The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1802-05-31 00:00:00

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER,
AND WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
Vol. II.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
N. CCXLI.
FIVE DOLLS. PER ANN.
MONDAY, MAY 31st, 1802.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
To the Editor of the National Intelligencer.
Sir, When an animosity has been once conceived towards certain men and certain principles, the mind discovers the operation of their baleful influence in transactions with which they are obviously and entirely unconnected. The enemies of the present administration are not content to condemn indiscriminately every measure of the government, and to abuse, without regard to decency or justice, the ministers of every department. Their hostility extends even to the college where the chief magistrate was educated. And because it has hitherto been the seat of republican principles, they would rejoice could it no longer remain the temple of science. Since it has happened, that some disorders which occurred at William and Mary, during the present course, have been candidly imputed to the political opinions prevalent there, by the false voices that have been industriously employed throughout the union, to misrepresent their causes and exaggerate their consequences.
With simple pain and indignation, I have remarked the temper, with which the story of these disorders has been handed to the world. The false accounts, framed to deceive the people of Virginia, have been corrected by a true statement of facts, in those papers whose circulation is more particularly confined to this state. I have referred to the National Intelligencer, as a more general and extensive channel of communication, in order to correct the errors, which may be entertained in remoter parts of the union.
The disturbances at William & Mary originated in a duel between two of the students, induced by circumstances in which the public are not interested. The president and professors possess no authority to call before them those who are not within the sphere of their jurisdiction, for the purpose of information; nor have they any coercive means of compelling a disclosure of facts, even from the members of the college. Thus situated, they appear to have thought, that, in the instance of a duel, the man whom public report designates as a party concerned is no longer worthy to enjoy the advantages of an institution, whose laws he has transgressed. On the other hand, the students affirmed, that rumour afforded no sufficient ground of punishment, and urged this opinion as a reason for revoking the sentence of expulsion. I do not mean to give an opinion upon this controverted point. After some delay, however, the sentence was confirmed. I know, that the professors were entirely friendly to the objects of that sentence, and were induced to render it only from a painful sense of duty. I know too, that however found may have been the objection urged by the students, their opposition proceeded less from a conviction of its correctness, than from an ardent attachment to their unfortunate friends.
It is not usual at William and Mary, or at any other college, that one student beholds with calm indifference, the punishment inflicted on another. Their sympathy is attended with an enthusiasm which knows no bounds. The passions of youth are frequently betrayed into the most imprudent violence by zeal originally virtuous and commendable.
I would not be understood to justify or extenuate the riots, which happened in Williamsburg. These remarks are intended to evince, however, that the turbulence of our republican principles had no agency in producing them.
Those riots have been exhibited to the world in the highest possible colours of exaggeration. It has been represented, that a large majority of the students willingly joined in the tumult, and menaced the few who were reluctant, into a coalition; that the church, the houses of the professors, and those of private gentlemen, were broken into pieces, by the impious and indiscriminate rage of the lawless multitude; and that, in consequence of the ungovernable disposition of its students, the doors of our venerable college were closed forever. Where-as, the scene, far from being thus mighty and terrible, was rather mean and pitiful. Not more than six students at the utmost were concerned; the rest severely felt and sorely expressed their disappointment. The windows of a few gentlemen were partially damaged; one professor lost the light over his door; another a single pane of glass; and a third, who was the minister of the parish, experienced the loss of pieces of mischief, though in an higher degree; since the resentment, which he had incurred, was levelled, not only against the windows of his own house, but against those of his
church. And with regard to the college, its exercises were never suspended.
It has been represented, that these disturbances are properly imputable to the temper of our political opinions. If they had any influence, why did it happen, that all those who entertained these notions, were not concerned? Why did it happen, that not the smallest injury was offered to the professor of mathematics, a gentleman well known in that part of Virginia, for a zealous opposition to the present administration?
It has been represented, that a young gentleman, formerly expelled from Princeton, returned to William and Mary, sowed the seeds of disorder there which had been crushed in New-Jersey, and finally contrived to subvert the only seminary of any importance in his native state. I am thoroughly acquainted with the character alluded to. The qualifications of his heart, and the powers of his understanding, are equally known to me. I conscientiously believe he has no disposition to subvert so useful an institution as either of the colleges above mentioned. And I know that (admitting him to be as malevolent as his enemies would have him) he possesses no talents which fit him for such an enterprize.
Such, and so unfounded, are the falsehoods that have been circulated concerning us. How widely different, Mr. Smith, are the enemies of William and Mary from her friends! Princeton is her principal rival; yet when that college was burnt, we felt a most cordial and sincere regret. The shades of difference which distinguished the political sentiments of the two schools were forgotten, and the president and professors of William and Mary generously lamented the fall of Princeton as a check to the promotion of science.
You will pardon me, Sir, for the length of this letter. I with the falsehoods, I have determined to detect, had justified my saying less. You, I know, will readily co-operate in every attempt, the false object of which is truth and justice.
A STUDENT.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Monday, April 19, 1802.
DEBATE, in committee of the whole, Mr. S. Smith in the chair, on the bills, from the Senate, to amend the judicial system of the United States.
The first section, as follows, under consideration:
"That from and after the passing of this act, the supreme court of the United States shall be held by the justices thereof, or any four of them, at the city of Washington, and shall have one session in each and every year, to commence on the first Monday of February annually, and that if four of the said justices, shall not attend within ten days after the time hereby appointed for the commencement of the said session, the business of the said court shall be continued over till the next stated session thereof: Provided always, That any one or more of the said justices attending as aforesaid shall have power to make all necessary orders touching any suit, action, writ of error, process, pleadings or proceedings, returned to the said court or depending therein, preparatory to the hearings, trial or decision of such action, suit, appeal, writ of error, process, pleadings or proceedings."
Mr. Bayard moved to strike out one session, and insert two sessions.
Mr. Bayard. I do not know any necessity why the supreme court should not be allowed to sit but once a year. We know that by the system of 1789, there were two sessions; and that under every modification of that system there have been two sessions. We know that this court has original jurisdiction in many cases, and that this arrangement will subject suitors to much delay. I know not from what analogy this system is derived. I know that the inevitable delays of law are sufficient of themselves, and I should think that system improper which multiplies the delays and vexations to which every system is inevitably subject. It will be recollected that it is impossible to bring a suit to trial the first term. I observe by this bill that a certain mongrel court is contemplated, to consist of one justice, vested with power to take preliminary steps without authority to take final ones. When the justices of the supreme court had to perform more laborious duties than they will have to perform under this system,
they sat twice a year. They then went from one end of the union to the other; whereas they are now to be confined to two states. I know not why suitors are now to be deprived of the advantages they then possessed. I therefore hope the provisions of the former system will be agreed to.
Mr. Nicholson. I hope the amendment will not prevail. When the gentleman observed that inconveniences would exist under the provisions of this bill, he ought to have pointed them out. For my part I see none. In last June term, there were only eight cases before the supreme court. Now, if it is necessary to call the justices of the supreme court together twice a year from all parts of the union to try eight cases, I confess I am at a loss to assign the reasons for the necessity. Suppose the number of cases should double, for it is probable they will vary from a larger to a lesser number. Suppose, then, they should enlarge to double the number, will it not be infinitely more to the ease of the judges to stay four weeks once a year, than to stay two weeks twice a year. Nor do I know that any delay will happen in the administration of justice. For one judge is to remain here in the recess to receive pleas, grant rules, &c. and if any original actions are commenced they are to take test from the 1st of August, equally with the 1st of February, according to the time of the year when they are brought. The pleadings may be filed, and all the preliminary steps taken in August, as well as in February. All the necessary orders may be given, as well in the recess as during the sittings of the court. It is barely possible, in some cases, that a delay of six months may happen, and that is all, though I do not know that ever that will occur.
Mr. Bayard. I thought I had pointed out an inconvenience, the greatest that can attend the administration of justice, I mean a delay attending the trial of causes; equal nearly to a denial of justice. A cause can rarely be brought on the first term, and then there will be no possibility of a trial for a year, whereas if there are two terms, it may be decided upon in six months. The bill lays there is no difference between six and twelve months delay. What temptation does this present to council? It is known that appeals are frequently made for the purpose of delay; and it is by artifice delay can be accomplished for a term, they will gain an entire year. Is this no advantage to a man, who has the money of another in his hands which he does not want to pay?
What is the answer of the gentleman from Maryland? The convenience of the judges will be promoted by this arrangement! This is a laudable spirit, and I am glad to see it come from gentlemen on the other side of the house. But in my opinion the justice ought to regard the convenience of the community; and the single question is, whether we will consult the convenience of the justices, or that of the community. I would wish to consult both; but when it interferes, the convenience of the judges must give way to that of the community.
The gentleman from Maryland has mentioned the paucity of causes before the supreme court. But I do not know that a paucity of causes at the end of a term is an evid of little business. I do know, from attending the court, that business was left undone at one term that required one week, and at the last term that required two weeks to complete. Besides, the causes decided, though few, are of vast importance. One cause was determined the last term to the amount of 180,000 dollars. The delay of such a cause might ruin one man, or make the fortune of another.
I do not know that this amendment will interfere with the other provisions of the bill, and I can therefore see no reason against adopting it.
Mr. Nicholson. I said there was a possibility of a delay of six months being incurred by this bill. But I do not consider it as so great a hardship as the gentleman does. I do not know the regulations in the supreme court for the continuance of causes. But I know that in Maryland a cause on appeal may rest for two years. Nor do I think it correct to hurry on a suitor to trial the first term. Besides, in the supreme court, under the provisions of this bill, there will be no necessity imposed on the suitor to attend at the August term; the council can make the necessary arrangements. I do not speak with absolute certainty when I say that there has been no original cause brought in the supreme court. In the state courts few causes are tried the first year—one year therefore can be considered as but a small de-
lay; & in a case where 180,000 dollars is depending, I will ask if the court would order a party unprepared, to go to trial the first term?
