ministry, in the paper of Nov. 8th, presented to Mr. Pinkney and myself, by the British commissioners, which had, as I thought, laid the foundation of such an arrangement. I stated that as it was stipulated by that paper, that the negotiation should be kept open for the purpose of arranging this great interest, without prejudicing the rights of either power, it was fairly to be understood as the sense of both parties, that our rights were to be respected, till that arrangement was concluded; whence it would follow that the same effect would be produced in practice, as if it had been provided for by treaty. I relied on this paper and the construction which I thought it admitted, with which, however, the practice had since in no degree corresponded, to show the extent to which the former ministry had gone in meeting the just views of our government, and thereby to prove that the present ministry in improving that ground had nothing to apprehend from the preceding one. Mr. Canning admitted that the view which I had taken of this paper derived much support from its contents and the time and circumstances under which it was presented, but persisted in his desire to keep the subject separate. I proposed as an expedient to get rid of his objection, that we should take up and arrange both points informally, in which case, provided it was in a manner to be obligato-
ry should demand reparation for the outrage, in general terms, so as that it should not appear by official document, that the subjects had any connection in the negotiation. I urged that unless it was intended to make no provision against impressment from merchant vessels, I could see no objection to his meeting me on that ground, as after what had passed, it was impossible to take up either subject without having the other in view, and equally so to devise any mode which should keep them more completely separate, than that which I proposed. Mr. Canning still adhered to his doctrine of having nothing to do with impressment from merchant vessels, till the affair of the Chesapeake was disposed of, after which he professed his willingness to proceed to the other object. In this manner the conference ended, without having produced the arrangement which I had hoped from it. Mr. Canning's conduct was in all other respects conciliatory.
My note to Mr. Canning was founded on the result of this conference. As it had not been in my power to come to any agreement with him on the general subject of impressment from merchant vessels, I considered it my duty to combine it with the affair of the Chesapeake, in the paper which I presented him to claim reparation for the outrage. I thought it best, however, to omit the other acts, of which it was desired that the reparation should consist. It seemed probable that a specification of each circumstance, in the note, would increase the indisposition of the ministry to accommodate, and give it support with the nation, in a complete rejection of the demand. I expressed myself therefore in regard to the other acts, in general & conciliatory terms, but with all the force in my power. The details had been communicated to Mr. Canning in conference too recently to be forgotten. Still it was just that no improper inference should be drawn from the omission of them. To prevent it, I obtained an interview of Mr. Canning immediately after my note was presented, in which, after reminding him of the omission alluded to, the motive to which I presumed he could not mistake, I added that my object in asking the interview had been to repeat to him informally, what I had stated in the former one, the other acts of which my government expected that the reparation should consist. In this interview nothing occurred without the limit of the special object for which it had been obtained. Mr. Canning did not lead the conversation to any other topic, and I could not invite it.
Mr. Canning's answer to my note was delayed more than a fortnight. Having refused to treat the subject in connection, and intimated in plain terms that if I was not authorised to separate them, it would be useless to prolong the discussion, I thought it improper to press it. My reply was equally explicit, so that with it the negotiation ended. The measure which he announced, as being determined on by the king, in case I could not agree to the separation, is completely the act of his government. You will observe that it is announced in a form which precludes in a great degree, the idea of its being adopted at my suggestion, as an act of reparation, and in a tone of decision which seemed equally to preclude my holding any communication with him on it.
My mission being thus brought to an end, has afforded an opportunity for me to return to the U. S. as I have long desired. Nothing but the great interest which I take in the welfare of my country, and my earnest desire to give all the aid in my power to the present administration, in support of the principles of our most excellent constitution, would have detained me here so long. In the present state, however, it is not possible, if in any it would be, for me to render any service by a longer continuance here. As soon, therefore, as I had answered Mr. Canning's note, I communicated to him my intention to return, and requested that he would be so good as to obtain for me an audience of the king for the purpose of taking my leave of him. This was granted on the 7th of this month, in which I renewed the assurance of the sincere desire of my government, to preserve the most friendly relation between the U. S. and Gt. Britain, which sentiment was reciprocated by his majesty. Mr. Pinkney succeeds me by an arrangement with Mr. Canning, which will appear in the enclosed copy of my correspondence with him, and which I have full confidence the President will approve. I regret that in transferring the business into his hands, I do not leave him altogether free from difficulty.