Mr. Griswold. We probably judge of the reasonableness or unreasonableness of delay by the practice of the states from which we severally come. In the state I come from it has been thought unnecessary to allow one term for delay in the case of writs of error. Because the errors being of record, the defendant always knows the reason on which the appeal is founded. The same principle applies to the courts of the United States. The arrangements of the bill will generally produce a postponement of twelve, and at any rate of six months. In some cases this will be a great hardship, and in others it may ruin the parties. I therefore think it important that the supreme court should sit twice a year. On appeals there can be no necessity for delay, as no new facts are to be tried, and all that is required is a decision on points of law.
Mr. Nicholson said, he did not pretend to know the course of proceeding in the courts of Connecticut; but in no court, with which proceedings he was acquainted, did he know the reasons of error assigned on the record.
Mr. Dents. It appears to me, from the provisions of the bill, the supreme court may in future be more properly called a court of injustice than a court of justice. I have always thought the delays in the courts of Maryland a great grievance, where in the case of a simple, undisputed bond, a delay may take place of four years. I feel there-fore no desire to accommodate the system of the United States, to that of Maryland; but rather to conform the system of Maryland to that of the United States. I know that the disposition of the defendant is of itself sufficient to produce delay, without any legal aid. I will challenge my colleague, or any other man, to shew me a court of appeal that sits but once a year. In such courts it had been usual to assign errors the first time, and try the next. Gentlemen should recollect that in this district an appeal lies in all cases above 100 dollars. The delay in the supreme court will certainly encourage appeals, which may be excellent for the counsellors, however unjust or oppressive to the community.
Mr. Nicholson. I will only say, that if it has heretofore been the practice of the supreme court to assign errors the first term, this bill does not abridge that power. They may be stated the 1st term, and the only delay that can occur will be for one year instead of six months.
Mr. Elmore. It appears to me that the arguments of gentlemen do not apply to the supreme court. It is not pretended that this court is calculated for the trial of original causes, but barely for the correction of errors. And it seems to me, that more delay will be effected by having two terms a year than by having one; for the number of causes actually tried will depend much more on the length than the frequency of terms. If there shall be but one sitting a year the justices will consider themselves under an obligation to try all the causes before them. It will also be recollected that delays in this court under its present organization are only to be affected by rules of court and not by our laws.
I wish to know, whether the causes that are likely to arise will not come up from every part of the union; not merely from Maryland, as might be inferred from the remarks of one gentleman? I would ask, if this is the case, whether the greatest of all possible inconveniences will not result from the frequency of terms? When the council are obliged to come on two or three times a year instead of once, will not the expense to the suitor be greatly increased?
It is decidedly my opinion that the expediting of business will principally depend upon the length of the term and the urgency with which the justices push forward the trial of causes.
In the state of New-York, the court of last resort sits but once a year, and no inconvenience has been experienced. They sit during the session of the legislature, and no cause is ever postponed without a sufficient cause for the delay. If then we consider that by this bill the inconvenience of a frequent attendance at courts is removed, and that the certainty of a trial, perhaps at the first term, is insured, in my opinion we must conclude that this plan is better calculated to expedite business, and to accomplish the due administration of justice, than the having more frequent sessions, which will be shorter, & in which business cannot be so well done.
Mr. Henderson. Whatever reasons
may have induced gentlemen in bringing forward this bill, I did not expect to hear alleged among them, that the frequency of terms is calculated to delay the administration of justice. If this amendment is not acceded to, the inevitable effect will be that hereafter the docket of the supreme court will be crowded, however it may have been heretofore. It will be recollected that the court is bound to exercise a legal discretion, and whenever a party desires a postponement, the court must decide according to this discretion; and I beg to know whether there will not exist the same reasons for delay when there is but one term a year, that exist when there are two? Must not the court be governed by the same rules in both cases. If so, the chance of getting a cause tried, is not in proportion to the paucity of terms.
The gentleman from New-York, thinks the paucity of terms will prevent delay. But, how can this be? May not suitors, in all cases for sums above 2,000 dollars, appeal; and may they not continue their suits from term to term? So also, as to writs of error which may be brought as to facts as well as law, this will operate as a complete supersedeas.
It seems to me wrong to institute courts for the administration of justice, and only give the citizen an access to them once a year. And if but one term a year, why not, on the same principle, have only one term in two or three years? The same arguments urged in favor of the former might with equal force be applied to the latter. He, therefore, hoped such inconclusive arguments would not prevail.
Mr. Elmore. My ideas on this subject may perhaps differ from those of other gentlemen from the different practices that prevail in different states. It is a fact, that in the state of New-York an appeal cannot be made barely for the purpose of delay. There a writ of error cannot be obtained, unless two council, after examination of the record, declare that, in their opinion, there is a material error. And if you make provision by law, that no removal shall, on the allegation of error, for the mere purpose of delay, take place, will not the court be bound by it? This is the only argument I have heard on the other side, and I have answered it by stating the practice in the state of New-York.
Mr. T. Morris said that when his colleague had stated that the court of appeals in New-York sits but once a year and that an inconvenience had been experienced, he ought to have added that the court sits as a branch of the legislature about three months. It follows that inconvenience may not occur there, though it should elsewhere. Having heard no reason for this innovation, he should vote for the amendment.
Mr. R. Williams. In addition to the reasons already assigned, I will add that this amendment, if adopted, will derange the whole system. It is possible that on this plan there may be delays, as it is impossible to organize any system without delay. But I believe that in legislating we ought to regard the interests of the whole people. I believe that the causes in the supreme court compared with those in the circuit courts are very few. If therefore this plan induces the holding two circuit courts annually, we ought of preference to suffer a slight inconvenience to exist in the supreme court. As to delay, it is not in general to be ascribed to the badness of the laws, but to the ingenuity of council. There are now but eight causes on the docket of the supreme court. Gentlemen say they will increase. If they do, we will have no objection to give that court two sessions; But I have a different opinion. I believe this system will have a different effect, and that it will not increase the present monstrous mode of business! It often happens that reasons for postponement arise from the parties not having time to bring forward their evidence. This cannot occur when the terms are at the distance of a year from each other.
Mr. Bayard replied to Mr. Williams, recapitulated his preceding remarks, and concluded by observing that as the old system, which gave two sessions to the supreme court had not been complained of either by lawyer or suitors, it appeared to him that the present object was to make federal justice so inconvenient that suitors would be obliged to abandon the courts of the United States. He asked if the effect would not be to deteriorate the system, so as to make it odious to the people.
Mr. Dana delivered his sentiments in favor of the amendment.
Mr. Holland. Gentlemen say, a delay of justice will be a denial of it, and

immediately afterwards and that the amendments for which suits are instituted in the supreme court are very large. I take it for granted that where the demand is great, the delay should be proportionally long. On this principle we have practiced in North Carolina. The great distance too of most of the citizens from the seat of government, is an argument for the practice of the terms from the great trouble implied upon the counsel and suitors. The gentleman from Delaware had lately told us that the convenience of the judges was to be consulted; but now he lays, their convenience is not to be regarded. So that let us form the bill as we please, gentlemen will not be satisfied with it in any shape. I therefore, consider the motion made as barely intended to defeat the whole bill.
Mr. Elmhurst observed that the term of the supreme court was so fixed as to occur during the session of congress. He observed that a system of justice ought to be so constructed as to be convenient to the United States; and that the assistance of counsel could be obtained at the cheapest rate, and who were acquainted with the parties. This will be the case under the new system. This argument in favor of it is invincible; it has not been answered. There are gentlemen of the law from most of the states who are members of congress, which will greatly contribute to the convenience of suitors in the most remote states, and particularly as the presence of suitors is not necessary in the decision of questions of law on appeals.
As to the opposition made to this bill, do not gentlemen see who oppose it. They are those who reside in or near this place, where gentlemen of the bar, who will monopolize the whole business of the courts, and who naturally think the more the terms the better for them.
Mr. Smith believed gentlemen forgot that the session was drawing near to a close. He hoped the question would be taken without further delay.
The question was then taken on Mr. Bayard's amendment, and lost—Ayes 26.
Mr. Bayard moved to strike out the third section, which directs that all suits returnable or continued in the supreme court from December term to June term, shall be continued over to August term.
He considered this provision as prejudicial on injustice. It operated to continue the suits for more than a year. This is the effect of this mighty potcheery of legislation! Where suitors are entitled to trial in six months, they are denied even a hearing for 14 months. He believed this was unprecedented in this or any other country. Will gentlemen say why these causes cannot be decided in June. As the justices expected to meet, as the suitors expected to have their causes tried in June next, if hereafter we are to have only one session, why interpose by a new repealing law, to affect a law which is not at present to be repealed till the first of July.
The question was then taken on Mr. Bayard's motion to strike out, and lost—Ayes 23.
WEDNESDAY, April 21, 1802.
The House proceeded to consider the amendments reported yesterday, from the committee of the whole House to the bill sent from the senate, entitled "An act to amend the judicial system of the United States." Whereupon,
The first amendment to add to the end of the first section, the words following, to wit: "And in each of the acts," intitled "An Act to establish the judicial courts of the United States," passed the twenty-fourth of September, seventeen hundred and eighty-nine, as provides for the holding a session of the supreme court of the United States on the first Monday of August, annually, is hereby repealed," being twice read, was, on the question put thereupon, agreed to by the House."
The yeas and nays being demanded by one-fifth of the members present, were as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. W. Alston, J. Archer, J. Bacon, P. Bailey, P. Bishop, R. Brown, W. Butler, M. Clay, J. Clapton, J. Conditt, R. Cutts, W. Dickson, L. Lincendorf, E. Elmer, W. Eustis, J. Fowler, E. Gray, J. A. Hanna, D. Heister, J. Heister, W. Helms, J. Holland, G. Jackson, M. Leib, S. L. Mitchell, A. New, J. H. Nicholson, J. Smith, J. Smith, (N. Y.) J. Smith, (Vir.) S. Smith, H. Southard, R. Stanford, J. Stanton, jun. J. Stewart, J. Taliaferro, jun. D. Thomas, P. R. Thompson, A. Trigg, J. Trigg, P. Van Cortlandt, J. P. Van Nels, and R. Williams.—44.
NAYS—Messrs. J. A. Bayard, J. Campbell, M. Cutler, J. Davenport, T. T. Davis, J. Dennis, A. Foster, G. Goddard, R. Griswold, S. Hastings, A. Henderson, B. Huger, T. Lowndes, L. R. Morris, T. Morris, J. Mott, T. Plater, N. Read, W. Shepard, Jas. Smith, J. Stanley, J. Stratton, B. Tallmadge, S. Tenney, T. Tillinghast, G. B. Upham, P. Wadsworth, L. Williams, and H. Woodson.—29.
The other amendments reported from the committee of the whole House, to the said bill, being severally twice read,
at the Clerk's table, some were agreed to, and others disagreed to.
Mr. Bayard moved to reconsider a select committee the 6th Section, which is as follows: "That when the judges of any circuit court upon the final hearing of a cause, or of a plea to the jurisdiction of the court, shall be divided in opinion, the supreme court upon being notified by the circuit court thereof, shall at their session to be held next thereafter, assign one other of the justices of the supreme court to attend the said circuit court, whose duty it shall be to attend accordingly; and upon a second hearing of the said cause the judgment or decree shall be entered up in conformity to the opinion of the court to be composed of the justice so assigned for the division thereof, and of the judges of the said circuit court." Provided nevertheless, that all questions arising in criminal cases, and submitted to the court, shall in case the court shall be divided in opinion be considered as adjudged in favor of the prisoner; and if the court shall be divided upon the final judgment or sentence, judgment shall be entered up in favor of the prisoner, and he or she forthwith discharged."
This motion was supported by Messrs. R. Williams and Nicholson and carried; whereupon Messrs. Bayard, Nicholson and R. Williams, were appointed the committee.
At the close of the sitting Mr. Bayard reported the following substitute for the 6th section: "That whenever any question shall occur before a circuit court, upon which the opinions of the judges shall be opposed, the point upon which the disagreement shall happen, shall, during the same term, upon the request of either party, or their counsel, be stated under the direction of the judges, and certified under the seal of the court, to the supreme court, at their next session to be held thereafter; and shall, by the said court, be finally decided. And the decision of the supreme court, and their order in the premises, shall be remitted to the circuit court, and be there entered of record, and shall have effect according to the nature of the said judgment and order: Provided, that nothing herein contained shall prevent the cause from proceeding, if, in the opinion of the court, farther proceedings can be had without prejudice to the merits; And provided also, that imprisonment shall not be allowed nor punishments in any case be inflicted, where the judges of the said court are divided in opinion upon the question touching the said imprisonment or punishment."
Consideration postponed till to-morrow.
THURSDAY, April 22, 1802.
DEBATE on the act to amend the judicial system of the United States
The amendment of the select committee, reported yesterday by Mr. Bayard, under consideration.
Mr. Henderson opposed the amendment on the ground of the delay to which it would give rise. Every question of evidence on which there shall be a division will arrest the proceedings of the court. Are gentlemen willing to give to the people of America a bill, purporting to amend the old system which will in reality be a snare to suitors? As much as I should lament the necessity of one judge, deciding, I would prefer that plan to placing the citizen in the situation proposed by this amendment. I believe the system would be the better by giving all circuit duties to one judge of the supreme court, though that too would be, in my opinion, highly defective.
Mr. Nicholson. The select committee were unanimous in recommending to the house this amendment. It occurred to them that some inconveniences would arise from it; but no substitute offered itself to their minds, from which greater difficulties would not flow. From their knowledge of the administration of justice, they believed that very little inconvenience would arise. In the course of the last eight years, but one instance was recollected, though the circuit courts were often held by two justices, in which there was a division, which rendered it necessary to carry a cause to the supreme court. I have now to regret, that the gentlemen from Connecticut and North Carolina (Messrs. Griswold and Henderson), instead of illuminating our minds, should only employ their understandings in opposing the report. I have heard no substitute proposed, excepting the decision by a single judge, which I should not myself consider as an amendment of the amendment, as I have ever understood that in a multiplicity of counsellors there is wisdom.
The gentleman supposes the amendment will arrest the proceedings of the court in every case of disputed evidence; I am of a different opinion. In the case alluded to, the witnesses will be allowed to give his evidence, if the court is divided, and the circumstance of a division of the judges will be sent up in the nature of a bill of exceptions to the supreme court, who must decide on it. This will not arrest progress in the trial below. In a question of such intricacy, as shall divide the court, will it be a denial of justice to delay the final decision
till the supreme court shall settle it. Not to do this, might be unjust and inquisitorial; and to vest a final decision in the justice of the supreme court would be to declare the district judge a mere cypher, and unworthy of confidence.
Where is the benefit of a court of appeals, if an appeal be not allowed in cases of such importance? Inconveniences certainly will happen; but they result from the nature of law, which you cannot make to suit every man's case. You must, therefore, submit to them.
Mr. Griswold. No case can be brought to the supreme court by writ of error under 2,000 dollars; nor any to the circuit from the district courts less than 500 dollars. Under this provision sums under 500 dollars may be sent to the supreme court; whereby suitors in remote quarters will incur expenses beyond the sum litigated. This will be a mere mockery of justice, and will drive every suitor from your courts. If that be the object of gentlemen, no better mode of accomplishing it can be devised, for no prudent man will run the hazard of going half a dozen times to the seat of government. I believe the gentleman from Maryland in the idea that courts are not often divided. I know that they are not often divided on a final question; but there is scarcely a litigated case in which the courts do not differ on collateral points.
As to the admission of a witness, the fact is, if the court differs, there is no admission. This must be the case in states where there is no calling vote. In Connecticut there is a calling vote. The cause therefore cannot go on. There will be a delay of ultimate decision until the opinion of the supreme court is known.
The gentleman from Maryland says we only find fault with the report without proposing any thing amendatory of it. Why, I can propose the re-enactment of the law of the last session just repealed. I believe with him there is life in a multiplicity of counsellors. He ought to have recollected this motion before he voted for the repeal. Let him therefore give force to that law. But I am prepared to propose another plan—that the circuit court consist of one judge. Not that I like this plan—on the contrary, I may almost say I abhor it; but of the two alternatives, this is the best.
Mr. R. Williams. It is not to be expected that gentlemen on the other side will agree to this law. I presume it is not their wish to have any of the responsibility attending it. Nor is it my wish that they should. My colleague has said, he would rather strike out the whole section, than agree to this amendment. What would be the effect? By this amendment there may be a decision, though there should be some delay. By striking out the section, there would be no decision at all. Under the old law, if division occurred, the case was decided at the next term by the new judge—there being an interchange of judges. The gentleman, therefore, might, on the principle on which he now judges, as well object to the delay occasioned by this postponement. I have, however, no partiality to this amendment. I should have no objection to let all preliminary questions fall, if the court is divided, and to allow an appeal, only on the ultimate question. In North-Carolina there are but two judges. This has been the practice there, without any inconvenience being experienced.
Mr. Henderson. I believe this bill is composed of such heterogeneous elements that it is impossible for any ingenuity to make any thing out of it. But as it must pass, it is our duty to render it as unexceptionable as possible; and what interest can we have in an imperfect system?
My objection has been attempted to be answered. One of the cases which I put related to the competency of witnesses. The gentleman from Maryland, says every man is a competent witness, until proved not to be so. Now, I ask, if a witness is stated to be interrelated, and the court is divided, how can the cause go on until a decision is made by the supreme court. The gentleman alluded to a bill of exceptions; but that is never offered, till the decision of the cause. What exception, moreover, can be taken where there is no decision? Every man acquainted with legal proceedings knows such language is unintelligible.
In the case of a bond, the whole jot depends upon knowing it; and yet the gentleman says the cause may go on! I did not say it was better to have no section than this. I said it would be better to retain the section stricken out than this. I hope, therefore, the house will re-enact the bill; that we may give the people at least a substance of justice, if nothing else. I fully agree with my friend from Connecticut (Mr. Griswold) that gentlemen by this time see the propriety of keeping the late system, rather than adopt this heterogeneous mongrel system. I do not believe that the ingenuity of man can rear on this basis a tolerable system. I would prefer trusting to a single judge, to the holding out false colours, and promising justice and yet denying it. For I repeat it—under this plan it will be impossible to be impossible to try causes, which if once hung up will be for life.
The question was then taken on agreeing to the report of the select committee, and carried—Ayes 39—Noes 27.
Mr. Leib moved to add to the bill the following new section: "That from and after the passing of this act, no special juries shall be returned by the clerks of any of the said circuit courts; but that in all cases in which it was the duty of the said clerks to return special juries before the passing of this act, it shall be the duty of the marshal for the district where such circuit court may be held, to return special juries, in the same manner and form, as, by the laws of the respective states, the said clerks were required to return the same."
Mr. Dennis said he understood the object of the gentleman was to prevent the packing of juries. He wished to know whether this effect was likely to follow from transferring the duty from an officer who holds his appointment during good behaviour, and who, he believed, was dependent upon no one, to an officer who was the mere creature of executive power.
Mr. Leib . My object is to prevent the packing of juries, which has heretofore been exercised by the clerks. I hold an opinion contrary to that of the gentleman from Maryland. I consider the marshal as a responsible officer, amenable to the President; whereas the clerk is the mere creature of, and dependent on the court. Therefore, think a more impartial selection of juries will be obtained by confiding this duty to the marshal than the clerk.
Mr. Tillinghast was opposed to the motion.
Mr. Giles hoped the amendment would obtain, the effect of which was simply to transfer to the marshal the duty of selecting special juries, in those states where this is not already the case. It is easy to see that if the judges should possess a bias towards particular individuals, no mode could be readier to give efficacy to that bias than by declaring the cause should be tried by a special jury, and make their clerk designate them. He would ask, if, under these circumstances, the clerk would not be most likely of all other individuals to summon a jury favourable to the views of the court. We have been informed, that there have been inconveniences of this kind experienced, in cases where there have been biases of courts to particular descriptions of citizens. Mr. Giles said, he had no doubt of the existence of such impressions. The first time he heard of this right possessed by the clerks, he thought it the most extraordinary he had ever heard of. He believed the amendment offered would remedy the present evil existing in some of the States without any inconvenience to any other State.