I have the honor to be with great respect, sir, your most obedient servant. JAS. MONROE. JAMES MADISON, Esq. Secretary of State. P. S. Not being satisfied with the undefined character of the proposed mission to the U. S. and Mr. Can-
new to me on the subject, in my interview with him on the day I was presented to the king, although an opportunity was offered for the purpose, I wrote him a note after the commencement of this letter, to make certain enquiries on that head, a copy of which note, and of his answer, is herewith enclosed. You will observe that he still holds himself aloof on it. I thought it my duty, and that it comported with strict delicacy, to make the enquiry, and I cannot but consider his reserve as affording cause for an unfavorable inference. It is probable, however, as the door is left open for further communication between us till the moment of my departure, that he will take some other occasion to explain himself more fully on the subject. You may be assured that I will seek every favorable opportunity to obtain such explanation of him.
From Mr. CANNING. Foreign Office, Oct. 22, 1807. Sir—Having seen in the American newspapers, an official article (of which I have the honor to enclose a copy) prohibiting all intercourse between the inhabitants of the U. S. and his majesty's ships of war universally ; I have the honor to request that you will have the goodness to inform me, whether this prohibition will extend to the ship of war, in which a minister accredited from his majesty, and charged with a mission to the American government, shall arrive in any of the ports of the U. S.? Or whether you, or Mr. Pinkney, can undertake to furnish Mr. Rose with such documents, as shall ensure his admission into the American ports, and a reception therein, suitable to the character with which he is invested? I have the honor to be, with great consideration, Sir, your most obedient humble servant, (Signed,) GEORGE CANNING. JAMES MONROE, Esq. &c. &c. &c.
To Mr. CANNING. Portland Place, Oct. 23, 1807. Sir—I have the honor to state in reply to your letter of yesterday, that the case to which you alluded, is specially provided for by the proclamation of the President. You will observe, on a view of that document, that an exception is made, from the prohibition it contains on other vessels, in favor of such ships of his majesty as may enter the ports of the U. S. with dispatches from his majesty's government. Had the case of a public minister, employed in a special mission to my government, not been comprized in that exception, as it clearly is, I have no hesitation in stating that he would be received without delay, at any port at which he might arrive. I have the honor to add, that Mr. Pinkney and myself will be happy to give to his majesty's minister every facility in our power, to secure him the reception at the port of his destination which is due to his public character, and promote his speedy arrival at the seat of the government of the U. S.
I have the honor to be, with great consideration, &c. (Signed) JAMES MONROE. The Right Honorable GEORGE CANNING, Esq. &c. &c. &c.
From Mr. CANNING. Foreign Office, Oct. 23d, 1807. 1-2 past 10, P. M. Sir—I have to acknowledge the honor of your answer to my letter of yesterday evening. It appears to me to be so important to have a clear understanding on the subject, to which that letter refers, that I cannot forbear requesting you to have the goodness to call at the foreign office to-morrow at two o'clock, if that hour should suit your convenience.
I have the honor to be with great consideration, Sir, your most obedient humble servant. (Signed,) GEO. CANNING. James Monroe, Esq. &c. &c. &c.
London, Oct. 28, 1807. Sir—I have the honor to send you a copy of a correspondence with Mr. Canning, touching a difficulty, which he supposed Mr. Rose might experience in entering the bay of Chesapeake, in consequence of the proclamation of the President. In the interview invited by his last note, I expressed my surprise, that any doubt should exist on the subject of it, and assured him, that Mr. Pinkney and myself would be responsible for Mr. Rose's prompt admission into our harbors, and arrival at Washington, without suffering the slightest molestation; on the contrary, that he should receive every attention and facility on the route which he might require. I told him, that no document from us would be necessary for that purpose; but that to put the question beyond all doubt, we would give him a passport, which should go to every object in detail, and that we would also give him letters of introduction to the governors of Maryland and Virginia, the states through which he would pass, to be taken advantage of, if he found that they would be useful. With this explanation and arrangement, Mr. Canning was satisfied.
I also send you a copy of a letter from Mr. Rose, senior, and my answer, relative to the mission of his
Mr. Rose's letter is unofficial, I have thought it proper, in consideration of his near connection with the minister, and station in the government, to communicate it. I leave this to-morrow, to meet in the channel the Augustus, the ship in which I propose to sail with my family to the United States. She has left this port, and is on her way to Portsmouth, where she will receive us. Mr. Rose, by going in a frigate, will most probably arrive before me, and even before doctor Bullus. It is important that you should possess all the information which I can give respecting the business in which I have been lately engaged with Mr. Canning, and of Mr. Rose's mission, at the moment of his arrival. I have therefore thought it advisable to commit to him this letter, and a copy of my correspondence with Mr. Canning, as Mr. Pinkney and I have done our joint dispatch. I expect to be at sea in a week from this date, and shall proceed to Washington immediately after my arrival in the United States, to communicate to you such further information as I may have, relative to the important concerns of our country in which I have been employed. I have the honor to be, with great respect, &c. (Signed) JAMES MONROE. (Documents to be continued.)