Mr. Davis . The power of selection must reside somewhere. The officer called upon to perform this duty ought to have some knowledge of men. The sphere of acquaintance enjoyed by the clerk, from the nature of his ordinary duties, is limited; whereas the marshal necessarily becomes acquainted with all the prominent characters in his district. For this reason I think the duty will be best confided to the marshal.
Mr. Dennis . The reading of the gentlemen from Virginia and Pennsylvania is founded in mistake. They have taken that for granted which remains to be proved. If the clerks were the creatures of the courts, and removable at their pleasure, there would be some force in their remarks. But that remains to be proved. The courts have the power of appointing, but not of removing; for I take it for granted that the officers appointed by the courts are only removable for mal-conduct.
It appears to me, since we have heard so much about executive patronage, that no possible case can be conceived of, where there can be greater danger than in giving the right of selecting jurors to the marshals, who are the mere creatures of the President. We are told, there is no danger from this source, except in cases of a political complexion. But there is no medium, through which political prejudices will operate more effectually than through the marshals.
Mr. Bayard said, he did not feel a strong spirit of hostility to the amendment, because, as it was expressed, he deemed it an extremely harmless thing, which tended only to expose the house to ridicule. It provided for jurors being returned by marshals in cases where clerks of the court had heretofore returned them. Now, for no such cases exist—clerks never do, nor ever did return jurors.
Mr. Leib was, however, opposed to the principle which he supposed it was intended to carry into execution. The object of the amendment, it would be perceived, was to prevent special juries. He deemed it very important to retain the power of summoning special juries in certain cases. In questions of great importance, which often arise in courts, and which involve great principles of law as well as intricate questions of fact, special juries are important. However competent ordinary juries may be to decide causes generally, yet when great commercial questions are involved in such decision, it must be very proper to have the power of summoning a jury of merchants to decide. The same remark is applicable to other professions and business in life. Men whose time has been
devoted to particular pursuits ought to be called in to decide in questions which regard their particular business. Clerks of the courts be considered as the proper persons to select such jurors. They are responsible officers, appointed by the court, dependent on their good behaviour; and who is most competent to decide what is the nature of a cause, the court or the marshal? Marshal are the mere creatures of the executive, proceeding from the nostrils of your President. Their political existence can be extinguished in a moment.
I am at no loss to see the object of this motion. Notwithstanding the declarations of gentlemen against executive influence, we have for one year past been a succession of acts tending to the principle for which they had been before diverging. They are now for making the selection of juries dependent upon a marshal, who is dependent upon the President, as they find that power not in the hands of men so dependent upon them as a marshal. And from this perillable motive, they are for establishing a precedent so dangerous to the administration of justice.
Mr. Giles . I did not intend to have risen in this debate, as my indisposition is such as almost to make silence necessary. But the charge of fostering executive patronage has been so often made that I will trouble the house with a few ideas; and I beg gentlemen to review the measures of the session, and say whether those measures are in the least at variance with the professions under which those now in power came into place; and whether those, who have heretofore been the strenuous friends of executive patronage, have not tried to divert the President of every power constitutionally delegated to him? What has been done this session? The internal revenues have been abolished. I beg gentlemen to look at the volume laid before us, and to see how many offices have been taken from executive patronage. I have not counted the number; but I observe them in large columns. These have been destroyed at a single blow. Those heretofore when out of power against executive patronage lay to the President, we repeat to you now what we heretofore have told you, and we have therefore taken from you the appointment of more than 400 officers.
I ask how many new offices have been created, or transferred to the President. I know of none; unless the commissioners of bankruptcy, who according to this act are to be appointed in the first instance, by the President.
[Debate to be continued.]
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, MAR 31, 1802.
Yesterday the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES arrived from Monticello.
We this day insert by request a piece, under the signature of "Philanthropos," respecting the ensuing election in this city. It is deemed proper, however, not to suffer such a performance in one respect to go unnoticed. An individual, not personally acquainted with the situation of Washington, would infer from a perusal of this piece, that we were in a state of distraction and great party violence; whereas the truth is, that no part of the union is more exempt from party spirit; nor is there, perhaps, any part of the union in which social intercourse is less interrupted by a division of political sentiment.
The following are the appointments, made by the President, and confirmed by the Senate at the commencement of the session.
This list embraces all the appointments made during the previous recess.
Albert Gallatin, of Pennsylvania, secretary of the treasury, vice Samuel Dexter, resigned.
Robert Smith, of Maryland, secretary of the navy, vice Benjamin Stoddert, resigned.
Thomas Tudor Tucker, of South Carolina, treasurer, vice Samuel Meredith, resigned.
Gideon Granger, of Connecticut, postmaster-general, vice Joseph Habersham, resigned.
Silas Lee, of Massachusetts, attorney for the district of Maine, vice Daniel Davies, appointed to a late office.
David L. Burnes, of Rhode-Island, judge of that district court, vice Benjamin Bourne, promoted.
David Howell, of Rhode-Island, attorney for the district of Rhode-Island, vice David L. Burnes, promoted.
James Nicholson of New-York, commissioner of loans for New-York, vice Matthew Clarkson, resigned.
Henry Potter, of North-Carolina, a judge of the 5th circuit, vice John Sitgreaves, declined.
D. A. Hall, of South-Carolina, chief judge of the 5th circuit, vice Thomas Bee, declined.
William Stephens, of Georgia, judge of the district court of Georgia, vice Joseph Clay, resigned.
William Kilty, of Columbia, chief judge of the circuit court of the district of Columbia, vice Thomas Johnson, declined.

John Oakley, of Columbia, collector & inspector of the revenue for the district of George-town, vice Matthew Lingan, resigned. Malachi Jones, of North Carolina, surveyor of the port of Carrabuck, vice Samuel Jasper, deceased. Joel Lewis, of Delaware, marshal of Delaware district, vice Robert Hamilton, whose term had expired. James Alger, of Georgia, commissioner of loans in Georgia, vice Richard Wylley, deceased. William C. C. Claiborne, of Tennessee, governor of Mississippi Territory, vice Winthrop Serjeant whose term had expired. John Graham, of Kentucky, secretary of legation to Madrid. Thomas Sumter, of South Carolina, secretary of the legation to Paris. Jonas Clark, of Massachusetts, inspector of the revenue for the port of Kennebec. Jonathan Russell, of Rhode Island, collector for the district of Bristol. William McMillan, of the North Western Territory, attorney for the district of Ohio. James Findlay, of the North Western Territory, marshal of the district of Ohio. David Duncan, of the North Western Territory, collector for the district of Michillimackinac. William Chubb, of the Indiana Territory, collector of the district and inspector of revenue of the port of Maclac. Walter Jones, jun. of Columbia, attorney for the district of Potomac. William Baker, of Columbia, marshal for the district of Potomac. James Wilkinson, Benjamin Hawkins and Andrew Pickens, commissioners to treat with the Cherokees, Chickasaws, Choctaws and Creeks. William Richardson Davie, of North Carolina, a commissioner to hold a treaty between North Carolina and the Tuscarora. John S. Sherburne, of New Hampshire, attorney for the district of New Hampshire, vice Edward St. Loe Livermore, nominated Feb. 18, but not appointed. George Blake, of Massachusetts, attorney for the district of Massachusetts, vice Harrison G. Otis, nominated Feb. 18. Samuel Bishop, of Connecticut, collector of the district of New Haven, vice Elizer Goodrich, nominated Feb. 18. Hermannus H. Wendell, of New York, marshal of the district of Albany, vice James Dole, nominated Feb. 21, but not appointed. George Maxwell, of New Jersey, attorney, for the district of New Jersey, vice Frederick Frelinghuysen, nominated March 2, but not appointed. Alexander James Dallas, of Pennsylvania, attorney for the eastern district of Pennsylvania, vice John W. Kitter, nominated Feb. 18. James Hamilton, of Pennsylvania, attorney for the western district of Pennsylvania, vice Thomas Duncan, nominated March 3, but not appointed. Presley Gar Lane, of Pennsylvania, marshal for the western district of Pennsylvania, vice Hugh Barclay, nominated March 3d, but not appointed. John Munroe of Virginia, attorney for the Western district of Virginia, vice Samuel Bracken nominated Feb. 21, but not appointed. Andrew Moore of Virginia, marshal for the western district of Virginia, vice Rob. Grafton, nominated Feb. 21, but not appointed. John Thompson Mason of Columbia, attorney for the district of Columbia, vice Thomas Swann, nominated Feb. 28, but not appointed. Daniel Carroll Brent of Columbia, marshal of the district of Columbia, vice Jas. L. Lingan, nominated Feb. 28, but not appointed. George Gilpin of Columbia, judge of the orphan's court for Alexandria county Columbia, vice John Herbert, nominated March 2d, but not appointed. John Hewitt of Columbia, register of wills, for Washington county, Columbia, vice John Peter nominated March 2, but not appointed. William Gardner of New Hampshire, former commissioner of loans, to be commissioner of loans for New Hampshire, vice John Pierce, removed. Joseph Whipple of New Hampshire, former collector of the district of Portsmouth, to be collector of that district, vice Thomas Martin, removed. Joseph Scott, of Virginia, marshal of the eastern district of Virginia, vice David M. Randolph, removed. John Smith of Pennsylvania, marshal of the eastern district of Pennsylvania, vice John Hall removed. Joseph Crochet of Kentucky, marshal of the district of Kentucky, vice Samuel Dowell, removed. David Fay of Vermont, attorney for the district of Vermont, vice A. Marsh, removed. John Willard of Vermont, marshal for the district of Vermont, vice Jabez G. Fitch, removed. Daniel Marsh of New Jersey, collector and inspector of the revenue in the district of Perth-Amboy, vice Andrew Bell, removed. James Lynn of New Jersey, supervisor for the district of New Jersey, vice A. Dunham, removed.