French Emperor, through the minister of Marine, Decrees, to know what construction would be put on the Imperial Decree of the 17th Dec. which renders vessels liable to condemnation for having on their passage been visited by British cruisers. The answer to the queries of the applicant was to this effect:—That the decree was liable to no construction different from its letter; that no one had a right to put any construction upon it; that it was plain and simple, and most severely, strictly, and literally executed upon all objects which it embraced; that vessels subject to the decree would be brought before the competent tribunal as soon as possible; and that the crews of such vessels as came under the decree would be permitted to live on board their respective ships, at the expense of the ship and cargo, until they were finally condemned, when they (the crew) would be delivered up to their respective consuls." Copies of the official letter from the minister might have been had in B. C. U. S., but the subject was not thought of at the time of sailing by either the captain or the passengers.
WASHINGTON CITY. MONDAY, MARCH 28.
Both Houses of Congress were almost exclusively occupied on Friday and Saturday in reading the documents accompanying the message of the President of the 22d. inst. The reading, notwithstanding, still remains unfinished, and it is doubtful whether it will be completed on Monday.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. SATURDAY, MARCH 26. Mr. Gardenier, who has been absent from the House for some time from indisposition, this day resumed his seat. Mr. Burwell reported a bill supplemental to the act fixing an uniform rule of naturalization, and repealing all other acts on that subject. [The bill recognizes the same rule of naturalization as the above recited law; also declaring that all citizens shall be considered as such no longer than whilst they actually reside within the United States; and also that if any citizen shall expatriate himself, he shall ipso facto be deemed an alien and ever after be incapable of becoming a citizen.] The bill was twice read and committed.
Mr. J. Clay presented the petition of the Stockholders of the Bank of the U. States, praying an extension of its charter. Mr. C. said he did not mean to press the consideration of the subject during the present session, & moved its reference to the Secretary of the Treasury.
Some conversation ensued on this motion, the great objection being that it would be incorrect to refer a subject for the purpose of obtaining a report on its expediency, until its constitutionality (which has been so much questioned) were decided on.
To obtain a decision of the House on its constitutionality previous to a reference to consider its expediency, Mr. D. R. Williams moved its reference to a committee of the whole, Which latter motion having preference, was carried, 55 to 45.
The House then resumed the reading of the documents accompanying the message from the President on Tuesday last.
A motion was made by Mr. D. R. Williams to meet to-morrow (Sunday)—Negatived, Ayes 19. About 4 o'clock the House adj.
ADVERTISEMENT. TO be sold on Thursday the 7th of April at the Dwelling House of Mrs. ANN SMITH in High street, Her whole Household Furniture, consisting of Feather Beds, Bedsteads, Blankets, Chairs, Mahogany Tables, D. S. Mirror, Glasses, Grate, 4 Stoves, Brass Fender, Andirons, Crockery Ware, Kitchen Furniture, a Milos Cow, Shower Bath, a pair of Globes, and an excellent Pian, in perfect repair; the Piano to be sold either at private or public sale; a valuable Negro woman about twenty, with a fine boy, near two years old; the woman is a good plain cook, a washer, ironer, and house maid. George Town, March 28—
NOTICE. PURSUANT to an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed at November session, 1806, entitled "An act authorizing the collection of certain ground rents due on lots in the Town of Cumberland, in Allegany county," and a supplement thereto, passed at November session, 1807, Public Notice is hereby given to all persons holding unimproved lots in said town, on which ground rents are now due, or before the first day of December next, the said lots will on that day be offered at public sale to the highest bidder, on a credit of 60 days. The sale to be held at Mr. J. Rine's tavern in said town, to commence at ten o'clock, A. M. and continue from day to day, until the whole are sold. THOMAS BEALL, of Saml. March 21—epts
New York, March 25. Yesterday arrived at this port, the brig Lambert, Jenkins, from the Isle of May, and St. Jago; came passengers Mr. Wells and family, and Capt. Hans Brown, of Philadelphia. From these unfortunate passengers the following statement of facts is received:—They took passage at London, Jan. 10, on board the American ship called Bristol Packet, J. M. Burns, master, bound for New York. They left Gravesend the 12th of January, and the Downs on the 17th with fair wind and weather, which continued until the 24th, when two sails hove in sight. Unfortunately they proved to be two French frigates, Themis and Penelope, 4 days from Bordeaux. They immediately made prize of the ship, under the French decree, finding she was from a British port, and besides, had British manufactory stores on board. They ordered the captain and passengers on board the frigates, and after taking out of the prize what they thought proper, they parted her.
Our informants were put on board the Penelope and well treated personally by the Captain, (Debarron) to whom they return their thanks for his civilities. On the 3d of February, they took with the crew of the Bristol Packet, in all 33, were put on board the schooner Elizabeth, bound to the Isle of May, where they arrived in ten days, and from whence they shipped for New York. [The above frigates were bound to the West Indies with troops.]
Baltimore, March 25. By an arrival at Philadelphia from Calcutta we learn that an embargo had existed for several weeks at that port, owing to an insurrection or engagement which had taken place between the natives and English troops in which a number of British soldiers and 60 officers were killed. The information was received from a passenger in the Philadelphia stage. The day's mail will no doubt furnish us with particulars.
PUBLIC MEETING.
The Citizens of Washington are requested to attend a meeting THIS DAY at Mr. LINDSEY'S Hotel, Capitol Hill at Five o'clock, P. M. to take into consideration a Memorial presented by the Citizens of George Town to Congress, requesting the imposition of a Tax on the county of Washington (including the city) for the purpose of erecting a Bridge over Rock Creek, and also praying the repeal of the law which exempts the city from county taxation. March 25—
FAMILY PHYSICIAN.
A new and greatly improved Family Physician, entitled "The Planter's and Mariner's Companion." FOR SALE AT R. C. WEIGHTMAN'S Book store, Washington city. J. MILLIGAN'S George Town And KID & THOMAS'S Market street Baltimore. March 28—2w
ADVERTISEMENT.
TO be sold on Thursday the 7th of April at the Dwelling House of Mrs. ANN SMITH in High street, Her whole Household Furniture, consisting of Feather Beds, Bedsteads, Blankets, Chairs, Mahogany Tables, D. S. Mirror, Glasses, Grate, 4 Stoves, Brass Fender, Andirons, Crockery Ware, Kitchen Furniture, a Milos Cow, Shower Bath, a pair of Globes, and an excellent Pian, in perfect repair; the Piano to be sold either at private or public sale; a valuable Negro woman about twenty, with a fine boy, near two years old; the woman is a good plain cook, a washer, ironer, and house maid. George Town, March 28—
NOTICE.
PURSUANT to an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed at November session, 1806, entitled "An act authorizing the collection of certain ground rents due on lots in the Town of Cumberland, in Allegany county," and a supplement thereto, passed at November session, 1807, Public Notice is hereby given to all persons holding unimproved lots in said town, on which ground rents are now due, or before the first day of December next, the said lots will on that day be offered at public sale to the highest bidder, on a credit of 60 days. The sale to be held at Mr. J. Rine's tavern in said town, to commence at ten o'clock, A. M. and continue from day to day, until the whole are sold. THOMAS BEALL, of Saml. March 21—epts

ENGLISH HOUSE OF LORDS. PROTEST.
The Veneris, 21 Jan. 1808. A motion was made to omit the fourth paragraph in the motion for an address to the throne (viz. the paragraph respecting the seizure of the Danish fleet), and the question being put, "That the said paragraph do stand part of the motion," the same was carried in the affirmative.
DISSENTIENT. Because no proof of hostile intention on the part of Denmark has been adduced, nor any case of necessity made out, to justify the attack upon Copenhagen, without which the measure is, in our conception, discreditable to the character and injurious to the interests of this country.
W. FREDERICK, VASSAL HOLLAND. RAWDON. NORFOLK. LAUDERDALE. SIDMOUTH. GREY. Dissentient, for the above reasons, and for those that follow:
Because, It has only been through the slow and painful progression of many ages, that civilized nations have emerged from a state of continual insecurity and violence, by the establishment of an universal public law, whose maxims and precedents have been long acknowledged to be of the same force and obligation, as the municipal constitutions of particular states. A system which has gradually ripened with the advancement of learning and the extension of commerce, and which ought to be held sacred and inviolate by all governments, as binding the whole civilized world under one politic and moral dominion.
Because, Alledged departures from the principles and authority of this public law in the earliest stages of the French revolution were held out by the parliament of Great Britain, as the origin and justification of the first war with revolutionary France, and because in all its subsequent stages, the continuance of hostilities was uniformly vindicated in various acts of state, as being necessary for the support of the moral and political order of the world, against the avowed disregard and subversion of it by the different governments of France, in their groundless and unprovoked attacks upon the independence of unoffending nations.
Because, The people of Great Britain in being repeatedly called upon by the king and parliament to support the public law, thus alleged to have been violated, and to exhibit an example to the most distant ages, of inflexible national virtue, submitted to the heaviest burthens, and sacrificed the most essential advantages, rather than consent to any peace, which was considered by their government as an abandonment of their allies, or as an inadequate security for the rights and privileges of other nations: And because, it appears in many state papers during the progress of the wars with the different governments of France, that it was the duty and the interest of Great Britain, and her pledge to the world, to maintain inviolate the acknowledged principles of public law, as the only foundations upon which the relations of peace and amity between nations could be supported.