Mount Edward Chisholm of Virginia, collector and inspector for the district of Ilwinton, vice Kirby, removed. Isaac Smith of Virginia, collector for the district of Cherrystone, vice Nathaniel Wilkins, removed. Thomas de Mattos Johnson of Georgia, collector for the district of Savannah, vice James Powell, removed. Josiah Hook of Massachusetts, collector for the district of Penobscot and inspector of that Port, vice John Lee, removed. Ruben Etting of Maryland, marshal of the district of Maryland, vice David Hopkins, removed. John Beard of New Jersey, marshal of the district of New Jersey, vice Thomas Lowry, removed. Edward Livingston of New York, attorney for the district of New York, vice Richard Harrison, removed. John Swartwout of New York, marshal of the district of New York, vice Aguilla Giles, removed. Ephraim Kirby of Connecticut, supervisor for the district of Connecticut, vice L. Chester, removed. Alexander Wolcott of Connecticut, collector for the district of Middleton, vice Chauncey Whittlesey, removed. Samuel Olgood of New York, supervisor for the district of New York, vice Nicholas Fish, removed. David Gellon of New York, collector of the district of New York, vice Joshua Sands, removed. Peter Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania, supervisor of the district of Pennsylvania, vice Henry Miller, removed. Charles Pinckney of S. Carolina, minister Plenipotentiary at the court of Madrid, vice David Humphreys, recalled on account of long absence from the United States.
Washington, May 27, 1802.
At a large and respectable meeting of the inhabitants of Washington, convened at the Presbyterian meeting house, for the purpose of nominating six characters to represent the western division of the city in council. Daniel Carroll of Dud'n. was unanimously appointed chairman, and Thomas H. Gilliss, Sec'y.
On motion, Resolved unanimously, That the chairman appoint a committee of five members, to select a number of six characters, six of whom to be approved of by this meeting as councillors, and supported at the ensuing election. Whereupon the chairman appointed Messrs. Daniel Brent, Richard Forrett, James Hoban, Leonard Harbough, and William Thornton, a committee for that purpose—who Reported the following gentlemen as selected by them, viz. Messrs. Thomas Peter, Joseph Hodgson, James Hoban, John Kearney, William Thornton, Augustus B. Woodward, Peter Lenox, John Jack, and William Brent. The meeting then proceeded to nominate six as councillors—When upon counting the votes, the following gentlemen appeared to have the greatest number, viz.
James Hoban 57 John Kearney 44 William Brent 44 Thomas Peter 40 William Thornton 38  Augustus B. Woodward 32 On motion, Resolved, That the proceedings of this meeting be signed by the chairman and secretary, and published in the Washington Federalist, and the National Intelligencer.
DANIEL CARROLL, of Dud'n. Chairman, T. H. GILLISS, Sec'y.
To the Fovers of the city of Washington.
Nothing has given me greater satisfaction than the good neighbourhood, industry and success, which have attended my native place (this city) for some years past. How sorry should I be to be a change in this beautiful scene! And unhappily the approaching election of our council but too much threatens it. Most true is the old observation, "We know when we are ill, but we often know not when we are well." The flourishing state of our city will depend greatly on our first council—a due attention must be paid to our mutual interests—no regard must be shown to the petition of every constituent without exception—and the deserving man ought to be the man of your choice—at a time when your passions are fermenting with the heat of party rage, and the sparks of animosity and ill will are daily kindling among you, and ready to burst into a flame, I hope it will not be thought unreasonable or impertinent, in an interested friend to the city, to address you on so alarming a crisis. The occasion calls loudly, upon every real well wisher to this place, to interpose his assistance and advice; to prevent, if it be possible, the dissolution of that order and peace, which are the strength, ornament and comfort of society. And here let me intreat you to suspend your passions for a time, and steadily view that dismal scene of madness and confusion which is opening before us. Behold in your city parties arising, and a fair and flourishing community, while
united, now disordered and unhing'd—the minds of a considerable part of its members corrupted, and debauched by partial meetings. Consider what heats and passions, what unkindnesses and incivilities, what hatreds and variances too frequently prevail, at such tempestuous times, among those who are linked together by the ties of nature, alliance, friendship and interest. Consider therefore, what fatal consequences may be justly apprehended when this bond of unity and social intercourse is thus violently rent asunder; and how extremely difficult it will be to pursue and promote the common good amidst such distractions and divisions. What man among you, who has the least regard for the welfare of the city, can look upon such a scene without feeling the most sensible concern? Therefore, my friends, let me conjure you to stop for a moment from the hurry of your pursuits, and calmly contemplate, in all its dimensions the picture which I have thus lightly sketched; then enquire impartially from your own hearts, whether the true motives of your convention will stand the test of a severe scrutiny, and justify a conduct which endangers your internal quiet and the public tranquility.
Direct yourselves of all prepossession, and still the noise and tumult of your passions, that the voice of reason may be distinctly heard. If upon a serious and fair examination, you can conscientiously declare that neither prejudice, party, passion, nor personal resentments, influence your judgment—that the genuine spirit of liberty alone, founded on the welfare of the city, and reasonable grounds of discontent, excite and animate your opposition. Then suffer me to entreat you to prosecute it with moderation, humanity and candour. For if a regard for the general good is the sole spring of your actions, you ought to manifest the uprightness of your intentions by cultivating and pursuing such measures, as will most effectually conduce to the advancement of the city. I address myself to the understanding of both parties (for sorry am I to observe that such distinctions are made) and desire them to consider that an intemperate zeal, arbitrary and oppressive acts, in forcing the inclinations and confidences of such as are placed in a dependent state, a rude ill-bred deportment towards those who differ in opinion from you; violent suspicions and invidious imputations will only serve to embitter and exasperate the minds of your opponents. Nay, even supposing these practices should be the means of accomplishing your designs, it must greatly stain the justice of a cause to triumph on the ruins of generosity, freedom, good nature and civility. It were much to be wished, that an unanimity of sentiment should prevail among us in the choice of our council. What effect can the election of the city council have upon the political scale of America? Our council must be selected from the whole city, and the questions which we ask one another respecting the men of our choice, should be with regard to the capability, and affection of the characters proposed—not with regard to their political sentiments. There are men of condescension, mutual forbearance, and harmonizers of mild and benevolent affection, to be found attached to each political party; and such ought to be the men of our choice. If you reflect, how intimately both your public and private happiness is connected with such a disposition, I hope you will endeavor to restrain all ill-natured and malignant passions, and support the true interest of the city.
Repair then my fellow-citizens, to the place assigned for the reception of your votes, with a ticket comprising twelve characters, formed on reflection; and with candour, as the basis upon which your judgment was formed. Several forts have been proposed—I have taken an attentive view of the whole. There are some characters in the city who have not been named. I therefore presume to offer a ticket, composed of characters, who if elected, I am sure will contribute to soften the passions, heal the divisions, and compose the jarring tempers and actions of friends and neighbours into concord and harmony, which is the hearty and sincere wish of yours,
PHILANTHROPOS.
May 28, 1802. Daniel Carroll, of Dud'n. James Barry, Henry Ingles, George Blagden, Robert Brent, Samuel H. Smith, Robert W. Peacock, Thomas Moore, John Jack, James Hoban, William Brent, Nicholas King.
BOSTON, May 24.
Extract of a letter from an American gentleman at Bourdeaux, to his correspondent in this town, dated April 2. "An arrest has just passed by the First Consul of France, for the encouragement of the French fisheries, and which may tend much to the injury of those of our country. As it may be interesting to our part of the U. States, I just note the principal heads of our information. The arrest is continued in force three years; a bounty of 50 francs is granted per year, for every man engaged in the Newfoundland fishery, and 15 for what is called the small fishery; for every quintal of fish, the produce of the French fishery, exported from France or the places where taken, direct to the French colonies, there is a bounty of 12 l. granted; for every quintal exported from the French ports in the Mediterranean to Spain, Portugal, Italy or the isles in the Levant, 6 l. is granted; for every quintal exported from the places of fishery direct from Spain or Portugal, 5 l. there is likewise granted a bounty of 5 l. for every quintal of oil, the produce of the French fisheries, imported direct into France; an additional duty of 6 l. per gallon is also placed on all fish the produce of foreign fisheries, imported into the colonies, exclusive of the local duties, now existing there; the duties in France remain as before. Colonial produce is still calm; merchants are anxiously waiting the result of the expedition to St. Domingo; much depends on the subjugation of the negroes in that colony; should they be reduced to order, and the plantations in that island escape destruction, it will perhaps experience a considerable decline in price."
New York, May 28.
By the ship Fanny, from Cape Francois (which place she left on the 6th inst.) we learn, that the troubles at St. Domingo have subsided. A few days before the departure of this vessel Christophe submitted, and is continued for the present in the rank he held. Toussaint & Dessalines have been compelled to surrender unconditionally. Toussaint was permitted to retire to his estates, after having formally resigned his public functions to the general in chief. Troops from France were expected daily at the Cape.
Extract of a letter from Port Republican to a merchant in this city, dated May 4th, received by the schooner Maria.
"The war is nearly at an end, general Christophe who burnt the Cape, has surrendered, with all his army, consisting of 4000 men. Toussaint is still at Haut-de-Cap. He is at this moment negotiating, and there is no doubt but he will surrender on such terms as may be offered to him—one of which is, that the blacks shall return to their duty on the plantation. This measure will in no small degree contribute to the extension of business, and will raise the price of American produce. The surrender of Christophe has been officially published by order of the commander in chief, general Le Clerc. "On the 2d inst. gen. Boudet failed from this port in a French frigate, with 500 troops on board, for Guadalupe, having been invited by Pelsage to take the command of that island."