Because, It is the first and most indispensable maxim of public law, founded indeed upon the immutable principles of justice, that no violence should be offered by one state to another, nor any intrusion made upon the rights, property, independence or security of its inhabitants, except upon an aggression by such state, and the refusal of adequate satisfaction; or in the rare instance of indispensable necessity, involving national destruction, such as in the case of an individual would justify homicide, or destruction of property for self preservation: and because the observance of this rule should, if possible, be held more sacred by great and powerful nations, it being the very end and object of universal law to give perfect security to the weakest communities under the shadow of an impartial justice.
Because, The late attack upon Copenhagen, in a season of profound peace with the crown and people of Denmark, and immediately following the solemn declaration by the crown prince, of his resolution to maintain his neutrality, and to consider any nation as an enemy which should seek to disturb it, would, without some just cause, which in this case is wholly unsupported by proof, be a most manifest and unprincipled departure from the whole system of moral policy and justice, which the British government had, as above, professed to act upon, inasmuch as any contempt or violation of public law by the government of France, though it might release Great Britain from all observance of it, as far as regarded such offending belligerent, could not possibly destroy or affect its protective sanctions in her intercourse with friendly and peaceable states. On the contrary, it ought to have invested the law of nations with a more binding and sacred obligation, since the professed object and justification of our war with France at that very moment was to restore to a suffering world the good faith and security which had
been lost by a contempt of its dominion.
Because, Information of a projected confederacy between France and Denmark, assumed, without evidence, to have been communicated to ministers through channels which called, on their parts, for inviolable secrecy, might be a foundation for acquitting them from blame, if the question before the House had been the propriety of their acquittal or condemnation, yet it cannot possibly justify, in the absence of all proof, an address to his majesty, pronouncing their attack upon Copenhagen to be an act of irresponsible duty; because, giving credit to the declarations of ministers, that they had informations of such projected confederacy, it is impossible for this House to know whether they ought to have been acted upon to so dreadful an extent, without having before it, most precisely and distinctly, the specific nature of such communications, so as to be able to estimate the credit due to them, not only from the facts themselves, but from the situations and characters of the persons by whom they were made.
The conduct, besides, of ministers, in the whole transaction, is in manifest opposition to this principle of the attack. They made no such charge upon Denmark when before Copenhagen, nor even pretended to have invaded her with a cause of war. Their language upon the spot, and even in the address proposed to his majesty, is the language of regret, a language utterly inconsistent with the vindication of a proceeding, which would have been as mild and forbearing against an enemy, as it was barbarous and treacherous against a friend. The position also of Denmark, when the assault was made upon her, is the strongest evidence to resist the presumption of an understanding with France. Her army was in Holstein, which France was menacing, whilst Zealand was left defenceless, and the ships dismantled, at a moment when the consciousness of a treaty or confederacy must have suggested to all the contracting or confederating parties, the necessity of concentrating the whole force of Denmark, to defend her capitol, and to secure her fleet.
Because, No evidence whatever has been laid before the House, to establish any hostile confederacy between Denmark and France, nor any design on the part of the former to depart from the strictest neutrality; on the contrary, the abovementioned solemn declaration of the Crown Prince to the British minister ought to have been received by his majesty's servants as the pledge of a firm resolution to maintain neutrality; and because nothing short of a hostile design in the government of Denmark, could justify the demand of her fleet, or the bombardment of Copenhagen to enforce the surrender of it.
Because, It was completely in the power of Great Britain to have protected the Danish fleet from any hostile attack of France, which destroys the pretence of such an indispensable necessity as could alone justify even the slightest trespass upon a peaceable and unoffending state.
Because, Still assuming, in the absence of all evidence to the contrary, that the government of Denmark was faithful to her neutrality, no speculation of the probable fall of her fleet into the possession or power of France, could possibly justify its hostile seizure by Great Britain. Such a principle would be utterly subversive of the first elements of public law, as being destructive of the independence of weaker states, inasmuch as it would create a jurisdiction in the stronger nations to substitute their own security and convenience for the general rule, and invest them also with the sole privilege of determining the occasions upon which they might consider them to be endangered; and because to justify the attack and plunder of a weak unoffending power, upon the assumption that a stronger belligerent might otherwise attack and plunder her, would be to erect a new public law upon the foundations of dishonor and violence, making the tyranny of one nation a warrant for substituting the dominion of oppression for the sacred obligations of morality, humanity and justice.
Because, Supposing it to have been not only probable, but even certain, that France could have succeeded in carrying away in the winter the ships and stores from Copenhagen, but without the consent of Denmark, faithful to her neutrality, the iniquity of that act, in sound policy, independently of all considerations of justice, ought to have been left to the French government to perpetrate; because the carcases of the ships would have been the only fruit of an act of the deepest atrocity, whilst the indignation of a brave and generous people, now too justly directed against Great Britain, would then have been pointed against France; and Denmark, with the protection of our fleets, might have kept open the Baltic to our commerce, and extended our maritime means of restoring the tranquillity of the world.
Because, Until this attack upon Copenhagen shall receive vindication by proof of its justice, or condemna-
tion, in the absence of it, from the Parliament of G. Britain, she has lost her moral station in the world, since the very system of wrong and violence, which she has so long confederated Europe to destroy, at the expence of her blood and resources, will have been established and confirmed by her own example.
Because, A whole nation ought not in the mean time to be dishonored, nor its immemorial characteristic brought into question for the acts of ministers; and because it is the duty of those subjects, who, by the constitution of the government, have the high privilege of perpetuating their sentiments upon the public records of their country, to vindicate themselves from the imputation of having acquiesced in acts of the greatest injustice.
ERSKINE.
JUNUS CRAVEN HAS removed his entire stock of DRY GOODS from Alexandria to Washington, and is now opening, at his new Store, between the Marine Garrison and Navy Yard Gate, an assortment equal to any in the District; among which are,
Wool's best London cloths, Do. double milled & plain cassimeres, Bennett's cords and velvets, Constitution Gerrow, hunting, Trailing, and silver cords, Velvets, Imperial, Brunswick waistcoating, Silk mole-skins do. Tolliets, swansdown do. Plain and figured Marseilles do. Bearskin coatings, Plains, kerseys, halfhicks, Rose and diffi blank ts, flannels, Superfine green cloth table covers, Calicoes, colored cambrics, Ginghams, silk and cotton chambrays, Furniture Chintz, Cambrie and jaronet muslins, India and British figured do. India mullmull figured and plain, Plain and figured lenoes, Laced cambrics, Elegant tambooured mulls, Grecian robes and Pelisse dresses, 84 damask and raw silk shawls, Damask scarfs, Camel's hair and swansdown do. Down scarfs, Long and short lace sleeves, spider & nett sleeves, Extra long and habit kid gloves, Do. do. silk do. Do. do. raw silk do. Cross-barred and plain Mantuas and lustrings, Persians and Medes, Thread and cotton laces, Lace caps and handkerchiefs, Book muslin and leno cap patterns, 447-8 Irish linens, Long lawns, linen cambrics, Irish diapers, table-cloths, napkins, Cotton counterpanes, Cambric Dimities, Common do. Furniture do. Ladies' and gentlemen's silk, thread, cotton, worsted, lamb's wool & Angola hose, Gentlemen's pantaloons do. Silk cords and buttons, Ribbons, floss threads, Scarlet and other colored bombazets, Hearth rugs, Russia sheeting, ticklingburg, Osnaburgs, baftas, gurrabs, &c. &c. ALSO, Imperial and young hyson tea of a superior quality in small boxes, to suit families, or by the pound—Also genuine Havana segars. T. C. is determined to sell on the lowest terms. February 3—tf
PUBLIC SALE. BY virtue of a decree of the honorable the circuit court of the district of Columbia, sitting as a court of chancery for the county of Washington, in the suit of
John Roberts and Samuel G. Griffith complainants.
Against Benjamin Bryan Defendant.
WILL be sold at public auction to the highest bidder, on Tuesday the 29th day of March next, at Stile's Hotel, in the city of Washington, at the hour of 12 o'clock, M. a lot of ground in said city, in that square designated in the plan of said city by square north of square numbered seven hundred and fifty-three, the said lot being bounded as follows to wit: Beginning at a point in the line of the west side of New Jersey Avenue, at the distance of one hundred and fifty one feet ten inches from the stone planted at the north east corner of said square, and running thence with the line of the said Avenue twenty five feet, thence leaving the said Avenue, and with a line at right angles with the line thereof running one hundred feet, then turning in a direction parallel to the line of the said Avenue, and running thence twenty five feet, thence an hundred feet to the point of beginning, containing about two thousand five hundred square feet of ground, together with the improvements thereon erected, and all the advantages therein belonging or appertaining.
This property is eligibly situated between the Capital hill and sugar house, and may be inspected at any time prior to the day of sale.
The terms of sale are cash or money to be paid immediately on the ratification of the sale by the court.
JOHN G. McDONALD, Trustee. 26th February, 1808.—cp4w
BURNS AND BELL
WOOLLEN drapers, men's merchants, and tailors, New Jersey Avenue, opposite the Secretary of the Navy's, respectfully inform the public that they have commenced business in the above line, where they will endeavor to give satisfaction—they have on hand a fresh supply of the most fashionable goods, suitable for the approaching season, all fresh and of the very best quality.