For Sale,
A TRACT or parcel of land consisting of 240 acres, more or less, late the property of Robert Buchanan, deceased; lying in Prince George County, Maryland, and on the point branch of the Eastern Branch of the Potomac River. Any person inclined to purchase, may view the wood and meadow land, as also the improvements and situation. If the above land is not sold before the 25th day of August, it then will be offered for public sale.—Also the whole of the following property of said estate: Horses, Cattle, Sheep, Hogs, Household and kitchen Furniture, and plantation utensils. Terms at public sale for the land one third cash, and a credit of twelve months for the balance, by giving bond with interest and approved security. For the personal property all sums over 50 dollars 12 months credit, by giving bond as above; all sums not exceeding 50 dollars, cash. The above land is situated about five miles from Bladensburg and ten from Georgetown. Possession will be given in December next.
JAMES BUCHAN,
Acting Heir. April 26, 1802. 12W323
Honore Martin,
vs. Ann Casenave, Nicholas
Toung, and Jeanne & Peter Casenave.
In Chancery, May 22, 1802.
ORDERED that the sales made by John Hewitt Trustee for the sale of certain lots in the City of Washington, as stated in his report, filed the 25th of April last, shall be ratified and confirmed, unless cause to the contrary be shown on or before the 25th day of June next: Provided a copy of this order be published in the National Intelligencer, a paper in the city of Washington; and in the Washington Federalist, a paper of George Town; once in each of three successive weeks, before the 25th day of June next.
The report states that lot number 4, in square No. 599, in the City of Washington was sold for 126 dollars, and lot No. 6, in square No. 610, was sold for 106 dollars.
A. C. HANSON, Chanc.
May 26, 1802. 12W32
Lots for Sale,
Or to Let on Ground RENT.
THE Subscriber offers to sell or to lease one hundred lots, advantageously situated; some in the vicinity of the Capitol, and others near the Navy Yard; for cash, credit or wet or dry goods.
WILLIAM PROUT.
Washington City, April 5, 1802. 22W
This day is published At the Office of the National Intelligencer—Price 6 cents. A VIEW Of the proceedings of the last Session of CONGRESS. May 31, 1802.
WAR DEPARTMENT,
May 24, 1802.
Notice is hereby given,
THAT separate proposals will be received at the office of the Secretary for the Department of War, until the expiration of the 31st day of July next ensuing, for the supply of all rations, which may be required for the use of the United States, from the 1st day of October, 1802, until the 30th day of September 1803, both days inclusive, at the following places, viz. First—At Niagara, at Detroit, at Michillimackinac, and at Fort Wayne. Second—At Cincinnati and St. Vincennes. Third—At Fort Mifflin, near the mouth of the Ohio, and Kaskaskia. Fourth—At South West Point, Tellico, Knoxville, and on the road from Nashville to the line between the Chickasaws and Choctaws, and any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the state of Tennessee. Fifth—At the Chickasaw Bluffs, Natchez, Fort Adams, Mobile, and on the road from Natchez to the boundary line between the Choctaws and Chickasaws, and at any place in the Chickasaw or Choctaw country, between Bear Creek and Natchez. Separate Proposals will also be received as aforesaid, for the supply of all rations which may be required for the use of the United States, from the 1st day of January 1803, until the 31st day of December, in the same year, both days inclusive, within the several states herein after mentioned, viz. Sixth—At Fort Wilkinson, at Cockspur Island, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the state of Georgia. Seventh—At Charleston, at Rock Mountain, on the head water of the Santee, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited within the states of South and North Carolina. Eighth—At Norfolk, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the state of Virginia. Ninth—At Fort M'Henry, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the state of Maryland. Tenth—At Fort Mifflin, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware. Eleventh—At Fort Jay, at West Point, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the state of New York, excepting Niagara. Twelfth—At Fort Trumbull, at Fort Wolcott, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the states of Connecticut, Rhode Island and Vermont. Thirteenth—At Fort Independence, (Boston harbor), and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the state of Massachusetts, the district of Maine excepted. Fourteenth—At Portsmouth, at Portland, and at any place or places where troops are or may be stationed, marched or recruited, within the state of New Hampshire and district of Maine.
A Ration to consist of eighteen ounces of bread or flour, or when neither can be obtained, of one quart of rice, or one and an half pound of fluted or bolted Indian meal, one pound and a quarter of beef, or three quarters of a pound of pork, one gill of rum, whiskey or brandy, and at the rate of two quarts of salt, four quarts of vinegar, four pounds of soap, and one pound and an half of candles to every hundred rations. The price of the several component parts of the ration, as well as substitutes and alternatives, must be specified. The rations are to be furnished in such quantities, as that there shall at all times during the term of the proposed contracts, be sufficient for the consumption of the troops at Michillimackinac, Detroit and Niagara, for six months in advance; and at each of the other posts on the western waters, for at least three months in advance, of good and wholesome provisions, if the same shall be required. It is also to be permitted to all and every of the commanders of fortified places, or posts, to call for at seasons when the same can be transported, or at any time in the case of urgency, such supplies of like provisions in advance, as in the discretion of the Commandant shall be deemed proper. It is to be understood that the contractor is to be at the expense and risk of issuing the supplies to the troops, and that all losses sustained by the depredations of an enemy, or by the means of the troops of the United States, shall be paid for by the United States, at the price of the article captured or destroyed, on the requisitions of two or more creditable characters, and the certificate of a commissioned officer, ascertaining the circumstances of the loss, and the amount of the articles for which compensation shall be claimed. The privilege is to be understood to be reserved to the United States of requiring that none of the supplies which may be furnished under any of the proposed contracts, shall be issued until the supplies which have been or may be furnished under contracts now in force, have been consumed, and that a supply in advance may be always required at any of the fixed posts on the sea board or Indian Frontiers, not exceeding three months.
HENRY DEARBORN,
Secretary of War. May 31, 1802. 22W131J
Tennessee Company.
THOSE interested in the Company, and who have not signed the deed of trust, are hereby notified, that the Subscriber will attend at the city of Washington on the 20th of December next, to give them an opportunity of complying with this regulation of the company. JAMES STRAWBRIDGE. May 26, 1802. 12W20D

Journeyman Printer.
A GOOD JOURNEYMAN PRINTER is wanted at the office of the American Literary Advertiser, opposite the Seven Buildings, Pennsylvania Avenue. Immediate application may be made. A durable and very advantageous situation. May 28, 1802. ep3t
Ten Dollars Reward.
RANAWAY on the morning of the 25th inst. a Negro Woman named Priscilla. She is about forty-five years of age, a short woman and very black; her clothing is not known only a negro cotton jacket and petticoat. It is likely she may change her clothing; she had a lot on her right side, it is perceivable from the other. I bought her from Mr. John Stephens, City of Washington. She lived for some time near the Great Falls on the Potomac, with Mrs. Maria Huger. I will give the above Reward to any person that will apprehend the said wench and deliver her to me or secure her in any jail that I get her again. JOHN SASSEER, Near Nottingham. May 28, 1802. ep3t
NOTICE.
THE legal voters in the City of Washington are hereby informed that the Ballots for City Council will be received as follows: For the first division or ward, comprehending all that part of the city south, including the south side of Pennsylvania Avenue, and west, including the west side, of Sixth-street west, at Morin's Tavern, Pennsylvania Avenue. For the second division or ward, all that part of the city north, including the north side of Pennsylvania Avenue, and west, including the west side, of Sixth-street west, at Rhodes's Hotel. For the third division or ward, all that part of the city east, including the east side, of Sixth-street west, at Stites's Hotel. The Polls will be open on the first Monday in June next, precisely at 8 o'clock in the morning, and continue open until 7 o'clock in the evening. DANIEL CARROL, of Dudn CORN. CUNNINGHAM, BENJAMIN MORE. May 28, 1802. ep3t
Public Sale.
In pursuance of an order of the orphans court for the county of Washington in the district of Columbia, will be exposed to Public Sale, on Thursday the 16th day of June next, at 10 o'clock in the morning (and continue from day to day until the whole is sold) at the corner of South E street and New Jersey Avenue, in the City of Washington.
ALL the personal property of Jasper De Carrap, late of the county aforesaid, deceased, consisting of a quantity of store goods of various kinds, chiefly in the dry goods line:—Its household and kitchen furniture, Beds, Bedsteads, Tables, Chairs, Looking Glasses, and a variety of other articles. Terms of sale, all sums under 6 dollars, cash; all above that amount 6 months credit, the buyer giving bond with approved security, bearing interest from the day of sale.
HENRY INGLE, Administrator. ELIZ. DE CARNAP, Administrator. May 28, 1802. ep3t
City Hotel, BROADWAY NEW-YORK.
THE subscriber most respectfully informs his friends and the public, that the above Hotel will be opened on the first of May ensuing, when the patronage is earnestly solicited. He avails himself of this opportunity to return his sincere and grateful thanks to those societies, parties, and gentlemen who have given him their support, and assures them a continuance of their favors will be a stimulus to future exertions to please; and that the utmost attention shall be given for their comfort and accommodation. Boarding may be had by the day, week, month, or year. Families travelling, may be elegantly accommodated with lodging and fitting rooms; and, if preferred, have dinners &c. in their apartments. The Hotel being so well known, it is almost useless to say, that it is situated in one of the most healthy and pleasant parts of the city; commanding an extensive view in every direction, not only of the city itself, but also of the Narrows, the North and East Rivers, the State of New-Jersey, York and Long-Island, &c. &c.
A handsome coffee-room will be fitted up in the principal story; where gentlemen may have tea, coffee, chocolate, soups, and refreshments in general, at the shortest notice. All the leading newspapers in the union, will be regularly taken in. Public dinners and suppers in a plain or elegant style either for large or small parties. Also, beef steaks, oysters, &c. regularly furnished. An ordinary every day at half past 2 o'clock, by the public's obedient servant. JOHN LOVITT. N. B. Rooms to let by the month or year. April 31, 1802. ep3t
TO RENT,
And possession given immediately, A TWO STORY brick house on E Street near the War Office, containing two parlors, six bed-rooms, and a kitchen, with an excellent garden, coach house, stable, &c. The house is in a walled-paved and papered; it was formerly occupied by Mr. Dexter, and lately by Mr. John Brown. Enquire of Clement Dorsey, Esq. George-Town; or of the subscriber, who has for sale a well finished three story brick house opposite the Six Buildings, and a variety of City Lots in the most eligible situations. The above House will be sold for less than any enclosure could build it. The payments will be made on the whole of the above property. WILLIAM DYER. April 7, 1802. ep3t
Building Materials will be taken in part payment. W.D.
Fifteen or twenty Shares
In the Washington Building Company to be offered at public sale on Saturday evening next at 7 o'clock, at Mr. Morin's tavern on the Pennsylvania Avenue, if not sold before by private sale. THE flourishing state of the stock may be seen at Mr. Morin's office, who is secretary for the company. If one half cash advance, will be an accommodation to the purchaser it may be lodged in the hands of the Secretary until the next Saturday evening when the certificates will be delivered.—Apply to WILLIAM DYER. May 17, 1802. ep3t
The sale of the above advertised shares in the Washington Building Company, is postponed until Monday evening the 31st instant. May 26, 1802. ep3t
St. John's College.
ON the 22nd day of June next the trustees of St. John's College purpose to proceed to the appointment of a professor of English and Grammar in St. John's College, who shall receive for his services at the rate of 200, to be paid quarterly—Dolls. 533 33. His duty is, in conjunction with an assistant, to teach English grammatically, and the Latin grammar, the vocabulary, and Cordeus, so as to prepare students for the schools of language. He and his assistant are likewise to teach writing and arithmetic, and the lower branches of the mathematics, if required, to such of the students as are not destined for the upper schools. By order of the visitors and governor of St. John's College. A. C. HANSON. May 14, 1802. ep3t
NOTICE.
THE subscriber takes the liberty to inform the inhabitants of Washington (who may not attend particularly to that part of the Corporation law respecting the right of suffrage) that unless their taxes be paid prior to the first Monday in June next, the day appointed for the election of common council for the City of Washington, they will be deprived of their right of voting. He also informs those who may make it convenient to call on him for the purpose of settling their dues that he may be seen at his lodgings (at Mr. Johnston's) every day from 5 to 8 o'clock A. M. and on Friday and Saturday from 4 to 6 o'clock P. M. at Mr. Rhodes's Little Hotel until the first Monday in June. WASHINGTON BOYD, Collector the county of Washington. May 12, 1802. ep3t
FOR SALE.
A TRACT of land, containing 2500 acres lying immediately on the river Potomac, in the county of Northumberland, Virginia, late the residence of PRESLEY THORNTON, Esq. Seventeen hundred acres of which are of the most valuable kind of low grounds on the river; between three and four hundred acres heavily timbered; the remainder is wavy high land extremely productive. The soil of this tract is equal to any in the state for cultivation of corn, wheat, tobacco, timothy, and small grain of all kinds. On this tract are a large commodious two story brick mansion house and two offices, a large brick stable, a valuable barn, cow house, and many other out-houses, all in good repair. The orchard and garden contain a variety of valuable fruit trees, and the waters abound with excellent fish and oysters. It is situated about a day's sail from Alexandria, Baltimore or Norfolk; there are two good mill seats for grist, or sawmills on this estate, and plenty of cedar and chestnut timber, exclusive of the heavy timber which it saved on some scattering will command a price in the City of Washington, nearly equal to the value of the land. The terms will be made easy to the purchaser or purchasers, and the tract will be divided into two or more plantations if necessary.—Apply to RICHARD PETERS, junr. No. 25, Walnut-street Philadelphia. Philadelphia, Nov. 11. ep3t
Now Landing AND FOR SALE.
BY the subscriber at his store in Jefferson-ton street, at very reduced prices, by wholesale and retail, for cash, country produce, or approved notes at 60 and 70 days. List, lump and brown Pepper, Sugars, Meats, Rum of different kinds, Holland gin, Cherry bounce, Madeira, Sherry, Lic. Fig Blue, bon, and Malaga wines, Clare in boxes of six First quality chewing prior quality, French Liquors, Coarse and fine salt, Hylon, Young Hyson, Shad and herrings in Imperial and Scut-barrels, strong teas, Hams, Shoulders, and Coffee, middlings of bacon, Chocolate, Gorgis Cotton, Almonds, Forland pickers, Raisins, China bowls, Prunes, Glass ware assorted, Fresh Licca oil, Sets of tea China, Cpers, Port wine in quarter or bottles, Anchovies, Patent cheese, Olives, Porter in bottles, Lemons, Powder, shot, & bar Brown and white soap, Mould and dipped candles, Ruffia Glue, Ginger, Alum, Pimento, And a few dozen very cheap long and short kid and fancy gloves. B. G. ORR. April 30, 1802. ep3t
Wanted Immediately,
A T William Lane's printing Office, Washington City, a good steady PRESS-MAN.—None need apply but those who can give satisfactory recommendations of their good behaviour. May 12, 1802. ep3t
FOR SALE, LOOKING-GLASSES & FURNITURE.
The subscriber respectfully informs the public, that he has just received from New-York various kinds of Looking-Glasses, from 5 to 70 dollars each—Also card tables, bureaus, &c. of an elegant and fashionable make. He continues to manufacture and sell all kinds of ornaments for chimney-pieces, door caps, knuckle pieces, metal tables, &c. &c. GEORGE ANDREWS. April 14, 1802. ep3t
Thomas Carpenter, TAYLOR, HAS just received an elegant and fashionable assortment of summer goods, consisting of London superfine cloths and cassimeres; India, Manchester, and silk striped nankeens; cotton cassimeres, bozlepoor, bengal elegant white chord for pantaloons, white and coloured marcelles, janes and satin croisés, silk gingham, black and other coloured striped linens, &c. All which he will make up on the most reasonable terms, and in the most neat and fashionable manner—Pennsylvania Avenue, west of the President's square. May 24, 1802. ep3t
CHARLES VARDEN, Merchant Taylor, from Philadelphia, GRATEFULLY acknowledges the favors conferred on him by the gentlemen of this City, and flatters himself that the general satisfaction he has already given will merit a continuation of the same. He has also received a handsome assortment of goods from Philadelphia, consisting of, Best superfine cloths, cassimeres, swansdown, Toylenettes, Velverettes, Tancy Cords, Costings, Flannels, &c. N. B. Regimentals, Naval Uniforms, and Ladies Habits, made in the neatest and most fashionable manner, and at the shortest notice—Washington City, New Jersey Avenue, next to Mr. Kapine's book store. Dec. 16, 1801. ep3t
Jol. Weems against John Weems jun. Sarah Weems, Wilhelmina Gantt, Henry Gantt, Philip Barton Key, and Charles Lowndes. IN CHANCERY, May 12, 1802.
THE object of the bill filed in this cause is to obtain partial relief against a bond, executed by the complainant to the said John Weems jun. for 2500, and a bond to the said Philip Barton Key for 500. It states, that the said bonds were executed by the complainant to secure a supposed balance to Amelia Weems, one of his father's representative, due from him, as executor to his father, that the said balance was not justly due from him, because since the decree of this court, directing him to pay money on account of which the said bonds were given, the complainant, as executor aforesaid, has had a decree against him at the suit of Daniel Kent, for the sum of 1305 1 3 2 and that several other suits have been instituted against him as executor. It states likewise, that the said balance was not due from him, because he was entitled to a contribution from the said Amelia, for money paid by him on a compromise made of a suit brought against him by William Loch Chew, for the recovery of a tract of land called Loch Eden, which suit his father, by his last will had directed to be defended to the last resort, at the expense of his estate. It is further stated that some of the defendants reside out of the state. It is, on the complainant's motion, therefore ordered, That he be entitled to an order to be informed, at least once in each of three successive weeks in the National Intelligencer, before the 12th day of June next, to the intent, that the non resident defendants may have notice of the complainant's application to this court, and of the substance and object of their bill, and may be warned to appear here on or before the second Wednesday in October next, to show cause wherefore a decree should not pass as prayed. (True Copy) Tell. SAMUEL H. HOWARD. Rec. Cur. Com. May 19, 1802. ep3t
To be Sold,
On the fifth day of June next, in the town of Nottingham, in Prince George county, for cash only, for the benefit of the creditors of Ignatius Boone, the following property to wit:
A LOT of Land containing an half acre, on which there are a dwelling house, kitchen and granary, all new, with a good inclosed garden and yard; this house is now occupied as a tavern and is sufficiently large for that use. Three small framed houses standing on the aforesaid lot on the country's land, and may be removed. A moiety of fourteen acres of land adjoining the town, about one third of the purchase money for this land not paid. Seven or eight negroes consisting of men, women and children; some horses and cattle, all his household furniture, a billiard table, and about sixty or seventy pounds Baltimore cash, of remnants of goods. The sale will commence at nine o'clock and continue until all is sold. ROBERT BOWIE, Trustee for Ignatius Boone. May 21, 1802. ep3t
Last Notice,
IN the matter of JOHN STICKNER, a BANKRUPT. NOTICE is hereby given to the creditors of John Stickney, that on the fifteenth day of June 1802, between the hours of ten and eleven A. M. at the clerk's office of the district of Columbia for the county of Washington, a certificate of discharge will be given to the said John Stickney, who is declared a bankrupt, unless cause be then and there shown to the contrary by the said creditors or some of them. By order of the hon William K. Hey, Esq. chief judge of the circuit court of the district of Columbia, this 24th day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and two. URIAH FORREST, Clerk of the circuit court, district of Columbia. May 26, 1802. ep3t
PROPOSALS
For carrying the Mails of the United States on the following Post Roads, will be received at the General Post Office in Washington City, until the 12th day of July next, inclusive.