N. B. Regimentals and naval uniforms made in the most elegant and fashionable stile with neatness and dispatch. October 23—tf
LINDSAY'S HOTEL.
The Subscriber has taken that well calculated house on the Capitol Hill Late occupied by Mr. Frost formerly by Mr. Stelle—Where he intends to open a Tavern on the 24th October. Those gentlemen who may favor him with their Custom may rely on every attention in the Power of the Public's devoted Servant.
GEO. W. LINDSAY. N. B.—EIGHT or TEN BOARDERS may be conveniently accommodated. October 19—tf
ROSS AND GETTY, HAVE for sale at their store George Town, the following articles just received from Philadelphia, by the schooner Carolina, capt. HAND, jun. viz. 30 kegs butter, 20 barrels, New Town, Pippin Apples, 10 do. buck wheat flour, 10 do. Cranberries, and 10 do. shell bark hickory nuts. Also a small assortment of very elegant Looking Glasses, Waiters, Trays, polished steel Shovel and Tongs, with cut and brass heads, &c. &c. January 9—tf
Notice to the Public. STAYED to my place convenient to the Hotel, city of Washington, on the 14th of March 1808, a small Brindell Buffalo COW, the tops of the ears cropped, no other marks appearing. Any person proving property and paying expenses, will please to call at my house as above mentioned. ARTHUR THOMPSON. March 23—3t
A GREAT BARGAIN. JOSEPH WHEATON Broker and Commission Merchant, has put into his hands for sale, at his office in F street near the Bank, a valuable property in the city of Washington, consisting of 646,453 square feet of city LOTS advantageously situated on the most prominent and valuable streets, and near the Navy Yard and Bridge, and to be had on the most reasonable terms of payment. This great bargain is recommended to gentlemen desirous of securing an early fortune, in this truly growing and flourishing city; the permanent residence and seat of the government of the United States. Other city property to be had—Houses and Lots—Enquire as above. All kinds of STOCKS bought and sold. If Wanted to Purchase a few MILITARY LAND WARRANTS Washington city, Dec. 11—tf
MR. JOSHUA B. BOND'S COLORADO running HORSE
FIRST CONSUL, WILL stand this season, at the subscriber's farm in Prince Georges county, Maryland, about seven miles from Queen Anne, ten from Bladensburg, the same distance from Upper Marlborough, and about sixteen miles from the city of Washington; at Twenty Five dollars the season, and one dollar to the groom; but Twenty One dollars will be received in full if sent with the MARE; if the money is not sent with the MARE it is requested that notes of hand will be sent at that time, given for Twenty Six dollars, payable at the expiration of the season, which will commence immediately and end the 1st of August. Good pasture will be furnished gratis, as soon as the grass is good, and in the mean time, hay and corn furnished at the common price, for the mares according to orders. The utmost care will be taken of the mares, but I will not be answerable for accidents or escapes. Consul is of fine figure, beautiful bright bay, with a small blaze in his face, and his hind ancles white; full 15 and 12 hands high. It is expected that the stock from Consul and well bred mares, will not be surpassed by the stock from any horse (scarcely) in America, for thurst, carriage, or saddle; or even from Consul and good looking mares, which have none of the running blood; their colts cannot be other than elegant in a carriage or under the saddle. Such mares as have little, or not any of what is supposed to be running blood in them, may be put to Consul at half price, the money sent with the mares. It should be preferred by gentlemen living beyond Bladensburg and Upper Marlborough, who wish to breed from Consul, by giving notice to the subscriber, he can be sent one day in each week to each place, from the first day of April, while there will be any mares to send to him from either of those directions; say Bladensburg on Tuesday, and Upper Marlborough on Saturday. ISAAC DUCKETT. March 12, 1808
PEDIGREE OF FIRST CONSUL. HE was foaled in Philadelphia county, June 1798, got by the noted running horse Flag of Truce, his dam by the imported horse Slender, his granddam from the imported mare Diana. Diana was got by Old Eclipse, Slender was got by King Herod, who produced more runners than any other horse in England, as may be seen by the Racing Calendar, therefore it may in truth be said on the dam side of First Consul, the two great grand sires were the best horses England ever produced. Flag of Truce was bred by colonel Good of Virginia and was esteemed the best turf horse in his day and was the sire to colonel Taylor's famous running horse Leviathan. First Consul has won either 20 or 22 purses from 100l. and 160g. and never started against a horse he did not outrun until the fall he was eight years old—the spring following he won three purses and distanced the field the first day at New Market on Long Island. JOSHUA B. BOND, Philadelphia. March 18—ep M&wf
THE SUBSCRIBER means to attend the Public Sales of LANDS at Jeffersonville, Indiana Territory which commences on the 2d Monday in April and continue 6 weeks, and will transact business there on Commission. Letters addressed to him at Thornsburg, Va. will be attended between now and the first day of April. JOSEPH POLLARD. March 23—3t
CHARLES H. VARDEA, MERCHANT TAILOR,
RESPECTFULLY informs the gentlemen of the district of Columbia and public in general, that he has just received by a late arrival from Philadelphia,
A CHOICE ASSORTMENT Of superfine Cloths, Cassimeres, single and double milled, superfine Coating, black silk Florentines. Likewise an elegant assortment of Spanelets and rich silk Mole-skins for waistcoats with a variety of other articles suitable for the season.