IN NEW-YORK. 65. From New-York by Bergen N. J. Hackensack, Paramus, New Antrim, N. Y. Chester, Goshen, Wardbridge, Shawangunk and New Paltz to Kingston once a week. Leave New-York every Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Goshen on Saturday by 6 P M. Leave Goshen at 7 P M and arrive at Kingston on Sunday by 7 P M. Returning—Leave Kingston every Monday at 6 A M and arrive at Goshen by 7 P M. Leave Goshen on Tuesday by 6 A M and arrive at New-York on Wednesday by 6 P M. 66. From Fishkill to Newburg twice a week. Leave Newburg every Tuesday and Friday at 2 P M and arrive at Fishkill by 4 P M. Leave Fishkill every Tuesday and Friday at half past 4 P M and arrive at Newburg by 6 P M. 67. From Newburg by New Windsor, Goshen, Warwick, Hamburg, Newtown, Johnsbury, Hope, Belvidere and Easton, to Bethlehem, Pa. once a week. Leave Newburg every Monday at 1 P M and arrive at Warwick on Tuesday by 7 A M and at Newtown on Wednesday by 9 A M and at Easton on Thursday by 11 A M and at Bethlehem at 2 P M. Returning—Leave Bethlehem every Thursday at 4 P M and arrive at Easton by 7 P M. Leave Easton on Friday at 4 A M and arrive at Newtown by 7 P M and at Newburg on Saturday by 9 P M. 68. From Rhinebeck to Kingston twice a week. Leave Rhinebeck every Monday and Friday at 11 A M and arrive at Kingston by 1 P M. Leave Kingston every Monday and Friday at 8 A M and arrive at Rhinebeck by 10 A M. 69. From Hudson to Catskill twice a week. Leave Hudson every Monday & Friday at 3 P M and arrive at Catskill by 5 P M. Leave Catskill every Monday and Friday at 8 A M and arrive at Hudson by 10 A M. 70. From Catskill by Freehold, New Durham, Bloemfield, Head of Delaware, Haverfield, Kortright, Meredith, Franklin and Quopack to Union, and from Union by Windham, Walton, Delhi, Head of Delaware, and the same route thence to Catskill once a week. Leave Catskill every Monday at 6 P M and arrive at Union the next Thursday by 6 P M. Leave Union on Friday at 6 A M and return to Catskill the next Monday by 7 A M. 71. From Albany by Troy to Lansingburg six times a week. Leave Lansingburg every day Sunday except at 9 A M and arrive at Albany by 11 A M. Leave Albany at 4 P M and arrive at Lansingburg same day by 6 P M. 72. From Lansingburg by Yates's, Cambridge, Salem, H. broon, Granville, Hampton and Poulton Vt. to Fairhaven Vt. once a week. Leave Lansingburg every Friday at 8 A M and arrive at Salem on Saturday by 10 A M. Leave Salem at 11 A M and arrive at Fairhaven on Monday by 10 A M. Returning—Leave Fairhaven every Monday at 2 P M and arrive at Salem on Tuesday by 10 A M. Leave Salem on Wednesday by 6 A M and arrive at Lansingburg on Thursday by 3 P M. 73. From Lansingburg by Waterford, Stillwater, Westfield, Fort Miller, Fort Edward, Sandhill, Kaaterskill, Fort Ann and Whitehall to Fairhaven once a week. Leave Lansingburg every Saturday at 8 A M and arrive at Sandhill on Sunday by 8 A M and arrive at Fairhaven on Monday by 10 A M. Returning—Leave Fairhaven every Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Sandhill by 4 P M and at Lansingburg on Friday by 6 P M. 74. From Albany by Schenectady, Tripp's Hill, Conesjohary, Herkimer, Utica and Whitestown to Rome twice a week. Leave Albany every Monday & Thursday at 2 P M and arrive at Schenectady by 6 P M. Leave Schenectady on Tuesday and Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Conesjohary by 6 P M. Leave Conesjohary every Wednesday and Saturday at 6 A M and arrive at Utica by 6 P M. Leave Utica every Sunday and Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Rome by 11 A M. Returning—Leave Rome every Sunday and Thursday at 2 P M and arrive at Utica by 5 P M. Leave Utica on Tuesday and Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Conesjohary by 6 P M. Leave Conesjohary every Wednesday and Saturday at 6 A M and arrive at Schenectady by 6 P M. Leave Schenectady every Monday and Thursday at 5 A M and arrive at Albany by noon. 75. From Utica by New Hartford, W. Ammerland, Oneida, Manlius, Onondaga, Marcellus, Auburn, Cayuga & Geneva to Canandaigua, once a week. Leave Utica every Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Oneida by 2 P M and arrive at Manlius by 7 P M. Leave Manlius on Friday at 5 A M and arrive at Cayuga on Saturday by 9 A M and at Canandaigua by 6 P M. Returning—Leave Canandaigua every Monday at 6 A M and arrive at Utica the next Wednesday by 6 P M. 76. From Canandaigua by Hartford to Niagara once a week. Leave Canandaigua every Monday at 6 A M and arrive at Niagara the next Thursday by 9 A M. Leave Niagara every Thursday by 3 P M and arrive at Canandaigua the next Monday by 6 P M. 77. From Cayuga to Seneca once a week. Leave Cayuga every Saturday at 11 A M and arrive at Seneca by 2 P M. Leave Seneca every Friday at 4 P M and arrive at Cayuga by 7 P M. 78. From Oneida to Canesovia once a week. Leave Oneida every Thursday at 3 P M and arrive at Canesovia by 7 P M. Leave Canesovia every Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Oneida by 10 A M. 79. From Utica by New Hartford, Paris, Hamilton and Sherburne to Oxford once a week. Leave Utica every Monday at 6 A M and arrive at Oxford on Tuesday by 6 P M. Leave Oxford every Wednesday by 6 A M and arrive at Utica on Thursday by 6 P M. 80. From Conesjohary by Cherry Valley, Cooperstown, Butternuts, Oxford, Union and Oswego to Athens Pa. once a week. Leave Conesjohary every Sunday at 1 P M and arrive at Oxford on Tuesday by 10 A M and at Union on Wednesday by 10 A M. Leave Union same day at 11 A M and arrive at Athens by 7 P M. Returning—Leave Athens every Thursday at 5 A M and arrive at Conesjohary the next Sunday by 11 A M. 81. From Athens Pa. by Chemungo N. Y. Newtown, Painted Post, Bath, Jerusalem, and Pattenstown to Canandaigua once a week. Leave Athens every Thursday at 6 A M and arrive at Canandaigua on Saturday by 7 P M. Leave Canandaigua every Monday at 5 A M and arrive at Athens on Wednesday by 7 P M. 82. From Cooperstown by Burlington, Brookfield, Sherburne, Dwyer, Fabius, Tully, and Sempromus to Scipio, once a week. Leave Cooperstown every Tuesday at 6 A M and arrive at Scipio on Thursday by 6 P M. Leave Scipio every Friday at 6 A M and arrive at Cooperstown on Sunday by 10 A M. 83. From Tripp's Hill to Johnstown twice a week. Leave Tripp's Hill every Tuesday and Friday at 3 P M and arrive at Johnstown by 4 P M. Leave Johnstown every Tuesday and Friday at 5 P M and arrive at Tripp's Hill by 6 P M. 84. From Schenectady by Balltown Springs, Saratoga Springs and Glensbridge to Sandhill once a week. Leave Schenectady every Tuesday at 7 A M and arrive at Sandhill by 7 P M. Leave Sandhill on Wednesday at 7 A M and arrive at Schenectady by 7 P M. 85. From Albany by Danieisburg and Danlock to Cherry Valley once a week. Leave Albany every Thursday at 2 P M and arrive at Cherry Valley on Friday by 6 P M. Leave Cherry Valley every Wednesday at 6 A M and arrive at Albany on Thursday by 10 A M. 86. From Vergennes Vt. by Wilstonsboro Penn and Plattsburg, to Champlain once a week. Leave Vergennes every Wednesday at 6 A M and arrive at Champlain on Friday by 6 P M. Leave Champlain on Sunday by 3 P M and arrive at Vergennes on Tuesday by 6 P M. IN NEW-JERSEY. 87. From Newark by Chatham, Morristown, Boonton, Rockaway and Sparta to Newtown, and from thence by Johnsbury, Hacketstown, Black River, Mendon, Morristown and Chatham to Newark once a week. Leave Newark every Thursday at 8 A M and arrive at Newtown on Friday by 6 P M. Leave Newtown every Saturday at 6 A M and arrive at Newark the next Monday by 7 A M. 88. From Trenton by Allentown, Monmouth C. H. Shrewsbury, Middlesex Point, Spottiswood, New Brunswick, Somerset C. H. Pluckemin, Raritan, New Germantown, Pittston, Alexandria, Plumstead Pa. Flemington and Pennington to Trenton, and from Trenton (leaving out Plumstead) back to Trenton every week. Leave Trenton every Tuesday at 8 A M, pass by Allentown, &c. and return to Trenton the next Tuesday at 6 A M. Leave Trenton every Tuesday at 9 A M, pass by Pennington, Flemington, &c. arrive at Plumstead and return to Trenton the next Tuesday by 6 A M. 89. From Trenton by Bordentown, Slabtown, New Mills, Mount Holly, Moorestown, Haddonfield, and Cooperstown to Philadelphia once a week. Leave Trenton every Tuesday at 9 A M, and arrive at Philadelphia on Wednesday by 11 A M. Leave Philadelphia every Wednesday at 2 P M, and arrive at Trenton the next Thursday by 3 P M. 90. From Philadelphia Pa. by Haddonfield, Taunton and Attilon to Tucker once a week. Leave Philadelphia every Thursday at 10 A M, and arrive at Tucker by 8 P M. Leave Tucker every Tuesday at 6 A M and arrive at Philadelphia on Wednesday by 2 P M. 91. From Philadelphia by Gloucester, Swoedsboro, and Woodbury to Salem once a week. Leave Philadelphia every Wednesday at 3 P M, and arrive at Salem on Thursday by 2 P M. Leave Salem every Tuesday at 6 A M and arrive at Philadelphia on Wednesday by 7 A M.
FOR SALE,
A NEGRO WOMAN about 38 years of age; she is an excellent Cook, and good washer. For Terms apply to the Editor. April 5, 1802. ep3t