Regimentals and Navy Uniforms made in the most elegant and uniform stile of fashion.
Richard Horswell's celebrated patent parallel suspenders far superior to any hitherto in use can be had on the same terms retail, as at his manufactory, November 27—tf
THIS IS TO GIVE NOTICE, That the subscriber of St. Mary's county, hath obtained from the Orphan's Court of St. Mary's county in Maryland Letters Testamentary on the personal estate of of Commd Plowden late of the county aforesaid deceased. All persons having claims against the said deceased are hereby warned to exhibit the same with vouchers thereof to the subscriber, at or before the 24th day of September next, they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate. Given under my hand this 18th day of March, eight hundred & eight. HENRY NEALE, Ex'r. March 23—6w
PORTRAITS,
PAINTED IN OIL COLORS. BY C. BOYLE, at the Building formerly occupied by Mr. G. Stewart, Pennsylvania avenue. Washington, March 11—tf
THE subscriber has purchased out the stock of GOODS lately belonging to Mr. Elisha Riggs, and will be enabled, from the conditions of purchase, to dispose of them in the same house on as liberal if not better terms than they were sold before. He expects by capt. Hand, from Philadelphia this week or the first of next, a handsome Spring Supply, which will make his assortment complete. They were laid in for cash, therefore will accommodate his friends no doubt satisfactorily. JOHN PETER. George Town, March 16—cp4w
NOTICE.
A Dividend will be made amongst the Creditors of the late Mr. Richard Cramphin on Friday the 1st day of April next, at Mr. William Ross's tavern, in Bladensburg. The creditors are requested to attend with their claims legally authenticated, as no respect will be paid to any others, except those known to be justly due by the Administrator.
Bonds passed to the subscriber for property purchased at the sales of the deceased's effects last Spring, became all due on the 10th of this month, and unless taken up by Saturday the 19th will be put in suit without respect to persons. THOMAS BOWIE, Admin'r of Rich'd Cramphin. March 16—7
SECRET HISTORY
OR HORRORS OF ST. DOMINGO. IN A SERIES OF LETTERS written by a LADY, to Col. BURR, late Vice-President of the United States, principally during the command of general Rochambeau, Price One Dollar. And other NEW BOOKS
Among which are the following: D. C. Third vol. Chapman's Select Speeches, 2 50 Fourth volume, do. 2 50 Reeces Medical Guide, 3 00 Hitchcocks Poems, 75 Barlow's Columbiad, fine plates, 20 00 Brooke's Gazetteer, new edition, 3 50 Public Characters for 1807, 4 25 L-y of an Irish Harp, by Miss Owenson, 1 00
LIKEWISE,
The second number of col. Toussard's American Artillerists Companion 2 00
The third number is now in the Press.
Gentlemen wishing to patronise this valuable work, are earnestly requested to call and leave their names at
J. MARSH'S, Book Store, George Town.
Where may be had any Book that can possibly be procured in New York, Philadelphia or Baltimore, without any advance on the price. March 18—6t
District of Columbia, Washington county, to wit:
IN the case of ROBERT GLENN an insolvent debtor, confined in the prison of Washington county aforesaid for debt, which he is unable to pay. Notice is hereby given to the creditors of the said Robert Glenn, that on Monday the 21th of April next at the hour of 10 o'clock A.M. at the Capitol in the court room the oath prescribed by the act of Congress, entitled "An act for the relief of insolvent debtors within the district of Columbia," will be administered to the said Robert Glenn and a trustee appointed, unless sufficient cause be then and there shown to the contrary. Ordered that this notice be published three times in the National Intelligencer before the 4th day of April next.
By order of the hon. Wm. Cranch, chief judge of the circuit court of the district of Columbia. WM. BRENT, Ck. March 23—3t
NOTICE.
THE Subscriber being anxious to settle all his business, has sold his entire stock of goods to John Peter; he therefore requests all those indebted to him to call and pay their accounts, (particularly such as are of long standing, as further indulgence cannot be given them). His Books are removed to the counting house of his brother Romulus Riggs, where all his accounts will be ready for settlement by his assistant Mr. Samuel C. Offut, or ELISHA RIGGS. George Town, March 16—tf